Question for Atheists, or anyone.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

I'm 17, and haven't believed god existed for 2 years, but I still find myself thinking about god alot. I don't know if it's because I'm constantly exposed to it, or if I'm still "used" to thinking about god, and all that.

I was wondering if the thinking about god will disolve as time goes on, or if I will always be plagued by this annoying thought process.

Do you ever reach a point where you can think of things in terms of not-god, but rather just nature, human genious?

[wtmusic]

1. Sorry, you're on your own

it's a lonely road cp but for myself, I just stopped asking the question. Wasn't really helping any.

[classics]

2. You may grow out of it.

You may become a humanist if you find truth in human frality, strength and inpermenance. Then again you may not, for whatever reason.

[roughsatori]

3. asking other people advice on how "not to believe"

anything, can only be cause for further trauma. LOL. My only advice would be not to try to believe or not to believe, just pay attention to how your mind works regarding divinity and let your thoughts pass without judgement. Try to find out about breathing meditation, sometimes known as "sitting practice" it has helped me accept my over active mind.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

4. Yeah, I just needed to make this post,

more of venting, than actually relying upon it to make a decision.

[chadm]

76. Embrace what your creator has given you

Think about it; it is physically impossible for humans to know whether or not God exists. We were CREATED that way. So do you think our creator would hold it against us if we took the position: "Out of respect, I will NOT attempt to label or define that which it is impossible for me to do...instead I will use everything I have been given to the best of my ability."

What I'm talking about is embracing Agnosticism...stop asking questions nobody can answer. Respect the natural order of things and use what you do have to do the most good.

Most likely we were simply created by the forces of evolution, but I will certainly not proclaim that God doesn't exist. I'm comfortable with the fact that I do not, and cannot know.

This said, I am SURE that the America Christian God is not God.

[Sirius_on]

77. I think of it like the Matrix

If we lived in perfection we would never survive. People would constantly turn to God for everything, thus removing free will and in return it would be God living our own lives.

I tend to believe that people have distanced themselves from God due to time seperation. Those who cannot believe in him due to physically being barred from contact with him will not believe. Its a natural human reaction. Anything that seems ungraspable or beyond thinking doesnt exist. Its human nature.

[Trajan]

122. Classic begging the question fallacy ....

Why not just ask God if the feelings will go away ???? ...

chuckles ....

[Brian Sweat]

5. I have been an atheists for almost 20 years,

but I was raised as a Christian. It is difficult to disabuse myself of the notion of a god, but I realize that this is just an attempt on my part to explain the unexplainable.

I never really read the bible before I became an atheists, but I have read much of it since I stopped believing. Once your realize what is really in that book, you will begin to realize that the god of that book is really quite silly. Did you know that in the New Testiment, Jesus curses a fig tree because it does not bear fruit out of season? Jesus is proferred to us as the incredibly enlighted individual. Why would he curse a fig tree, for not bearing fruit when it should not be bearing fruit. He is also supposed to be a great miracle worker. He fed thousands with a couple fish and a couple loaves of bread. Why can't he feed his disciples without cursing a fig tree.

God hates figs.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

6. Yeah, and god hates homosexuals,

so maybe the fig tree really was a fag tree? And the fag "tree" didn't like the disciples, and....

[roughsatori]

9. The Fig Tree Killing

I have been disturbed by that since I was a child. I remember thinking it could not be true. I have even read theological defenses and explanations of the killing of the tree. I did once read a Biblical scholar who thought that the Fig Tree Incident was apocryaphal.

[AnnabelLee]

14. I've read that the fig tree story

is really a slap at the Mithras. I thought I had a link, but I seem to have lost it.

[jonnyblitz]

24. Do you still find yourself thinking about Santa Claus too?

Let the fairy tales go and live in reality....

[jonnyblitz]

25. I erroneously reponded to you instead of the poster of this thread

sorry..oops

[Tigermoose]

29. Did you read the one about not throwing pearls before swine?

nt

[Terwilliger]

58. you're not an atheist

...a skeptic, maybe, but I'm a skeptic and I never ascribe some unknown circumstance to a higher power.

BTW, what is an atheists?

[Az]

62. Atheist: A definition

The word theist means one who believes in god or gods.

The prefix 'a' means without.

Thus an atheists is one who is without a belief in god or gods.

This can come about by any number of ways. The person may have never heard of the concept of god. The person may have heard it but rejected it. The person may adhere to a belief system that rejects the notion of gods. Without further knowledge we cannot ascertain what variety of atheist they are.

A person can shift from atheist to theist often. The degree of certainty they posess being a primary determining factor in this shift. The term agnostic was coined to attempt to explain those closer to the fulcrum on this matter but it is perhaps disingenuous.

The word gnostic comes from the greek meaning To Know or have specific Knowledge of the matter. Thus an agnostic would be someone that is without specific knowledge of the matter. To be a gnostic on the matter of theism one would have to have either absolute knowledge of the universe or have absolute knowledge of god. Neither case is possible so this leaves everyone in the state of agnostic.

There are varying degrees of certainty and some attempts have been made to define these within the various communities. On the atheistic side the generally accepted terms are strong atheist and weak atheist. These terms are problematic as well.

The difficulty comes from the nature of the claim. Against specific claims for god some can be nearly absolute in their certainty of rejecting them. Let us say that someone claimed that god was that which made all rocks float in mid air. A simple demonstration that rocks do not float in mid air would suffice to refute this claim. Thus a person could be said to be absolutely certain that this claim is wrong.

But what if the claim were made that god is that which we find in common between all people. This is not a claim that god is an entity floating around in space. This claim is far more difficult to refute if indeed it needs to be refuted. Thus you will find far fewer rejections of this claim.

Society is full of claims for god. A selfdescribed atheist is typically responding to the predominant claims in their immediate envriroment. Thus the reason you find so many atheist in the US griping about xianity. The predominant religion in the US is in fact xianity and thus those that reject its claims are going to largely base their arguments on that which they regularly face.

[Terwilliger]

64. so you're saying

I shouldn't have tried to corral people into specific labels...I understand

[Az]

67. No

I am saying that words have meanings. A person can vary between atheist and theist as often as they care to. It is not really a choice. At any given moment a person either does or does not believe in god or gods. If at the moment they do not believe in god or gods then they are by definition an atheist.

Atheism is not a club. It is not sometning you sign up for. It is a definition of a current state of mind. Just a a human is a human an atheist is an atheist. Wanting to find a place in the world has no impact on this definition. Language serves us only if it allows us to better understand the world around us by conveying definitions that we can share. If you devalue the language to such a point that nothing has meaning anymore then you have lost the ability to communicate.

[nolabels]

71. And thus to say, that the words are the constraints.

You cannot empress a known onto somebody or something. It is acquired through the experience or born into it as such. Birds don't get together and have meeting about when they are going to fly north or south for the winter, they just do it.

People know they are going to do it but can't do it their selves. The birds really have no cognitive activity to show they ever reasoned with it, but the complex task they perform doing it means that communication is not the only way information is transferred. Things that can be observed, anticipated and measured is what we know, but is only a small part of what there is

[Az]

79. You can't guess

You do not know what someone is until they tell you themself. And even then there is the question of whether they are a fair judge of themself. I did not state it was easy to figure what a person was. It takes time and effort for a person even to know themself. Yet the definition is valid. A person that at a given moment does not posess a belief in god or gods is in fact an atheist. That is the meaning of the word and applies in those instances. Now if you want to go around placing labels on people without getting to know them fine. Me, I will take the time to figure out who a person is and base my judgement on that. But for the purposes of discussions and debates it is necissary to have a base definition from which to work from.

[nolabels]

97. I agree with the definition on what an atheist is or is not

I just might like to point out this thing that people call belief as opposed to a known in describing what is taking place and the results of such actions. As in when someone is trying to compare the empirical as opposed to the theoretical. Sometimes from the practical or common sense across the spectrum to philosophical where no ridged or constant circumstances occur and intellect and the pondering finally bears itself out from the circumstances.

I was also inferring from the ‘tend to happens’ points and across the gambit of thoughts where the effect might be experienced or noticed much later (even centuries). Cause and effect can be measured but an absolute certainty has never been possible because of control of the variable.

