The Faith of Atheists and Agnostics

[Philip]

This morning, I happened across a comment about challenging atheists, made by our good friend Bippy: "If I were you I would approach it in a different way. I would actually use an indirect approach to show them that atheism is truly a religion more then a position of logic, reason and science."

Yes, atheism cannot know or prove how the universe began, nor how things previously non-existing and immaterial came into being and THEN organized themselves into massive marvels of engineering, functionality, on an unfathomable scale, from microscopic to galactic details. NO KNOWN/VALIDATED (and ALL necessarily SUBSEQUENT) scientific processes or analysis can account for this. And the great complexity, design and functionality - awesomely apparent at the very beginning, when previously non-existing things came into to being - are great evidences for the Intelligent Designer behind it all.

Given the above, and given that ALL atheists and agnostics - especially those in the West and places that the internet touches - well know that Christianity, Judaism and Islam assert that not only is there a God - or what I call a "god" - behind the universe - but that if you get it wrong as to exactly who He (or "he") is, then your eternity will likely be terrifying, the punishment great, the consequences enormous. And so, especially knowing that vast millions of Christians assert the truth of the Bible - that dying without faith in Christ leads to eternal separation from God, punishment, hopelessness and darkness - this means that such atheists and agnostics realize that IF they are wrong about the God question, then they will be (are) DOOMED. But that if they are correct and there is NO God, then it really doesn't matter, does it? As the only thing that would ultimately matter are their lives before death. As forever afterward, they would share the dreams of rocks!

So, given the enormous potential consequences of getting the God question WRONG, atheists and agnostics (and other non-Christians), well know they need to have the answer to this question correct. They have to have a strong core belief that they are correct - which I would call "faith." One dictionary defines faith as: "Having complete trust or confidence in someone or something." Now, of course, merely having faith in a thing or a God (or god) does not change whether or not He (he) is a reality or non-reality. He (he or nothing) is either the reality or not. And faith is a gamble of playing the odds, is it not? The unbeliever must have faith that His spiritual/non-spiritual beliefs are valid and will never harm them - certainly not ETERNALLY. This is why so many atheists and agnostics spend vast amounts of time trying to disprove Christianity or that the universe required a God. As, psychologically/emotionally, they want to FEEL that they are correct, even if they can't prove that.

So, all unbelievers - even atheists and agnostics must have a faith - a core certainty that they have chosen correctly, as to the God question. And they well know this, surrounded by various theists and Christians. But I wonder, given the severe consequences IF they are wrong about the God behind Christianity, are they never stressed or worried about the possibility that they are wrong? Do they not think about that, or the horrific thoughts it should conjure? They also well know that they cannot physically or scientifically PROVE their non-theist beliefs, that their beliefs ALSO require faith. Even agnosticism requires a faith - not just that things are unknowable - but that remaining in the "things are unknowable camp" is nonetheless a rejection and lack of acknowledging God (or ANY god). The Bible calls such people unbelievers in the Lord, not just "unbelievers in anything specific or that is unknowable." And, so, it's not just important that the faith of atheists and agnostics be strong - for their eternal well being - it must be held in something that is actually TRUE. I don't think I could function if I thought I even "might" have the answer to that question wrong. And given the impossible option that ALL that came into being at the Big Bang, with great power, organization, design, functionality, with unfathomable scale of detail - to think ALL of that could happen, uncaused/without an Intelligence behind it all - that would cause me to have a crisis of faith about the enormous uncertainty of my unbelief (IF I were truly honest with the implications of it all). ESPECIALLY given the uncountable chain of uncaused miracles that would have been IMMEDIATELY necessitated by the beginning, content, organization, design, function and scale of the universe.

[1over137]

I am thinking where I (or rather my past I) fit into your post.
I was/am the type of person that longs for truth. But I did not see there is God. And I certainly did not want to push myself into belief. I am not the type of person that would gamble with this. What I had to lose? Well, the truth.

edit: well, I am not entirely right in the above. The time had come that I needed help and wondered that if God is he would help me. He did. He took me from ashes and I am here and am believer.

[Audie]

I am thinking where I (or rather my past I) fit into your post.
I was/am the type of person that longs for truth. But I did not see there is God. And I certainly did not want to push myself into belief. I am not the type of person that would gamble with this. What I had to lose? Well, the truth.

edit: well, I am not entirely right in the above. The time had come that I needed help and wondered that if God is he would help me. He did. He took me from ashes and I am here and am believer.

Its good to look for, long for truth.

