Why are there religious people?

[quatona]

Atheist theology.

I need to remember this as an illustrative and most obvious example when I have to explain what an "oxymoron" is.

 

[Joshua260]

He is made of immaterial spaghetti, so problem solved.

Incoherent. That's like a married bachelor.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Incoherent. That's like a married bachelor.

Is it any more incoherent than an immaterial, unembodied, spaceless, and timeless intelligence?

 

[Colter]

Still waiting for your response to this:

The answer should be obveous, whatever your current beliefs about the origens of life, destiny, morality etc are.

If the child of an atheist came home and said some of the kids in the neighborhood were talking about God, creationism, salvation, life after death kind of stuff, asks dad about all if these things, the atheist promoting dad would impart his beliefs (theology) about all of those things. Trusting dad, jr might be satisfied with those answers, they would become his conceptual pholosophy going forward until he realized differently.

Children eventually figure out that mom and dad aren't perfect, neither is the church.

 

[yesyoushould]

Atheists have been using these forums to dogmatically promote their disbelief as long as I have been a member (and probably before that as well).

It is good for all that believe in God to be with one another.

 

[yesyoushould]

Hmmm...interesting thread.

I would say that, if you are an atheist, and you regularly come into threads like this one, then yes, you are promoting atheism.
If not, what are you doing here?

I came to the website (christianforums.com) because it is Christian. I couldn't have imagined it would be ridiculed and attacked by non believers in Christ. Or allowed by believers in Christ.

 

[yesyoushould]

The answer should be obveous, whatever your current beliefs about the origens of life, destiny, morality etc are.

If the child of an atheist came home and said some of the kids in the neighborhood were talking about God, creationism, salvation, life after death kind of stuff, asks dad about all if theses things, the atheist promoting dad would impart his beliefs (theology) about all of those things. Trusting dad, jr might be satisfied with those answers, they would become his conceptual pholosophy going forward until he realized differently.

Children eventually figure out that mom and dad aren't perfect, neither is the church.

I think the Church is perfect. Not mans church of course.

 

[Colter]

I think the Church is perfect. Not mans church of course.

The creature may crave perfection but only the creator possesses it. The institutional church is man made and man dominated.

 

[yesyoushould]

The creature may crave perfection but only the creator possesses it. The institutional church is man made and man dominated.

I don't find anything wrong with being a believer in God.

 

[Colter]

I don't find anything wrong with being a believer in God.

Neither do I, I'm confused about why you interpret me that way?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The answer should be obveous, whatever your current beliefs about the origens of life, destiny, morality etc are.

And that is? The answer is obvious to me, since I know myself well enough. My purpose in asking you is to test whether you know what you're talking about, because I suspect that you don't. You can't look beyond the label 'atheist' and what you think it entails to actually see what atheists really believe.

If the child of an atheist came home and said some of the kids in the neighborhood were talking about God, creationism, salvation, life after death kind of stuff, asks dad about all if these things, the atheist promoting dad would impart his beliefs (theology) about all of those things. Trusting dad, jr might be satisfied with those answers, they would become his conceptual pholosophy going forward until he realized differently.

First, it should be clear by now that the atheist is not imparting a theology. To even write that suggests that you don't understand atheism at a fundamental level, which means we're back to square one, the definition of atheism as a lack of belief in gods. Second, I cannot comment on how individual atheists' would behave in the situation mentioned above. It's sufficient to point out, however, that this is not how all atheists would handle it. By way of illustration, I would encourage the child to investigate the matter more deeply, to borrow books from the library, to read, and so on. I don't have all the answers, and some of the answers I do think I have may not be complete or satisfactory. I can admit that to the child. She may be upset that I haven't given her a straightforward 'yes' or 'no' response, but hopefully in doing her own research she will come to understand why I didn't just give her "the answers".

 

[Colter]

And that is? The answer is obvious to me, since I know myself well enough. My purpose in asking you is to test whether you know what you're talking about, because I suspect that you don't. You can't look beyond the label 'atheist' and what you think it entails to actually see what atheists really believe.



First, it should be clear by now that the atheist is not imparting a theology. To even write that suggests that you don't understand atheism at a fundamental level, which means we're back to square one, the definition of atheism as a lack of belief in gods. Second, I cannot comment on how individual atheists' would behave in the situation mentioned above. It's sufficient to point out, however, that this is not how all atheists would handle it. By way of illustration, I would encourage the child to investigate the matter more deeply, to borrow books from the library, to read, and so on. I don't have all the answers, and some of the answers I do think I have may not be complete or satisfactory. I can admit that to the child. She may be upset that I haven't given her a straightforward 'yes' or 'no' response, but hopefully in doing her own research she will come to understand why I didn't just give her "the answers".

Atheist come in many flavors, whatever their belief is, that is their belief. The unity of the atheist community is their disbelief in God and the godless ideals that bind them together. There is diversity among atheist just like the diversity among believers.

I don't think you are honest with yourself at a fundamental level. On the one hand you say things like this "Is it any more incoherent than an immaterial, unembodied, spaceless, and timeless intelligence" but then claim an open mindedness.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Atheist come in many flavors, whatever their belief is, that is their belief. The unity of the atheist community is their disbelief in God and the godless ideals that bind them together. There is diversity among atheist just like the diversity among believers.