What I was getting at is somebody might be able to compare some parts of ones intellect with others and maybe find which is more valid (or better if you need). But when you only have something like this to use for a reference points for the measure of something you can’t see and or maybe never fully understand, how could one give a valid definition of what others are observing or even seem to know, that what is collaborated is the correct answer.

The paradox (along with many others) about viewing the contents of the box is relevant here. I don’t like labeling anybody especially with other’s ideals (“words” could be used inter-changeably here).

Knowing to me, would be in the doing, just like them little ants that go about their business with out asking any questions and only checking each others credentials. I cannot see how putting a few pounds a gelatinous mass of flesh on a constant and making it work, this would just seem as folly to me. Maybe even seeing anything first hand might not mean nothing either.

[Terwilliger]

102. Definitely not a club

I'd beat myself over the head with it

[Maple]

7. Well first you have to determine

if you genuinely don't believe in any kind of supernatural being, or if you're just trying to upset various people in your life. It may also be that you are angry at God because of something going on in your life. If you are genuinely an atheist...and it can be a journey, even a long one...then you become indifferent to the whole idea of religion.

Secondly, of course you're going to think about it. Especially during the process of giving it up. You are surrounded by references to religion every day. Even ones you're not consciously aware of. The belief saturates your culture.

Thirdly, it may just be that the version of religion presented to you doesn't fit. Maybe another Christian religion would make more sense to you. Or maybe Buddhism, or Hinduism or Paganism.

Finally, stepping away from everything people around you believe to be truth is a big step mentally and emotionally. You have to be ready for it, and not always ducking what might seem like a lightning bolt. Or figuring things that go wrong in your life are 'punishment'. There will always be things that go wrong...that is the nature of life.

And you don't have to accept evolution as an alternative either. I don't think we begin to know enough about anything to determine HOW life began, much less where or when. Evolution was certainly part of the process, but it isn't the whole explanation.

Yes, you do reach a stage where you not only don't believe, but wonder how you ever could have.

PS on edit. Yes, I'm an atheist. Became one during my teens, and I'm 57 now.

[roughsatori]

11. God still believes in you Maple, that's all that matters

I am just teasing--a friend of mine always says that to me.

[Maple]

13. LOL God would say

Maple who?

[ott]

8. Paraphrased quote:

Atheists are God's favorite because they leave him alone and he's always on their minds.

I think about it on a daily basis. Partially it's my agnosticism, in part because it's such a significant part of the lives of billions of others sharing this rock with me.

It hasn't faded with me, but it has morphed from an annoying thought process.

This site might provide some insight: http://atheismawareness.home.att.net

[Birthmark]

10. Don't worry about it.

I've been an atheist for about 30 years. My advice is just deal with things as they come. God or no-god becomes less and less relevant the older I get.

[fabius]

12. Same age I started disbelieving...

Now that I'm 30 years older and have seen people close to me die, it helps me to believe in God again. Or at least in something greater than ourselves. There's no particular harm that I can see in having a vague general belief. But if you don't believe, that's OK too. This is the only thing nobody can help you with.

Now, I do NOT believe any kind of supreme being is personally speaking to Shrub.

[nolabels]

39. I beleive in all kinds of things that I cannot see

The energy and spirit that let you and me write these words would be just one example. The exact measurement of it, or for that matter anything, known to exist but not being able to be seen, is for the person or thing interpreting the data to place in importance.

The reverence and measurement of it is also subject to something that can’t be really be seen but could be observed working. Instead of investigating why something can't work, I like to investigate why some things do work.

The bearing on the interpretation from one to another that our language has a direct influence on make this all possible. I am quite glad your interpretation of what belief means and is defined by your words with your definition of the words is different than mine or anybody else’s. In some sense this is part of the glue that holds the world together :-)

[AnnabelLee]

15. For myself,

& most of the atheists I've talked to, you do think about it less & less as you grow older.

[leftyandproud]

16. just accept it...

Accept the fact that WE DON'T KNOW...WE will NEVER know anything about this subject. Mankind is incapable of grasping the concept. We know the big bang happened. We don't know why it happened, or what caused it to happen, and we never will.

[ewagner]

48. Similar

Good post lefty.

Came to the same conclusions about 10 years ago.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

78. I was never much for being a moderate,

on any issue, especially this one. I know their is no god, just because I cannot prove it doesn't mean it's not true. Would we even consider god a relevant question if our ancestors, and precessors had not questioned it?

It seems that the only reason we woulud think a god existed is because we needed questions to be answered, and now that many of the basics have been, more and more people are dissenting from the status quo.

I can't imagine us even considering a their being a god, if our society hadn't indocrinated it in us.

[edward]

88. "never much for being a moderate."

A very thoughtful question and response. If you are really 17, a fairly mature person.
The term "atheist" is what dogmatists say when you do not share their thought and belief. If you do not live in Australia, we do not accuse you of hating Australia. It is a narcissistic approach.
It is hard to break from any mental training, and believing in God is no different, though perhaps very hard.
Why do we have to belive? Why does the most powerful being in the universe need us to believe "He" exists? Who would say that we have to believe in air, or the planet earth?
Perhaps you are ready to read Aristotle on the subject. He says"God is thought thinking itself." Not an easy idea to get your mind around. (and I am 46)
When Descartes said, I think therefore I am, he also is telling us that thinking and being are the same. That is, what is more real than what we think.

[gottaB]

17. I don't need God

to think my own thoughts, but I find myself thinking about what other people mean when they talk about God.

That's hard to avoid. A lot of people talk about things in religious terms, some quite intelligently.

From time to time I am reminded of how ideas I'm dealing with arose from religious thinking, or have certain connotations. That doesn't constitute being plagued, but it can be irksome.

When it comes to values, stuff I knew when I could barely tie my own shoes, then I definitely recognize the imprint of a religious upbringing. That doesn't prevent me from being able to scrutinize my values rationally and without recourse to a notion of God.

[AliceWonderland]

18. There's nothing wrong

with thinking about it, necessarily. I'm an atheist, and I wonder about the existence of god/nature of reality/soul/nature/all that cosmic stuff constantly. I'm not going to change my secular humanist worldview because of wondering, that's all. If you can't question your beliefs, then they're just another form of dogma, anyway. When I think about god, I examine it and my Roman Catholic upbringing. It's only brought positive things for me, actually -- I'll had some awfully interesting conversations because of it. It's all a journey.

[Chicagonian]

19. yes, the conditioning does wear off.

It's something that was 'hard-wired' into your brain for something like 15 years.
Give it some time.

[Merlin]

20. The questioning will never cease. But wisdom will come.

Or as T. S. Eliot put it:

We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And know the place for the first time.

I'm nearly 60 and it's always been on my mind. Maybe I'm atypical, but it's an extremely fascinating subject for me.

What happens I think is that you eventually reach an explanation that works for you -- at least for a while until you find something better. That place feels comfortable, and you can look upon it as wisdom.

FWIW, I have developed what I'm often told is an odd point of view. In my view, there IS a god, but one very different from the one we are told about in religion. I believe there had to have been an initial creator, a profoundly powerful and intelligent force. But that force maintains no contact with or control over things, other than requiring the universe continue to operate in accordance with the natural laws, such as those discovered by Newton, Einstein and all the rest. God is a builder and a programmer. He constructed the system, established its operations, and lets it run on its own.

Interestingly, Newton and Einstein believed pretty much the same thing. So did most of the founding fathers, Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, and many others, who were not christians, but rather deists--a now extinct belief, based on reason, which grew out of the enlightenment.

Good luck in all your exploration. It is an enthralling topic, and the discoveries you make along the way will be many.

[AliceWonderland]

21. Merlin, that is most intriguing

I don't believe I've encountered a modern-day deist before. I'm glad you posted!

[Merlin]

32. Thank you Alice.

And what a beautiful name you enjoy!

[Vladimir]

22. its a consideration

I was raised in an atheist family, and if anything have gone slightly in the other direction - I am now an agnostic. Mainly because I don't really care, but also because I can't see how you can say for sure that there is no god.

One thing that I have never done, though, is thinking in terms of religion. When shit happens, I don't think about god and going to a church, I think about human stupidity. I see humanism as a problem solving tool, and religion as a way of running away from problems. But hey, if others want to believe, whatever. I couldn't care less.

