I find your lack of faith disturbing.

[Tcg]

Do theists (some that is perhaps not all) have any reason beyond this to mistrust atheists?




Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

Quite true Indeterminacy, the holographic universe and quantum foam seem as counter - intuitive as 'something from nothing' and in fact support the possibility of Something along those lines whereas infinite regression and a complex intelligent entity without any origin of its' own seems even more counter -intuitive.

But My talking - point is that trying to wangle a 'creator'of some sort onto the table is irrelevant to the religious argument, just as Genesis -literalism is utterly irrelevant to the religion -debate. But of course the religious lobby have:

(a) an agenda of wangling a 'Creator' into science - credibility so that 'God'can be taught in the science -class, and:

(b) they have bamboozled many Christians into thinking that one can be a Christian or one can be an evolutionist, but not both.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #7

smearing atheism with the Marxism broad brush is a convenient argument

Smearing theistic belief with the dogmatic organized religion broad brush is an equally convenient argument.

[TRANSPONDER]

Yes, But I'm not smearing organised religion with the theocratic totalitarianism brush. But since you mention it, maybe I should. I have seen too many examples of an extremist authoritarian religious cult trying to dominate society and not just in the US. There was (as a spin off of Billy Graham's evangelical colonialism in the UK) a thing called the 'Festival of Light' which was a reactionary religious -based pushback against the Liberalism of the 60's. It failed, but a notorious and iconic example was the attempt to ban 'Life of Brian' now shown everywhere and regarded as one of the best comedy films ever.

Now, religion is all very well and can claim some benefits, but you have to watch it all the time and prevent it getting temporal authority. Otherwise theocratic totalitarianism is what you will get. And I don't need to reach for the broad brush - the very clear picture is already painted in the US and very worryingly.

The Marxist regimes were not about atheism even though the Dogma they adopted was anti - religious. Atheism tends towards rejection of Dogma, religion or political, and is nothing to do with pushing Marxist dogma, though - as I said - it is a convenient scaremongering tactic to bash atheism with. On the other hand, warning against pushy and authoritarian religious Dogma is not scaremongering; that is a very real and unavoidable process - unless people reject it. I'm not to sure now that they will, but all we can do is counter the apologetics propaganda (not to say lies) that evangelical and propagandist religion consistently peddles. The main fear is atheism (or irreligion at least) being deprived of a voice, which is what the Religions would love to do.

No, my pal, the broad brush is right there in plain view.

[Jose Fly]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #2]

Well yes, but this speaks more to the perceived moral result of lack of faith. I'm referring to simply the lack of faith.

For example, years ago I had a discussion with my pastor at the time and expressed that I was doubting the claim that the Bible is the word of God. He became somewhat incensed with me not because of some moral failing, but simply my lack of faith. He of course had no real answers to address my doubt, but rather threatened me with hell if I didn't believe. I could be wrong, but I got the impression that my lack of faith threatened his faith. He also must have realized he had no real answer and that may have been unnerving as well.


Tcg

I've had similar experiences with some of my Christian friends and family. Oftentimes I come away with the impression that there's not much more to it than tribalism and security in numbers. One of my (IRL) friend groups is made up of all Christians, except me. Every so often one of them will say something to me like "Why can't you just be like the rest of us and be a Christian?" There's no appeal to Christianity being the truth or me being in need of salvation, and instead it's just a sort of "join us" type of tribalism, where if I'd only go along with the group then we'd all be that much closer and unified, which I guess would make us better friends.

When it comes to actual Christian leaders though it's more what you describe (i.e., more aggressive and a bit desperate), where IMO it's about their fear that me being an unbeliever might influence others to stop believing, and if that plays out enough then the Christians will be the outside group that's feeling the pressure to join the majority.

When I was younger and regularly attended church I often wondered what would happen if you removed the social component, and made going to church an individual experience. Somehow I think a significant number of church-goers would quickly lose interest.

[Tcg]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #2]

Well yes, but this speaks more to the perceived moral result of lack of faith. I'm referring to simply the lack of faith.

For example, years ago I had a discussion with my pastor at the time and expressed that I was doubting the claim that the Bible is the word of God. He became somewhat incensed with me not because of some moral failing, but simply my lack of faith. He of course had no real answers to address my doubt, but rather threatened me with hell if I didn't believe. I could be wrong, but I got the impression that my lack of faith threatened his faith. He also must have realized he had no real answer and that may have been unnerving as well.


Tcg

I've had similar experiences with some of my Christian friends and family. Oftentimes I come away with the impression that there's not much more to it than tribalism and security in numbers. One of my (IRL) friend groups is made up of all Christians, except me. Every so often one of them will say something to me like "Why can't you just be like the rest of us and be a Christian?" There's no appeal to Christianity being the truth or me being in need of salvation, and instead it's just a sort of "join us" type of tribalism, where if I'd only go along with the group then we'd all be that much closer and unified, which I guess would make us better friends.

When it comes to actual Christian leaders though it's more what you describe (i.e., more aggressive and a bit desperate), where IMO it's about their fear that me being an unbeliever might influence others to stop believing, and if that plays out enough then the Christians will be the outside group that's feeling the pressure to join the majority.

When I was younger and regularly attended church I often wondered what would happen if you removed the social component, and made going to church an individual experience. Somehow I think a significant number of church-goers would quickly lose interest.

I think you're right. It seems that the perceived mental health benefits of faith relate more to the practice of religion, the social aspects and perhaps the rituals more than the faith itself.

