Why do atheists become atheists?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-01-2015, 07:43 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(24-01-2015 06:49 PM)Plan 9 from OS Wrote:  I'm an RCC raised Christian since birth. So for me, the default is the assumption that Christianity is correct. It's what I was raised with, it's what most of the people I ever knew are - even the people I know today. But I will say when I first started feeling doubts about whether Christianity is real, it's very scary. You do all of this searching trying to find logical arguments (which are actually apologetics pieces) for why Christianity (for me RCC specifically) is the one true faith and the preferred religion for salvation. Everything that you learn and are taught is referred to as the truth. Even in the gospels, Jesus is quoted to say "I am the way, the truth and the life" and "I am the alpha and the omega".

But you know what's ironic? Well maybe not for the majority here, but for those of us new to all of this it's the notion that the deeper you dig, the more knowledge you seek and simply the more you learn the less tenable religion becomes. One of the areas that was critical to shaking my faith is the old testament writings, and how contradictory they are to the new testament. I can see how gnosticism developed in the 2nd century about 2 separate Gods, where the OT God is evil while the NT God (Jesus) is good. And yes, it does read like we're reading about two different Gods. When you read that the fall of Jericho written in the bible did not happen based on the archaeological record, the Israelites were most likely never enslaved as a nation within Egypt and to me most especially that the Israelites where NOT a distinct nation who was promised the land occupied by Canaanites but where in fact Canaanites themselves...it really makes you take pause. Then you read the NT and see Jesus referencing things that happened in the OT that we now know as false, i.e. Moses wrote the pentatuch, that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt and that they were a group of outsiders who were supposed to take Canaan, then you wonder WHY would the Son of God talk to the people about things that were false - since it was written that God will never deceive nor be deceived. How does that square?

Then you think more about morality and wonder how can God be the sole source of morality? There were plenty of nations prior to Israel who have had written laws that were very much similar to the laws revealed to the Israelites on Mt Sinai - with the Code of Hamurabi (sp?) being front and center. Then the Chinese had the Golden Rule before the birth of Christ. So if all of these laws were not known to man before God revealed it - and that's the position we have to take, right? God was unknown to all other nations prior to revealing himself to Abraham, so why is it logical to explain this away by saying that God wrote these laws on our hearts from the dawn of time? Then why would he have to reveal anything then aside from his existence to all of us? How does that square? Because what seems more reasonable to me about morality is that it was a necessary development that was needed in order for civilization to be possible and progress. And morality is really quite simple, isn't it? Do things to maximize the benefits to all, and to avoid doing things that cause direct harm to others. Isn't that really what morality is all about?

Welcome to this discussion, and welcome to Atheism 101 - The Realm of Reason.

I understand your fear. The hardest part for you will be accepting that when we die, it's over. We have one life, and that's it.

It is never easy coming to the state of atheism. You will be blindsided every step of the way. You will wonder if it's all worth it, or if you should go back to your safe little world of theism.

You don't know this yet, but yes, it is worth it. It will take time, but be patient. At the end of it all, you stand with the truth and as you approach death in your later years, you will die with the truth.

I would rather die with the truth than live with the lies.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2015, 08:06 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(24-01-2015 05:22 PM)Free Wrote:  
(24-01-2015 05:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  Nope, didn't.

But I'm not getting into it with you again. You make a claim, you support it. Simple.

You are cutting out most of what that discussion is about. It goes back to THIS post.

And I have supported my claims.

Big Grin

It's not just these posts or this thread.

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-01-2015, 08:34 PM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(24-01-2015 06:49 PM)Plan 9 from OS Wrote:  I'm an RCC raised Christian since birth. So for me, the default is the assumption that Christianity is correct. It's what I was raised with, it's what most of the people I ever knew are - even the people I know today. But I will say when I first started feeling doubts about whether Christianity is real, it's very scary. You do all of this searching trying to find logical arguments (which are actually apologetics pieces) for why Christianity (for me RCC specifically) is the one true faith and the preferred religion for salvation. Everything that you learn and are taught is referred to as the truth. Even in the gospels, Jesus is quoted to say "I am the way, the truth and the life" and "I am the alpha and the omega".

