What triggers atheism?

[harvey1]

I've been thinking about this subject lately because some atheists on this board said at one time they were a Christian. Then I got to wondering, what would bring a Christian to the point to where they no longer believed in God?

In Christianity, the scriptures are very clear on what brings such a person to that point:

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools... They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen

This verse in Romans 1 clearly sums up what many Christians believe about so-called Christians who turn away from believing in God. The particular verse that is emphasized is that atheism is in response to:

• not glorifying God
• not giving God thanks
• thinking became futile
• their foolish hearts were darkened
• exchanged the truth of God for a lie
• began worshipping the universe rather than God

When you look at that list, the one that sticks out the most is that their "thinking became futile." That is, "thinking" in Greek is better translated as "disputing within themselves," or "questioning what is true." And, "futile" is translated as vain, empty, or foolish. Hence, they began a line of inquiry within themselves that they started doubting their beliefs in a vain and empty kind of reasoning. That is, I translate it as, "their thinking began to consider meaninglessness as meaningful."

I think that is right on the money. In all my experience with people who became atheists (which seems like the majority of atheists, although I'm not sure), what seems to be the case universally is that meaninglessness became somehow a meaningful way to think for them. So, instead of seeing purpose in creation, they began to see it as meaningless. Somehow, this soon developed into a line of thought where they "began to worship the universe rather than God."

So, what evil lurks at that point when you see meaninglessness as meaningful? In my mind, it's as Paul stated: "they claimed to be wise, they became fools." In other words, they were lured away from God by the appeal of wisdom. The same reason why Eve took the forbidden fruit from the serpent. The desire for wisdom, if not tempered with the desire to give God glory, is a subtle means by which a Christian can become at odds with God.

Therefore, here's my question. Is atheism caused by a rejection of meaning in life in order to be vainly knowledgeable, is that what is really happening? I'd like to understand what causes someone from a natural tendency to be open-minded about the causes of the universe, to be very narrow-minded about what can't be the cause.

[Dilettante]

Quote:
Of course (and surely you can uphold much of Jesus's doctrine without being a Christian)


Not necessarily, since it's not original or relevant.

A fortiori, especially if it's not original. There might be people out there who are following many of his doctrines without their knowledge.

Quote:
but don't forget that the French revolutionaries did not invent human rights.


No, they just gave shape to the whole thing as a social standard. The concept of human rights as sacred and evident independently from religion is arguably a 18th century effort.

You are correct here. Francisco de Vitoria and the 16th century School of Salamanca theologians had a religious concept of human rights. "Secular priests" like Kant and others gave human rights a secular formulation. Unfortunately human rights are not "sacred and evident" except perhaps in western civilization. And they're not really "rights" at all, they're ethical principles--but that's another debate.

Quote:
Yes, but only if there is no such thing as human free will--in which case, anyone's responsibility for any actions is greatly diminished, if not eliminated.


Free will is not part of the subject. We are talking about Jesus omniscience and responsability.

You'd be surprised to know that for most people, at least in this forum, the issue of free will is inextricably linked to the issue of divine omniscience.

[trencacloscas]

A fortiori, especially if it's not original. There might be people out there who are following many of his doctrines without their knowledge.

So?

You are correct here. Francisco de Vitoria and the 16th century School of Salamanca theologians had a religious concept of human rights. "Secular priests" like Kant and others gave human rights a secular formulation. Unfortunately human rights are not "sacred and evident" except perhaps in western civilization. And they're not really "rights" at all, they're ethical principles--but that's another debate.

You are right. Another debate, completely. Anyway, I seriously doubt that the De Vitoria concept of human rights be as rich and organic as the one formulated by Illuminism, especially noticing his theories in international law.

You'd be surprised to know that for most people, at least in this forum, the issue of free will is inextricably linked to the issue of divine omniscience.

I guess it's not only in this forum. For centuries religious people poisoned this kind of debate with the free will issue.