[Iverson]

23. be calm

The frequency with which you think about god is not big deal unless it becomes an obsession.

Believers are a loud majority, so culturally you will be awash in it for the rest of your life. The real challenge is just to be secure in who you are and what you think; define yourself by who you are, not by who others are.

[AnAmerican]

27. define yourself....

If I may be so bold. I like the line "define yourself by who you are, not by who others are."

My own version.....Define yourself by who you are, not by what others want you to be.


AnAmerican

[Iverson]

30. a fine corrollary

Let us hope that Cointelpro_Papers takes them both to heart.

[BonjourUSA]

26. Normal. The religiousity is all around you

If one day you hear : "God and all his fellows bless America". Or best, if one day you hear this archaism never again : "God bless America".Or still best, if one day you see a witness in a lawsuit swearing on the constitution of the United States or on nothing at all, perhaps your mind will be free.

[buddhamama]

28. know where you're coming from

i gave up my catholic teachings when i was 17/18 and i still think about 'GOD'-that is over ten yrs. i can't really give you an answer. for me, i think it still occurs because i am open to possiblities. i don't believe but i'm not disprectful towards others who do,and i'm not about to declare that i am right and others are wrong. plus, i teach my son as best as i can, about different religions/philosophies. i've read to him from the Bible,etc. so it comes up often in my house.

the only advice i feel i can/should give you is to be respectful of the beliefs of others. if you support religious freedom than you need to support religious freedom--if you know what i mean.

[southernfried]

31. can't be an atheist just because you want to

maybe that descision was a little premature.

[RobinA]

35. Yeah, Maybe....

you are more of an agnostic. I've always been an atheist and I never think about god. I mean, to me he's just a myth that a lot of people seem to have a reason to believe in. The whole notion seems a bit silly to me. I think more about the psychology of religion and why humans seem to have this need for it.

[EV1Ltimm]

33. : )

if you were an atheist in india, you'd be thinking in terms of ganesh, i'm sure.

but don't feel obligated to be one way or another. if thinking from time to time that god created something or divinely set forth a plan for someone to create the fork makes you comfortable, then so be it.

but you can definitely reach that point where you don't see an act of god, but rather how a couple of billion years of completely random acts and a couple of months of human dedication brought forth adult swim on cartoon network.

peace late.

[Tigermoose]

34. The most important question we face is that of the soul's existence.

Christianity has 2000+ years of history and great thinkers, from the Hebrews, Greeks (Plotinus in the 5th annead proves God's existence through reason), and Christian philosophers such as Augustine, Aquinas, and C. S. Lewis. If you are really interested in this question, I would first advice reading Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis, who was an atheist who turned Christian after years of soul searching and investigation into most of the major religions and movements. He addresses agnosticism, dualism, atheism, etc. In case you don't know Lewis, he was best friends with J. R. R. Tolkien, the author of the Chronicles of Narnia (among other great works), a professor at Oxford, and one of the most intelligent men of the 20th century. After Lewis, a whole world of great thinking lies before you, from Pascal to Montaigne and others. I am in graduate studies, and it is shocking how little attention is paid to the 2000+ years of Christian philosophy and thinking in favor of new unproven theories of modern academia (some good, some bunk). But that's what modern thinkers get paid for, to discard the old and come up with their brand-spanking new theories-of-everything-as-long-as-it-doesn't-involve-God. But I digress...

Most importantly, however, is experience. As a young man, it is difficult to accept or understand the Christian concept of surrendering oneself, and it is no wonder modern man has a particular problem with that because of the move to emancipation of the individual in the last few hundred years since the "Enlightenment." But once you screw up a few times and hurt some people and yourself, and see loved ones die, and see how shitty most people sometimes act, you will come to see the wisdom in Christianity. The worst thing you can do is stick your head in the sand and pretend its not an important issue. It is funny how many otherwise intelligent people will say to always seek the truth, but when God comes up they stick their hands to their ears and say "neener neener can't hear you...blah blah blah...."

Also, don't let issues like evolution sidetrack you. Many fundy Christians set a false example for most Christians when they make this a litmus test of the faith. The only thing most Christians would maintain is that God provided the spiritual "spark," or instilled our souls in the human form. So, evolution is not really a big deal at all as long as the theory does not maintain in the strictly biological evolution of human consciousness and the soul.

If you are a more reserved, spiritual and reflective type, I would advice Catholocism, Lutheranism, or Presbyterianism. If you are more outgoing and prefer to worship expressively, go with some of the protestant pentacostal groups. Methodists are a good mix of the two. I find many fundy Christians have a whiplash reaction to their original entirely-faith-based Christianity, and refuse to use reason to reconcile themselves and find themselves at the other end of the spectrum, as proclaimed atheists and/or agnostics. Christianity makes sense, if you seek, you will find the answers you look for. Jesus, Augustine, Acquinas, Thomas, Plotinus, Plato, Shakespeare, Pascal, Montaigne, etc....so many great minds whose foundational core was their Christianity, and yet today many ignore this tradition in their pride. Which is another thing, to be Christian is to seek to be humble, another quality very tough to deal with as a modern American, especially a young man. I was there, I know how it is. Hang in there, use your mind to research ALL perspectives (don't rush to judgment), and give it time. I know you'll be a Christian if you do this. It is simly the truest, best answer for all that is.

[Twitch14]

86. Ah, but here's the rub

Say that our young Conintel_Pro takes your advice, decides that Christianity is the best way for him, yet can't find a single sect that truly fits what he believes. Even if his words and actions could be used as the best example of a Christian, if he doesn't align himself with one particular sect, then is he truly a Christian?

Personally, I would say yes. However, I would wager that most Christians, even those who don't consider themselves Fundamentalist, would answer no. I don't remember Jesus ever saying that you'd be checked at the gates of Heaven to see if you were a card-carrying member. This is one of the main reasons why I punted on the whole idea of organized religion about 15 years ago. (Raised Catholic, BTW.)

[Tigermoose]

95. My advice was to do serious research....

and if he does that, than church denomination is pretty inconsequential. If he becomes an "intellectual Christian," he will probably gravitate towards Catholocism because of its immense tradition based on theology and great-thinkers, or Lutheranism for the same reasons if he distrusts the Church. Fundy denominations play better with the more faith inspired Christians who aren't into intellectualism and knowing the why of everything. I envy them actually, and wish my mind would let me rest in a simple faith. But I find I've been rewarded in my own way, so that is why I say to each his own.

btw, going to church and being part of a church community is useful for establishing a reinforcing habit that backs up your findings through reason and faith. We humans are largely influenced by habitual patterns, and it is this reason the Catholic church is so good about rituals and community, although they got pretty dogmatized and needed to adjust for the growing demand for the Word for everyone, and not just the clergy. Personally, I'm somewhere between Lutheranism and Catholocism. I attend mass, but I'm not Catholic ;P

[BurtWorm]

91. The most important question is not "Is there a god" or "Is there a soul"

but when am I going to eat? Even infants worry about this question. We never stop worrying about it.

[Tigermoose]

94. Nah. Eternal damnation vs. salvation trumps temporary suffering.

nt

[Az]

92. Perhaps it would be better

To learn to understand the nature by which the mind works. Including how we come to believe things. Then he could turn his understanding to the nature of the various beliefs presented to him with knowledge and understanding instead of reliance on ancient texts and the subsequent rationalization thereof.

Even should one use the longevity of particular belief sets you are faced with the problem that there are a mutlitude of surviving beliefs. And pointedly many of these are based on completely different founding principles. There are far more than just the Abrahamic religions in this world and some of them are older than those. Longevity is no guaranteer of truth. Merely funcitonality within social structures.

[Tigermoose]

93. While you are waiting for Science to give you the answers...

to the secrets of the universe, I'll go with Christianity. I hope science comforts you in sickness as well as in health.

and also..the texts came after the oral tradition.

and current theory holds that our minds are shaped by language, which in itself is nothing more than deferred meaning, combined with a subconscious that still remains a mystery. It's kinda like Quantum Physics, which says that reality is shaped by perception...which in our case is fundamentally flawed because of our language constructing our thought processes. Coincidentally, this fits with Christian ideology that says man is in a fallen state, and that only through divine grace and inspiration can we come nearer the truth as it exists outside of our fallen nature. Have fun thinking, and waiting on the scientists to show us how to live and think.

