My journey to athiesm.

[afleitch]

This may swing close to the religion/philosophy board but I want to get this off my chest.

First off I'm not going to bore you all with a big story. There was no 'revelation' and I would mistrust it if there was. The understanding was gradual and indeed was underway long before I came to the conclusion that I have done. I want to take this moment to pre-empt something. Just because I reject the divinity of a man called Jesus, does not mean that I cede to certain sorts of Christians that their interpretation of his message is correct. He, like any other historical figure should be defended when he is misused by those who are inspired by them. In fact the man requires greater defence given that he is just a man.

I don't believe that anyone who is a athiest is 100% certain that there is no external force, deity, god, life force, Gaia whatever you want to call it. It is just that the weight of the evidence is against it and continues to be stacked against it. For those who are theists the burden of proof must be on them. Particularly for Christians. It is no good for them even saying 'well I'm not 100% sure either but I think there is a god.' or 'I think that Jesus was devine' That's not good enough for a professing Christian; you have to believe 100% you cannot go part way. You have to base that belief on faith alone, or have faith 'plug' any gaps that you may summise that's the whole point of Christian faith.

Do I fear death? Yes. I cannot think of any human alive who does not harbour even a fleeting concern for the method in which they will die. It might be peaceful, it might be painful. It is a quirk of human evolution and consciousness that we have the capacity to undertand death and that it will happen to us. It is out of our consciousness and our selfishness (we are primates) that we get a bit frustrated that we have to die; that theres nothing after the event (many of us feel the same way about aging). That what we do in life has no effect on that outcome. It's a damn shame.

That's why the concepts of 'spirits' exist in just about every culture. If they did (and again the onus is on those who believe that such things do exist to demonstrate this), I suspect after having given it much thought that I would prefer it's 'destination' not to be one where it is joined to it's creator and looses all sense of independence but one whether it chooses it's own demise, floats around the ether or attaches itself to another creature. In either of the last three scenarios it retains it's independence. In either of those three scenario it more adequately reflects it's 'origin.' For the religious who say that it's not for me to determine what happens to it you now have to prove two things; not only that it exists, but that it's destination is at the hands of another.

But that is a digression. I mentioned how selfish we are and why we get annoyed at our own demise. But we are also wonderfully unselfish too. We do great things, we may even lay down our lives. To then suggest that this capacity for the good (and the bad) is 'given' to us by a deity demeans in my mind the greatness of that action.

I'll tell you what the 'straw that broke the camel's back' was on this. It was speaking to a street pastor just a week ago who desribed her relationship with god. To condense it down it was basically this; She said he was so perfect and we could never be. We could only aspire to it.

That is the scope of the relationship. Let's personify it a little. Imagine you were married to someone. And every day they said to you that you were not up to their standard. That you could never quite be perfect certainly not in comparison to them that they were the ideal model, the gold standard. First of all such a relationship would clearly not be on equal terms. Secondly the relationship would demonstrate power, control. Some would consider it to be, let's be frank about this, psychological abuse. Perhaps a better comparison for a 'creator' would be as casting them as the mother/father in parent/child relationship.

I would not tolerate such a relationship materially. I cannot tolerate a spiritual one.

[afleitch]

psst...ei

Damn that rule Well spotted.

[afleitch]

Amen JMF.

Baaa.

[afleitch]

Amen JMF.

Baaa.

1 person has to stick by him afleitch.......the rest of us aren't lined up to do it.  

He's still in bubble. As I outlined my position hasn't changed on the 'message'; it's just I don't believe the messenger was divine nor did he come from anything divine.

[afleitch]

Devine.

That some fancy new Scottish pronunciation of "divine?"

It's actually a common surname in my part of Scotland That's probably where that came from!

[afleitch]

Amen JMF.

Baaa.

1 person has to stick by him afleitch.......the rest of us aren't lined up to do it.  

He's still in bubble. As I outlined my position hasn't changed on the 'message'; it's just I don't believe the messenger was divine nor did he come from anything divine.

I'm not in a "bubble" I choose to believe and have faith in God out of my own free will. I disagree with your belief and I wish that you wouldn't have chosen to go that way but I respect your free will. JMF is correct in the way he stated that separation of faith. We may not always like all the answers we hear but they are sometimes rooted in truth.

