The origins of atheism

[HitchSlap]

Those of us who are not despondent, have found meaning in life. The question is, is there a reason for this existence in which we must have meaning to keep us from being despondent?

What does anything I've said have to do with despondency?

As for a "meaning," we all make our own. It's a combination of committed relationships, vocations, avocations, charity, compassion, art, music, literature, education, children, nature,etc.

 

[Freodin]

I do understand why you feel Christians demonize you for disagreeing with them. That is wrong for Christians to do that, you're right there. Christians should always try to love first and a part of loving is understanding why someone feels the way they feel and helping them find peace.

That you even manage to proclaim this right now is, I think, a sign of hope. A sign that your human side has not been buried by your Christian side completely.

Because, sorry, I have to say it... you are wrong here again. It is, based on Christian doctrine, not wrong for Christians to demonize unbelievers... they are told to do that.

All that talk about "love" is nice, but it is just a label. The content behind this label is what you posted earlier: Christians, don't listen to unbelievers! You don't need to. They don't have anything to tell you, all they tell are lies, they only do it because they want to attack you, they are evil and liars, and they know that they are evil and liars, they just don't want bow to God, they hate the light, they are like murderers, they follow Satan.

And consider: this is originally not even aimed at atheists. It is aimed at people who believe in God or gods... just differently from yours.

That is what Christianity tells you about unbelievers. That is what you (in part) quoted, what you joyfully proclaimed to be the truth of Jesus. That is what you accept as true... even if that spark of humanity within you just recognized that it is wrong for you to do so.

I recommend you for that confession... even if I know that it is shortlived and will be buried under Christian doctrine shortly.

I believe you feel you have peace, you don't think you need God. Yet you're here where Christians reside, trying to tell us how we are wrong. Since you're here trying to tell us why we're wrong, do you expect us to not defend our beliefs? However, there does come a point where it is pointless to defend and just let God do what He does. This is that point for me. I can defend myself, but I don't need to defend God because He's more than capable of doing that Himself.

I cannot speak for any atheist other than myself... but perhaps you might come to notice that almost every post that I make, in almost every thread that I post in, is in response to some claim, some question about atheists or atheism.

I am not here to attack you or Christianity. I am here to defend me and my position against the sometimes viciously slanderous attacks, or somtimes simple falsehoods, that atheists are confronted with. Read back: this is a thread about the "origins of atheism"... and regardless of what atheists tell here, they always have to here the same old slander. We are here to sow discontent. We hate God. We are close-minded. We are here because we secretly want to be Christians.

Sometimes the arguments that Christians use to declare their "truth" over others is an indirect attack on atheists: You have the Truth, no debate about that necessary. How can these pesky unbelievers deny the Truth? How dare they? Don't they see how puny and false their views are?

If you personally feel singled out and attacked by me, don't fret. Quite the contrary: again I recommend you for your willingness to communicate (even if our mutual disagreements sometimes make me want to scream! How can this pesky Christian deny the truth? How dare he? Doesn't he see how puny and false his views are? )

There are many "Christians" here who are beyond even that means... you cannot even talk to them, err, "rationally".

At what point does it become pointless to defend your own beliefs?

Never. Look back, some two or three posts you made to me. "Answer this, and I win. Answer that, and I win. Don't answer, and I win". If I - or you - stop defending our views, we have conceded the struggle.

And, sorry, I have to "attack" your beliefs again, your claims of truth, the center point of all this struggle.
I can defend my own views... but I don't really need to. I haven't yet met one person, who heard about my "Primal Chaos" notion and said "Oh, yes, that is the Truth! Why didn't I see it before!". Sadly, most people don't even bother to comment about it... it just goes above their heads.
But as I said: I don't need to defend these ideas. I have no investment in them. They are an idea I consider true, but they are irrelevant for my life. In all important regards, I am a standard run-of-the-mill atheist: I don't believe that religious stuff.

