Why assume that God and science can't co-exist peacefully?
Anyone ever become an atheist after believing?
- Thread starter Philluminati
- Start date
Why assume that God and science can't co-exist peacefully?
It is very broad, it deals with a narrow idea (That anyone who doesn't understand or have knowledge of the concept of God/Religion is by default an atheist), but it is broad in how it defines its relevance.
However it is a device used to extend the artifice that atheism (in whichever guise you wish to define) is a default position, people who know better realise that the idea is academic at best, but that doesn't stop such statements as "Babies are born Atheist..which is a flawed statement for the following reasons.
Implicit Atheism is a meaningless concept as it presupposes a position (implied atheism) before the subject is able to express their own.
We simply do not know whether someone has a belief until they are able to express one or not.
Babies and those in so-called isolation (although I note that isolated communities usually express a belief one way or another) are simply unable to express one way or the other, they neither have or lack a belief and that is why implicit atheism is flawed, at least in my opinion.
To be fair, it is another precursor to another debate on the validity of definitions ascribed by individuals which is ultimately pointless, I don't agree that the term implicit atheism has any validity in defining a neutral position as it implies a definitive, but I am aware that others may well disagree with me, as is their right to do so.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,614
I used to have some silly beliefs when I was younger, not religious ones, conspiracy theories etc. Having said that, I did believe for the same reasons as religious do, i.e. the idea of it being true is for more interesting/appealing than reality, hence the confirmation bias would kick-in whenever the beliefs were challenged. But now I’ve grown up and I have no time or respect for unevidenced nonsense, no matter what its origin.
I think people do the things they do for a range of reasons and justifications, religion is one of them. People have a shared belief and a set of principles and ideals that they strive to live up to, this can manifest in various ways, both good and bad and are both selfless and selfish, sometimes at the same time.
The world is a complex and pretty dangerous place for most people, and religion helps them cope with that and gives them some form of community and shared identity when that is just about all they have.
I would not take that away from them.
How can two things co-exist when one doesn't exist at all?
Let's assume for the purposes of my point that they do.
What? Are you saying that someone who doesn't believe in God can't know the difference between right and wrong?
They are assuming authority over themselves, no one else....
It does happen though.
The problem with saying it is the person generally thinks such acts and morals only comes from the churches.
Atheists people and organizations help people all the time, but there isn't a huge atheist banner for these people to sit behind. Instead we have a bunch of separate charities in a bunch of separate communities doing a bunch of separate good and we care more about doing that good than pushing an atheist agenda.
That's not what I'm saying at all, merely picking at the arrogance of it. In fact, Jesus spoke of the "good Samaritan", where even the religious person walked on by. Which of course implies that people can be good without being religious, but that's not the test. The point is, we are all born with the original sin, and all are unworthy in the sight of God. It takes Christ to make us right with God. That's the whole point of Christianity. It has nothing to do with works. It's all about grace. That's something that the atheists can't seem to grasp.
The Grace of God, which is a gift from God, it is not up to you to decide who receives that Gift or not. It is arrogance in the extreme to presuppose the will of God, wouldn't you agree Jason2.....
What does that even mean? I wasn't born with sin. I was born an innocent baby. Did this harm somebody in some way? Of what exactly am I unworthy?
Because it doesn't make a lot of sense? Why do I need Christ in my life? I live a good life, I take care of my family and friends, help charity where I can, I respect my life and the lives of other people around me. What about my life is dissatisfactory to your God?
I think the point is to rebuff the claim that religion and religious teachings are somehow required in order to maintain an ethical and moral society.
I don't believe in a God, heaven or hell, but I still know the moral difference between right and wrong and act accordingly, not just because my religious views dictate it, or threaten me with punishment for doing "wrong".
i am a little disappointed...had some freaky stuff typed up..to do with propositions, 3d and 4d thought structures, multiple dimensions, paradoxes, all propositions being true God and No God.... and my ctrl c keyboard skills failed me and i accidentally clicked back on browser....
foiled again
foiled again
I follow Christ and he alone claimed to be of God. I do not claim to know the will of God through my own understanding, but rather from the teachings of Christ. If Christ was a fraud, then I too am, just as the apostle Paul said, and we are all condemned for claiming to be representatives of God.
i am a little disappointed...had some freaky stuff typed up..to do with propositions, 3d and 4d thought structures, multiple dimensions, paradoxes, all propositions being true God and No God.... and my ctrl c keyboard skills failed me and i accidentally clicked back on browser....
foiled again
I hate it when that happens.
Study of ethics? Instinct? I think most people are able to make an ethical, moral decision without the need for referring to religious teaching. To claim that it would be necessary is arrogance in itself.
How do you know that religious teachings are morally correct?
Last edited:
Do you believe morals are objective or not?