I should have made clear that I was directing that more an jmf than yourself. However you cannot state that jmf's answers are 'rooted in truth,' because he made his observation from the Bible, which has not been proven as the truth (or a truth) in any way. Therefore jmfcst is not appealing to 'truth' in his judgment.

[afleitch]

Amen JMF.

Baaa.

1 person has to stick by him afleitch.......the rest of us aren't lined up to do it.  

He's still in bubble. As I outlined my position hasn't changed on the 'message'; it's just I don't believe the messenger was divine nor did he come from anything divine.

I'm not in a "bubble" I choose to believe and have faith in God out of my own free will. I disagree with your belief and I wish that you wouldn't have chosen to go that way but I respect your free will. JMF is correct in the way he stated that separation of faith. We may not always like all the answers we hear but they are sometimes rooted in truth.

I should have made clear that I was directing that more an jmf than yourself. However you cannot state that jmf's answers are 'rooted in truth,' because he made his observation from the Bible, which has not been proven as the truth (or a truth) in any way. Therefore jmfcst is not appealing to 'truth' in his judgment.

Not the truth according to you. But for hundreds of millions of others, including myself, it is the truth.

Then it us to you to prove that bthis is the case and therefore the truth. I have said on the balance of probabilites and the evidence and understanding that we have that the existence of a god and certainly a creator god with us in mind is highly improbable. Again I have only one thing to argue; that there is no god. You have several; firstly that there is a god, secondly that there is only one, thirdly that it's 'yours' (i.e the Abrahamic god and not Vishnu or Zeus), fourthly that while it's Abrahamic it's a god that sent his son and isn't the god that sent Mohammed or hasn't sent anyone yet and fifthly that the book to which you and jmfcst describe is divinely inspired 100% on the nail truth. You have to validate all of this before it can be regarded as the 'truth' and that I am shying away from it.

[afleitch]

I'm sorry Grumpy for offending all the atheists around here with my religion. Why should he just be able to post a thread without a challenge? That is more offensive to me.

As opposed to you becoming offended by somebody admitting they are atheists.

I'm not offended, saddened but whatever.

Why saddened?

[afleitch]

I'm sorry Grumpy for offending all the atheists around here with my religion. Why should he just be able to post a thread without a challenge? That is more offensive to me.

As opposed to you becoming offended by somebody admitting they are atheists.

I'm not offended, saddened but whatever.

Why saddened?

Does it matter? All I'll do is get stomped on by everyone here if I dare state my faith. Anyway, have a good day, enjoy your thread.

Asking questions as to why you hold the Bible to the 'truth' because you accuse me of shying away from that 'truth' is not stomping on your faith. It is enquiring about it.

[afleitch]

How many converts do you think he has secured so far on this forum?  I take it efficacy is not a factor in the algorithm when it comes to preaching "the word," is it?

How many converts did Noah secure?  How many converts did Lot secure?  To give a testimony is only the responiblity of a Christian, it is God who does the securing.

this thread as sad as it is doesn't come as a surprise, for it was always obvious Andrew had never met Christ.  Hopefully, he will understand one day that his faith was simply a bunch of religion and was not a relationship with God.

1John 2:19-20 "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.  20But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth."

Again prove to me that Noah existed, that Lot existed. Prove to me that there is a god, only one god, that there are no other, that this one god is Abrahamic, but the Abrahamic god that sent a son (not the one who has yet to send it or who also sent Mohammed), that this god revealed himself to an illiterate desert people and that what they wrote down is 100% the truth (and has since been passed down correctly)

Again while your quotations may be as intriguing as a conversation between Peter Pan and Wendy they are of the same weight and value. They carry no 'truth' because you have not proven that is the truth and the only truth.

[afleitch]

It takes quite alot of reflection and serious consideration, and though I've never been that religious before I started to consider myself an Atheist anyway, I do understand the amount of personal deliberation and tough realization it can take to overcome things such as religious belief. I'm glad for you, Afleitch. Cheers.

    Good job. I agree with Marokai that it takes a lot of courage to shake off ideas that you feel are no longer right for you. I actually made the journey from Atheism to Christianity (or rather what my limited 13-year old intellect at the time understood to be Christianity) back to Atheism, so I think, just maybe, I might share in a tiny bit of what you have gone through.

