Atheism: The Death Of Hope.

[seer]

Okay. God illumined your mind to his scriptures by using his scriptures; he revealed himself to you via scripture. Thus the scriptures are God's revealed word. Is that about right?

Pretty much, but there may have been another step in there.

Good questions. I haven't figured a whole lot out from the axiom "everything is one." It does seem to imply though, that there is nothing experienced in our lives, in our universe that isn't entangled with all other things. So, if there is a god/God/gods, all things from the tiniest bits of stuff to the most cosmic bodies are all interconnected with this distinguishable being understood as 'God.' It's not a stretch from there to understand that everything that is, while being distinct in expression from other things, is also everything else that is, ontologically.

That seems pretty important to me. I have no proof that this is the case, however. The notion is more immediately pleasing to my mind than the traditional reductionist views of enlightenment science, however, and harkens back to the animistic notions of the paleolithic period.

Is this much different than classic pantheism? Even so, saying that every thing is one doesn't really get us anywhere does it? So everything is one, therefore...?

[Truthseeker]

Can God exist in nothing?

[B&H]

I'm jumping off a thread in Natural Science that linked this article:

http://www.science20.com/writer_on_t..._a_joke-139982

So spiritual beliefs seem to both offer hope and help humans cope. And that these beliefs are deeply ingrained. So one wonders why militate atheists seek to destroy this natural coping mechanism, why do they want so to kill hope?

I would criticize militant atheists the same way. The fact that religion in their view is unrealistic and a mere crutch, does not automatically guarantee that stamping it out wherever it may be found, would be a good thing. Dreaming while asleep is the very antithesis of critical thinking, but who would argue that it should be wiped out?

Militant atheists would have better strategy to stamp out only those forms of faith that are most likely to lead to depression and other mental problems, such as Christian fundamentalism. No problem with saying and believing and preaching that Jesus rose from the dead. But if you find it necessary to label everybody who disagrees with that as a fool, this is the exact type of narrow-minded bigotry that deserves to be stamped out. That mindset then leads you to believe that everybody whom you alienate, are only those whom God wanted to alienate, and its not too long before you become as deranged as apostle Paul.

[seer]

I would criticize militant atheists the same way. The fact that religion in their view is unrealistic and a mere crutch, does not automatically guarantee that stamping it out wherever it may be found, would be a good thing. Dreaming while asleep is the very antithesis of critical thinking, but who would argue that it should be wiped out?

Militant atheists would have better strategy to stamp out only those forms of faith that are most likely to lead to depression and other mental problems, such as Christian fundamentalism. No problem with saying and believing and preaching that Jesus rose from the dead. But if you find it necessary to label everybody who disagrees with that as a fool, this is the exact type of narrow-minded bigotry that deserves to be stamped out. That mindset then leads you to believe that everybody whom you alienate, are only those whom God wanted to alienate, and its not too long before you become as deranged as apostle Paul.

Deranged as apostle Paul? Well we know where you are coming from.

[Doug Shaver]

So one wonders why militate atheists seek to destroy this natural coping mechanism, why do they want so to kill hope?

I don't regard myself as a militant. Those who do can speak for themselves.

If your religious belief is the only way you can have any hope, then I don't want to kill it. But I don't believe it is the only way.

The only hope I lost when I became an atheist was the hope that I could live forever, and I'm getting along just fine without that one.

[Sir]

I agree with Doug.

Also, "hope and fear are two ends of the same ladder." ~Osho

What matters is now. You only ever live now. So now is all that matters.

[seer]

What matters is now. You only ever live now. So now is all that matters.

I don't believe that. Now what?

And not according to the study in the OP:

http://www.science20.com/writer_on_t..._a_joke-139982

EVOLUTIONARY PURPOSES

If a tendency to believe in the reality of an intangible network is so deeply wired into humanity, the implication is that it must have an evolutionary purpose. Social scientists have long believed that the emotional depth and complexity of the human mind means that mindful, self-aware people necessarily suffer from deep existential dread. Spiritual beliefs evolved over thousands of years as nature’s way to help us balance this out and go on functioning.

[Sir]

I don't believe that. Now what?

I believe that you don't believe that. I don't understand your question, though.

And not according to the study in the OP:

http://www.science20.com/writer_on_t..._a_joke-139982

I don't see how this quote disagrees with what I said. Can you explain, please?

[seer]

I don't see how this quote disagrees with what I said. Can you explain, please?

You said all that matters is "now." But according to the study human beings generally need to believe in something more, something that transcends this world.

[Sir]

You said all that matters is "now." But according to the study human beings generally need to believe in something more, something that transcends this world.

Oh, okay. I understand now. Thank you for clarifying that.

Strangely, we only ever experience now, regardless of what we believe, or feel the need to believe. Something that transcends this world is something that is not necessarily now, so it is not something that can be experienced. All that can be experienced is now.

[NotSoHumblePie]

Yes, they were anti-religious, Just like Mao, Pol Pot, Castro - they were atheists and wanted religion gone. You simply can not divorce their atheism from all this.

Yes you can. See: the difference between atheism and anti-theism.

[seer]

Yes you can. See: the difference between atheism and anti-theism.

Arbitrary. They were both anti-religious and atheists. Granted, not all atheists want religion removed from the public square, but they did. And many still do, need I mention men like Dawkins, Hitchens (God rest his soul) and Dennett? And it is/was their atheism that drives this.

[Doug Shaver]

You may call that narcissism, I call it wonderful...

Some women, after their husbands beat them, would say, "You may call that abuse, I call it love."

[Truthseeker]

Some women, after their husbands beat them, would say, "You may call that abuse, I call it love."

I do not know why the universe is what God created. Because God is unchanging, the universe is what we have "to live with" and will have to. Your being an atheist will not make the universe better, but your becoming a Christian may.

[seer]

Some women, after their husbands beat them, would say, "You may call that abuse, I call it love."

So now you compare God to a wife beater? Really Doug...