RE: Former atheist
March 2, 2015 at 12:07 pm
(This post was last modified: March 2, 2015 at 12:18 pm by Mister Agenda.)
(February 27, 2015 at 1:36 pm)Strongbad Wrote:(February 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: [/i]Believed that physical reality was all that there was, and stories of “creation”, deities, spirits, angels, demons, souls, etc., were merely fantasies[/i]
(February 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Yes. But more like misinterpretations of otherwise actual events. For example, the flood myth was based on a local event transformed into legend.
So, you used to believe that spirits, angels, demons, and souls were "misinterpretations" of actual things, but now you believe they are real? Can you please explain the operation of a "soul"? Where does a soul reside? How does a soul communicate with other entities? Does is it have ears, vocal chords and a mouth, or does it just use telepathy? Does it have a brain, and if not, how does it process information?
Sounds like you're setting up for an argument from ignorance. If Chad doesn't know the answers to your questions, do you think it makes you correct?
(February 27, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Strongbad Wrote: And then somehow you became convinced that Christianity was no longer to be grouped as a falsehood with all other religions, because it is actually the one religion that is true.
(February 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: No. I’m very ecumenical. I think there is something going on at a more fundamental level that sensible reality. That is a feeling shared by most religions. How different cultures approach the Divine gives each religion its own flavor. In my own case, Christianity is the best framework for me to use because it is the most familiar and corresponds with my spiritual experiences.
(February 27, 2015 at 1:36 pm)Strongbad Wrote: So you don't believe that Christianity is the one religion that is true, but you go with it because it corresponds with your "feelings" and "spiritual" experiences? What is a spiritual experience? Is that like a "feeling"?
If the topic is whether Chad was an atheist, he's established it as reasonably as most of the atheists who post here.
(February 27, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Strongbad Wrote: That the god you now “believe in” is actually real, and that he really did create the universe, and that he really does rule over it. That angels, demons, spirits, etc., are factually real. And that after your death you will be resurrected and you will live forever in the presence of this god.
(February 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Yes. All except the idea of a physical resurrection.
(February 27, 2015 at 1:36 pm)Strongbad Wrote: So you "believe in" non-physical "resurrection? Please explain the mechanics of this.
What's with the 3rd degree?
(February 27, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Strongbad Wrote: For some reason, I don’t believe you were ever an atheist..I say bullshit."
(February 27, 2015 at 1:04 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: And I say piss off.
(February 27, 2015 at 1:36 pm)Strongbad Wrote: So sorry to piss you off. And, spoken like a true Christian!
He didn't say he was pissed off, he said piss off, and I don't blame him. There's nothing hypocritical about a Christian telling someone who is implying that he is a liar to piss off.
(February 27, 2015 at 4:40 pm)Pizz-atheist Wrote:(February 27, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Strongbad Wrote: "So when you were an atheist, you:
• Believed that ALL religions were contrived by men, and ALL were works of fiction
• Could not accept the claims made by religious people or their “holy” books
• Believed that religious people, of all “faiths” were misguided at best, and delusional at worst
• Believed that physical reality was all that there was, and stories of “creation”, deities, spirits, angels, demons, souls, etc., were merely fantasies
There are many irreligious theists who would be in full agreement with these points.
So? They are still not a litmus test for 'true atheism'.
(March 1, 2015 at 2:16 am)Delysid Wrote: I believe many of these people are liars. Those amongst these "former atheists" that are genuine more than likely "became atheists" by rebellion or maybe even through anger at their imaginary god.
The conundrum here is that belief in a supernatural deity does not operate within the realm of logic and/or rational thinking. Faith is a matter of faith, not knowledge, not logic, not reason. God, since it requires faith to believe in, is therefore also a matter of faith, not knowledge, not logic. There is no empirical evidence for any god.
So, for one to go from an atheist to a theist, one must have, at some point, on some level, used some rational thinking in order to come to the conclusion that they, in fact, did not believe in any god(s). They decided they would use logic to tackle the subject of god. After spending a certain amount of time like this, they must have then made a conscious decision that they would halt their use of logic and rational thinking when it came to tackling the subject of god, and revert back to using faith, for whatever reason. This would tell me that they considered faith to be superior to logic all along, which is what makes me doubt the genuineness of claims such as these.
Not everyone 'logicked' their way to atheism. If they were never taught to believe, but also never taught how to evaluate claims, there's no reason to think they would be that difficult to persuade. It's not atheism that acts as a bulwark against susceptibility to irrational beliefs, but rational skepticism.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.