There are some subtleties at work here that seem to be escaping most people. They have to do with the nature of 'belief'.
A rational person might say "I believe in the Big Bang." A religious person might say "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis." But these statements are not even remotely similar with respect to what is meant by the word 'believe'.
For the rational person, the statement of 'belief' in the Big Bang means that they understand that the concept provides a scientifically and mathematically consistent explanation, congruent with the evidence, which accounts for the evolution of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initiating event, up until the present. When the 'inflationary model' came to the fore, rational people said "Well, good... that clears up a few questions and makes things even more coherent." NOBODY threw up their arms and wailed "Ain't so... ain't so... the Big Bang is the inerrant truth... not this ridiculous, atheistic 'inflationary model'."
See... when we say "I believe in the Big Bang", we don't really mean the same thing as the religious person means when he says "I believe in creation, as described in Genesis," or "I believe in God." Our 'belief' in the Big Bang (or anything else) isn't really a 'belief'... it is more properly a 'paradigm'... a useful way of looking at something, or thinking about something. If additional information is uncovered that adds to the conceptual model, that is a good thing... not a disaster. If part of the conceptual model is discovered to be incorrect, and must be tossed in the trash and replaced with something completely different... that is also a good thing... not the end of the world as we know it. And often, no matter how highly confident we may be of the accuracy or completeness of a particular paradigm, we may have reason to apply a DIFFERENT paradigm to the same thing; for example, we might want to contemplate the potential implications of a major change in a physics theory from the perspective of the Tao, the Gaia hypothesis, or ecological homeostasis. We KNOW that all theories are approximations... and that is OK. We KNOW that we don't know all the answers... and that is OK. There is nothing wrong with saying "We don't know... yet; but we're working on it."
But these modes of thinking, perceiving, contemplating and understanding are utterly alien to the 'religious' mind. for the religious mind, a 'belief' is not a paradigm... a useful way of thinking about something... it is an internalized conviction that one knows the absolute 'truth' pertaining to some aspect of existence and/or objective reality. 'Beliefs' are a key component filter of the religious person's 'self-description'... a part of what DEFINES them as a person... the very thing that creates their world-view... their 'subjective reality'. Any attack on one of these internalized 'beliefs' is interpreted as a vital threat... an attack upon the 'self-description'... and attack on their subjective reality.
So, when a fundie disparages evolution, for example, it really has nothing to do with genuine, intellectual dispute regarding scientific details... they are generally scientifically illiterate, anyway. Any 'scientific' arguments that they present are inevitably not even understood... they are just lifted from the pre-packages lies and misrepresentations that are found on dozens of Liars for Jesus (LFJ) web sites, and parroted.
No... none of this has anything to do with a mere disagreement pertaining to evidence and understanding. It has to do with minds that deal with fundamental issues in an entirely different way. It has to do with a flexible, open-minded, intellectually honest curiosity about the universe contending with a rigid, unyielding world-view that depends from a certainty that their delusional faith-based 'beliefs' represent the absolute 'truth' of reality.
We might as well be talking to an alien species, from a distant planet.
When the religious enter a forum like this one, they are (generally) seeking new information which might allow them to QUESTION their beliefs more effectively, or might put their beliefs at risk... they are seeking VALIDATION... of their beliefs, and hence, their self-description.
2006-08-14 12:24:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
First of all, atheists don't believe in some other "god", they believe there is no god at all.
I "evolved" into an atheist after 9+ years of christian school. I read the bible, and frankly, found it so full of holes and inexplicable contradictions, that I couldn't believe anyone would follow it. I did research into other religions, and found the same contradictions.
I looked into the sociological and cultural aspects of religion, and discovered that, for the most part, they teach the same things...be good, and don't hurt anyone. I looked at the historical aspects of religion, and discovered that a HUGE portion of mankind's attrocities stemmed from a spriitual base. I learned that most civilizations were founded and ruled by spiritual "leaders". Scientific research offered up not only explanations, but evidence as well, to the questions that religion tried to answer. Logic invalidated the claims made by every religion that I studied. My life turned around, and I was happy for the first time. I took responsibility for my life and actions, realizing that I was the one who succeeded or failed. I no longer had to thank a god when something good happened, or blame a devil for something bad. I'm much better off in the real world.
I don't think I ever really believed in god, I just never had the knowledge or evidence to make a logical decision, until I did the work myself.