People who make up things to say about other people's imagined shortcomings or about science for that matter
are probably on a quest for something else.

[Philip]

People who make up things to say about other people's imagined shortcomings or about science for that matter
are probably on a quest for something else.

Audie, no need for cryptic references to some imagined inaccuracy. I can't help it if one's views force and trap them within unavoidable categories. Please detail what SCIENCE shortcomings I've imagined. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but you have said that one cannot prove or disprove God's existence by science. Either one HAS a verified SCIENTIFIC explanation for the unexplainable origins of the universe or they do NOT! And if they admit the obvious - that they do NOT have such a scientific answer for the origins of extraordinary and necessary, immensely complex, organized, exquisitely functioning, previously non-existing things, while also admitting that they do not believe in God OR they presently see the answer to His possible existence as unknowable, then such a person sits in the category of "non-theists," with the subcategory of "non-Christian." And so, IF they are wrong and if the Bible is true, and they DIE in that category/sub-category (non-theist/non-Christian), then they will be eternally separated from God and terribly punished. This is inescapable! When it comes to Christianity/faith in Christ, one is either RIGHT or they are WRONG! And being wrong comes with horrific consequences.

And let's be clear, Audie, you have NO scientific explanation for there being no God (only conjecture, feelings, belief). And I would call that, yes, a "shortcoming" for ALL who live and die by their faith in unproven scientific conjecture that the universe required no God. Or even if they don't presently believe in God but think or are uncertain that there might be some remote but unknowable possibility that One might exist, as they have apparently made their present judgment call that their unbelief - EVEN IF WRONG - isn't something to be terribly concerned about. One either believes or they do not. And they are either very focused and concerned about the truth of the matter or they are not. If they are unconcerned, WHY not? My guess would be, given the stark consequences, they have FAITH - either that God doesn't exist or that it really doesn't matter - else they would be pretty stressed out and searching diligently for the ultimate answers.

Bottom line: There is NO SCIENCE behind ANYONE'S unbelief that can disprove God (in fact, much the opposite, given the impossibilities of the origins, design and functionality of things), so let's not pretend that I'm making up something about ANYONE'S SCIENCE views. I'm ultimately making a judgment on non-Christians SPIRITUAL beliefs, as Atheism, agnosticism and belief in false religions and false gods are matters of what one believes/has faith in. And, at least as far as the Bible are concerned, ALL in the non-Christian category have faith in SOMETHING besides Christ - even if their faith is that things are presently unknowable for them. Obviously, if the Bible is true, terrible consequences await all who do not develop faith in Christ before they die.

NO, you can't MAKE yourself believe that upon which you do not. But here's what EVERYONE CAN do: They can WANT to know the Truth of the matter concerning God, to be WILLING and OPEN to God's Truth as it's provided (if He and it actually exists), to sincerely SEARCH for His Truth (to earnestly seek the truth of the matter concerning God's existence), to not AVOID seeking, searching, listening for the possible Truth of God, to not RUN AWAY from or ignore possible truths from God, to acknowledge God and affirm His truths when you recognize them/to not deny God's truths when they are made known to you. If anyone is willing to do these things, God will do ALL necessary to save a person, to make them understand the reality, sacrifice and necessity of Christ for their eternity. In a nutshell, you must search, listen, be willing, obey as prompted.

Oh, and they can ASK God to reveal Himself to them, with sincerity and desire to know and obey, IF He exists, and as He reveals Himself.

[Kenny]

Yes, atheism cannot know or prove how the universe began, nor how things previously non-existing and immaterial came into being and THEN organized themselves into massive marvels of engineering, functionality, on an unfathomable scale, from microscopic to galactic details.

Atheism is a default position; it doesn’t prove anything. Are you suggesting because atheism has no answer, yours is should be accepted?

Given the above, and given that ALL atheists and agnostics - especially those in the West and places that the internet touches - well know that Christianity, Judaism and Islam assert that not only is there a God - or what I call a "god" - behind the universe - but that if you get it wrong as to exactly who He (or "he") is, then your eternity will likely be terrifying, the punishment great, the consequences enormous. And so, especially knowing that vast millions of Christians assert the truth of the Bible - that dying without faith in Christ leads to eternal separation from God, punishment, hopelessness and darkness - this means that such atheists and agnostics realize that IF they are wrong about the God question, then they will be (are) DOOMED. But that if they are correct and there is NO God, then it really doesn't matter, does it? As the only thing that would ultimately matter are their lives before death. As forever afterward, they would share the dreams of rocks!

