Were the majority of atheists once religious?

[Zetesis Apistia]

I raised this question in another thread. It is my contention that a bad religious experience and not a lack of evidence is the basic cause for atheism. I also believe that the majority of atheists came from either a catholic or a protestant background. What I would like to do is add a poll to the thread so we can get an accurate count. If you desire to add anything with your vote feel free to have at it.

[Nickman]

The only problem is Islam promotes the killing of unbelievers....

- "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

Luke 3:17 His winnowing fork is in His hand to thoroughly clear His threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

"And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Now shoe [sic] me one verse in the New Covenant that condones killing in the name of Jesus

Jesus is the same God as in the Old Testament according to Christianity. Whatever the OT God said, Jesus said as well, because that was him before he came to earth in the flesh.

Jesus also said, "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose (Matt 5:17). His followers have been doing just that for 2000 years, i.e. Crusades, Inquisitions.

[Danmark]

So when Muslims kill Christians for not converting you thing that is loving your neighbor?

When Christians killed Muslims in the Crusades for not converting, do you think that was loving your neighbor.

The catholics were behind the crusades not Christians. And no I don't think the catholic were loving their neighbors.

1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

Just because a person claims to be Christian doesn't make him a Christian. A tree is known by its fruits.

As Nickman has shown, there are ample verses in the NT Christians can use to justify 'righteous killing,' just as in the Quran. Saying Catholics are not Christians is little different from saying Evangelicals are not Christians.

Both Christianity and Islam have a history of killing 'infidels.' Islam is going through a cultural phase similar to what Christianity has before. The only difference is the numbers involved from generation to generation due to cultural influences. I see much more in common between religious zealots in Christianity and Islam, than between members of the same religion.

[Zetesis Apistia]

As Nickman has shown, there are ample verses in the NT Christians can use to justify 'righteous killing,' just as in the Quran. Saying Catholics are not Christians is little different from saying Evangelicals are not Christians.

For example?

But as for the Quran it explicitly says to kill the infidel. No interpretation necessary.

[Zetesis Apistia]

[Replying to Zetesis Apistia]

I see that you specified your request with "new covenant" (essentially NT). Why do you get to pick and choose which part of your holy book to obey and a Muslim coudn't? He could decide not to obey the parts condoning the killing of unbelievers just as you ignore the parts of the bible that have said to do so as well

Because Jesus changed some things with the new covenant. As in...

Matthew 5: 38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

God said that the time would come when he would make changes and he did.

[Zetesis Apistia]

The only problem is Islam promotes the killing of unbelievers....

- "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

Luke 3:17 His winnowing fork is in His hand to thoroughly clear His threshing floor, and to gather the wheat into His barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.

This is not instructions for how Christians are to treat others. This is what God intends to do at the final judgment. Nice spin though.

"And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

These are the laws of Judaism not Christianity.

Matthew 5: 38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Christianity promotes love and forgiveness. We are instructed to kill no one.

Now shoe [sic] me one verse in the New Covenant that condones killing in the name of Jesus

Jesus is the same God as in the Old Testament according to Christianity. Whatever the OT God said, Jesus said as well, because that was him before he came to earth in the flesh.

Jesus also said, "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose (Matt 5:17). His followers have been doing just that for 2000 years, i.e. Crusades, Inquisitions.

Jesus is the same, but how he chose to deal with sinners in the new covenant as opposed to the old has been changed. An elementary understanding of the new testament is all it takes to figure that out.

[Nickman]

These are the laws of Judaism not Christianity.

So then, just divorce Christianity from Judaism and call it a day. Oh wait! You can't.

Matthew 5: 38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Christianity promotes love and forgiveness. We are instructed to kill no one.

Christianity promotes the Torah. Some of which is good, and some of which is bad. The only thing Christianity does is exchange animal sacrifice for human sacrifice, and turns the invisible Yahweh into a three part God.

Jesus is the same, but how he chose to deal with sinners in the new covenant as opposed to the old has been changed. An elementary understanding of the new testament is all it takes to figure that out.

Why the change? I understand the NT quite well and make it my duty to understand it in the context of how it was written. The OT God was immutable. You contradict this attribute.

[Zetesis Apistia]

So then, just divorce Christianity from Judaism and call it a day. Oh wait! You can't.

Moses legislated laws that were intended to govern a nation that was about to be birthed. Those laws pertained to that nation and that nation alone. It would be impossible to enforce levitical law as Christianity spread abroad. Those laws were abolished in the new covenant. They had to be. It wasn't a divorce it was a transition that hardliners rejected. I shouldn't have to tell you all of this stuff when you already know it.