[Az]

111. Comfort

In sickness I will find comfort in human kindness for humans are basically good and reach out to those who are hurt. To science I will look for a possible cure for whatever illness I am stricken by. I recommend the same for you as well as I have more confidence in medical technology than I do in prayer and I value your presense and wish it to continue. And incidently if you are in need of comfort you need only reach out and I or others will be there.

[Trajan]

124. May I recommend a COMPLETE immersion ...

in the world of your own beliefs ? ....

Can I also behoove you to COMPLETELY reject scientific knowledge and all benefit thereof ???? ....

One MUST have a sincere moral core: .. a set of values that is constant and congruent ...

You reject science as a source of solace and comfort ...

Will you become seriously ill one day ? ....... THAT would be unfortunate: .... but since science does NOT bring comfort, please do NOT allow science, or its produce, to intrude in your pain: ..

Do NOT use ANY medical practice or pharmacological agent that was devised through a scientific regimen .... because THAT would expose an inconsistency in your belief system: ... one CANNOT reject a premise of beneficence, and then go on to enjoy that beneficence ....

One might call that hypocrisy ......

Would a person reject Krsna as a god, then light a candle in his honor ? .....

Would a person deny Mohammed , and THEN declare him the TRUE apostle of God ? ....

IF you become ill: .... Do NOT seek the 'solace' or 'comfort' of medical science, but instead do was Jesus would do: .... perform an exorcism ...

According to scripture: .... illness is caused by demonic possession, and was healed through exorcism :

-------------------------

Matthew 9:32-33
As they went out, behold, they brought to him a dumb man possessed with a devil. And when the devil was cast out, the dumb spake: and the multitudes marvelled, saying, It was never so seen in Israel.

Matthew 12:22
Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.

Matthew 17:15-18
Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.

And I brought him to thy disciples, and they could not cure him.

Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him hither to me.

And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour.


James 5:13-15
Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any merry? let him sing psalms.

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

---------------------

It would be inconsistent for a man to belittle the scientific method, and its goals of providing benefit for mankind, and THEN go on to enjoy the fruits of that enterprise himself ......

Be honest with yourself and your god: .. and live ONLY by true beliefs, like those described in those New Testament verses .....


I believe solace and comfort are HUMAN traits, executed by human beings with a HUMANISTIC 'spirit', no matter WHAT theology they ascribe to, or which they lack thereof ....

--------------

"…a God who could make good children as easily a bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave is angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell -- mouths mercy, and invented hell -- mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!"
-- Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger


<edit: ... I was WAY out of line, and misread the tenor of your post ..... >

[Quahog]

116. THANK YOU, Tigermoose!!

Awesome post. You have summarized much of my own life journey in a few paragraphs. I was born into an atheist household (actually, both of my parents were exposed to Christianity as children and rejected it, along with all notions of God, in young adulthood). I always had a strong spiritual bent, and immersed myself in a number of rich spritual traditions as I traveled the world. At one point I thought the Hinduism of the Bali Aga people was really calling my name, at another time Buddhism was hugely appealing. But through all of this, the story of Jesus continued tugging at my subconscious, which was ironic, as the Christian tradition was the very one that I rejected out of hand from day one.

At some point, some combination of the Jesus Christ Superstar soundtrack and the reading of Kazantzakis' "Last Temptation of Christ" and a number of other simultaneous stimulae caused me to begin reading deeply in the Christian tradition. I cannot say that I had a "born again" experience, at least not one that would pass muster with most fundamentalists! God kind of sneaked up on me. But many of the authors you mention (especially C.S. Lewis and Augustine of Hippo), and two that you do not mention (Franz Kafka and Thomas Merton), profoundly altered my understanding of my own place in this messy reality. I received the sacraments of the Roman Catholic Church at age 31. That was 12 years ago.

I still find myself in conflict with some of the Church's teachings, but I find that this is the case with almost all Catholics. Hasn't appeared to damage the Church all that much to suffer these varying degrees of dissent from the laity. But I do not believe that I am in conflict with God, except at those times when my actions do not reflect my gratitude for all that He has given me. I am not an evangelist, and I have no axe to grind with anyone. I simply try to live my life in accordance with the teachings of Christ. I find that this is usually easy to do when I put other people's needs before my own, and difficult when I do not.

The rift between that which we consider knowledge and that which we accept on faith exists not only in our culture but within every human soul, and each individual deals with it in their own way. But it is not a thing which can be "resolved" in the truest sense of resolution, that is, that it may be put to rest once and for all. As you suggest to our young inquirer, this is a life-long process, and only a closed and inflexible mind will forstall it. No need to rush to conclusions at age seventeen! Heck, I'm 43, and I struggle with my faith every single day. It's a rewarding struggle in the long run, but I am certain that at age seventeen I would not have found it so.

[Trajan]

123. It could very well be ...

That "Jesus, Augustine, Acquinas, Thomas, Plotinus, Plato, Shakespeare, Pascal, Montaigne, etc...." .. are ALL wrong .....

SINCE they are all human beings, and human beings are by nature faulty, imperfect and ignorant .... I would BET THE FARM that they are all wrong ......

You are asking a man to believe simply because 'these great men believe, so YOU should too ' .....

This could be defined at least as an appeal to inappropriate authority, an ad vericundiam argument, in that even THESE great minds arent perfect, and are subject to human error ...

Nay, ... dont simply follow the 'wise men' like a sheep follows the shepherd, but instead SEEK THE GOD defined within the dogma itself ....

One cannot 'know' what god is without using the prescribed theology as a guide, and then one can seek THAT god within the framework provided by THAT theology .....

Christians, for instance, generally REJECT the reality of the hindu deities and the Muslim 'Allah', we presume because they have studied each theology and have come to the conclusion that the god(s) defined in THAT theology is not a reality .... just as Hindu's and Islam have rejected Yahweh/Jesus as a 'true god' .. again presuming they have studied the theology and have rejected the premise definitively ....

One might have well provided a list of great hindus or great muslims as evidence to how Islam or Hinduism is 'definitely' valid ....

I am an atheist because I do NOT see as real ANY of the theologies offered by mankind ..... not a single one .... even though the brilliant luminaries in the "Christian Hall of Fame" are ALL christians, they have yet to make THAT god real for me ...

[JNelson6563]

36. much depends on how you arrived

at this atheism.

I was Catholic all my life. It was purely happenstance that led me to serious investigation of Christianity. After several years of hard work on the topic I came to the realization that it was all bunk.

Now I see folks try to attribute almost anything to "God". For instance our dentist, seems after that court decision on the Pledge he got a little zealous in bringing God into the convo at every turn. He identified my son's straight teeth as "God's work". My take happens to be genetics.

A friend of mine called and told me about her sister's husband dying rather young and unexpectedly. She was a bit shaken up, told me how he drank and smoked way too much and then tells me she knew this happened for a reason. I said yeah cause he drank and smoked way too much. She laughed and dropped that part of the topic, knowing I made sense.

There are folks who will cling to their religious beliefs as though their life depended on it and that is fine. That same friend in the above paragraph was with me during those years I delved into religion, a fellow Catholic even. As I shared some of my conclusions she tried to counter them but she's not very knowledgable. Finally, she could take no more and the truth of the matter came out. I will never forget how child-like she was when she cried out "I can't believe my Mim (grandma) isn't in heaven with Jesus!" I realize then that I could never again have such a conversation with her as it would be intentional cruelty to do so after this revelation.

This is a journey you take alone. It can be very difficult if you were ever a devout believer--keeping a clear head in spite of preprogramming--overcoming paradigms in your head takes discipline. Just be sure to put no pressure on yourself to arrive at preset conclusions. Remember your mind is free to travel where it will. Take your time, take in all the info you can and make well thought out decisions. Also know you don't have to arrive at an either/or thing. Agnosticism is for those who have no problem admitting they just do not know. To some that represents cowardice, to me it looks like honesty.

If I can be of any assistance don't hesitate to PM me.