But you know what's ironic? Well maybe not for the majority here, but for those of us new to all of this it's the notion that the deeper you dig, the more knowledge you seek and simply the more you learn the less tenable religion becomes. One of the areas that was critical to shaking my faith is the old testament writings, and how contradictory they are to the new testament. I can see how gnosticism developed in the 2nd century about 2 separate Gods, where the OT God is evil while the NT God (Jesus) is good. And yes, it does read like we're reading about two different Gods. When you read that the fall of Jericho written in the bible did not happen based on the archaeological record, the Israelites were most likely never enslaved as a nation within Egypt and to me most especially that the Israelites where NOT a distinct nation who was promised the land occupied by Canaanites but where in fact Canaanites themselves...it really makes you take pause. Then you read the NT and see Jesus referencing things that happened in the OT that we now know as false, i.e. Moses wrote the pentatuch, that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt and that they were a group of outsiders who were supposed to take Canaan, then you wonder WHY would the Son of God talk to the people about things that were false - since it was written that God will never deceive nor be deceived. How does that square?

Then you think more about morality and wonder how can God be the sole source of morality? There were plenty of nations prior to Israel who have had written laws that were very much similar to the laws revealed to the Israelites on Mt Sinai - with the Code of Hamurabi (sp?) being front and center. Then the Chinese had the Golden Rule before the birth of Christ. So if all of these laws were not known to man before God revealed it - and that's the position we have to take, right? God was unknown to all other nations prior to revealing himself to Abraham, so why is it logical to explain this away by saying that God wrote these laws on our hearts from the dawn of time? Then why would he have to reveal anything then aside from his existence to all of us? How does that square? Because what seems more reasonable to me about morality is that it was a necessary development that was needed in order for civilization to be possible and progress. And morality is really quite simple, isn't it? Do things to maximize the benefits to all, and to avoid doing things that cause direct harm to others. Isn't that really what morality is all about?

That's one of the dues in this thread I find quite instructive.
My way away from the Christian God and Christianity equals to that of OS.
Still it is puzzling to me, that those ethical thinking atheist are such a small minority.

Any system of religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be true.
Thomas Paine
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-01-2015, 03:30 AM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(24-01-2015 02:16 PM)WitchSabrina Wrote:  Stevil, no. This has been explained to you oh so many, many times on this forum.

damn!
To set the record straight WitchSabrina.

Free has claimed that he has proof that god doesn't exist. This is why he puts himself at 7 on the Dawkins scale.

His "proof" is that there isn't any evidence that god exists.

My claim is that I don't know if god exists or not but that I disbelieve any claim that there is a god. So I am 6.

Free asserts that anyone at 6 believes that god's existence is possible and hence has a burden of proof upon them to prove that god's existence is possible.

I have explained to Free that I don't know if god's existence is possible or not. That I hold no such beliefs.

I (and many others) have explained to Free that absence of proof does not equate
to proof of absence. (As in the well known black swan analogy and countless other easy to grasp analogies).

I have made no claims other than to say I lack knowledge of god's existence and I lack knowledge of the possibilities or impossibilities of god's existence.

Free asked me if there is knowledge about god that I don't know.
I said sure, I don't know god's age, height, what it is made of etc.

He then goes off and asserts that I have made a claim that god has an age, a height, a substance and demands me to provide proof of this claim that I haven't made.

I clarified that I haven't made such a claim. That "I don't know what god is made of" either means that "I haven't discovered yet what god is made of" or means that "I lack that knowledge because god doesn't exist".

Free is being a douche. His logic is extremely poor, and he runs off with strawmen rather than listen to clarifications of his inept attempt at comprehension.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Stevil's post
25-01-2015, 09:16 AM (This post was last modified: 25-01-2015 12:33 PM by Free.)
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(25-01-2015 03:30 AM)Stevil Wrote:  I have explained to Free that I don't know if god's existence is possible or not. That I hold no such beliefs.

Then if you don't know, you have no business being sub 7.0. Being sub 7.0 requires doubt based upon what you do know, not upon what you do not know. Claiming complete ignorance is the same as someone who has never heard of any such thing as a supernatural god. Those who "do not know" anything in regards to the possible existence of God, are completely atheistic.

The definition of an agnostic is this:

Agnostic:

"A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, such as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience."

Hence, a true agnostic is one who determines that there is knowledge in existence, but it is currently unknown, or it cannot ever be known. Since the agnostic position most certainly asserts the possibility that there is knowledge that is currently unknown, or unknowable, then that position has the burden of proof of providing the evidence that there is, as asserted, some kind of yet undiscovered knowledge that is currently unknown, or unknowable.

EDIT: Now before you read Chas' fucked up objections below this thread, I have edited this to demonstrate what the word "unknown" means:

Unknown:

noun

"A thing, influence, area, factor, or person that is unknown:"


In each example of what "unknown" is defined as above, it denotes an existence. A thing, influence, area, factor, or person are all existences within reality. Hence, unknown knowledge is a thing in existence, but is not yet known. It does not mean it does not exist, but rather it is an existence.

