Why are you an atheist?

IT-Guy

PBroderick wrote: »

I think anyone who disrespects someone else because they hold a religious belief has a clearly dodgy moral code. This may or may not include you, but certainly includes a number of contributors to this thread.

And as I said numerous times, the bible (new testament) is not a book of rules to live by - it is several different accounts of Jesus's life rewritten over 2,000 years. The details change but the message never changes.

Unfortunately for us all, the old intolerant "boy's club" exists right here in this little ol' forum just as it did in Israel 2,000 years ago, Berlin 80 years ago or Darfur 9 years ago.

As mentioned elsewhere, it's by no means a sign of dodgy morals on anyone's part if they are skeptical and critical of a belief system. If that's disrespectful to you then you share more in common with those responsible for the atrocities mentioned in your last paragraph above than you might be aware of. Indeed they used a lot less than vocal criticism to justify their actions. And don't you think it's a bit of a leap in comparing this 'ol boys club' as you called it to genocide and many other 'cides you might care to mention? Interestingly the first mention of genocide I ever encountered was in the bible, how's that for a thinly veiled juxtaposition?

Rasheed

Lads please why does this thread have to decend into another 'us vs. them'?

PBroderick, I'm a catholic and I started this thread because I was curious as to why people became atheist, that's all. Nobody slagged me or my religion off, everyone was perfectly polite and answered my question.

Now I understand if you and other posters dont agree with atheism but there is no need to row about it.

Everyone has their right to believe what they want to believe and a hearty debate is no harm but please,let no one get personal.

That's my little speech over!

IT-Guy

Galvasean wrote: »

So, IT-Guy, why are you an atheist?

It initially started as an excuse to get out of going to mass on a Sunday morning as I was completely and utterly bored of it! I was constantly arguing over going as I didn't see the point of it, I mean guys in robes telling grown people how to behave towards one another, telling us that we're all made in God's image (lookswise, personwise, how exactly?) yet born with original sin (makes a mockery of jesus dying on the cross for our sins - surely the slate is wiped clean now?). The only thing I can honestly say I learned from religion is how it's co-opted the normality of humanity as a religious message. There's always been a bit of the 'ya don't say' meme when it comes to it's core tenet which to me is - don't be a dick. End of.

Also when I was 11 I was hit by a car and ended up in hospital with a badly broken leg. I remember my mother telling me she'd pray for me and ask God to help make me better. I asked her if he had the power to intervene in my recovery howcome he was unable to prevent me from being knocked down? My mother had no answer and to be honest I think I shook her faith a little so from then on I was pretty careful not to tell her how insulting I thought another incident was on my road to recovery. I was prayed over (against my wishes but I was only a kid shur!) by a group with a padre pio relic. A few weeks later the infection lingering in my right tibia cleared up and my mother was intimating it was padre pio's doing. Nothing at all to do with the bone transplant from my hip to replace the infected bone in my tibia and the liters of antibiotics? Not the least bit insulting to the medical staff? But the price of a quiet life when you're a kid is learning when to keep your mouth shut but always keeping an open mind

As the years went on my questions about religion were more fully formed and fleshed out and the cognitive dissonance required to ignore all the inconsistencies was more evident. As a result I've grown away from religion and more towards humanism, I prefer to search for the answers to human problems amongst humans, no deities needed to explain the machinations of the world.

What about you Galvasean? What turned your blackened atheist soul?

jank

Sonics2k wrote: »

Surely, even as a Christian, you must have found the staggering irony of this to be mindblowing?

LOL, yet again for the 50th time when did I ever say I was a Christian?

Exactly my point, you are not interested in truth only in being proved right.

robindch

PBroderick wrote: »

I'll say it one more time, get the **** away from me.

PBroderick wrote: »

GET AWAY FROM ME YOU SAD, SAD FAT MAN

PBroderick is now the proud owner of a red card. The next uncivil twitch will result in an immediate forum ban.

/the eye that never sleeps

Father Damo

GarIT wrote: »

I think is a crime against a child to have it baptised before it can make its own decision. If I could sue my parents for what they did to me I would.

:pac:

Did you refund all baptism, communion and confirmation money to your uncles by any chance?

Athiests crack me up.


Im not an athest as such, I give it little thought. Im just too lazy to go to mass. Quite possibly the main difference between my generation and the older one being that because our schools taught us absolutely sweet FA about religion none of us have a clue as to why we are even meant to go to mass.

Dades

robindch wrote: »

PBroderick is now the proud owner of a red card. The next uncivil twitch will result in an immediate forum ban.