Christianity promotes the Torah. Some of which is good, and some of which is bad. The only thing Christianity does is exchange animal sacrifice for human sacrifice, and turns the invisible Yahweh into a three part God.

The OT is divided into historical, prophetic, wisdom, and law books. All of that is quite applicable in Christianity except for the way we are to deal with law breakers. You know good and well that Jesus changed how we are to treat law breakers.

Jesus is the same, but how he chose to deal with sinners in the new covenant as opposed to the old has been changed. An elementary understanding of the new testament is all it takes to figure that out.

Why the change? I understand the NT quite well and make it my duty to understand it in the context of how it was written. The OT God was immutable. You contradict this attribute.

God doesn't change but he reserves the right to develop a plan and make changes to it when he sees fit. Especially when he predicted that he would eventually make those changes...

Jeremiah 31: 31 Behold, the days come, says Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Yahweh.
33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says Yahweh: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:
34 and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Yahweh; for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says Yahweh: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.

What in the world do you think he meant by that? It has always been there but for some reason you guys keep saying, what...changes? It's in black and white. God said the time will come when I will make some changes. There it is in black and white and you still can't see it. So goes the verse...

Isaiah 6: 9 He said, "Go, and tell this people, 'You hear indeed, But don't understand; And you see indeed, But don't perceive.'
10 Make the heart of this people fat; Make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And turn again, and be healed."

[Nickman]

Moses legislated laws that were intended to govern a nation that was about to be birthed. Those laws pertained to that nation and that nation alone. It would be impossible to enforce levitical law as Christianity spread abroad. Those laws were abolished in the new covenant. They had to be. It wasn't a divorce it was a transition that hardliners rejected. I shouldn't have to tell you all of this stuff when you already know it.

So by your own admission, the Ten Commandments are obsolete. Homosexuality is now ok, because Jesus never said anything about it. In the argument that you make, we cannot listen to anything in the Old Testament. If you do, (In the words of JoeyKnothead) then "ya have sum splainin to do."

The OT is divided into historical, prophetic, wisdom, and law books. All of that is quite applicable in Christianity except for the way we are to deal with law breakers. You know good and well that Jesus changed how we are to treat law breakers.

Jesus never said what you just said. Infact he said he came to uphold the law. You cannot uphold a law that you change. You're making absolutely no sense.

God doesn't change but he reserves the right to develop a plan and make changes to it when he sees fit. Especially when he predicted that he would eventually make those changes...

Jeremiah 31: 31 Behold, the days come, says Yahweh, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they broke, although I was a husband to them, says Yahweh.
33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says Yahweh: I will put my law in their inward parts, and in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people:
34 and they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know Yahweh; for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says Yahweh: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will I remember no more.

What in the world do you think he meant by that? It has always been there but for some reason you guys keep saying, what...changes? It's in black and white. God said the time will come when I will make some changes. There it is in black and white and you still can't see it. So goes the verse...

Isaiah 6: 9 He said, "Go, and tell this people, 'You hear indeed, But don't understand; And you see indeed, But don't perceive.'
10 Make the heart of this people fat; Make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And turn again, and be healed."

So what was the reason that he went with a plan that he already knew wouldn't work? He started out with a goal. That goal according to NT writers is that no one should perish. His abilities as an omnipotent, omniscient deity are not conducive with those attributes.

Not to forget that this God already made provisions in the OT that cancel Jesus completely.

2 Chronicles 7:14
if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.

No sacrifice is needed according to your God's own words.

[bernee51]

Good morning ZA, I note that the conversation has moved on somewhat from where we left it...more along the lines of discussing the vertical. If you don't mind me going back to where we were up to....

The greatest deception being that of self as an individual entity. i.e The hallucination that we are a spate ego enclosed in a bag of skin " as Alan watts put it.

I would agree that we are all made up of the same "God matter" with just a rearrangement of the atoms. But it appears that through consciousness God has granted us our own personal identity. We can confirm that through our own isolated consciousness. Isolated consciousness makes me my own entity.

Yes, it 'appears' that way. But is that the way it is in reality. We are made of the same stuff as the rest on the universe, stardust, as Sagan so eloquently noted. We are biological creatures that cannot be separated from the biosphere that sustains us. Yet we have this 'consciousness'. Not just any consciousness, many other animals are conscious, but a very specific self reflective consciousness. The sort of consciousness that allows us to ask 'who am I?"

