Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
I came to a realization which kind of stunned me. It's obvious once you lay it down, but it shows that atheists and theists are taking part in the same tug-of-war, but for different reasons.
Theists are frequently trying to "save" atheists from the eternal punishments which await them for their lack of faith.
What I realized is that atheists are trying to save theists also. (I mean this in a general sense, I'm not saying every atheist has the same motivations, but I hope this would make sense as an overall description.) We want to save them from the shackles which control them. We want them to take ownership of their own rules and morals, and stop having them dictated to them by those who presume to speak for god. We want them to realize that it's up to us. If we want the world to be a better place, than we have to do it. It's not going to magically happen on its own.
And further than this, we want to free society. We want to stop the endless conflict religion causes, both on a small scale, and much larger ones such as wars. It seems to me that a primitive society might "need" religion to help it become in some way civilized, to give the people some way of coming together. Some guy can't just stand up in the middle and say, "Right, I've just come up with these rules which you have to live by". It's much more compelling to say, "God just gave me these rules you must live by." Until most people start living by sensible rules, you can have no civilization, and maybe that's the only way it could get going. But we now have civilization, and it's clear that our rules are so far removed from those laid down in any religion as to make such "commandments" irrelevant. And science has shown us that primitive guesswork about the nature and origin of the universe is non-productive and unnecessary.
So we have this tug of war, both side feeling that their side is the true way, and which will lead to a better world for everyone. But atheism isn't trying to just trying to prove a point about who is right, it's trying to rescue the enslaved. We want to stop future generations being born into this slavery also, and to free society from the unfair power religion holds.
PS: This is how I have seen things from my perspective, and perhaps I have assumed too much. Sorry, I didn't mean to appoint myself as some sort of atheist spokesperson. Let me ask all atheists, what would be your aims with regard to helping theists, or the situation with religion? What do you hope to achieve by debating all these topics on the forum?
If atheists are trying to “save” theists, then why spend so much time on a forum filled with other atheists? Isn’t that preaching to the choir so to speak? I think atheists tend to like being around other people who think just like they do. Just my thoughts.
(August 19, 2014 at 2:16 pm)Goosebump Wrote: Surely you must admit that asserting that those without salvation suffer from these dilemmas and those who are "saved" do not is at least condescending?
The OP asserts that atheists are rational and theists are irrational and somehow hampering humanity; is that also condescending?
(August 19, 2014 at 12:54 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Salvation means much more than a "Get Out of Hell Free" card. It also involves delivery from the nihilism of ontological naturalism, the idolatry of scientism, the bondage of sin, and ignorance of your true Self.
Surely you must admit that asserting that those without salvation suffer from these dilemmas and those who are "saved" do not is at least condescending?
I am merely offering up a list of errors to which atheists are prone. Some or none of these may apply to any particular person. If the shoe fits, wear it.
August 19, 2014 at 3:20 pm (This post was last modified: August 19, 2014 at 3:21 pm by Goosebump.)
(August 19, 2014 at 3:11 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: I am merely offering up a list of errors to which atheists are prone. Some or none of these may apply to any particular person. If the shoe fits, wear it.
My apologies as I have no depth of understanding as to what errors one group of people may or not be susceptible to. I can assume that you do.
But be that as it may would you not consider a statement like the following to be condescending?
Most religious people suffer from self delusion, self aggrandizement, superiority complex, egomaniac tendencies and a lack of empathy that they can only shed by accepting not to believe those religious teachings.
I don't know if any of that is true or not. But it sounded condescending when I wrote it. Is it?
(August 19, 2014 at 3:20 pm)Goosebump Wrote: Most religious people suffer from self delusion, self aggrandizement, superiority complex, egomaniac tendencies and a lack of empathy that they can only shed by accepting not to believe those religious teachings.
I think it is true. I also think Chad's comment is true. Condescending, yes. But also true.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
(August 19, 2014 at 3:33 pm)Goosebump Wrote: Perhaps putting aside the condensation on both sides would foster better discussion.
But then we'd be all wet.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
August 19, 2014 at 3:51 pm (This post was last modified: August 19, 2014 at 3:51 pm by Goosebump.)
(August 19, 2014 at 3:34 pm)Tonus Wrote:
(August 19, 2014 at 3:33 pm)Goosebump Wrote: Perhaps putting aside the condensation on both sides would foster better discussion.
But then we'd be all wet.
I'm very sorry, I am a poor speller and poorer proof reader. I often lack attention to detail. Thank you for pointing out my error, I assume I selected the wrong spell check word, and using light humor to make it enjoyable for everyone.
I meant to use the word condescension I suppose I should stick with smaller words in the future to avoid such embarrassment.
(August 19, 2014 at 3:51 pm)Goosebump Wrote: I'm very sorry, I am a poor speller and poorer proof reader. I often lack attention to detail. Thank you for pointing out my error, I assume I selected the wrong spell check word, and using light humor to make it enjoyable for everyone.
I meant to use the word condescension I suppose I should stick with smaller words in the future to avoid such embarrassment.
We’re just razzing the new guy a little; it’s good to see you can be light-hearted.
August 19, 2014 at 4:08 pm (This post was last modified: August 19, 2014 at 4:08 pm by Neo-Scholastic.)
(August 19, 2014 at 3:25 pm)Tonus Wrote:
(August 19, 2014 at 3:20 pm)Goosebump Wrote: Most religious people suffer from self delusion, self aggrandizement, superiority complex, egomaniac tendencies and a lack of empathy that they can only shed by accepting not to believe those religious teachings.
I think it is true. I also think Chad's comment is true. Condescending, yes. But also true.
Don't forget that I am a self-identified "Pompous Ass." Nevertheless, my intention was to show that the Christian concept of salvation is multi-faceted and deserves more than the one sentence summary given in the OP. I should also note that Evangelicals focus way too much on the avoidance of eternal damnation, often to the exclusion of these other important aspects of salvation: delivery, victory, etc.