When I first became an atheist, I missed the community that I once shared via the church going experience. A bit of research revealed that Quakers are very open to atheists and in fact have a growing number of non-theists. The town I lived in at the time had an active Meeting so I began attending and continued to for a few years until I moved out of state. The first two Quakers I spoke with were atheists and the theists there were welcoming even knowing I was an atheist. I benefitted greatly from this experience even though it didn't involve faith in God given that I had none.


Tcg

[Jose Fly]

I think you're right. It seems that the perceived mental health benefits of faith relate more to the practice of religion, the social aspects and perhaps the rituals more than the faith itself.

It's (IMO) probably all of the above. There's certainly something to be said about achieving certainty about what happens after we die. And so there's no mistake here.....I'm fairly confident that the mental health benefits are quite real, even if I don't think the beliefs that create them are. There's no shortage of psychological studies showing the existence these benefits.

When I first became an atheist, I missed the community that I once shared via the church going experience. A bit of research revealed that Quakers are very open to atheists and in fact have a growing number of non-theists. The town I lived in at the time had an active Meeting so I began attending and continued to for a few years until I moved out of state. The first two Quakers I spoke with were atheists and the theists there were welcoming even knowing I was an atheist. I benefitted greatly from this experience even though it didn't involve faith in God given that I had none.

Tcg

That's really interesting. I've never met a Quaker. Maybe it's time I did!

[Tcg]

I think you're right. It seems that the perceived mental health benefits of faith relate more to the practice of religion, the social aspects and perhaps the rituals more than the faith itself.

It's (IMO) probably all of the above. There's certainly something to be said about achieving certainty about what happens after we die. And so there's no mistake here.....I'm fairly confident that the mental health benefits are quite real, even if I don't think the beliefs that create them are. There's no shortage of psychological studies showing the existence these benefits.

In most cases there are benefits, but this fairly recent study has revealed an exception:

Study Examines Religious Experiences and Depression

A national study examines the link between religious experiences and depression by following more than 12,000 American adolescents from their teens into middle adulthood. The research indicates that attending religious services staves off depression, but it also ties life-changing spiritual experiences and a belief in divine leading and angelic protection to an increased risk for depression, especially in men.

https://neurosciencenews.com/religion-depression-17753/

When I first became an atheist, I missed the community that I once shared via the church going experience. A bit of research revealed that Quakers are very open to atheists and in fact have a growing number of non-theists. The town I lived in at the time had an active Meeting so I began attending and continued to for a few years until I moved out of state. The first two Quakers I spoke with were atheists and the theists there were welcoming even knowing I was an atheist. I benefitted greatly from this experience even though it didn't involve faith in God given that I had none.

Tcg

That's really interesting. I've never met a Quaker. Maybe it's time I did!

They're quite a varied group given that they have no set dogma or doctrine one must hold to be a Quaker. One of the men I met had been a bomber in WWII. He described watching people being killed by the bombs he dropped. As a result he became a pacifist which led him to Quakerism. I couldn't agree fully with some aspects of pacifism, but certainly couldn't argue with his reason to be one.


Tcg

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #2]

Well yes, but this speaks more to the perceived moral result of lack of faith. I'm referring to simply the lack of faith.

For example, years ago I had a discussion with my pastor at the time and expressed that I was doubting the claim that the Bible is the word of God. He became somewhat incensed with me not because of some moral failing, but simply my lack of faith. He of course had no real answers to address my doubt, but rather threatened me with hell if I didn't believe. I could be wrong, but I got the impression that my lack of faith threatened his faith. He also must have realized he had no real answer and that may have been unnerving as well.


Tcg

I've had similar experiences with some of my Christian friends and family. Oftentimes I come away with the impression that there's not much more to it than tribalism and security in numbers. One of my (IRL) friend groups is made up of all Christians, except me. Every so often one of them will say something to me like "Why can't you just be like the rest of us and be a Christian?" There's no appeal to Christianity being the truth or me being in need of salvation, and instead it's just a sort of "join us" type of tribalism, where if I'd only go along with the group then we'd all be that much closer and unified, which I guess would make us better friends.

When it comes to actual Christian leaders though it's more what you describe (i.e., more aggressive and a bit desperate), where IMO it's about their fear that me being an unbeliever might influence others to stop believing, and if that plays out enough then the Christians will be the outside group that's feeling the pressure to join the majority.

When I was younger and regularly attended church I often wondered what would happen if you removed the social component, and made going to church an individual experience. Somehow I think a significant number of church-goers would quickly lose interest.

I'd say you've absolutely hit the nail on the head. The religious do at times claim that it has community the way atheism doesn't. But is that what it's all about? Community? The problem about Community is the way it can reject those who don't Fit.

And I definitely feel (just a feeling or impression) that there is a real fear of someone asking awkward questions. I've seen it slammed down with a few stock rebuttals, but a familiarity with a few apologetics can rebut those, and then the panic starts and the conversation is to be ended.

It's interesting to compare Atheist Experience, where the religious are invited to 'phone in with the religious apologetics shows where the last thing wanted is atheist input.

There have been debates where bot sides are put (with or without a vote at the end) and a couple of Christian shows where atheists were invited to explain themselves. Those are generally respectful, but not too common.

I have to say I probably wouldn't care for a friendly exchange with a Christian as I'd expect first claims that the Bible could be relied upon and (when it was argued that it couldn't) appeal to Faith.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #13
I wasn't talking about smearing organized religion with a broad brush; I was talking about smearing all theistic belief with a broad brush of organized religion.

And as I see it, you've failed to illustrate how dogmatism is any less dangerous in the hands of atheists than it is in the hands of theists.

[Gracchus]

"Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see." Hebrews 11:1 NIV
So according to the Bible, "faith" is assurance that wishes will be granted and belief-trust without evidence. I call that definition "gullibility".