How ‘bout if were both wrong? Suppose God does exist; but you are worshipping the wrong one? And this real God keeps getting madder and madder each time you ignore him, and worship your fake one? I’d rather play it safe and not worship at all.

So, given the enormous potential consequences of getting the God question WRONG, atheists and agnostics (and other non-Christians), well know they need to have the answer to this question correct. They have to have a strong core belief that they are correct - which I would call "faith." One dictionary defines faith as: "Having complete trust or confidence in someone or something." Now, of course, merely having faith in a thing or a God (or god) does not change whether or not He (he) is a reality or non-reality. He (he or nothing) is either the reality or not. And faith is a gamble of playing the odds, is it not? The unbeliever must have faith that His spiritual/non-spiritual beliefs are valid and will never harm them - certainly not ETERNALLY. This is why so many atheists and agnostics spend vast amounts of time trying to disprove Christianity or that the universe required a God. As, psychologically/emotionally, they want to FEEL that they are correct, even if they can't prove that.

I get the impression you assume Atheists and Agnostics obsess over God as much as you guys do. I don’t think so; if there is an obsession, it isn't over God, but his “fan club” that we obsess over. Those who believe in God that we have to deal with on a daily basis. These are the people that concern us; not some imaginary guy looking over your shoulder keeping score! He has no effect on us; just those who believe in him.

Ken

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

As a former atheist myself, I can assure you that no amount of discussion or reasoning or appeals to "logic" will make the slightest impression on atheists. Atheists will laugh Bippy's idea that atheism is a religion. That's just another dead end.

I was a member of a local atheist organization that met on Wednesdays to listen to taped lectures by noted atheists. We were vocal, we were hard liners and refused to participate in pseudo-religious feasts like Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter. We were not pipsqueak atheists like Audie or confused like Kenny. We understood the Bible* and its stories were familiar to us. I find modern atheist to be mostly angry and quite ignorant about the biblical narrative. Perhaps this age of easy-to-find information has turned both atheists and Bible believers into superficial thinkers: we have become florists instead of gardeners, so to speak. We can create a nice bouquet from bought flowers but have no idea how to cultivate them ourselves.

FL

*or so we thought because we had read it!

[Philip]

FL: Atheists will laugh Bippy's idea that atheism is a religion.

Doesn't matter if they laugh at it - as atheism IS a personal religion, based upon certain unproven assumptions. So, for them, it IS a religion. And it IS believed upon faith that a universe popped into existence and THEN organized itself, down to the tiniest of extraordinary details, amidst a vast array of complex and precisely tuned mechanisms. Perhaps FL was just a more sophisticated atheist, more serious about it, had their own "services" ("met on Wednesdays") and "sermon"s ("to listen to taped lectures by noted atheists), arrogant ("We were vocal, we were hard liners") and missed out a lot of good food and family arguments ("refused to participate in pseudo-religious feasts like Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter") . Oh, and they are OLDER than most of today's atheists, didn't have the internet - other than those, they sound very familiar, and unfortunately, were just as lost. Thankfully, FL was transformed - into the nice, respectful, polite and PC Christian he is today.

[Kenny]

As a former atheist myself, I can assure you that no amount of discussion or reasoning or appeals to "logic" will make the slightest impression on atheists. Atheists will laugh Bippy's idea that atheism is a religion. That's just another dead end.

I was a member of a local atheist organization that met on Wednesdays to listen to taped lectures by noted atheists. We were vocal, we were hard liners and refused to participate in pseudo-religious feasts like Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter. We were not pipsqueak atheists like Audie or confused like Kenny. We understood the Bible* and its stories were familiar to us. I find modern atheist to be mostly angry and quite ignorant about the biblical narrative. Perhaps this age of easy-to-find information has turned both atheists and Bible believers into superficial thinkers: we have become florists instead of gardeners, so to speak. We can create a nice bouquet from bought flowers but have no idea how to cultivate them ourselves.

FL

*or so we thought because we had read it!

Sounds like you were a member of a very angry religious cult. IMO you did well to get out!

Ken

[Audie]

As a former atheist myself, I can assure you that no amount of discussion or reasoning or appeals to "logic" will make the slightest impression on atheists. Atheists will laugh Bippy's idea that atheism is a religion. That's just another dead end.