2006-08-14 12:30:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bill K Atheist Goodfella 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
I used to be Christian, went to church every Sunday, and then i just grew out of it, it just seemed too surreal for me, the bible sounded more like something written by the brothers Grimm and god more like something a mother made up to stop her kid from worrying and annoying her with stupid questions about death. God just seems like an easy out, a threat to keep everyone in line, peace of mind for ppl who were wronged in life and never got any justice, they get it in death. I just thought about it a lot for a long time. There is no easy answer or explanation for the way i believe, just as i am sure there is no easy answer for why u believe. I have studied evolution, science, religion and human behavior, to me atheism is the closest i can get to the truth. No matter what no-one knows 100% what happens when we die, that's why it is such a big issue for everyone, all i know is what ever is coming for me will come and if i am right and it is nothing i am prepared and if i am wrong and there is a god, well it will be a nice surprise, either way i will do my best to live a good productive life.
2006-08-14 12:32:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by bobatemydog 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Athiests do not believe in any form of a god. Agnostics believe that is a god, but not actual "God" per say. I used to believe in God and gradually over time I began to believe otherwise. I am an Athiest and I guess the reason for it is because, when I became more into science and things of that nature, it seemed unrealistic to me.
2006-08-14 12:23:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by MEGA MANDY 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
The definition of an Atheist is, One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods. No god at all ghosts angels or any fairy tales. We look at the world in fact. To me religion is the root of all evil. All the wars in the world, EVER , have been and are now based on some religion or another. The existence of a god just isn't true. It scares ones of religion to think there is no after life. Ill say this live your life, continue to have good morals and love your people. The world would be a better place.
2006-08-14 12:26:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by jeffrey k 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I was raised Christian, and tried to keep believing, but it just didn't make sense anymore. I couldn't keep believing that a just and merciful God was running things, when the world around me was full of randomness, chaos, and needless suffering. You can come up with contorted explanations about how it's all part of God's plan, but the more contortions I had to do, the better it seemed to assume there was no God. Presto, the painful logical contortions disappear, and the world makes sense--all the sh** happens because nobody is in charge.
2006-08-14 12:32:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by rainfingers 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
First, I'm not an Athiest or a Christian. But I have experience as both. I was brought up in a Christian family, but religion just never really made sense to me. I couldn't understand a lot of things, like if God loves everyone, why he would send them to a place where they burn for eternity. And I didn't want to follow any of the 'rules' of christianity. So I basically said I don't care, I'm not going to believe in anything anymore. So I just did what I wanted and followed my own path for years. I refused to do anything religious or spiritual. Every time someone said 'God' I would balk. But going my own way was not very good for me, as I did not do things that were positive. Eventually, I came to believe in a power that is greater than myself. I still don't believe in the religion side, just that something else is out there. So I guess my answer to your question is that I didn't want the rules to apply to me, so I thought that if there wasn't someone 'up there', no rules would apply to me.
2006-08-14 12:44:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
You will get some angry answers from Atheists...and for that I am sorry. Your question is one of the most respectful I have seen.
I was raised in a religious family, but I was encouraged to explore other options than Christianity. I read the bible and the Koran and I attend many different church services. In the end god and the bible did not seem believable to me. There was no major catastrophe or event that changed my way of thinking. I believe in evolution. Of course no one can know for sure. I made the best, educated decision for me. Yours is different and I respect that. No one will truly know until the end.
2006-08-14 12:30:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by Lisa 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
I am agnostic, but to be honest with you. I think of both sides as being pompous. There is no way of knowing either way, both have faith, one with the faith in God, and the other with a faith that there is no God. Why even try to figure it out, there is no way too. I became agnostic when I actually sat down and read the Bible, it's absurd, and I can't honestly see why anyone else would not see it after reading it. This is why I think so many Christians that I have met have never read the thing from front to cover, I think they are afraid to for fear that they will see how absurd it is.
2006-08-14 12:24:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Excellent question. I am an atheist and I always have been - I insist on proof before belief. As an atheist I don't believe in any god.
We are, that's it - there doesn't have to be a reason or mover behind it.
That's pretty much it - BTW I like the way you asked your question and I hope you like my answer.
People can learn a lot from this - you and I may disagree, but we're able to discuss it with out going psycho!
2006-08-14 12:24:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Marc B 3
·
1⤊
0⤋