Christianity, in some regards, is a nice idea. It has some good points. It also tries to sell some very weird ideas. But basically I don't mind it. I simply do not believe it, but I don't care as long as it isn't "pushed down my throat" (an expression that the right-wing-religious groups just love, not mine
Other religions bother me no more or no less. Islam has a lot less impact on me than Christianity... so I deal with it less. Shintoism might be big in Japan... here in Germany it is so rare that most people haven't ever heard about it. Whom would I even debate about the divinity of the Tenno? I just don't believe it, neither Islam nor Shinto.

You - you Christians and you personally - are invested in your beliefs though. Your claim of "Truth" cannot allow competing claims of "truth". So you must perceive any such claim as an "attack" and start to "defend" against it.
And - again I am sorry to say that - it is quite difficult to defend religious claims. They tend to not stand up to close scrutiny by skeptics.
Thus very early - starting already in the Bible - the "defenders of the faith" came up with a different method: demonize your opponent. Works very well in the in-group, the believers, but tends to aggravate the unbelievers. But who cares about them?

This is what you have to understand. Christianity is build on an attack on other beliefs. (So is Islam and, to a lesser degree, Judaism).

And just like you, we have a right and a need to defend against these attacks.

 

[Ana the Ist]

He who commits sin is a slave to it. That would be you unfortunately.

Nor am I obligated to do anything that I do not already want to do.

Ummm...care to elaborate? How can you "be a slave" to something that you did?

Let's use an easy example. You think stealing is a sin, right? So let's suppose that I visited you at your house, sat on your couch, reached between the cushions and found a fiver. Instead of giving you the money, I pocket it (stealing). I ultimately go on about my day like nothing happened...and for all you know, nothing did happen.

How am I now a "slave" to stealing?

 

[Chriliman]

That you even manage to proclaim this right now is, I think, a sign of hope. A sign that your human side has not been buried by your Christian side completely.

Because, sorry, I have to say it... you are wrong here again. It is, based on Christian doctrine, not wrong for Christians to demonize unbelievers... they are told to do that.

All that talk about "love" is nice, but it is just a label. The content behind this label is what you posted earlier: Christians, don't listen to unbelievers! You don't need to. They don't have anything to tell you, all they tell are lies, they only do it because they want to attack you, they are evil and liars, and they know that they are evil and liars, they just don't want bow to God, they hate the light, they are like murderers, they follow Satan.

And consider: this is originally not even aimed at atheists. It is aimed at people who believe in God or gods... just differently from yours.

That is what Christianity tells you about unbelievers. That is what you (in part) quoted, what you joyfully proclaimed to be the truth of Jesus. That is what you accept as true... even if that spark of humanity within you just recognized that it is wrong for you to do so.

I recommend you for that confession... even if I know that it is shortlived and will be buried under Christian doctrine shortly.


I cannot speak for any atheist other than myself... but perhaps you might come to notice that almost every post that I make, in almost every thread that I post in, is in response to some claim, some question about atheists or atheism.

I am not here to attack you or Christianity. I am here to defend me and my position against the sometimes viciously slanderous attacks, or somtimes simple falsehoods, that atheists are confronted with. Read back: this is a thread about the "origins of atheism"... and regardless of what atheists tell here, they always have to here the same old slander. We are here to sow discontent. We hate God. We are close-minded. We are here because we secretly want to be Christians.

Sometimes the arguments that Christians use to declare their "truth" over others is an indirect attack on atheists: You have the Truth, no debate about that necessary. How can these pesky unbelievers deny the Truth? How dare they? Don't they see how puny and false their views are?

If you personally feel singled out and attacked by me, don't fret. Quite the contrary: again I recommend you for your willingness to communicate (even if our mutual disagreements sometimes make me want to scream! How can this pesky Christian deny the truth? How dare he? Doesn't he see how puny and false his views are? )

There are many "Christians" here who are beyond even that means... you cannot even talk to them, err, "rationally".


