Yes, I said religions, as in, plural. First, the definition of religion, as per my Microsoft Outlook “look up” function (the authority, I’m told, on all things linguistic):
“people's beliefs and opinions concerning the existence, nature, and worship of a deity or deities, and divine involvement in the universe and human life”
The statement “there is no God” takes just as much faith as the statement “There is a God,” as neither are provable hypotheses. Atheism is a religion, as it is a BELIEF system founded on the FAITH that there is no God. It is a religion that is against religion, which sort of sounds funny and laughable, when you reason it out a bit, but a religion it is, none the less.
The only person on Earth who is not taking a leap of faith, whatsoever, and who is also the only one arriving at a perfectly LOGICAL conclusion devoid of faith and belief, is the guy who says “I don’t know, it is beyond me to know, and I am open to both the existence, or non-existence, of a God.” However, you don’t see this guy ridiculing the faithful, both believers and non-believers, do you?
So why all of the snide remarks, smart-assed comments, and general feeling of superiority coming from folks in the atheist crowd whenever the subject of religion comes up? Is their faith that there is no God so much more noble and logical than a faith that there is one? I see atheists ranting on about logic this, and truth that, but their beliefs are not based on a logical conclusion, and they have no way of determining what the truth is, despite their claims.
Does anyone disagree with what I have written here? If so, I’d be interested to listen to what you have to say.
As a quick aside, I’m not interested in a theological debate about whether God exists or not (I am already pretty much decided on that), I am more interested in discussing whether or not atheism is just as much a religion as any other.
21 comments:
I could not disagree with what you have written, Goober. In fact, I have long thought the same thing. Once upon a time when this mob was still at Jon Ray's Tongue Tied I corresponded with a guy who called himself Glacian Maelstrom, which I suppose was a take-off on Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. In addition to taking himself way too seriously, Glacian professed to be a lifelong atheist and an adoring admirer of Friedrich Nietzsche.
I once suggested to him that he might one day discover that God had been at work in his life all along and then become a believer. He hooted at this suggestion, affirming to me that he would always be an atheist. His fervid insistence that there was no God rivaled the ranting of Jimmy Swaggert, Pat Robertson and Oral Roberts. I also asked him to explain to me what ethical standards governed his conduct if it were not derived from a spiritual belief in some being superior to his own intellect...what kept him from rationalizing or justifying any action he might take, regardless of how evil and depraved, if it benefitted him and suited his purpose. I don't remember what he said. It was eminently forgettable. It was about that time that I learned that the atheist and believer in Friedrich Nietzsche and his mentor, Arthur Schopenhauer was 19 years of age!
I believe in God because I have been shown in a concrete fashion that a supreme being is at work in my life. I have been saved from myself and my actions on too many occasions to doubt the existence of a higher power. Not all atheists are bad. Snorphty, for example is an atheist and I love him. Granted, he's not always up in someone's face making fun of religion, either.
Oh, and...
I know that as a Christian I am supposed to "witness" to others about my faith. I will do so if that other person evidences a desire to hear my testimony. Otherwise I keep my mouth shut.
Yeah, atheism is religion. The scribes and the Pharisees were "religious" hypocrites.
How terrible it will be for you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door to the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. You don't go in yourselves, and you don't allow those who are trying to enter to go in.
Matt. 23:13 ISV
And I believe in God for the same reasons Annie does. I also have been shown in a concrete fashion that He is at work in my life, i.e. my recent healing. (And for those that prayed for me, thank you so very much.)
C-Bug...
I am delighted that you're back and in good health. It must have been scary.
Actually, I wasn't scared at all. Now my family..... that's a different story!
watch out where the huskies go, don't you eat that yellow snow
Not believing in a deity is not a religion.
It's incumbant on proving an existance, not proving an absence of existance. Just in the presumption of innocence and not the proof of innocence.
Religion is faith based.
Religion provides comfort, strength and a sense of community and also provides a structure of ethics and values.
Religious tradition also provides, family and social bonds, and a means of learning history, morals and values.
Much of religion is allegorical.
There is nothing wrong with religion when practiced with these purposes. It's the distorted views of lunatics which create problems.
I readily admit that I believe in God in part because it is comforting and functional for me to do so. I believe that I would find it pointless to continue this charade we call life if there were not something larger, more powerful and wiser than I.
If this be intellectual or emotional dishonesty, then make the most of it.
Actually Dawkins wrote a book "The God Delusion" to refute the existence of God but the problem I, along with many others, is that Dawkins book works to disprove a god based on the rules for a god that he makes up. In other words, he creates a god in his mind then tries to prove that he does not exist and even then by his own admission he only proves that it is unlikely that god exists. This is standard among the atheist crowd, they can not prove that there is no god despite their sense of superiority.