Seconded.

PBroderick - if you want to return to debate about the Bible, please do so. If you just posted here to get offended - then GO AWAY. This forum is for discussion. Anyone is welcome - but they have to engage.

jank - you are on your very last warning. Another snipe at this forum or users will result in a ban. Not because anyone gives a crap - but because it's boring now

Improbable

Righto, let's get this baby back on track again shall we?

OP, I'm an atheist because:

a) My parents were atheists. I was never brought up with religion of any kind. I was born in Turkey and then moved to Bahrain when I was very young so the minimal amount of contact with my extended family during summer holidays from school and whatnot reduced the effects of religious influence via family members, both in regards to direct influence on me and indirect influence via pressuring my parents. I consider myself quite lucky that that was the case.

b) Being an agnostic atheist (I'm sure someone will link the excellent graphic we have saved just for those occasions when we need to define what an agnostic atheist is) is, in my opinion, the only logical choice. In a nutshell, what it means is that I do not believe that any kind of god or supernatural being exists, but that I admit I cannot know for sure if one exists or not. The reason I don't believe in a god is simple. There is no evidence for it. There are many things we can point at and say "We don't know exactly how that works or exactly why it works or exactly where it came from", but that does not mean that god did it. I find that to be the most common argument I come across when debating this topic and it has many forms. "Where did the universe come from? How did life start? etc. etc.". The truth is, there are plenty of questions we don't have the answer to. But saying at that point that god did it is just idiotic. Think back through human history to a time when they didn't know that lightning was caused by an electrical discharge or that the Sun was a massive sphere of plasma roughly 8 light-minutes away from the earth. People invented gods to explain these things and countless others. We as a species have an incredible urge to find causation in events, and when there is no logical answer to be had at the time, we will settle for illogical ones. I'm not arrogant enough to assume that just because I (or humans as a species) don't understand something, that it must mean god did it.

That's why I'm an atheist.

GarIT

Father Damo wrote: »

:pac:

Did you refund all baptism, communion and confirmation money to your uncles by any chance?

Athiests crack me up.


Im not an athest as such, I give it little thought. Im just too lazy to go to mass. Quite possibly the main difference between my generation and the older one being that because our schools taught us absolutely sweet FA about religion none of us have a clue as to why we are even meant to go to mass.

I don't really see what money has to do with it. I was a young child and adults paid me to do what they wanted, I didn't know what it meant. If it would make a difference I probably would, but I don't think adults that bribe children deserve anything back. As I said if you can remove any record of my baptisim I would pay everyone back but you can't its a perminent historical record that can't be undone.

My problem is that my parents have made me a member of an organisation that I cannot leave which I consider to just be a glorified paedophile ring. If there is any judgement I don't want to be a part of the orginisation that has committed more crimes than any other single orginisation ever.

I'm not Athiest I'm Pasatfarian, its no big deal though its all a joke anyway.

I found I was taught a lot actually, I just didn't believe any of it.

Wibbs

With me when I was about 11, it was a school trip to Lourdes, as was popular in those 70's days. Actually it was a funny and very Irish setup back then. The most popular package was a week in Lourdes followed by a quick jaunt over the Pyrenees* and a week in the fleshpots of Spain. Rarely the other way around. You'd think that way would be better for the soul. More to confess and such.

Anyhoo... yea in Lourdes with the school and they had the sick lined up on beds with priest droning over them busy chucking holy water at them. Poor, twisted in illness, desperate people laying there asking for forgiveness? I mean WT jumpin F? thought I. What "sin" have they committed? Daft wasn't in it. Major lightbulb moment for me.

Then I read up on the Christian faith itself which was an eyeopener. Then looked at other faiths. All of which had the same guff going on to some degree or other. Equally all had some worthwhile stuff too. Funny enough I was helped in this by one of the Priests in my school who loaned me loadsa books on theology and philosophy. Nice man. I remember asking him why he still believed after such reading, where I didn't and he siad he couldn't explain it well, but the nebulous "faith" idea was much of it. Which is fair enough. To each their own and his faith whatever it was certainly informed his life in a positive way.

Basically none of the religions made much overall sense to me. Including Buddhism BTW, though it's quite fash, even among some agnostics/atheists(dunno why as its chock full of magical thinking). I found it a terribly internal and navel gazing yoke altogether and I found Buddha to be... well a bit of a tosspot. Of the big noises in the various faiths I found Muhammed as written to be a right dodgy character, with zero sense of humour, though Jesus and Krishna came across as people with a bit of craic in them(The jesus as god bit I never got, he was far more interesting to me as written as a man). I enjoyed and still enjoy some of the great thinkers within some faiths. There were some cracking minds at work in Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism and Islam(though I found Augustine of Hippo a right bloody bore).