Julie

[Tigermoose]

37. Have you ever discussed Christianity with a scholar in the field?

edit: I am definitely not a scholar in theology or Christianity :)

It seems you are a believer in Predestination -- cause and effect being the ultimate cause of everything -- a modern version of Predestination, but thats what it is in-effect. Our lives and actions are pre-ordained by previous causes - genetics, society, etc. If you believe we have an individual will, that would be called a soul, and you would be contradicting yourself. You want freedom of the soul? Or to be an automaton of predestined natural (genetic) and societal causes?

[JNelson6563]

40. Um, no, I don't believe in

predestination. What is this conclusion based on?

And I have discussed religion with some excellent minds. It is from them I learned how to take a more objective look at it all.

Julie

[JNelson6563]

56. Oops, I re-read your post

and now understand where your conclusion comes from. Excuse my missing it the first time through.

It seems you are a believer in Predestination -- cause and effect being the ultimate cause of everything -- a modern version of Predestination, but thats what it is in-effect."

The genetics thing I referred to determines some of our physical characteristics and I am pretty sure science goes along with this. ;-) I do not believe genetics predetermines who we ultimately become.

Cause and effect; as in you drink too much and smoke too much with an existing physical condition leading to premature death. Well I don't know that I would qualify that as predestination. I'd say it is poor choices.

I do not see the ability to make choices in our lives as automatically meaning we have a "soul" (which I am guessing you use the Christian meaning of?). I think many do not fully realize the fact they are actually making choices in many cases in the first place. I also believe that in many situations folks do not realize they even have choices. I guess it all comes from clear vision and enlightenment. I have seen too many cases where folks stay in miserable situations because they believe they have to this or that thing. It never occurs to them to look beyond the paradigm society (or their particular segment of it anyway) has set for them.

I believe that we have a long way to go down the path of evolution. One of the biggest indicators is how common hate is between humans who have different views/religious beliefs/customs etc. Fear is at the root of that, an irrational fear. Irrational fear is a very base emotion. Animalistic even.

Sorry for all the blather.

Julie

[Tigermoose]

68. So, if causes are not genetic they are social?

If the cause for our actions are not caused by genetic reasons, then they would be caused by social ideologies and conditioning? Is this your perspective?

If not, how do you account for the notion of us having "free will"? If you say evolution, then it is still nothing more than a genetic and social ideological cause and effect, and you have not escaped your predestined part. Your choices are nothing more than chemical and social stimuli.

[JNelson6563]

73. But I do not consider

social influences to be irreversable. For instance, not all who come from abusive homes go on to be abusive parents. Cycles can be broken. Independent thought can be achieved and paradigms disregarded. I feel the greater frequency with which this happens is indicative of progress we make as a species.

Julie

[Tigermoose]

96. But how is independent thought achieved?

Other social influences? Genetics? The individual soul?

Do you think animals have independent thought? Consciousness?

My idea for human evolution is that we are done evolving biologically. Our evolution for the last few thousand years, and probably for a few thousand more, will be one of the evolution of ideologies, as we develop more and more efficient ideologies that maximize our societies and individual happiness....Christianity being the truth as well as ideology that God has chosen to reveal to us as the best way of knowing him and ourselves. Tearing down social systems and religion without an adequate replacement is like backtracking in man's evolution. Man's next big step is to harmonize Faith and Reason rather than seeing them as opposite ideologies.

[JNelson6563]

99. Well objectivity is the goal

when it comes to independent thought. That would mean being able to view something without any of the emotional attachments. It's a vision thing. IMO it can be one of the hardest things for us to do.

Man's next big step is to harmonize Faith and Reason rather than seeing them as opposite ideologies.

They are opposite ideologies. The two cannot be merged.

Julie

[nolabels]

100. Fideism affirms the priority of faith

http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/handouts/faith_reason.html
(snip)
Fideism -- a type of reasoning which holds that religious belief systems are not ultimately subject to rational evaluation. Fideism affirms the priority of faith (fides) over reason. In its most vulgar forms, fideism is simply believing something because you want to believe it, and in its most sophisticated forms, fideism is a type of rationality which acknowledges the epistemological priority of personal commitment.
(snip)


Here is a neat one in a nut shell and about 20-30 pages
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/f/faith-re.htm
Faith and Reason
(snip)
The interplay between reason and faith is an important topic in the philosophy of religion. It is closely related to, but distinct from, several other issues in the philosophy of religion: viz., the existence of God, divine attributes, the problem of evil, divine action in the world, religion and ethics, religious experience and religious language, and the problem of religious pluralism. Moreover, an analysis of the interplay between faith and reason also provides resources for philosophical arguments in other areas such as metaphysics, ontology, and epistemology.(snip)

[Tigermoose]

107. They are not antithetical.

If you follow reason to its logical conclusions, you will find that nothing has meaning outside of faith, which in that case reason will enhance and support faith, and increased faith will encourage stronger reasoning, etc etc.. Now...many fundamentalist Christians espouse faith as being superior to reason, but I believe they do that in ignorance. Augustine, Acquinas, Lewis, Pascal, Montaigne, Plato, Plotinus, etc....all foundational philosophers who used reason to strengthen their faith. The opposition of faith and reason is a post-Enlightenment idea encouraged by those such as Voltaire to tear down Christianity and the Church. We limit ourselves and our possibilities by accepting a dualist mentality of binary opposites.

[JNelson6563]

115. assigning supernatural

cause to an event requires no reasoning.

It has been my experience that the more reason entered the picture the less sense faith in the supernatural made. I do not see the two as hand in hand but I can see where a believer might think so.

I used to think so too.

Julie

[Az]

117. There were many theologists

that considered reason to be an anathema to faith. Martin Luther comes ot mind. Reason aspires to discern truth. If the truth is that there is a god then reason should lead to this.

As to meaning. Why do you lead with the assumption that there must be an implied meaning to life? Why not apply to life whatever meaning you find valid. Perhaps the only meaning to life is what you make of it.

Your arguments seem to be built on a form of increduality. You place your assumptions about the nature of the universe and then deny any that do not fit it. Should not you lead where truth demands? Should you not discover a means of finding truth? Does not faith immediately break the quest for truth by denying the actual search for it? An insistance of truth to me seems highly suspect, particularly when it denies an active search for truth.

[Quahog]

119. On the other hand

There have been many theologians who have made the marriage of faith and reason their life's work. Thomas Aquinas comes to mind.

We have a tendancy, also culturally conditioned since the Enlightenment, to equate reason in it's purest sense with the pragmatic application of reasoning skills to the scientific process of inquiry and experimentation. But they are not the same things. If we can only use our reason for the purpose of "proving" one thing or another, then yes, reason and faith cannot merge, because the existance of God can be no more proven than disproven.

But I see no sense in limiting the great gift of intellectual reason to the task of proving or disproving this or that hypothesis. There is an outer boundary of reason, that leads to notions like quantum physics, that has little to do with experimentation, or even with sensate reality. I wish I had more time in my life to go to those outer reaches of my own intellectual capacity (sadly, I have to work for a living).

But I think the whole argument of "is this God's work or is it genetics" begs the issue of whose work genetics is. As one of the earlier posts in this thread stated, we know that the Big Bang happened, but we don't know why (that is, "why" in the ontological sense, not why the cosmic materials reacted in the way that they did). We can apply a "why" to this occurrance, but this is bound to be a creation of our own minds, of our intellect, our reason, and our faith, in varying proportions.

I cannot recommend highly enough a slim volume by C.S. Lewis entitled "Mere Christianity." Lewis was not a scientist or a theologian, but he had remarkable clarity of thought, and expressed some profound observations on these very issues in the most rational, accessible and comprehensible terms. It's a book that you can read in 90 minutes, but beware, you may end up thinking about it for years.

[Az]

121. Why limit reason

Science and reason do not prove things. They pursue truth. If god exists we certainly cannot prove such a thing with reason but it most certainly seek some evidence of the matter and in so doing raise the certainty of the matter. Alas this is where the discussion turns into the true theological debate and is perhaps a bit too much for this forum. Suffice to say that I am familiar with C.S. Lewis and a number of other theologians. I fear that Mr Lewis' conclusions were a measure more of his time than his reason. He was not as he suggested free from influence as his society, much as ours, was soaked in talk of god.

As to his conclusion that one must accept that Jesus "was, and is, the son of God, or else a madman or something worse." This is again flawed. Like the old Pascal Wager the flaw here comes from not considering further possibilities. He places the notion that the bible is an accurate description of real occurrences. This is far from proven. Thus Jesus could be any number of things including misrepresented.