There you again, invoking the nebulous "godless ideals" that we supposedly revere. You can't name a single thing I actually believe or care about. To you I am just the label I identify by - 'atheist'. But it's worse than that, because my actual icon on this site reads 'humanist'. Yet you know nothing about what that means and you don't appear to care enough to learn. For someone who ostensibly acknowledges the diversity of views atheists hold, you are ever so eager to thrust us into a single box, variously labelled "godless ideals," "atheist theology," and "doctrines of doubt." Your unwillingness to listen, coupled with your eagerness to assign these labels, makes a productive conversation with you needlessly difficult.

I don't think you are honest with yourself at a fundamental level. On the one hand you say things like this "Is it any more incoherent than an immaterial, unembodied, spaceless, and timeless intelligence" but then claim an open mindedness.

How is that question incompatible with open-mindedness?

 

[bhsmte]

I came to the website (christianforums.com) because it is Christian. I couldn't have imagined it would be ridiculed and attacked by non believers in Christ. Or allowed by believers in Christ.

Of course, you are on the portion of the site that allows non believers voluntarily. If you want to just talk with Christians, there are Christian only portions of this site.

I visit those parts of the site once in a while. Not to post, but to be entertained, watching Christians tear each other up about who has the correct biblical interpretation.

 

[yesyoushould]

Of course, you are on the portion of the site that allows non believers voluntarily. If you want to just talk with Christians, there are Christian only portions of this site.

I visit those parts of the site once in a while. Not to post, but to be entertained, watching Christians tear each other up about who has the correct biblical interpretation.

There I go again, overly cautious.

 

[Colter]

There you again, invoking the nebulous "godless ideals" that we supposedly revere. You can't name a single thing I actually believe or care about. To you I am just the label I identify by - 'atheist'. But it's worse than that, because my actual icon on this site reads 'humanist'. Yet you know nothing about what that means and you don't appear to care enough to learn. For someone who ostensibly acknowledges the diversity of views atheists hold, you are ever so eager to thrust us into a single box, variously labelled "godless ideals," "atheist theology," and "doctrines of doubt." Your unwillingness to listen, coupled with your eagerness to assign these labels, makes a productive conversation with you needlessly difficult.



How is that question incompatible with open-mindedness?

The question is a statement of belief in the guise of an open minded question.

I have had quite a bit of experience with Atheists, humanists, agnostics etc. over the years. I'm reflecting back to you your beliefs in as much as you have written about them. I have never asserted to know anything more about you then I can glean in your writings. But I can say with certainty that you say you once believed but having left faith you indicate that you no longer believe anything. I'm just saying that now you believe something different as opposed to nothing at all.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The question is a statement of belief in the guise of an open minded question.

In what way? I'm not seeing how asking the question somehow implicates closed-mindedness. Besides, why aren't you questioning Josh's open-mindedness for dismissing immaterial spaghetti as "incoherent"? Why does his statement not draw your ire? Could it be because he is not an atheist?

I have had quite a bit of experience with Atheists, humanists, agnostics etc. over the years.

And yet, after all these years, your understanding of atheism is still flawed at a fundamental level.

I'm reflecting back to you your beliefs in as much as you have written about them.

What beliefs specifically? I've asked you multiple times to tell me what my "old beliefs" and "new beliefs" are, so that I can gauge whether you actually know what you claim to know. I suspect you don't.

I have never asserted to know anything more about you then I can glean in your writings. But I can say with certainty that you say you once believed but having left faith you indicate that you no longer believe anything.

Wrong. You did not glean that from my writings because I never said such a thing.

I'm just saying that now you believe something different as opposed to nothing at all.

And what is that "something," Colter? How could you possibly know? You're too fixated on the label and what you think it means to know anything about that "something". You pontificate about the beliefs of atheists, but when push comes to shove, you haven't a clue. You don't know what I believe. You only know what I don't believe. Yet you somehow think that this is enough to go on and pontificate on what atheists believe.

 

[bhsmte]

There I go again, overly cautious.

Cautious about what?

 

[Colter]

In what way? I'm not seeing how asking the question somehow implicates closed-mindedness. Besides, why aren't you questioning Josh's open-mindedness for dismissing immaterial spaghetti as "incoherent"? Why does his statement not draw your ire? Could it be because he is not an atheist?



And yet, after all these years, your understanding of atheism is still flawed at a fundamental level.



What beliefs specifically? I've asked you multiple times to tell me what my "old beliefs" and "new beliefs" are, so that I can gauge whether you actually know what you claim to know. I suspect you don't.



Wrong. You did not glean that from my writings because I never said such a thing.



And what is that "something," Colter? How could you possibly know? You're too fixated on the label and what you think it means to know anything about that "something". You pontificate about the beliefs of atheists, but when push comes to shove, you haven't a clue. You don't know what I believe. You only know what I don't believe. Yet you somehow think that this is enough to go on and pontificate on what atheists believe.

I've already said atheist are diverse in their belief in a Godless universe. It's not that complicated, just as believers have diversity in belief, unbelievers have diversity in unbelief. When a Dawkins writes a provocative book entitled "The God Delusion" we can glean from his book that he believes people of faith are deluded. Add to that what he does believe about the universe and that constitutes his belief. The same goes for you.

And labels aren't written in stone, they are designations for the purpose of communicating. I know you are a unique personality reality.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I've already said atheist are diverse in their belief in a Godless universe. It's not that complicated, just as believers have diversity in belief, unbelievers have diversity in unbelief. When a Dawkins writes a provocative book entitles "The God Delusion" we can glean from his book that he believes people of faith are deluded. Add to that what he does believe about the universe and that constitutes his belief. The same goes for you.

Aha, yes, go on... You stopped short for some reason. I wonder why that is? Could it be that you really know next to nothing about what I do believe?