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.

[bernee51]

Harvey - in the past I have always read your posts with an open mind, you have obvious intelligence, something to say and a reasonable way of saying it.

This post, however, plumbs the depths of consdescention

]
bernee51: "For me, atheism is the exact oppsite - it is a positive search, through meditation and a self-enquiry, into the meaning of life."

Well, I don't know if you were a Christian. It doesn't sound like it. It sounds like you were a New Ager who found Nothingness (i.e., New Age+Nothingness=Bernee's atheism).

Again with the "True Christian" (TM) skata.

What gives you the right to decide who or what is a christian? If someone doesn't meet Harvey's standards of christianity they were obviously not a "True Christian" (TM)

I've never been a "New Ager" in the way that term is popularly used. "New Age" religion is as pre-rational as mythological christianity. I have been a seeker of knowledge, truth and self understanding. The point I am currently at is not through dogma or devolution of responsibility onto a mythological frameworrk - but through deep meditation ans self enquiry.

James, I think you were a real Christian, and that bothers me. Why? Why? Why? Looking at your account, it appears that intellectual vanity brought you down.

And it is the very same thing, along with the large shadow of your ego that is shielding you from the truth.

You should have realized that atheism is a hungry belief system that practices 24/7 to defeat the arguments of Christians,

Atheism is not a belief system - where is the system? Describe it to me. Most atheist I know could care less about what christians want to believe - it is not beholden on someone who lacks belief in god to convince the world of their beliefs.

There is no EAC

[bernee51]

Agnosticism is a lack of belief in God. Atheism is a denial that God exists.

Do you believe that if you say something wrong often enough Harvey it somehow becomes the truth?

Agnosticisn - lack of knowledge
Atheism - lack of belief.

It is not a pre-requisite of agnosticism to not believe in god. It is not a pre-requisite of atheism to deny the existence of god.

[harvey1]

Agnosticisn - lack of knowledge

Lack of knowledge? Wouldn't that be ignorance?

Atheism - lack of belief.

Just because Anthony Flew suggested that atheists take that tactic in the late 70's is no reason to accept a change of meaning that this word has had for quite a long period.

It is not a pre-requisite of agnosticism to not believe in god. It is not a pre-requisite of atheism to deny the existence of god.

Well, it is not a prerequisite to call the Iraq war a real war, but that doesn't change the facts, now does it?

[China Cat Sunflower]

Harvey,

China Cat Sunflower: "I decided to leave all of those assumptions aside and accept only what I could verify for myself."

So, you jumped to a belief that made even larger, unfounded assumptions? Why?? Ah, this is a horrible Christian approach to life. Your faith was easily washed away.

No, I moved away from belief based systems, and stopped being afraid to say "I don't know." I'm making every effort to find out the why, where, what, when, and how, but there are many things I simply don't know the answer to, so I put them back in the "to be considered" file until I have more information. Faith, as you're describing it, attempts to short circuit that reasoning process. It's an easy way out of making a personal effort to understand things.

Let me ask you something, if you can be objective and honest enough to answer: Between you and we atheists, who seems to value a broad based view of both sides of the equation? And who is making broad, sweeping value judgements about the veracity and worth of other's thinking processes? Answer that, and you'll have a pretty good indication of who is broad minded and objective, and who is narrow minded and intellectually insulated.

Chris

[harvey1]

This post, however, plumbs the depths of consdescention

Too bad you think that.

Again with the "True Christian"... What gives you the right to decide who or what is a christian? If someone doesn't meet Harvey's standards of christianity they were obviously not a "True Christian"...

Well, if you expect me to look on Church registers to find out who's a Christian, then a number of atheists and agnostics, some of them who post here, are probably still on some of those registers.

The New Testament is quite clear that a Christian is someone who has devoted their life to that calling and are willing to undergo ultimate sacrifices to remain a Christian. In my book, that doesn't describe those who give up their faith without shedding tears of anguish over years of time. I doubt any here have undergone years of such anguish. Assisted suicide seems more likely the case.

I've never been a "New Ager" in the way that term is popularly used. "New Age" religion is as pre-rational as mythological christianity. I have been a seeker of knowledge, truth and self understanding. The point I am currently at is not through dogma or devolution of responsibility onto a mythological frameworrk - but through deep meditation ans self enquiry.

That's fine. But, were you ever a committed Christian? Perhaps you were a different religion?

And it is the very same thing, along with the large shadow of your ego that is shielding you from the truth.

Okay, is that supposed to be a Buddhist joke? Why do you bring up Eastern religious beliefs as part of your atheist beliefs?