Note, though, that consciousness is only ever referred to in the singular. You feel that your consciousness is individual, separate to mine and every one else's, but is it? How do you know? Are you the same ZA from 40 years ago, 30, 20? When did you stop being that ZA and become the one you are now? All those things that come together to make up ZA, all the thoughts,beliefs, ideas, wishes, needs etc are mere objects projected onto consciousness. Like the things we seek to bring happiness , they are impermanent.

Consciousness, awareness itself, is common to us all. How it manifests is what makes us 'different' . Consciousness is like a screen on which the movie of our life is projected. For all the screen is the same but the movie differs.

Understanding this leads to the understanding that, across all levels of existence, we are indeed 'one'...and that 'one' is sacred, divine. This is a truly 'horizontal' attitude to being

1. A void, by definition, can never be filled.
2. Seeking to fill it from out there is always going to end in failure. All out there is impermanent.

There is an answer to this conundrum.

I agree that it cannot be filled through personal efforts apart from God. I believe that is what brings people to a state of hopelessness. Attempts to fill a void that never gets filled eventually discourages. Suppose God purposely created a void that only he could fill. In fact that is how we confirm our intellect of God. You say voids cannot be filled because by experience you cannot fill them. But the fact that you attempt to fill them apart from God causes you to conclude that they cannot be filled. Through my personal metamorphosis i was able to fill those voids one by one through God. That is how I confirmed God.

I said there was an answer...and there is.

Once there is a realization of the true nature of being, there comes an understanding that we are not separate...and there is no void. I may have mentioned this before but Ramana describe sit thus...

"In a pinhole camera, when the hole is small you see shapes and colours. When the hole is made big the images disappear and all one sees is light. Similarly when the mind is small and narrow it is full of shapes and words. When it broadens it sees pure light. When the box is destroyed altogether only light remains.

The answer lies in the word self

We are "self" ish by nature. The reason we never fill the voids is because self is an obstacle that hinders our filling it. When we can remove self then we will have found the key to our own utopia.

Exactly...but the idea of 'salvation' does the exact opposite...it seeks to preserve the 'soul', the individual.

An attempt to bring meaning and legitimacy to lifei.e. to fill the void

All of us look for purpose, for happiness, for acceptance, etc. Apparently there is a sense of incompleteness when these needs are not satisfied or else why do we bother to search for them? We have voids that need to be filled. We know that from experience. You say they cannot be filled. I say that I know they can. Before my Christian conversion I would have agreed with you though.

And the void cannot be filled, not because it is unfillable, but because it is an illusion.

Religion, by definition, means relinking. But relinking to what?

Why do people by nature feel the need to "relink" Is it because we have a sense of incompleteness because we are not linked? I suggest this to be the case.

And I agree. But linked to what. We intrinsically know of the true nature of our being. The are moments in our lives when we get a glimpse of this, 'peek' experiences. God belief and related religions are all trying to do rebuild this link, turn the glimpse into an apprehension.

They are all trying to answer the fundamental question...'who am I?' Who would know better than 'I'.

A hint...the answer does not lay in the statement "I am {something}".

It is merely "I AM"

In order to relink there is a requirement for experience of that to which the relinking is to occur. Christianity holds that relinking can only occur through Jesus " John 14:6. Already there is an attempt to put boundaries around the boundless.

Two opposing views cannot be true at the same time. Blaspheming Muhammad by embracing Jesus means they cannot both be paths. It has to be one or the other. We eliminate paths simply because two contradicting paths cannot possibly be true at the same time.

A false dichotomy.

Perhaps there is no path. Remember 'a pathless land'

Again I dont think you quite understand the darkness to which I refer, or perhaps I do not understand you. It is not a secular darkness, not a darkness of action.

Darkness of the soul is what I am referring to. Is there another kind?

It is a darkness which occurs before the light of realization. It is the darkness of the destruction of the individual self, the soul.

Out if this darkness arises subjective experience of light (inner light); moral elevation; intellectual illumination; sense of immortality; loss of fear of death; loss of a sense of sin.

It is an embrace of what you call 'god' but is, in fact, an embrace of the true nature of existence...pure awareness itself.

[10CC]

[Replying to post 321 by Zetesis Apistia]

According to the Gospel of Matthew when Jesus was asked about the greatest commandment Jesus said that loving God with all your heart was the first and greatest commandment. Loving your neighbor was only the second.

Yeah what's with that?
Every ounce of love you have belongs to god, what are you supposed to use to love your neighbour?

Well apart from the love of God you cant love your neighbor. Not really.

This is code for..........................what?