Never. Look back, some two or three posts you made to me. "Answer this, and I win. Answer that, and I win. Don't answer, and I win". If I - or you - stop defending our views, we have conceded the struggle.

And, sorry, I have to "attack" your beliefs again, your claims of truth, the center point of all this struggle.
I can defend my own views... but I don't really need to. I haven't yet met one person, who heard about my "Primal Chaos" notion and said "Oh, yes, that is the Truth! Why didn't I see it before!". Sadly, most people don't even bother to comment about it... it just goes above their heads.
But as I said: I don't need to defend these ideas. I have no investment in them. They are an idea I consider true, but they are irrelevant for my life. In all important regards, I am a standard run-of-the-mill atheist: I don't believe that religious stuff.

Christianity, in some regards, is a nice idea. It has some good points. It also tries to sell some very weird ideas. But basically I don't mind it. I simply do not believe it, but I don't care as long as it isn't "pushed down my throat" (an expression that the right-wing-religious groups just love, not mine
Other religions bother me no more or no less. Islam has a lot less impact on me than Christianity... so I deal with it less. Shintoism might be big in Japan... here in Germany it is so rare that most people haven't ever heard about it. Whom would I even debate about the divinity of the Tenno? I just don't believe it, neither Islam nor Shinto.

You - you Christians and you personally - are invested in your beliefs though. Your claim of "Truth" cannot allow competing claims of "truth". So you must perceive any such claim as an "attack" and start to "defend" against it.
And - again I am sorry to say that - it is quite difficult to defend religious claims. They tend to not stand up to close scrutiny by skeptics.
Thus very early - starting already in the Bible - the "defenders of the faith" came up with a different method: demonize your opponent. Works very well in the in-group, the believers, but tends to aggravate the unbelievers. But who cares about them?

This is what you have to understand. Christianity is build on an attack on other beliefs. (So is Islam and, to a lesser degree, Judaism).

And just like you, we have a right and a need to defend against these attacks.

Debating and discussing my faith in God is only a part of my Christianity. My true calling and what Jesus himself commands of me is to love Him with all my heart and soul and love my neighbor (you) like myself. In doing this He guides me to where I must go.

Ultimately, Jesus wants us to love and help those in need. I've realized many atheists don't need anything or at least don't admit they need anything and if a Christian spends too much time debating and discussing their faith with them, they may be missing their true calling which is to help those who admit they need help. I don't doubt that others viewers have benefited from what I've said on these forums, but you don't seem to be benefiting because you already have everything you need. Therefore, I will stop this discussion and move on to help those who may need my help.

Ultimately, my purpose is to further the Kingdom of God. Debating and discussing things with the same atheists all the time has made me to realize it's time to move on and help those who admit they are in need.

Thanks for your time. God bless!

 

[Ana the Ist]

It was a call for transparency and love.

I have noticed no one addressed the question I asked, so I will ask it again. Surely we are obligated to love one another, right?

I don't think so...no.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Godless materialism, Evolutionism with no ultimate creator. Secular totalitarianism. All theses are generally godless philosophies of life.

None of those philosophies are necessary to be an atheist.

 

[Chriliman]

What does anything I've said have to do with despondency?

As for a "meaning," we all make our own. It's a combination of committed relationships, vocations, avocations, charity, compassion, art, music, literature, education, children, nature,etc.

As Christians we are called to help the despondent. You don't seem despondent, so far well, until we meet again.

 

[ScottA]

"Sorry?" means "What?"

Most people, and the atheist demanding demonstrable proof, cannot go outside the universe in order to make their evaluation. I did. I was take outside and shown.

 

[Loudmouth]

I just want to know the honest reason why you're here.

I certainly can't answer that question for other people, but I can certainly answer it for myself.

My main area of concern is the attack on science led by creationists. I think good science is worth defending. Scientific knowledge is some of the most important work that we have done as a species, and it deserves to be passed down and built upon.