Thank you It was not as difficult as I thought it would be. I've 'came out' before

 Much of the cultural aspect of religion; going to mass etc I had dropped some time ago. I stopped regularly attending mass when I was 16 when I protested at a bishops statement that affected me and was based on lies and fear. But while the 'worship' faded the attachment was still there. I was a critic, I continued to criticise but still to believe. Then I stopped believing.

It didn't make any sense; the fact I was being asked to suspend so much that I knew and understood about the world, people and myself in order to confirm with one book (or the people who clutched it and jabbed it with their finger)

It isn't real. And i'm actually glad it's not.

[afleitch]

That said, I don't agree with afleitch's conclusion that a rejection of deistic supremacy is logically sufficient to support an embrace of atheism.  I think both he and that street preacher he mentioned missed the point by focusing too much on God the King, and not enough on God the Father.

Without having to rely upon any scripture, one can make some basic inferences about the nature of a benevolent deity.  Such a being would have considerably more experience than any human could possibly hope to have, experience he could use to fashion a code of conduct that it would be to our benefit to follow, and which if he is benevolent would desire to make known to humanity in a fashion that humanity can comprehend.  Yet, just as sometimes a parent needs to tell his child "No" because the child is not capable of comprehending the reason why doing something is a really bad idea, it is not unreasonable that a benevolent deity might have to at times resort to such a method.

Actually it was very much focused on 'God the Father.' Which is why such a relationship for eternity ending (or beginning depending on how you look at it) with being 'fused' with a creator and loosing your own independence is horrifying. I do not wish to have the relationship with a god that I had with my own father when I was 5.

And to pick up a point, I see no reason to believe particulary from the Bible, Koran etc that their deity is in any way 'benevolent.'

[afleitch]

I have to say that there was no real 'journey' except away from atheism somewhat. I remember arguing with my mother over whether there was a God or not when I was six years ago (I was a non-believer then, it is strange but many of 'my' 'attitudes' I can see are rooted in the myself that I first can remember long ago at the beginning of my conscious life... I've pretty much always had a pretty existentalist worldview... I can't explain it but that cosmology always 'made sense' to me). I didn't even realize people really believed in the Bible (as in really believed) until I discovered the internet age 13.

But I'm pretty disillusioned with Atheism now.

Out of interest what would you consider yourself ? (and I know you're not one for labels )

[afleitch]

But if want me to stop being so obtuse: non-believer. In Everything.

Good man

[afleitch]

I'm glad you're glad afleitch isn't Christian anymore, and I look forward to your eradication of the liberal Christian plague upon our society.  In the future, we should consider pre-screening, to keep him and his type out.

I never said that.  Do you have anything truthful to say or is your whole point based off a smear?

You're right; I apologize.  I had forgot to put my jmfcst-goggles on when I read your post.  I had been hoping you would have at least avoided quoting the Bible at him, like you did in his marriage thread, but my reaction was completely over the top.

Don't feel bad It's all he's got and he makes very poor or very irrelevant use of it.

[afleitch]

I'm glad you're glad afleitch isn't Christian anymore, and I look forward to your eradication of the liberal Christian plague upon our society.  In the future, we should consider pre-screening, to keep him and his type out.

I never said that.  Do you have anything truthful to say or is your whole point based off a smear?

You're right; I apologize.  I had forgot to put my jmfcst-goggles on when I read your post.  I had been hoping you would have at least avoided quoting the Bible at him, like you did in his marriage thread, but my reaction was completely over the top.

Don't feel bad It's all he's got and he makes very poor or very irrelevant use of it.

I've seen him be nice before, though, and it's the end of an era, and it's all very sad, why isn't he being sad?

I have always believed, and I am sure I have said this on before there is a high probability that he is bi-polar with the potential to swing from extreme laid back highs to agressive lows. That is the best explanation I can find from 6 and a half years of interaction with him.

[afleitch]

Update

All is well! As liberally minded as I was, the moment you come to realise 'hey guys this is it' can actually be quite traumatic. You have to go through the process of 'burying the dead' somewhat. It now also means all my relationships are on the same level while still being different - my love for my family or for Chris for example. There is no longer some presence that has to bew thought of in hallowed terms and who gets away with murder (literally). I'm apologising for my wrong doing to the person I wronged. I'm talking about my fears with people who can respond, I'm wishing people well from my heart and giving them my best wishes and grace.