Yea it made no sense. On top of which if I tried to imagine a possible deity, one responsible for the wonder that is all of creation, the organised lot seem to imagine a really small and petty one. One hardly worth talking to, never mind worthy of "worship".




Galvasean, bet you're sorry you called my name in vain now? :D


*interesting flight that one. Usually bloody turbulent. Cue the men breaking out the duty free and the women breaking out the rosaries. I kid thee not. I saw grown women pray in unison because of a few bumps. Daftest of all was a couple of them getting out of their seats and praying in the aisle. Consternation among the cabin crew.

Bannasidhe

In an attempt to get this thread back on topic I decided to discuss belief in God with my theist OH but rather then ask her why she believed, I decided to explain why I don't. To see if she, as a believer, gets where I am coming from.

In the end I came up with the following analogy:

OH arrives home and tells me someone has taken a baseball bat to her car. Smashed the windscreen, windows, headlights and left dents all over the body work. She informs me it was the guy who lives in the first house of our little terrace.
As we are heading out to look at the damage, I ask her how she knows the guy from house #1 did it. She tells me her uncle told her. I say - 'did your uncle see him do it?'. 'Oh no, he believes he did it and I believe my uncle.' 'Did anyone see him do it?' 'No. But why would my uncle lie to me? He loves me.'
So we get to the car and it is indeed thrashed but I notice the dents are narrow - not the kind that would be made by a baseball bat - more like a hurley was used. I point this out to OH. She insists the guy from house #1 did it with a baseball bat because her uncle, whom she trusts, texted her and told her he did. I say but you said you uncle didn't actually see him do it, no one saw him do it. There is no evidence he did it. Indeed the evidence that is there suggests it was a hurley not a baseball bat.

We are left with a situation that my OH believes house #1 guy did it because she was told he did by someone she trusts. I believe there is no evidence to support that claim and that such evidence as is there calls her uncle's claim into serious doubt. I suggest we look for more information - I find footprints in mud next to car that would indicate the perpetrator wears size 8 shoes. House #1 guy wears size 12 shoes. Angle of dents in the roof suggest the perp is about 5ft 7" -House #1 guy is 6ft 5".

OH is not interested in this evidence of the existence of an alternative explanation for what happened to her car. She absolutely believes house guy# 1 did it because she was told by a source she trusts that he did.

I cannot accept that house guy #1 is guilty as not only is there no evidence to prove he did it - all the available evidence points to a different culprit.

Now - imagine we are talking about how the universe came into existence....
The universe exists - but the evidence points not to a single creator who made it all in a short period of time but to a series of events millions of years ago sparking a continuing chain reaction.

She understood where I am coming from even as she disagrees with me. I understand how her belief in a God brings her comfort and a sense of belonging to something that is greater then herself even as I disagree with her.

Apparently we are all descendants from Adam and Eve. If that's the case then that would mean Adam and Eve's kids would have had kids together which would mean the church condones incest?
So you see why i just think everything they tell me is lies.

Improbable

Deleted User wrote: »

Apparently we are all descendants from Adam and Eve. If that's the case then that would mean Adam and Eve's kids would have had kids together which would mean the church condones incest?

It's metaphorical. That's the old testament. Of course that's not what it means, you've misinterpreted it.

Please pick one.

Delirium

Deleted User wrote: »

Apparently we are all descendants from Adam and Eve. If that's the case then that would mean Adam and Eve's kids would have had kids together which would mean the church condones incest?
So you see why i just think everything they tell me is lies.

and don't forget that Eve was a female clone of Adam:eek::P:pac:

endacl

Have been following this one for a while now. My flippant sounding answer, for what its worth, is....

I'm an atheist because I'm a grown-up. I've no room in my head for illogical, fluffy, childish thinking. I grew out of it at the same time I grew out of the other childish silliness.

Doesn't mean I don't enjoy fiction and the suspension of disbelief. The recent Avengers movie was particularly enjoyable. Religious fiction, on the other hand is badly written, poorly plotted, and displays for the most part, a lamentable lack of character development. Just doesn't hold my interest.

I really can't engage with the question. For me, it really is like arguing with children over the existence of Santa*. I mean, the idea is attractive, but its impossible to take seriously anybody who seriously holds the notion.