As a second area of interest, I see Christians on this site who clearly don't understand the atheist position. The idea that atheism is a religion or a belief is perhaps the best example of this misunderstanding. If anything, we have a belief that true and good ideas can stand up to skepticism and challenges. We have a belief that uncomfortable truths are more important than comforting faith based beliefs. We have a belief that true ideas should be evidenced. Even if we agree at the end of the day, at least there is a chance you will leave the discussion with a better understanding of where we are coming from.

 

[Loudmouth]

Most people, and the atheist demanding demonstrable proof, cannot go outside the universe in order to make their evaluation. I did. I was take outside and shown.

And you can prove this?

 

[Cearbhall]

Most people, and the atheist demanding demonstrable proof, cannot go outside the universe in order to make their evaluation. I did. I was take outside and shown.

I don't think even most Christians would believe that.

 

[Loudmouth]

It's fine to be a skeptic, but if that's all you are you'll miss the truth because of your skepticism.

Why wouldn't the truth stand up to skepticism? Why can't theistic claims withstand the challenge of skepticism?

If you're always skeptical about truth claims then what truth are you basing your skepticism on?

Without skepticism, there can't be false ideas, so there can't be true ideas either. If something becomes true just because it can be uttered, what kind of world would that be?

Without skepticism, what would stop you from believing in fairies, leprechauns, or UFO's? Would you believe anything is true the moment someone claims it is true? If not, then you are a skeptic as well. The only difference is that you don't use that skepticism when it comes to your own beliefs.

 

[Chriliman]

I certainly can't answer that question for other people, but I can certainly answer it for myself.

My main area of concern is the attack on science led by creationists. I think good science is worth defending. Scientific knowledge is some of the most important work that we have done as a species, and it deserves to be passed down and built upon.

As a second area of interest, I see Christians on this site who clearly don't understand the atheist position. The idea that atheism is a religion or a belief is perhaps the best example of this misunderstanding. If anything, we have a belief that true and good ideas can stand up to skepticism and challenges. We have a belief that uncomfortable truths are more important than comforting faith based beliefs. We have a belief that true ideas should be evidenced. Even if we agree at the end of the day, at least there is a chance you will leave the discussion with a better understanding of where we are coming from.

I appreciate your response.

Always seek the truth and you will find it.

 

[Cearbhall]

It's fine to be a skeptic, but if that's all you are you'll miss the truth because of your skepticism.

Huh? Wouldn't the truth pass any test? Skepticism is rational.

If you're always skeptical about truth claims then what truth are you basing your skepticism on?

The truth that something which is correct will prove itself to be such.

 

[Chriliman]

The truth that something which is correct will prove itself to be such.

Interesting...you think truth proves itself. I definitely agree, but I want to know how exactly you think truth would do this?

 

[Loudmouth]

Interesting...you think truth proves itself.

Do you think truth is established by the phrase, "because I say so"?

I definitely agree, but I want to know how exactly you think truth would do this?

If something is true, wouldn't it have consequences in the universe around us? If something is true, shouldn't we see one thing and not another?

 

[Cearbhall]

Interesting...you think truth proves itself. I definitely agree, but I want to know how exactly you think truth would do this?

Upon evaluation. So if you're saying that a skeptic who doesn't bother to investigate can't reasonably make definitive claims, then we're in agreement.

 

[Chriliman]

Do you think truth is established by the phrase, "because I say so"?

Depends who's saying it. Right? Isn't that the truth? If science says its true that God is not needed, we'd better listen right? Because science holds the truth, science is the truth, right?

Or should truth stand on its own as true?

If something is true, wouldn't it have consequences in the universe around us? If something is true, shouldn't we see one thing and not another?

Certainly.

 

[Chriliman]

Upon evaluation.

You got it!

 

[ScottA]

And you can prove this?

It IS proof...to me personally...because it happened to me. But you were not there with me...so, prove it to you? No.