But you are claiming total ignorance, and therefore do not even meet the definition of anything sub 7.0 or above 1.0.

Since you have no knowledge at all, you can have absolutely no beliefs, right?

Hence, you are 7.0.

Do you understand this?

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-01-2015, 09:17 AM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
Double Post: Please delete. TY.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-01-2015, 09:22 AM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(25-01-2015 09:17 AM)Free Wrote:  
Stevil Wrote:I have explained to Free that I don't know if god's existence is possible or not. That I hold no such beliefs.

Then if you don't know, you have no business being sub 7.0. Being sub 7.0 requires doubt based upon what you do know, not upon what you do not know. Claiming complete ignorance is the same as someone who has never heard of any such thing as a supernatural god. Those who "do not know" anything in regards to the possible existence of God, are completely atheistic.

The definition of an agnostic is this:

Agnostic:

[u]"A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, such as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience."[/u]

Hence, a true agnostic is one who determines that there is knowledge in existence, but it is currently unknown, or it cannot ever be known. Since the agnostic position most certainly asserts the possibility that there is knowledge that is currently unknown, or unknowable,

No, it doesn't. You misunderstand the definition.

Quote:then that position has the burden of proof of providing the evidence that there is, as asserted, some kind of yet undiscovered knowledge that is currently unknown, or unknowable.

But you are claiming total ignorance, and therefore do not even meet the definition of anything sub 7.0 or above 1.0.

No one is claiming total ignorance.

Quote:Since you have no knowledge at all, you can have absolutely no beliefs, right?

Hence, you are 7.0.

Do you understand this?

You do not understand that you do not have a logically sound position.

Not having knowledge in no way implies that there is knowledge to be had.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-01-2015, 09:28 AM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(25-01-2015 09:22 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-01-2015 09:17 AM)Free Wrote:  Then if you don't know, you have no business being sub 7.0. Being sub 7.0 requires doubt based upon what you do know, not upon what you do not know. Claiming complete ignorance is the same as someone who has never heard of any such thing as a supernatural god. Those who "do not know" anything in regards to the possible existence of God, are completely atheistic.

The definition of an agnostic is this:

Agnostic:

[u]"A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, such as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience."[/u]

Hence, a true agnostic is one who determines that there is knowledge in existence, but it is currently unknown, or it cannot ever be known. Since the agnostic position most certainly asserts the possibility that there is knowledge that is currently unknown, or unknowable,

No, it doesn't. You misunderstand the definition.

Quote:then that position has the burden of proof of providing the evidence that there is, as asserted, some kind of yet undiscovered knowledge that is currently unknown, or unknowable.

But you are claiming total ignorance, and therefore do not even meet the definition of anything sub 7.0 or above 1.0.

No one is claiming total ignorance.

Quote:Since you have no knowledge at all, you can have absolutely no beliefs, right?

Hence, you are 7.0.

Do you understand this?

You do not understand that you do not have a logically sound position.

Not having knowledge in no way implies that there is knowledge to be had.

Again, all you ever do on these forums is assert your opinion without ever explaining it or backing it up with any kind of logical argument.

Like WitchSabrina says, you do this trolling bullshit all the time, and yes, it is annoying.

Back up your assertions, or fuck off. And I mean that most sincerely.

Big Grin

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-01-2015, 09:43 AM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
(25-01-2015 09:28 AM)Free Wrote:  
(25-01-2015 09:22 AM)Chas Wrote:  No, it doesn't. You misunderstand the definition.


No one is claiming total ignorance.


You do not understand that you do not have a logically sound position.

Not having knowledge in no way implies that there is knowledge to be had.

Again, all you ever do on these forums is assert your opinion without ever explaining it or backing it up with any kind of logical argument.

Like WitchSabrina says, you do this trolling bullshit all the time, and yes, it is annoying.

Back up your assertions, or fuck off. And I mean that most sincerely.

Big Grin

I am simply denying your unfounded assertions. So, there's that. Drinking Beverage

You consistently twist definitions to suit your presuppositional stances.

Oh, and where did WitchSabrina say that? Consider

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-01-2015, 09:48 AM
RE: Why do atheists become atheists?
To all cool or not so cool debater of this highly sophisticated branch of the thread:
Please remember how this thread is called.

Any system of religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be true.
Thomas Paine
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: