Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Please stop all the off topic personal bickering bordering on personal attacks. Accusing a member of juvenile behavior is awfully close to a personal attack, and replying to that accusation does nothing to further the discussion of the topic.
Speaking of the topic, THIS is the Opening Post, which establishes the topic for this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash
This is not another thread about the evidence or lack thereof for a god, so let's please not waste time going there . This is about some statements I routinely see here suggesting that the reason atheists and agnostics don't want to believe in God is because they want to sin. Which makes no sense in and of itself . But I want to directly address this oft repeated statement .
Do theists really believe that the only reason atheists and agnostics don't believe is because they want to sin?
Can theists truly not grasp that some people simply see no evidence of a God , and certainly none that might want a person to follow a particular faith, and see no point in believing in something like this without solid evidence ?
On what basis would a theist who believes this claim that someone like Stephen Hawking just wants to sin ? What evidence would a theist have that Sam Harris's atheism is rooted in a desire to pretend God doesn't exist so he can sin without guilt ? What about Dan Barker , a former Pentecostal preacher who decided he no longer believed ? What evidence would a theist have that Dan Barker left the faith so he could sin at will?
Is the concept of simple disbelief in invisible and silent supernatural beings really this hard to grasp , that theists have to resort to these kinds of allegations ?
Now, in case you're interested, here is what I observe. Remember, for the past 2+ years, I have been observing the postings in both the Christianity forum and in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum.
To answer the first question, I don't think that theists believe that atheists don't believe is because they want to sin. Instead, it appears from the postings I recall that the Christians think that atheists are angry at God. The atheists laugh at this idea because they contend that you can't be angry at something that you do not believe exists. If you don't believe in any deity, there is no such thing as sin, so the very idea that an atheist would forego religion just so he/she can sin all they want is simply incredible.
To answer the second question, the theists see evidence that is enough for them to believe (such as the Cosmology argument), and find it completely incomprehensible that anyone could possibly fail to see the same evidence that they see. So, no, some theists are unable to grasp the concept that there is no evidence that the atheists will recognize.
The ideas presented in the third paragraph really don't make sense to me. Since atheists don't believe that the concept of sin applies to them, there is no reason to think they "just want to sin." I see no reason to think that the self-proclaimed atheists are "pretending that God doesn't exist so they can sin without guilt." I think that most people would take Dan Barker's reasons for leaving the faith at face value. He left for whatever reason he said. Did he say he left so he could sin at will? If so, that's why he left.
If you want to know what Atheists & Agnostics think, go read the threads in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum and see. Some of them went through very traumatic experience as they left religion. There are several threads about how they became who they are.
Please stop all the off topic personal bickering bordering on personal attacks. Accusing a member of juvenile behavior is awfully close to a personal attack, and replying to that accusation does nothing to further the discussion of the topic.
Speaking of the topic, THIS is the Opening Post, which establishes the topic for this thread:
Now, in case you're interested, here is what I observe. Remember, for the past 2+ years, I have been observing the postings in both the Christianity forum and in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum.
To answer the first question, I don't think that theists believe that atheists don't believe is because they want to sin. Instead, it appears from the postings I recall that the Christians think that atheists are angry at God. The atheists laugh at this idea because they contend that you can't be angry at something that you do not believe exists. If you don't believe in any deity, there is no such thing as sin, so the very idea that an atheist would forego religion just so he/she can sin all they want is simply incredible.
To answer the second question, the theists see evidence that is enough for them to believe (such as the Cosmology argument), and find it completely incomprehensible that anyone could possibly fail to see the same evidence that they see. So, no, some theists are unable to grasp the concept that there is no evidence that the atheists will recognize.
The ideas presented in the third paragraph really don't make sense to me. Since atheists don't believe that the concept of sin applies to them, there is no reason to think they "just want to sin." I see no reason to think that the self-proclaimed atheists are "pretending that God doesn't exist so they can sin without guilt." I think that most people would take Dan Barker's reasons for leaving the faith at face value. He left for whatever reason he said. Did he say he left so he could sin at will? If so, that's why he left.
If you want to know what Atheists & Agnostics think, go read the threads in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum and see. Some of them went through very traumatic experience as they left religion. There are several threads about how they became who they are.
Just for clarification , this thread was started specifically because a couple of theists were claiming that atheists disbelieve so they could keep sinning without guilt . I could name them if it's not against the rules , but I think everyone can guess who I'm referring to .
As for the weird and angry responses , I am still amazed at the number of posters who got butt hurt over a simple question that had a fairly easy and non threatening answer .
Please stop all the off topic personal bickering bordering on personal attacks. Accusing a member of juvenile behavior is awfully close to a personal attack, and replying to that accusation does nothing to further the discussion of the topic.
Speaking of the topic, THIS is the Opening Post, which establishes the topic for this thread:
Now, in case you're interested, here is what I observe. Remember, for the past 2+ years, I have been observing the postings in both the Christianity forum and in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum.
To answer the first question, I don't think that theists believe that atheists don't believe is because they want to sin. Instead, it appears from the postings I recall that the Christians think that atheists are angry at God. The atheists laugh at this idea because they contend that you can't be angry at something that you do not believe exists. If you don't believe in any deity, there is no such thing as sin, so the very idea that an atheist would forego religion just so he/she can sin all they want is simply incredible.
To answer the second question, the theists see evidence that is enough for them to believe (such as the Cosmology argument), and find it completely incomprehensible that anyone could possibly fail to see the same evidence that they see. So, no, some theists are unable to grasp the concept that there is no evidence that the atheists will recognize.
The ideas presented in the third paragraph really don't make sense to me. Since atheists don't believe that the concept of sin applies to them, there is no reason to think they "just want to sin." I see no reason to think that the self-proclaimed atheists are "pretending that God doesn't exist so they can sin without guilt." I think that most people would take Dan Barker's reasons for leaving the faith at face value. He left for whatever reason he said. Did he say he left so he could sin at will? If so, that's why he left.
If you want to know what Atheists & Agnostics think, go read the threads in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum and see. Some of them went through very traumatic experience as they left religion. There are several threads about how they became who they are.
Good post. I would just observe that theists may get the idea that we are 'angry (or "Mad" at God, because we are always dishing out criticisms of Biblegod, usually. This is not because we believe God exist and he is bad, but because he would be bad if he did exist, the whole Bibleclaim about goodness collapses and so does Bible credibility.It is just one thing like Genesis incredibility, Gospel discrepancy and more and more to doubt, like invalid argument from prophecy and even fiddling of history like the Siege of Jerusalem, and doubts there was ever an Exodus, all pile up to make us reject Bible and its claims as unreliable.
On the second point I think you nailed it.
On the third, I can see the valid idea behind us wanting to Sin. And if the theist can't wrap their head around my mindset, I can get theirs and see how they would think that we accept Son (let's face it, it is a mindset we all grow up with and it took time before I realized it was a myth) and because we want to "fornicate in the street" as one Muslin asshat put it (perfectly untrue, I fornicate discreetly in a back alley as does any decent person), we convince ourselves to reject the God claim using all sorts of arguments. It is a handy way of dismissing the arguments for any reason other than showing them false. Which is a dangerous thing (for Faith) to try.
So after 18 pages of wrangling it seems the answer is..no, theists do not seem to be able to wrap their cranial stodge around atheist disbelief in the god -claim and will do anything to avoid their brain Glomming..is that the right word? I think it's the right word...Glomming our disbelief, because it might make too much sense.
To "glom onto" something is to seize on a notion and cling to it. At least as Americans use the idiom. I have never seen it gerundized into "glomming" apart from "he is glomming onto the notion that ...". "Glom" has a negative connotation of embracing a notion that appeals to you or seems right apart from evidence. For me it always evokes the image of a drowning man grabbing onto a bit of flotsam to stay afloat.
Perhaps you are thinking of "grok" or "grokking" which is derived from Sci-Fi (no, not Star Trek, but Heinlein) and is a made-up Martian word meaning literally "to drink" or metaphorically "to be one with" or as now in common usage (e.g., "I grok Spock"), to "get" or understand something or someone philosophically and be enlightened by it, especially if it's a little bit out of the mainstream of thought.
Some atheist, use the flag "lack of belief" to rally the troops when in fact the "lack of belief", for that person, is based on "well, I don't need that so nobody does" or "I was abused so I am getting revenge".
It has been my experience -- which is quite extensive, I may add -- that many vocal theists really DO have an issue with "lack of belief" and to see anyone accuse atheists of "well, I don't need that so nobody else does" is rather ... hollow ... given the all too common theistic position of, "I need that so everyone else does."
Which is why, of course, there is a very loud chorus of squeaky theistic wheels that seem not to care overmuch about Constitutional rights in this country. Thus there is always one religious group or another out there trying to make their superstitions the Law of the Land.
On an individual basis, the excuses you presented are classic head-in-sand fantasies many theists have about atheists. Yes, yes ... atheists were abused as children; they want to live lives of sin without being accountable to a higher power; they're out to get revenge against theists due to some perceived wrong committed against them; they're just mean-spirited people who hate the fact that others have found happiness in religion ... yes, the list of "reasons" why someone might be an atheist is quite extensive.
Extensive ... but incomplete.
Because, you see, there is one reason for atheism that is left off this list again and again and again: religion simply doesn't make any sense.
However, the vast majority of theists I've debated with don't even want to acknowledge that reason because doing so gives a form of credence or validation to it. In other words, if a theist accepts that "religion makes no sense" is a valid reason for atheism, the theist must then acknowledge that yes, perhaps, religion really DOESN'T make any sense. There aren't many theists out there who will ever say such a thing much less believe it.
The result, of course, is that "religion makes no sense" simply cannot be a valid reason for atheism no matter how often or how loudly atheists claim (in one way or another) that the absurdity of religion is their primary reason for disbelief. (I consider a "lack of evidence" part of religion's absurdity).
"Well of course religion makes sense. It makes perfect sense. Therefore, the cause of atheism must be something else ..."
Which brings my point full circle. Atheists just want to sin, they were abused, they're mean, they're out for revenge, they just hate Christians, and suchlike. Anything, any reason other than one that deals with the logic, evidence, probability, or scientific stance against religion is acceptable.
Now ... I know what some theists might be thinking as they read my post: "But there ARE atheists out there who just want to sin, were abused, etc., who use that as a reason for atheism."
Perhaps, but so what? First of all, I've yet to meet one. Secondly, even if I have met one without realizing it, someone who disbelieves for bad reasons will almost certainly encounter those who disbelieve for good reasons; there's a damn good chance that, over time, the petty reasons which originally brought them to atheism will evaporate in favor of the logical, scientific, and evidence-based reasons which nearly all atheists espouse.
Unfortunately, however, there are theists out there who fixate on those petty reasons for atheism and assume that those reasons lurk in the center of each atheist heart. These theists will argue that the "religion doesn't make sense" reason isn't the real reason for someone's atheism.
"Heavens, no!" *polite church laugh* "Atheists know that Christianity [or whatever religion] makes perfect sense and if they would just get over themselves, they'd see that."
This can sometimes lead into a lot of armchair psycho-analyzing by the theist in the hopes of pinning down the bona fide reason why an atheist doesn't believe; some theists will even accuse atheists of actually believing in God but are merely passing through some rebellious stage that keeps them from being "right with the Lord."
Believe me when I say that this kind of word wrangling can really grind the gears of many an atheist who, despite telling and retelling the reasons for their disbelief, are accused of some petty, sophomoric reason for not thumping that Bible right alongside the theists.
But, bUU...let's take it away from religion...if we take the word 'faith' period...
I have 'faith' that that chair will not collapse when I sit in it.
Yes, my faith is built on seeing a fat person sit on it, so my belief is based on 'something'
pretty sound.
However, unless I look underneath it and try it out a bit...my faith in the chair could be incorrect.
(That fat person could have done it in! Weakening something.)
My issue is in the word itself, apart from religion...faith , to me, means a hope or trust that something 'is' what I 'think' it is.
Op, just curious: did anyone else just answer the questions? Without opinions, monologues, or essays?
Many of the responses I've read are from atheists, not theists. I haven't seen another theist answer directly besides 1. Lol
Clearly without whining, rancor , or other nonsense , just you . It seems beyond the others to answer simply and honestly . I'm not sure what is so scary about the questions . I have no trouble admitting that I can grasp theists choosing to believe .
But, bUU...let's take it away from religion...if we take the word 'faith' period...
I have 'faith' that that chair will not collapse when I sit in it.
Yes, my faith is built on seeing a fat person sit on it, so my belief is based on 'something'
pretty sound.
That example isn't faith. It is a belief based on the verifiable evidence that 99.9% of the time, chairs do not collapse when we sit on them. Now, if the verifiable evidence was that 99.9% of the time we sit on chairs they DID collapse then to believe that the chair you are about to sit on will NOT collapse is an act of faith...because the belief is not supported by the verifiable evidence.
As a former atheist, I recognize quite clearly that sin is fun, and I did not want to get involved in religion and submit to God.
There is something to be said for the dull, overly solemn, pleasure-condemning attitudes religion often conveys ... and not wishing to waste one's life refraining from LIVING simply because of ancient superstitions that were meant for Hebrews.
Depending on the denomination, religion can be the thickest, most saturated wet blanket ever draped over the soul of humanity.
And the reason for the condemnation of pleasure has very little to do with the harm indulging in pleasure actually brings. Sure, certain pleasures such as wanton fornication, alcohol abuse, and such do carry disastrous consequences. Some denominations, however, go well beyond that and into the realm of an oppressive, joyless existence.
Why? Well ... because if we have too much fun in this world, we won't sit around babbling prayers, reading the Bible, and giving all of our attention to God (which is just one of many reasons suggesting that the Biblegod is as fake as Aphrodite).
I mean, think of it: A God who is so vain, egocentric, and narcissistic that he literally wants to prevent you from having fun because it will draw away your attention -- like some ultra-jealous spouse who would rather see you bored, miserable, and stir crazy than to let you have a night out with the guys/gals.
Do I really have to remind everyone that this is just a means of social control? Of course I don't, yet that is precisely why many religions thumb their noses at worldly pleasures.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
So, yes--some of it is simply because an atheist chooses not to believe.
Which is nonsense. No one "chooses" what to believe. One is either convinced ... or not. One cannot wake up one day and "choose" not to believe in God because they want to hire a prostitute, for instance. The lack of belief was already there. Think about your own faith. Could you honestly just decide with a snap of your fingers to no longer believe in God and actually mean it? Because if you could not, I'm not sure why you think those who are atheists somehow did it so they could begin their life of sin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
Having said that, the reason you choose not to believe is because you are in the same condition every man is born into -- your heart is deceitfully wicked (as was mine). God had to regenerate me so I could believe. If he hasn't regenerated you, it's quite easy to see why you don't believe.
First, once more, you do not "choose" what to believe.
Secondly, see what I mean? If you read my first post I wrote in this thread, you'll know what I'm talking about. There's always some "reason," some "excuse" as to why atheists don't believe, but it is NEVER because the religion simply makes no sense. It's never that. It always has to be something else ... and quite often, the reason begs the question. In other words, the reason for disbelief has God as part of the cause.
Fortunately, however, atheists have dismissed outright the horrific idea that humanity is born into deceitful wickedness and thus we need a god to draw our value from. The idea that human beings have no intrinsic value is a breeding ground for even more deceitful wickedness ... but that's a topic for some other day.
However, it would seem to be that the situation is entirely in reverse. It isn't atheists rejecting God so we can sin. On the contrary. It is Christians like you accepting God so that you won't sin. Apparently we atheists do just fine without God since we're not running amok in the streets. I've heard more than a few Christians, on the other hand, proclaim that, without God, there would be no reason not to murder, rape, steal, lie, and commit all manner of crimes.
That's what happens when humans have no intrinsic value. You need a God to keep you from sinning. By rejecting Christianity and, by default, Original Sin, atheists have no need of a God to remain decent human beings.
Last edited by Shirina; 06-21-2016 at 10:29 AM..
Reason: My post wasn't long enough for the "tl;dr" crowd who wanted simple answers with no opinions. :P
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I fornicate discreetly in a back alley as does any decent person), we convince ourselves to reject the God claim using all sorts of arguments. It is a handy way of dismissing the arguments for any reason other than showing them false. Which is a dangerous thing (for Faith) to try.