Atheism is not a belief system - where is the system? Describe it to me. Most atheist I know could care less about what christians want to believe - it is not beholden on someone who lacks belief in god to convince the world of their beliefs.

Yeah... Sure.

[bernee51]

Agnosticisn - lack of knowledge

Lack of knowledge? Wouldn't that be ignorance?

That would be correct - ignorance as to the existence or otherwise of god(s)

Atheism - lack of belief.

Just because Anthony Flew suggested that atheists take that tactic in the late 70's is no reason to accept a change of meaning that this word has had for quite a long period.

Christians like to define god - why don't you leave it up to atheists to define atheism. Here is a good place to start

It is not a pre-requisite of agnosticism to not believe in god. It is not a pre-requisite of atheism to deny the existence of god.

Well, it is not a prerequisite to call the Iraq war a real war, but that doesn't change the facts, now does it?

Straw man

[China Cat Sunflower]

Harvey,

One more thought on the "who is a real Christian" thing: A true follower of Christ would be making every effort to put Christ's philosophy of Christian love into practice, would they not? So I would assume that in true Christianity, the major emphasis would be on the Golden Rule, loving our enemies and returning love for hate, actively opposing the idea of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" by opposing capital punishment, walking the extra mile at all times, forgiving everyone at least seventy times seven, not judging others, but striving to be perfect like God who is absolutely impartial... etc., right? And everyone who isn't absolutely focused on making the utmost effort to do all of that stuff couldn't rightly be called a true Christian, wouldn't you agree?

Where does that leave you and your denomination (whatever that may be)? Can you honestly say you're a true Christian? See, I don't see much emphasis being placed on any of that stuff. What I do see being emphasized is a lot of ethnocenticity, xenophobia, judgementalism, general fear tactics, revenge and retribution, nationalism...All the nasty stuff that religion has stood for, and is emblematic of throughout history. Maybe if Christianity had something to do with what Jesus was talking about while he was alive it wouldn't have the huge credibility problem it does today.

Chris

[harvey1]

Where does that leave you and your denomination (whatever that may be)? Can you honestly say you're a true Christian? See, I don't see much emphasis being placed on any of that stuff. What I do see being emphasized is a lot of ethnocenticity, xenophobia, judgementalism, general fear tactics, revenge and retribution, nationalism...All the nasty stuff that religion has stood for, and is emblematic of throughout history. Maybe if Christianity had something to do with what Jesus was talking about while he was alive it wouldn't have the huge credibility problem it does today.

Hey, I keep the faith as best as I can. Perhaps you don't see the reason why you should have stuck with your Christian beliefs, but I do. A lot of Christians suffered a great deal so that you could have that faith, and when I hear how you gave it away as if you were cleaning out your basement and giving the stuff away for free, I can only think that the religion meant very little to you. Maybe it did, but you sure don't act like it. The only person here who expressed any emotion at all was JamesBrown, and I give him the respect of acknowledging his faith. To those who didn't have that kind of attachment, then why do you even bother calling yourself a one-time brother or sister of Christ? It's just a down out falsehood.

I'm sorry if I offend you and others. But, I guess I get tired of a bunch of radicals trying to purport their views as intellectually superior when that's just a bunch of bull.

[harvey1]

That would be correct - ignorance as to the existence or otherwise of god(s)

Bernee, agnostics don't believe because they don't think there's sufficient evidence for that belief, not because they are ignorant people. C'mon.

Christians like to define god - why don't you leave it up to atheists to define atheism. Here is a good place to start

Atheism can define itself however it pleases unless it protrudes into other beliefs (e.g., agnosticism or pantheism). Those bounderies are already determined, so atheists will have to accept the historic designation. Agnosticism was an invented term by Huxley to find a middle ground between theism and atheism. That's clearly documented. It's also clearly documented how Russell, Darwin, and many others also followed up by accepting this term. It is quite clear that Flew argued for this later tweeny position of atheism encompassing agnosticism, and the motives were also clear.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Harvey,

You didn't offend me at all, my friend. See, all of that Golden rule stuff is more important to me now than ever, and in that sense I'm still a Christian. I just don't think that God is a thing, or a being that exists in a certain place somewhere "out there." That's why I'm an a-theist. I'm not interested in destroying religion, and if your religion is working for you, making you a better person and giving you a purpose in life I think that's great, and more power to you.

I still study the Bible on a regular basis, as well as the sacred scriptures of other religions, and not to find discrepancies and ways to trip Christians up. The Bible is a fascinating collection of literature, and when considered from a literary and historical perspective all of the problems inherent in a literalist reading disappear.

Chris