I was a member of a local atheist organization that met on Wednesdays to listen to taped lectures by noted atheists. We were vocal, we were hard liners and refused to participate in pseudo-religious feasts like Thanksgiving, Christmas and Easter. We were not pipsqueak atheists like Audie or confused like Kenny. We understood the Bible* and its stories were familiar to us. I find modern atheist to be mostly angry and quite ignorant about the biblical narrative. Perhaps this age of easy-to-find information has turned both atheists and Bible believers into superficial thinkers: we have become florists instead of gardeners, so to speak. We can create a nice bouquet from bought flowers but have no idea how to cultivate them ourselves.

FL

*or so we thought because we had read it!

I will pip you, ya squeek, and then ya will see what is what!

why in the meantime why on earth would anyone go to atheist meetings?

I know your bible better than most xtians, btw. Not that its hard to.

The "atheism is a religion" bit is almost as good as the " how come there are still monkeys?"
argument if the goal is to get laughs, or groans.

Anyone trying to claim logic / philosophy as supporting their religious views are subject to a quick litmus test:
Are you a yec? Do you think world wide flood? That archaeology proves red sea crossing and sodom /gomorrah?

There's more, but thats enough. May as well try to convince a fighter pilot that the 19th century belief that heavier-than-air flight is impossible.

If the goal is to win contempt, fine. If someone wants to see the heathens converted, keep the fundies
locked in the attic.

[RickD]

Kenny said:
How ‘bout if were both wrong? Suppose God does exist; but you are worshipping the wrong one? And this real God keeps getting madder and madder each time you ignore him, and worship your fake one? I’d rather play it safe and not worship at all.

[Audie]

Kenny said:
How ‘bout if were both wrong? Suppose God does exist; but you are worshipping the wrong one? And this real God keeps getting madder and madder each time you ignore him, and worship your fake one? I’d rather play it safe and not worship at all.

Im worried its really Allah! I've not been covering my hair!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/c ... urning.jpg

)

[Philip]

The "atheism is a religion" bit is almost as good as the " how come there are still monkeys?"

How about if we swap the word "religion" for "world view" or "belief orientation" - would that make a difference? It actually means the very same. And that description label covers what one's basic belief is. It's what they strongly - or MOST strongly perceive/believe. Really, Audie, you're playing with semantics. Bottom line: You have a belief system that basically guides your decisions and actions, and it currently includes belief in no Deity or god.

[Kenny]

The "atheism is a religion" bit is almost as good as the " how come there are still monkeys?"

How about if we swap the word "religion" for "world view" or "belief orientation" - would that make a difference? It actually means the very same. And that description label covers what one's basic belief is. It's what they strongly - or MOST strongly perceive/believe. Really, Audie, you're playing with semantics. Bottom line: You have a belief system that basically guides your decisions and actions, and it currently includes belief in no Deity or god.

No. Swapping "world view" or anything else will not do. Lemme put it this way; if an Atheist world view, or belief orientation does not include God, what could it possibly include? (answer) everything else. With that in mind, when you consider the countless options of world views, beliefs, or orientations available to atheists, why would you assume two atheists would have similar world views, beliefs or orientations? In theory, my world view, orientation, or beliefs could be closer to yours than Audies, even though we both dismiss your concept of God.

Ken

[Philip]

OK, Ken, then let's use the term "theistic world view." You're either in or out! Such theistic belief either includes a God/god or not. Whether you like Beethoven or rap in addition, matters not a bit. Now, atheism can include all of the maybe or pseudo science and pop metaphysics one so desires - but its not rational or fact-based, scientifically (or otherwise) driven anti-theism - as there is no such animal. It's just pure unbelief in a Deity/deity and/or while perhaps also entertaining the possibilities of some metaphysical-based origins. They sure cannot be scientifically based non-theism.

[Kenny]

OK, Ken, then let's use the term "theistic world view." You're either in or out! Such theistic belief either includes a God/god or not. Whether you like Beethoven or rap in addition, matters not a bit.

Doesn't matter to who? You? Maybe it matters to the atheist you are referring to.

Now, atheism can include all of the maybe or pseudo science and pop metaphysics one so desires - but its not rational or fact-based, scientifically (or otherwise) driven anti-theism - as there is no such animal. It's just pure unbelief in a Deity/deity and/or while perhaps also entertaining the possibilities of some metaphysical-based origins. They sure cannot be scientifically based non-theism.

Ever heard of the Piraha people? They are a primitive tribe of the Amazon rain forest who have no concept of God. When the guy studying them (Daniel Everette) told them about Jesus, they didn't believe him and lost interest. Now what is their world view? It obviously doesn't include God, it obviously doesn't include anything to do with science; but yet they are atheists. So what are their atheist world views?