Does atheism equal freedom?

Question

Having been an evangelical Christian once and now being an atheist, I feel the chief benefit to me of atheism is that it frees me from a lot of the unpleasent side affects of religion.

It's nice to think God loves you and you're going to heaven when you die, but it also requires that you feel guilty for things you are not responsible for (lust for example), that you interperate absolutely everything through the lens of religion instead of viewing events naturally, and that occasionally you feel an uniquely desperate feeling of abandonment when your life takes a turn you don't expect and you have no feeling that God is doing anything to help you through it or save you from it (which is a feeling the atheist does not experience, because they obviously realize bad things happen and don't expect cosmic help).

In my opinion, atheism is just less burdened with religious weight that simple drags on every day life. We as atheists are free to act, feel, and think as we please.

Freedom from thinking deeply?

What, because I'm not terrified about the notes Jesus is taking on my thoughts, I'm going to think LESS about various possibilities?

That's the stupidest thing you could have said in response to this question. Bravo.

Oh, and the textbook thing was great. Yes, atheists can't think out of a textbook. That's a biting criticism coming from someone who gets their entire world view out of a couple pages written by four apostles and a guy who had a vision on the way to Damascus.

I wouldn't say atheism is the "center of my life," and if it was, you'd be correct in saying that I was missing something.

It happens to be the center of my point of view on this board, though, so you'd expect to hear about it here.

You even advance my point in one way - religion IS the center of life of the religious. If it isn't, then they're not really a believer, are they?

The atheist is free to chose anything that makes them happy as the center of their lives.

One person said "If God be true, then it is only sensible to interpret things according to His involvement; whether this is inconvenient or not is immaterial; what matters is whether or not it's true. If you have difficulties with math, dispensing with them in the name of freedom is not the right thing to do."

Well you pretty much made my point, right? Comparing religion to math is not a good analogy. You had to preface your argument with "if God be true." Well, God very well may not be true, and in that case, interpeting everything by his involvement is not only burdensome, but useless.

Conversely, it is impossible to doubt whether math exists. It might take work to understand math, but there is no chance it is useless.

Yes I know I am bombarding with "details here but I feel this is a worthy discussion."

You say: "either God will help me or He won't, but in no case will He allow something that will prevent my growth and maturity."

That is really a naive faith. God clearly does allow things that will prevent growth and maturity in believers. Traumatic brain injury, for example. The thing is you never hear about the stories where God failed, because those people have no voice.

For one example you can't beat, when I felt my faith slipping, I praid that God would support it. Well, he didn't, did he? So much for your faith that God would not allow that.

PREACHER'S WIFE: Funny that you do not allow other users to contact you. I guess that makes your hobby of galling judgement easier because you don't have to hear the responses.

First of all, how DARE you tell me what the state of my own heart and soul was at any point. You have NO idea and your understanding of the matter is frankly lazy and pathetic. Your own religion teaches you not to judge, because it's not your place.

Frankly you need to shut up and repent because you are sinning against the words of your own Savior. Your pride, arrogance, and hypocrisy are galling.

Answer 1

atheism is not a freedom but another form of dependency. Atheist is dependent on his her own believes and conclusions about the world. These conclusions and believes are always in a great relation with stomach and sex organs.

Answer 2

It's true. Christianity works together with the conscience to set a standard that everyone falls short of which can cause strife. Some of the greatest Christian people have felt the greatest burden over their "sin", though by comparison to others they were saints.

Regarding your example of lust, I don't think you are right. It's not wrong to be turned on by someone other than a spouse. It's only becomes wrong when you respond sinfully to that thought. For instance, if you see a hot girl and get turned on, there is no sin involved. If upon being turned on you entertain fantasy thoughts of taking her to bed, then at that point it becomes wrong.

Use that principle with eating. Even though gluttony is a sin, it's not wrong to be hungry. It's not wrong to have cravings. It's what you do with those cravings. Certainly a person who endulges every food craving is hurting themselves. Eating healthy is a discipline and requries denying natural cravings, or at least keeping those cravings in check to thier proper place.

I think Christianity has taken things too far in that they confuse temptation with sin.

So certainly atheism is far less burdened with religious weight. But then not all atheists are the same. Some have very high moral standards while others use it as an excuse to have no moral standards.

But freedom from a burden is not always a good thing. What if Martin Luther King wanted to unfetter himself from his internal driven burden of leading his people to equality? Certainly that would have been easier. So in a sense, denying your conscience is also much less burdensome then following it.

I think that what's of greater imporatance then "freedom" is truth. If atheism is true, then I really don't care if it's "less burdensome". The same is true of Christianity. I really don't care if it's "more burdensome". I care if it's true or not, which is an entirely different discussion. But you have made a good point.

Answer 3

While I don't think guilt is *always* a bad thing, now that I'm an atheist I only feel guilty when I do something that is really wrong (which usually involves actually hurting someone).

One major problem with religious ethics is they make people feel guilty for things that are not wrong at all (sex, for example), which just leads to suffering.

Atheists are free of the pointless religious rules, yet we still follow the more or less universal human moral codes, like not killing people and not stealing and such. I know fundamentalist Christians have a difficult time with the concept of non-Christians having morals, but it's true.

And it means I feel more free. I know I can do what I want while relying on my innate moral sense instead of a potentially morally problematic preacher telling me what not to do (and, worse, what to do--many Christian ethical obligations are wrong, such as the attempt to shame people and condemn those who are different).