[kayell]

38. I don't belive in god, but I think about religion(s)

Religion is pervasive in our society, and for that reason it is worth thinking about, and even studying. I find religion and religious writings interesting in what they have to say about the search of humans for values and meaning. There is a lot of good in the writings of many religions. There is also a lot that I would term evil from the stand point of someone who values human diversity, tolerance and peace. Being aware of the beliefs of a number of different religions give a lot of insight into human beings and the range of ways we think about the world. Religion has also been a major factor in much of history, and is deeply emeshed in politics world wide. I don't think that it is necessary to ignore religious thought to be sure of your own beliefs.

[sybylla]

41. It's only human, cp

As I watched my children grow I noticed that as they left different stages of development, they often took two steps forward and one step back. They would get past the stage of needing to have me in their presence every waking moment only to fall back to it two weeks later when they had a particularly bad day. They would give up a particular behavior because they had matured beyond it, but then fall back to it again for a little while because it was familiar and less scary. I think of it like they were trying on a favorite pair of jeans they had outgrown to see if they were still as comfortable as they remembered. They learned that once you have outgrown something, it never feels right again. But that doesn't ever stop you from going back occasionally and trying it.

It's all about fear. Marching into the unknown, changing world is scary. Leaving behind a behavior that gave comfort at least in its familiarity if not in reality is difficult. I have always thought of myself as at the very least an agnostic as a child (belief in god, santa and the tooth fairy all disappeared at the same time) and an atheist as an adult. I grew up in a family that became disillusioned with their church when I was young so they left me to my own devices religiously. I never went through all the religious schooling my friends did. I never was indoctrinated in the religion. And I still have occasional days when I think of god, try him/her on for size, and every time I am reaffirmed in the knowledge that it just doesn't fit.

Don't worry. It is only natural.

[mclam]

42. Don't think of it as a plague.

One of the reasons I'm an atheist is because (for the most part) it isn't dogmatic. There's no law that says "There is no God and you shall not even consider for a moment that there might be." Atheism is based on humanist rationalism and a big part of that is accepting the room for doubt. "Wisest is he who knows that he does not know." -Socrates

So it's fine (and even a good thing) to be thinking about God. That's how you confirm your atheism. I've been known to be brought to tears in churchs, mosques and synangogues by the beauty of the spaces but I think of it more as an appreciation for humanity's yearning for something beyond itself (the same yearning that brought us science and philosophy) rather than the power of God working through me.

When you go to college take a class on the Bible as Literature or the influence of mythology on Judeo-Christian religion. It's absolutely fascinating and went further towards confirming my atheism than anything I'd ever done or thought before. Studying and thinking about religion will help you realize and articulate why you're an atheist.

[Augspies]

61. Very nicely put

"but I think of it more as an appreciation for humanity's yearning for something beyond itself"

Many times people who are religious or overly spirtual will look at those of us who prefer the world as experienced, as if we were missing some ineffable joy, some part of being human. But we don't really; joy, mystery, and longing to create better futures doesn't require religion or god. It is something built into us as human beings--a need to find something 'else' to explain why the tracks in the sand jagged left instead of right, and just because that need has expressed itself in our history as religion, Cathedrals, hymn makers, Bach, Handel, or sacred dances doesn't make those things any less an expression of humanity neither does it make those things God-given.

I should explain, I too (an atheist) find the creations of religion beautiful, poignant, and horrible too. I also find the same awe looking out into space, or into my garden. The process of life and the universe is vast, complex, and completely awe inspiring. Look to all those things to find your answers.

Also I think that the poster should look into some Carl Sagan he is a master of this.

Jeremy

[SheepyMcSheepster]

43. I grew up in the methodist church

I was even president of the youth group for a couple of years. I never really felt any connection to the christian god during that time.

Everything you think is based on words/symbols, try thinking about something without using words in your brain or 'talking to yourself'. these symbols that we use by no means communicate totally what we feel and observe. there are problems with the theories from wich we base our understanding? what about time? it is a subjective thing, it is not real, we made it up. what about gravity? sure it's there and we can observe it but it is yet to really be understood. My point is that we have a don't even really have the faintest idea about what is going on and then we try to communicate the ideas we have about what is going on through a flawed communication system. this leaves me to decide that nobody really has the answer, no one knows the truth. Their truth comes through their own view of the world/universe. don't worry about god and live your life the way feel you should. The one thing i can believe is that we are all a part of this big crazy universe thing, so i feel that what ever happens here is ok because we are part of the whole(god/tao)

Humans are animals and our behaviour does not always hinge on logic, it is largely influenced by emotion and beliefs which are not neccessarily logical.

i read some books a while back that helped me kind of organize how i feel about things, try reading some Robert Anton Wilson "Prometheus Rising". He is a fun read and very interesting. sorry for the long post.

[BurtWorm]

59. No need to apologize for that post

It was very interesting. I find RAW very interesting. Haven't read any of his books, but I check out his writings on the Internet every once in a while. I learned about general semantics through him. I like RAW when he's attacking bullshit, but I find that he's a bit of a sucker himself occasionally, especially on way out conspiracy and psychosocial theories.

[Dhalgren]

44. I still like

the Xanthipus quote - (paraphrase, I don't have the text before me)
"If you were to come upon god, you wouldn't know what you were looking at."


edit: typing

[edward]

90. ok, what do you make of that?

provocative thought.

[Dhalgren]

118. Ansalm said,

"God is that than which nothing greater can be conceived." What Xanthipus would say is "God is that which is beyond conception." In order to hold a thought, that thought must be incompassable (?) by your mind, therefore, what you are conceiving in thought is not-god. Whereas, god, in reality, is god. Old Xanny wasn't an atheist, he was actually the purist of worshippers. He said that since god was absolutely, and by deffinition, unknowable, you should go about your business in as upright and ethical a manner as possible and hope for the best.

[RandomKoolzip]

45. You know what man

If you're smart enought to use a name like Cointelpro Papers (or to even know what COINTELPRO was fer pete's ache) , I don't really think you need too much more guidance. You're on the right track: skepticism is a human being's most advanced instinct.

Don't worry about the existence of a god; let's worry about the possibility of sustainable life first, THEN move on to the metaphysics.

[Terwilliger]

46. As a skeptic (which is what you are) you can question that...

and the questions could plague you for the rest of your life.

Hell, at some point you may "discover" "god".

The value is to leave your mind free to explore the possibilities.

[blondeatlast]

47. Some very intelligent replies to this post--

I won't weigh in since I'm a Christian, but I'm used to seeing several seething posts regarding Theism vs. Atheism.

Glad to see we can have an intelligent thread in GDF!!!

:bounce:

[Gringo]

49. I "snapped out of it" at about age 12

Though I occasionally went through the motions for social reasons.

Atheism does not mean that you consider the existence of a deity to be impossible, it just means that you find it unlikely and reject all theologies.

Any philosophy that would say flat out "there is no god, period" would be irresponsible, and dishonest.

How can living people discount any possibility for what may or may not exist outside of our perception, or beyond our lifespan?

So I don't "believe" in God, but I like to fancy that there might be a higher power around, doling out little punishments to the bad folks. I also like the idea of an afterlife, or a rebirth, but I'm not counting on it. And I believe that the likelihood of a God that would sent you to hell (or the existence of a hell for that matter) for not worshipping him is so slim that I don't sweat it AT ALL. Who would want such an egomaniacal god surrounded by sycophants, anyway?

[Dr Fate]

52. Nice SF gif- I'm moving there in 3 weeks.

n/t

[Terwilliger]

53. WHAT?!

Oh there goes the neighborhood! :hi:

[Dr Fate]

50. You will go back and forth...

...dont worry- perfectly normal.

I went from flat-out-atheist, to "some thing is there", back to even stauncher atheist, and back to "some kind of natural, explainable force exists, but I'm not worried about it and no one has it figured out anyway."

[blondeatlast]

51. Reread the subject line, so I WILL weigh in

Anyone who holds a THOUGHTFUL belief/nonbelief? should have doubts either way. As long as you can question yourself, your beliefs, and, if you do believe in one, your Deity, you are bound to be a better person for it, IMHO.

