What Does Being An Atheist Actually Entail? (Theism in mind)
April 27, 2015 at 11:47 pm
(This post was last modified: April 28, 2015 at 12:09 am by gomlbrobro.)
“Unless one can genuinely believe that all of these secular scientific assertions make sense, it can’t be wise to invest their belief in it….”
In other words, unless one personally dives in to the study and proof of evolution and astrophysics, that person is essentially putting faith in another person’s beliefs and conclusions to be sound. Similarly, that same person will refuse to believe in theistic teachings. Why put faith in the biased assertions of scientists over the biased assertions of theism. (I say theism because the teachings/representation of a religion is not always what that religion was originally founded upon). Why so easily accept one, yet not genuinely search the answers for the other? It is certainly not because abstract science, by the means of proving creation, is easier to understand. The short answer is because the alternative belief (theism) would completely change the dynamic of your life and future-it is easier not to investigate the topic further. Being open is the first and hardest step–requiring submitting to unaccountability, pride, and change.
The same could question could be posed upon theists, however. Why not search for the science creation proof? The crucial difference between the two instances is that every theist can and does completely understand their belief – it’s called faith. The problem for most atheists is that they can’t and don’t fully understand why they believe it. Top-notch scientists in the field of astrophysics, cosmology, and evolution – as flawed as it is – have a merit to be an atheist because they fully understand what it means to be. Most others, on the other hand, are putting complete faith in to human scientists to justify their beliefs. There’s a distinct and vital difference between the founders of a belief, and the followers.
Again, with all of that said, people who believe in a god know what it means to believe in it – faith. Not faith in scientists, but faith in the belief of an omnipotent god that rests upon the fact we don’t know all of the answers.
Better put, what will it be: blind faith in others humans’ finite intellect, or blind faith in an omnipotent god? Theism gives the tools (e.g. literature and teachings) and capability (e.g. faith, intellect (or lack of), human morals ect.) for everyone to independently be a part of what it means to believe in it.
Science creation simply doesn’t do it for most. Trusting scientists’ say-so is not what I wish to “worship”, if you will.
Sorry if I offended any of you. I'm just trying to say my thoughts. If you want to criticize any of it go ahead. God Bless.
In other words, unless one personally dives in to the study and proof of evolution and astrophysics, that person is essentially putting faith in another person’s beliefs and conclusions to be sound. Similarly, that same person will refuse to believe in theistic teachings. Why put faith in the biased assertions of scientists over the biased assertions of theism. (I say theism because the teachings/representation of a religion is not always what that religion was originally founded upon). Why so easily accept one, yet not genuinely search the answers for the other? It is certainly not because abstract science, by the means of proving creation, is easier to understand. The short answer is because the alternative belief (theism) would completely change the dynamic of your life and future-it is easier not to investigate the topic further. Being open is the first and hardest step–requiring submitting to unaccountability, pride, and change.
The same could question could be posed upon theists, however. Why not search for the science creation proof? The crucial difference between the two instances is that every theist can and does completely understand their belief – it’s called faith. The problem for most atheists is that they can’t and don’t fully understand why they believe it. Top-notch scientists in the field of astrophysics, cosmology, and evolution – as flawed as it is – have a merit to be an atheist because they fully understand what it means to be. Most others, on the other hand, are putting complete faith in to human scientists to justify their beliefs. There’s a distinct and vital difference between the founders of a belief, and the followers.
Again, with all of that said, people who believe in a god know what it means to believe in it – faith. Not faith in scientists, but faith in the belief of an omnipotent god that rests upon the fact we don’t know all of the answers.
Better put, what will it be: blind faith in others humans’ finite intellect, or blind faith in an omnipotent god? Theism gives the tools (e.g. literature and teachings) and capability (e.g. faith, intellect (or lack of), human morals ect.) for everyone to independently be a part of what it means to believe in it.
Science creation simply doesn’t do it for most. Trusting scientists’ say-so is not what I wish to “worship”, if you will.
Sorry if I offended any of you. I'm just trying to say my thoughts. If you want to criticize any of it go ahead. God Bless.