BOW. I disagree that religion needs to prove anything. The vast vast majority of Americans and in fact the world believes in the existence of a god. Furthermore, the foundation of our rights (Natural Law, inalienable rights, etc) is the existence of a god. The atheists want to change the prevailing view and undermine the foundation of our freedom. I would say the burden of proof is on them.
On a more philosophical note, if God does exist, what obligation does He have to prove anything to anyone? He he beholden to no one.
Religion, also, is not strict a matter of faith. There are many who believe in God who hold that belief through evidence they have seen or through a logical deductive process.
Religion being mostly allegorical is merely your opinion and not fact.
You can't prove a negative.
Since atheists cannot prove that God does not exist, they, in turn, cannot insist that we, the Believers, prove to them that He does.
And we can't anyway. That's His job.
Unfortunate stalemate. For the moment. Everybody will find out some day.
Atheists are simply another group trying to break-down the moral fiber of our society, such as it is. If you allow others to weaken your beliefs, no matter what they are, then you're not a true believer in anything, especially yourself.
vocal atheists want to insist that you shouldn't believe in G-d. I think the concept of G-d is a personal one. I don't believe in a supreme being, but I don't insist that there isn't one. And I never suggested if there is that he need prove it to me. I only state that if you want me to believe it, you need to prove it to me. I say anything is possible, but I also think the possibility of an knowing, all seeing, divine being is extremely low. I tend to believe G-d is a necessary construct of the human mind which needs to explain the world around him or her.
What does it say of human moral fiber if the only thing that keeps you from running amuck is the fear that god will punish you.
You relig-ocrats always marvel why an atheist, without the fear of punishment by god doesn't just go around murder rape and pillaging (when it is usually in the name of religion that these things occur in en mass).
Personally, I don't mind most of you religio-crats. I leave you alone and you should leave me alone. I don't try to disproved god...... that would cut into my happy hour...
It's the non-believers of the quiche eating, tree hugging, self flagellating, nanny staters who tell others how to think that I mind.
Likewise it is the bible thumping fire and brimstone zealots who are at least, if not more, dangerous.
I openly admit that I was for many years an agnostic. I didn't argue the point, I would discuss, calmly, God's existence with anyone who brought it up, whether they were believers or atheists.
But, I'm with Annie and C-Bug.
There are NOW, too many instances of peace, saving, "intervention" in my life to chock it up to be luck.
C-Bug, I'm with you on the, "...why are you people SO freaked out?" scenario. Been there, done that. If I live, we gots da medical insurance with an out of pocket of $4000 per year. Again, and on the other hand, If I die, I'm covered. Says so in my Bible.
In my personal experience, Atheists are as fervent and as rabid as any snake-handling, talking-in-tongues, faith healing, hyper-Christian or plane crashing, bomb belt wearing, Islamofascist, ever thought about being. Ever see film of Madeline Murray O'hare? Jeez, she looks like Charlie Manson, with the crazy eyes and all.
I also think what Bill said is right. There is in the human mind that spark to seek a "God". But that spark is there BY HIS HAND, IMHO. It goes hand in hand with the rest of man's need for knowledge. The difference is where you cross the line from needing proof. Proof is found in quantum physics. Belief is the "knowledge" that God exists, but without proof.
God has not set out in the Bible a systematic proof that He exists. He assumes that mankind will believe. But I believe that He gives evidence of His existence by revealing things in His word that men did not know at the time the Bible was written.
Such as "paths in the seas". The circle of the earth, and why did he say that our sins are separated from as as far as the 'east is from the west'? Why did He not say as far as the 'north is from the south'? If a man goes west he will return to the beginning point but he can still continue going west infinitely. If a man goes north he can only go so far and then he must go south, a definite distance.
Are you going to smoke the rest of that? Can you pass it this way, please?
Anonymous said...
Are you going to smoke the rest of that? Can you pass it this way, please?
The Apostle Paul said he was a fool for Christ. Whose fool are you?
Psa 14:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
The Palmist spoke of the paths of the sea. These are what we now know are oceans currents that have been mapped. These were not known until after Ferdinand Magellan began to circumnavigate the world in 1519-1521. This was well after the Bible was written. The circle of the earth refers to the fact that the earth in a globe, which was not known at the time of Columbus' journey. _ another anon.
BOW;
The statement that the religious must prove that there is a God is no more or less reasonable than a statement requesting that you prove that there is not.
I understand the difficulty in proving a negative (as in, it is impossible), but so is PROVING his existence. Since God, as an institution, is neither verifiable nor falsifiable, then a firm belief that he either exists, or alternatively, that he does not, is exactly that: a belief.
By definition, a belief, in this case, is an article of faith. The believer's faith in His existence is no more and no less a faith than the non-believer's faith that He does not. Both are non-verifiable hypotheses, and the final step, from wondering to knowing is one of faith.
Therefore, atheism is as much a religious belief as theism.
Post a Comment