FWIW, I called myself an atheist when I was your age, and I've had several reversals and re-reversals since then. During one of my atheistic/agnostic periods, nothing short of a miracle happened to me, so I began thinking more and more and finally came to believe in God.

But if you think I have blind faith now, think again. I still question. I will lose my faith when I lose my doubt (well, it makes sense to me).

[BurtWorm]

54. I've reached the point

where I'm at peace with my atheism. It did take a while. I stopped believing in and fearing God in my early teens, but I went through a period of believing in the possibility of mysticism in my 20s. I even thought I had gone through a couple of mystical experiences that brought me closer to an understanding of what "god" is. Then I went through a long period of not give a fuck about the god question. A few years ago, I became interested in skepticism, which led me to some works criticizing the notion of a historical Jesus. It's odd, but once Jesus was finished for me as a historical human being, god went out the window with him.

[Friar]

55. depends on what you mean by "God"

Phycists have an open argument about the necessity of a "prime mover" and most are agnostic about this concept. When it comes to the dieties of the world's religions they pretty much agree that these are ideologies unsupported by the evidence. Read lotsa science stuff and come to your own informed conclusions. Speculation drenched in hope and fantasy aren't much to go on.

Phycists? Who the heck are they? :crazy: I think I meant Physicists :grr:

[Cointelpro_Papers]

103. Science is a major reaason I don't believe in god.

I understand more of science than the average science teacher, but that's what I think. I've had discussions with a few teachers, and completely talked circles around them.

[Az]

57. Find a community

It sounds as if you have not readily accepted the constant drumming of the god drums. I do not know if you came to this conclusion on your own but I do know that finding other atheists can be a daunting task.

Our society is essentially god soaked. Depending on where you live there can be constant reminders that you are expected to believe in god or face punishment. It would be an extroridinary individual that could resist such marketing on a constant basis. What you may need is to find some like minded people to associate with with which you can further explore your thoughts and perhaps expand upon them as well.

There are a number of orgs that are atheist friendly. If you wish to wade before you plunge in you may want to consider the Unitarian Universalist Church. This is a nondogmatic relgion. Originally based on two xian denominations they eventually merged and became something else. The UUs are open to all who embrace tolerance. They do not drum god into people and they embrace exploration. They count amongst their numbers atheists, humanists, pagans, fallen xians, mixed religious marriages, and anyone with a desire for non brimstone and damnation community.

If you feel you are ready for something a bit more specific consider the various atheist/humanist/skeptical associations. American Atheists have representation in most of the states. They tend to be a bit more combative and focused on opposing the fundimentalists though. If you seek a more positive route you may want to consider the Secular Humanists. They too have a fairly wide representation and their charter deals more with how to build a better community on humanist principles.

There are also the skeptical societies. These focus more on dealing with the multitude of paranormal belief systems and thus go beyond the theistic questions. These focus on opposing those that would scam people and prey upon their hopes and desires. Often seen as the spoilers the skeptics in truth are fighting for those that are caught in the midst of delusions.

There is also a new entity (relitively new) called the Church of Free Thought. This is essentially an atheist church dedicated to exploring the world freed of dogmatic blinders. They are based in Texas and have a few branches that may be in your areas.

The trick here is not to let yourself be isolated. As I mentioned this society is soaked in god. It is a constant drone. Added to this religions offer an incredible social support structure that those who do not buy their dogma are expelled from. Some have the personality that thrive in isolation, some do not. We are a social creature. To expect to thrive in isolation is perhaps a bit much. Do not deprive yourself of all the trappings of community simply because you percieve the majority to be based on a lie. There are other ways.

[Liberator_Rev]

60. Check out "http://atheists-for-jesus.com"

Personally, I much prefer being a "Liberals Like Christ", but if you really want to be an atheist,
check out http://atheists-for-jesus.com , a very serious group of people free enough to appreciate
great thought even from religious thinkers.

at http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org .
WE are the Answer to the "Christian Coalition" & "Religious Right" .
YOU are the way to get the word out, because unlike THEM,
WE are the friends of the POOR and the downtrodden,
who can't give US the kind of support that
the RICH give to our opponents.

[Terwilliger]

65. Rev...now come on

there are no Atheists for Jesus...if anything, there are atheists who think that the Christ example and story was a good one with poitive values.

Atheists-for-Mohammed would be in the same group.

[Az]

69. I suspect that is the idea

I doubt you will find a mind capable of twisting itself around enough to say that there is no god but Jesus was its son. The idea behind the Atheists for Jesus is just the support of the teachings attributed to Jesus.

[edward]

89. everyone is wrong except for you, right?

atheists for Jesus. that is both hilarious and arrogant.
you never tire of judging people do you.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

104. Damn it, I though I'd escape this crap,

but their is always someone like you ready to shove religion and Jesus down my throat, even when I portrait myself in a some what vulnerable position.

An atheists for jesus is not an atheist, and If i really want to be an atheists, I will not believe in jesus, for belief in him is a belief in a god.

[nolabels]

108. Post #63 is a good post if you skin like leather, or you're willing to....

take someone else’s word on it. I don't never. Quest onto the Unknown, where the biggest crime might be not wanting to know. As you travel you may notice that the sirens along the shore are sometimes relics of a forgotten day


http://www.geocities.com/wadamse/rapanuipics.html

[blondeatlast]

63. Why is thinking about "god" an annoying thought process?

Beware: the dogmatists on the atheistm spectrum are just as dangerous as the dogmatists of any established religion.

Now that I reread your post, (and I've read your previous posts) it looks as though you want to be convinced that "god" doesn't exist. As many of the atheists have told you already, it ain't gonna happen.

You've gotten some good advice from many thoughtful atheists on the board who are telling you it is okay to question your atheism and I heartily agree. I don't think that is what you want--you want to be convinced so that you will not have any doubts. That is dangerous, but you are too young to know that yet.

Let those thoughts cross your mind--they are there for a reason. If they are annoying, avoid this board, there are too many intelligent people on both sies to make you fell comfortable.

[Paulie]

66. Here's a resource for you

Check out www.ffrf.org

[Damndifino]

70. There's a lot of us out there

The Celebrity Atheist list may be a useful resource. Sounds frivolous, I know (sort of like celeb endorsement), and I suggest it merely as a way of addressing the sense of isolation that may come from being atheistically-inclined. You'll find a large number of famous writers, scientists, politicians, actors, film-makers and so on who are atheists or agnostics, together with some information about their (lack of) beliefs. Some may surprise you.

The list is at:

http://www.celebatheists.com/index.html

[Az]

87. No new posts for over a year

Though I did hear that something was about to change at Celeb Atheists.

[Blue_Chill]

72. Sounds like you want to be an Atheist

but you aren't really sure about it yet. Perhaps you shouldn't try so hard and believe whatever you think is right.

[Az]

80. It also sounds like

He is an atheist but is in a society inundated with god talk. If all his friends and classmates believe in god and the culture is saturated with god talk then it is little doubt that his difference is going to be a point of concern. When you realise that there is something different about you it takes a prominent place in your awareness. When you are just part of the crowd the same issue would have little relevance. Thus if he was in fact a theist he would likely give god far less thought because his belief would not stand out.

[Blue_Chill]

82. maybe

But I disagree that society is "inundated with god talk" and that "difference is going to be a point of concern" is a point of concern in a society in which 15%-20% agree you.

try being a white hispanic liberal Christian on a college campus for 2 weeks if you want to know how it feels to be different. You fit in no where.

[Az]

85. Pluralistic systems

In a pluralistic society everyone is a bit different. We are a nearly unique society. Most nations have a homogeny bordering on monotonous. We are the ultimate melting pot. Unfortunately there is a natural human tendency to be attracted to similarities. Thus clumping occurs even within this bubbling pot. Obvious differences are the first to stimulate clumping (race, gender, etc). But then you get into religious clumping and it becomes a bit more gradiated.

Race and gender bias are relatively easy to overcome. There are active groups within our society attempting to overcome them. The voices supporting such bias are becoming increasingly muted. Religion however has an active and powerful voice. Add to that the fact that religion can change your entire world view. Many religions are also actively exclusive. Advocating shunning of anyone not connected to the belief system.