*I don't argue the Santa question with children. That would be mean. But adults arguing the existence of god? FFS. Grow up. Accept reality. Get on with making the most of your finite existence. And for the noisy minority of ye, stop interfering in other people's finite existences. This may in fact be my main problem with the question. It reminds me of those pricks in youth defence, the taliban, orange knobends marching up and down, Omagh, no pints on ****e Friday....... etc........etc......

Rant done.

swampgas

I can relate to that analogy - the occasional discussion on religion I had with my father many years ago seemed to boil down to what we are prepared to trust as a primary source of truth:

(1) trust an external authority - e.g. the church
(2) trust our own conclusions, based on our own assessment of evidence.

My dad was quite a humble man - he didn't seem to believe he had the right to challenge the authority of the church. It seemed to me that he simply hadn't the confidence to draw his own conclusions on something so important, but who knows what really goes on in someone else's head?

I think my Dad thought it was strange that I could be so confident/arrogant to think that I could know better than theologians and priests. One of the major steps in my own path to atheism was deciding that I could trust my own judgement.

swampgas

endacl wrote: »

Have been following this one for a while now. My flippant sounding answer, for what its worth, is....

[rant ...]

Rant done.

Are you not intellectually curious about why so many adults are religious? I know I am.

endacl

swampgas wrote: »

endacl wrote: »

Have been following this one for a while now. My flippant sounding answer, for what its worth, is....

[rant ...]

Rant done.

Are you not intellectually curious about why so many adults are religious? I know I am.

Not a bit. In much the same way I'm not intellectually curious as to why otherwise intelligent adults would continue time and time again to vote for fianna failure. I just wish they wouldn't.

It's their own affair. Except where it impacts on others.

Galvasean

IT-Guy wrote: »

What about you Galvasean? What turned your blackened atheist soul?

I posted in here a while back, during peace time. In summary learning that there were many other religions equally as valid/crazy combined with study of the natural world led me to conclude that a celestial super being isn't behind it all, much less that humans can know the will of said being.

Bannasidhe

swampgas wrote: »

I can relate to that analogy - the occasional discussion on religion I had with my father many years ago seemed to boil down to what we are prepared to trust as a primary source of truth:

(1) trust an external authority - e.g. the church
(2) trust our own conclusions, based on our own assessment of evidence.

My dad was quite a humble man - he didn't seem to believe he had the right to challenge the authority of the church. It seemed to me that he simply hadn't the confidence to draw his own conclusions on something so important, but who knows what really goes on in someone else's head?

I think my Dad thought it was strange that I could be so confident/arrogant to think that I could know better than theologians and priests. One of the major steps in my own path to atheism was deciding that I could trust my own judgement.

Exactly. OH comes from a family that 'knows its place and accepts it'. They do not question those in authority and are terrified of being seen as rocking the boat or being arrogant. As I have no such issues it took me a while to even comprehend she did.
I eventually got my head around the notion when she mentioned she had this on-going for 3 years insurance claim against her former employer following a very serious work related injury. I asked was her former employer denying liability - no he admitted it. So WTF is the hold up? WTF is your lawyer doing? I'm writing him a letter!! She was horrified. She just couldn't believe I had the ovaries to challenge a member of the legal profession. As far as I was concerned he was just a professional whose services she was paying for - like a mechanic - and as he was employed by her she had every right to question him. Same woman would have no issue tearing into a mechanic so why were lawyers any different?

Now it may be a coincidence but a month after I wrote 2 letters (first to ask WTF he was doing to close this case, second to inform him that he could seek costs from the other side and stick his pay me 1.5% of the claim up his hole) the case was settled - for 10 k more then had been, according to her lawyer, the insurance companies max offer.

Once again, that may be coincidence and have nothing to do with my snorting with derision in his office when he told us their offer and insistence that in that case we go to court. 'You could lose and get nothing Mzzzz .....Ummmm?' 'It's Dr Ummmmmm actually, as as the other party have admitted liability and made an offer I doubt if the judge would rule against my OH. It's really a matter of convincing them it would be cheaper to settle. That's your job.'
She got a cheque 2 weeks later - the lawyer didn't even have it made payable to his firm as is the usual practice but to my OH - could be a coincidence too.

A LOT of Irish people are afraid to stick their head above the parapets and cause a stir. Those that do are often dismissed as 'the usual suspects - whatever that's supposed to mean.

swampgas

endacl wrote: »

Not a bit. In much the same way I'm not intellectually curious as to why otherwise intelligent adults would continue time and time again to vote for fianna failure. I just wish they wouldn't.