Answer 4

Right on, Penguin. I, too felt a big burden lifted off of me when I decided to finally reject the notion of God and church about a year ago. Now I live by my own sense of morals and ethics, born out of my own sense of what is right, and not what some preacher is trying to shove down my throat. I am much happier, I feel more free than ever, while at the same time knowing that I, and I alone, am responsible for my behavior and attitude.

Answer 5

That has got to be one of the longest questions on record. In fact, it was so long (as were some of the responses) that I've completely forgotten what the question was...let me check.

Yes, but I think about it the other way around...I am free, therefore I MUST be an atheist. Thinking things through, actually investigating some of the facts we have come across, deciding for myself what makes the most sense. That's just liberating.

Answer 6

Yes, absolutely. Life is to be lived. It's that simple. There are things that are wrong, and things that are right. But life is not all black and white absolutes as religion would have us believe. I like that many gray areas are left up to me to decide for myself. Free thought is a beautiful, and liberating thing.

I think people misinterpret when you say the absence of unpleasant side effects of religion to mean that you can run amok, willy-nilly, doing anything you please. Of course this is nonsense, but there's no convincing some people that morals can, and do, exist outside of religion.

Answer 7

I cannot understand how you could be a Christian and then an atheist- those of us who are truly born again, not just one that goes to church, can no longer live their lives without Christ. NO you do not have to feel guilty for things you are not responsible for- that is false. Christ died to set us free. I do not view everything through the eyes of religion. I think that is why you may have "left" your faith. You need to see things through the eyes of God . There is a total difference here- Yes, you are free to act , feel and think as you please, but remember the God that you said you once served is the ultimate judge. Momentary pleasure is not worth eternity.

I got a personal email from someone that said I was not a Christian because of this statement I made- the person who did the questioning here actually said he is an atheist- that does not mean he has just "falling away for a time" he has chosen to become an atheist, who does not believe in God at all- my intention was not to start an argument- You chose atheisism which is much different then just falling away.

Answer 8

Does my thought negate thought in all others? It negates MY thought in others, yet that does no longer mean that OTHERS might desire to proportion my ideals. in case you're viewing biblical narratives as literal bills, then confident, there are going to be contradictions. yet then lower back, 4 eyewitnesses to an identical journey could have contradictions of their bills, so what's your factor? If, on the different hand, the different myths of the international's religions are considered as cultural memories and tries through the different societies to make sense of the international around them, out of a want to work together with a extra physically powerful potential that's previous comprehension, then the contradictions are beside the point - it extremely is consistent with how each and every lifestyle interprets the Divine. finding at clouds, one individual sees a dragon, one sees a chicken, one sees a tulip, one sees an accumulation of water droplets condensing around small debris... =) Now, if there is one faith that asserts that that's "the only actuality and the only way", then there's a topic with that way of thinking. whether it extremely is THEIR subject, no longer mine.

Answer 9

Freedom *and* responsibility.

No "I was only obeying orders" not even rules from on high.
No Satan to blame, but no divine commandments to settle issues, or to argue over.

Why did Sartre consider "Man, condemned to be free..?"
Atheism isn't just a "get of religion free" card, whatever benefits it *does* come with.
If I can "act, feel, and think " as I please, how should I "act, feel, and think"? Is it just hedonism, simple or sophisticated?

Yes, I'm an ex-Christian atheist.
But I don't think it's that simple and easy.

Answer 10

Freedom doesent have a master who sets the rules for you, Freedom gives you the option to make your own rules. Being an atheist has the same good moral capabilty of a christian, but with one less god.

Answer 11

Let's address this point by point:
but it also requires that you feel guilty for things you are not responsible for (lust for example),

Not true! There is a difference be having a lustful thought (which is natural, and sometimes is presented supernaturally) and choosing to entertain it, which you ARE responsible for. Furthermore, you are not REQUIRED to feel guilty - this does NOTHING for you. The bible even speaks of a healing for your guilty conscience.
Hbr 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.


that you interperate absolutely everything through the lens of religion instead of viewing events naturally,

If God be true, then it is only sensible to interpret things according to His involvement; whether this is inconvenient or not is immaterial; what matters is whether or not it's true. If you have difficulties with math, dispensing with them in the name of freedom is not the right thing to do.

and that occasionally you FEEL an uniquely desperate FEELING of abandonment when your life takes a turn you don't expect and you have no FEELING that God is doing anything to help you through it or save you from it (which is a FEELING the atheist does not experience, because they obviously realize bad things happen and don't EXPECT cosmic help).

Expectations and feelings are poor tools for facing reality! If you were sold a false brand of faith, no wonder you retreated under pressure. I have learned that the proper position to take is that of patient faith: either God will help me or He won't, but in no case will He allow something that will prevent my growth and maturity.


In my opinion, atheism is just less burdened with religious weight that simple [sic] drags on every day life. We as atheists are free to act, feel, and think as we please.

In summary, you appear to have abandoned your faith due to disappointment and for the sake of convenience. Whether you ever return to Christianity or not, I hope you realize that this is a poor way to make decisions as this sort of thinking likely affects your entire life, including whether or not you persevere through tough subjects in college, whether or not you stay married, and whether or not you love any children you are given the privilege of raising. For your sake as well as theirs, I hope you change your decision making process.