Organised religions reaction to our pluralistic system has been to open its attitude a bit and be publiclly accepting of any belief systems that pay homage to a similar god. But wrath is still maintained for those that reject the central tenant.

Fortunately there are a large number of believers that do not hold to the dogmatic views espoused by the organised churchs. Unfortunately organised churchs are better funded and have a larger voice in the community. There are cities in Michigan that I can vouch for having every second billboard posted being in some way about god.

Thus we see that even though there are individuals the do not believe in inundating the system and we know that there are significant numbers of nonbelievers, they are none the less oppressed. Atheists have few well organised groupings. They have no active social voice. There is no constant barrage of "There is no god" being pushed on the public. There are no attempts to start up Bertrand Russell appreciation clubs.

Keep in mind that religious fanaticism is spotty throughout the states. There are some areas that are literally soaked in it. There are some areas that are not as inundated. College campuses being a place of intellectual exploration (hopefully) are far more likely to find resistance to dogmatic exortations of what to think and what not to think. Thus you will find that those willing to break free are going to prosper in such surroundings while those adhering to the bible or such will not be as nurtured.

As to oppression. I can name female elected representitives. I can name black elected representitives. I can only guess about atheist representitives as no one has stood out and claimed atheism and been elected. I should note that many have claimed their religion loudly and been elected. That in my book is oppression.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

81. Hmm, yeah i've considered this exact thing,

but the nature of how I began to reject the notion of a god, doesn't allow for that contention.

[JohnKleeb]

74. not sure if I can answer

if you're confused you could be agonstic. I consider my self Christian and Catholic but I lean Uniterian. I questioned Catholicism and Christianity for a while but you know seeing true believers really changed my mind.

[wuushew]

75. The existence of God is irrelevant

I have come to the conclusion that whether humans believe in an afterlife is not important if one considers the two following arguments.

(A)Atheist: We are born, we live and we die. Our existence is the sum of our memories and our perceptions of reality from moment to moment. The nature of life is the acceptance of one's limited existence and feeling of belonging as a part of a process.



(B)Theist: In accordance with christian ideas an individual is doomed to either an eternity of heaven or hell. This implies an INFITITE amount of time. Human existence as well as all sentient existence manifest in terrestrial animals is a process of living from moment to moment and gauging those experiences within a framework of ones collected memories. In an infinite amount of time would a human soul pocess an infinite capacity for human memory? If so the very nature of that existence would be unlike anything that resembeled human experience. The other alternative is that souls are forgetful. Given 2 or 3 million years would you rember what all the fuss about the BFEE was? Either scenario requires a death of ones current nature of reality or that a person's personality will gradualy fade as a result of the passage of time.

[blue america]

83. Been there before.

I was raised in a very Catholic family, went to Catholic grammar school, and totally rebelled against religion in general. I've slowly become more spiritual over the last few years, but still haven't found a faith or spiritual structure that I'm comfortable with, and haven't been able to completely overome my catholic upbringing.

[Peregrine]

84. Go to a site with like minded

Internet Infidels a friendly group to guide you through your discovery.

[nolabels]

98. Thanks for link, way cool,

Imagine that! a website where "Political Discussions" are a secondary subgroup.
Well, some might like it anyway :o

[Liberator_Rev]

101. For FreeThinkers Only!

Sorry I didn't notice the responses to my post # 60 earlier, but it's just to bad if Terwillger and AZ don't like the fact that there have been very bright atheists who have had a web site called www.atheists-for-jesus.com on the internet for years.

My friends, it's one thing to deny the existence of God, but quite another to deny the very existence of www.atheists-for-jesus.com. Why don't you try telling THEM that they don't exist? Or tell them that Free Thinkers are NOT ALLOWED TO BELIEVE whatever it is they believe about Jesus.

P.S. Just because they call themselves "Atheists for Jesus" doesn't mean that they share the belief of Christians that Jesus was divine or the son of God.

[Cointelpro_Papers]

106. Your response was loaded to say the least,

In fact I think you even implied that I couldn't be an atheist unless if went to this site. Any site that is for "atheists" and has the word jesus, and is about jesus, is not a site for atheists, it is a site for Christians.

No it doesn't say they believe like Christians do, but it does imply that Jesus is a god, and all that. Just to say that Jesus ever lived, implies a certain amount of belief in Christian values. Thanks for trying to take advantage of me though, I really appreciate it.

Hey, Lib Rev, if you really want to believe in god then go here. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4003&mesg_id=4003&page=2

[Terwilliger]

113. I never said there wasn't a link

I was just saying that just because people like the Jesus example doesn't make them pro religion.

[Az]

114. Um

I believe I came to your defense in regards to the atheists for jesus link. Did you have the impression that I was some how decrying atheists that liked the teaching attributed to Jesus? If so that was certainly not my intent. I appologise for any misunderstanding.

[Ramsey]

105. I never think about "god"

I really truly do not believe in the concept of god that most religions teach us. I do not believe in worship, or liturgy, or the bible or indoctrination. The thought that a higher being would require us lower beings to gather periodically and bow down and say certain phrases in order to be "saved" always seemed like the transparent ritual for controlling the masses that it is. The act of worship is completely incongruous with the concept of a truly enlightend higher being.

I was raised as a Protestant christian, and I didn't have any bad experiences in the church. But over the years, I started to ask, why am I here saying these words and singing these songs that mean absolutely nothing to me, that don't ring true, that have nothing to do with life?

I am a scientist, perhaps that education led me to further reject the mysticism of religion. I really don't miss it at all. I believe that when I die I will become ashes and dust, and that's fine with me. It simply means I assume I have one turn on this planet, and I am going to make the best of it. I am going to do my best to be a good person, to serve others and to be personally happy and fulfilled. And I don't need to get on bended knee to some icon to achieve that.

So I guess my answer is yes, god will fade, if you come to a place in your mind where you reject the dogma and find your own truth.

[jobycom]

109. Follow your questions, you may be trying to learn something

I'm an atheist, don't get the wrong idea by my post heading. But if you are still thinking in terms of gods, you are still trying to work something out. Atheism is just a word, a label, like every other description of belief. Don't try to make it fit. Instead, work out what you believe, not what you want to believe. I don't mean that you secretely want to believe in god. I mean you might be trying to understand something beyond the simple idea that there is no god. Even amongst people who call themselves atheists, there are broad differences. There are those who don't believe in gods, there are those who believe there are no gods (in a positive sense), there are those who don't believe in gods, but still believe their is a higher form of right and wrong, that it comes from a metaphorical extrapolation of the needs of humans, of what's best for humans.

There's a lot to work out. Basically, you are telling yourself that you don't believe in a god, but you haven't figured out what you believe in instead. Don't run from that. Figure it out. It will change over time, as you get more life experience, and have more things happen that you have to understand in terms of your own belief. Just stay honest with yourself, and don't try to judge yourself by others who may use the same word as you. I've found that while I have similar political and religious goals as fellow athiests and therefore enjoy their company, I have some spiritual issues of disagreement with some. Instead of fighting it, I just admit that my beliefs are mine, and accept them.

[ChadCoffman]

110. Don't worry, it'll pass.

It's a terribly efficient thought program. It'll pass within a few years.

[Enjolras]

112. This is why religion is so popular

It isn't only cultural conditioning, but also the natural desire, at least at times, to believe in the power of something bigger than ourselves, than all of us. It's especially true in time of crisis. No atheists in foxholes, right? People believe what they want to believe, and once the whole religion thing snowballed, there was a peer pressure aspect as well. To be a non-believer is to be ostracised as an outsider, though I prefer to think of it as an elite group of intellectual independents.

I kind of wish there were a God, but I'm sure there isn't.

[Quahog]

120. I would just like to say...

... that I think the overall quality of exchange on this topic, not to mention the lack of invective, is amazing. There is a tendency among "liberals" (the open-minded, inclusive ones, right?) to automatically equate Christian spirituality with fundamentalist bigotry, and to fall quickly into name-calling mode whenever Christian viewpoints are expressed. There has been almost none of that here, and it makes me glad that I came over to DU (it's a pervasive problem at many other progressive boards).

Thank you all for being true liberals, and keeping yourselves open to other POVs even as you express your own. This is a good community.

BTW, Jesus WAS a liberal Jew.