It's their own affair. Except where it impacts on others.

Fair enough. I'm genuinely curious myself.

The better I understand why somebody believes something that seems wrong to me, the more likely I am to be able to be to make them understand what I believe instead.

You may say I'm a dreamer ...

Beruthiel

swampgas wrote: »

Are you not intellectually curious about why so many adults are religious?

The root cause is fear imo.
They may say it's not, but it is.
The thought of no longer existing is frightening for an awful lot of people.

endacl

swampgas wrote: »

endacl wrote: »

Not a bit. In much the same way I'm not intellectually curious as to why otherwise intelligent adults would continue time and time again to vote for fianna failure. I just wish they wouldn't.

It's their own affair. Except where it impacts on others.

Fair enough. I'm genuinely curious myself.

The better I understand why somebody believes something that seems wrong to me, the more likely I am to be able to be to make them understand what I believe instead.

You may say I'm a dreamer ...

I get you. Paradoxically, I really have no interest in changing minds. Respect right to belief and all that (even if the belief is crackpot)....

It's the meddling 'thou shalt nots' that boil my pi55.

swampgas

Beruthiel wrote: »

The root cause is fear imo.
They may say it's not, but it is.
The thought of no longer existing is frightening for an awful lot of people.

I don't disagree that fear is a factor, but I think it's a lot more complicated than that. Especially the mechanism by which rationality seems to get a selective bypass for religious beliefs. I know some very clever theists, who are entirely rational when dealing with (say) complex technology, but who nevertheless seem completely irrational when it comes to religion. It makes me wonder what makes the mind work the way it does.

Improbable

endacl wrote: »

I get you. Paradoxically, I really have no interest in changing minds. Respect right to belief and all that (even if the belief is crackpot)....

It's the meddling 'thou shalt nots' that boil my pi55.

Anyone can believe whatever they want to believe, but they can't DO what they want. Religious freedom is not a get-out clause for inexcusable actions or just as importantly, as a basis for dictating policy on what other people can or cannot do. That's one of my biggest pet peeves about organised religion.

Bannasidhe

swampgas wrote: »

I don't disagree that fear is a factor, but I think it's a lot more complicated than that. Especially the mechanism by which rationality seems to get a selective bypass for religious beliefs. I know some very clever theists, who are entirely rational when dealing with (say) complex technology, but who nevertheless seem completely irrational when it comes to religion. It makes me wonder what makes the mind work the way it does.

It doesn't just happen with religion - I have worked with historians who are viciously anal about sources and the need for objective interpretation yet will spout the most ridiculous bit of jingoistic nationalism.

Ickle Magoo

swampgas wrote: »

It makes me wonder what makes the mind work the way it does.

Me too.

I think in the most part it comes down to a fantastic ability to compartmentalise. I'm always astounded at hearing about theistic scientists and the like, carrying out research and yet never once assigning an anomaly or action to the work of god. I find it absolutely mind-boggling that people can live their lives on almost two completely separate planes of logic simultaneously.

robindch

Beruthiel wrote: »

The root cause is fear imo.

I disagree -- it's certainly fear in a some cases, but religious belief is caused by many things, and most of those are interesting.

Take a look at Leah whatever-her-name-is in the other thread; she claims to have become a catholic because she had a pre-existing belief that "moral law" was embodied in some conscious entity, and the catholic deity fitted in there neatly. Or philologos who, as far as I can make out, hold protestant beliefs because they similarly fit his pre-existing worldview. I don't get much of a sense of fear from either of those good folks, at least as far as their stated reasons go.

In these cases, an evolutionary view of religion makes more sense in that it can support both the fear and the pre-suppositions.

Wibbs

swampgas wrote: »

I don't disagree that fear is a factor, but I think it's a lot more complicated than that.

I'd agree. While fear may be a large part of it, it's only one part of the puzzle. Tradition would be another reason. It's a strong meme and memes are ridiculously easy to transmit. The need in some for some sort of parent figure throughout life another. The "God of the gaps" another. The supreme pattern matching machine that is the human mind is always looking for such patterns and "purpose" in things, both large and small, so the notion that the universe must surely have a plan would be yet another reason. A mix of all of the above would lead to some believing. Fear is certainly in there, but IMHO it's a small enough reason in many religious people's lives. After all people forget that many faiths had and have no clear notion of an afterlife(to the degree of Christian/Islamic theology), yet people still followed them.

old hippy

PBroderick wrote: »

Jokes? Where?

Have you heard the one about a nekkid couple, an apple and a snake?