Considering atheism [Currently Christian]

[drfuzzy]

Deidre, I'm confused. If atheism is a natural conclusion then presumably for you to arrive at your present position you must be using a more potent natural conclusion. What happened?

Well, when I look back over the past five years of going from belief to disbelief to belief (leaving out a lot of details of course) I would say that emotionally, I wasn't "comfortable" as an atheist and that struggle between my mind and emotions started when my grandmother became ill a few years ago and then passed away. Maybe the main delineating line between belief and lack of belief comes in the form of wanting (or needing) to believe vs. being comfortable with the idea that no god exists. My mind and heart never "agreed" when I was an atheist. :/

I actually understand that struggle quite well. Particularly if a person has been raised in a belief system - the idea of breaking from that system is emotionally painful, even without threats of hell and the disappointment and fury of family.  Combine that with grief (I'm sorry for your loss) and oh boy, do you EVER want to know that your loved one is in a wonderful place, and that you will be reunited one day.  (Actually a piece of me still longs for that fantasy.  I have so many people that have passed away that I would love to see again.)  You will walk your path - in your time.  You have already challenged your belief multiple times, and for many of us, it's part of the process.  It was for me.  Best wishes.

[*Deidre*]

Well, when I look back over the past five years of going from belief to disbelief to belief (leaving out a lot of details of course) I would say that emotionally, I wasn't "comfortable" as an atheist and that struggle between my mind and emotions started when my grandmother became ill a few years ago and then passed away. Maybe the main delineating line between belief and lack of belief comes in the form of wanting (or needing) to believe vs. being comfortable with the idea that no god exists. My mind and heart never "agreed" when I was an atheist. :/

I actually understand that struggle quite well. Particularly if a person has been raised in a belief system - the idea of breaking from that system is emotionally painful, even without threats of hell and the disappointment and fury of family.  Combine that with grief (I'm sorry for your loss) and oh boy, do you EVER want to know that your loved one is in a wonderful place, and that you will be reunited one day.  (Actually a piece of me still longs for that fantasy.  I have so many people that have passed away that I would love to see again.)  You will walk your path - in your time.  You have already challenged your belief multiple times, and for many of us, it's part of the process.  It was for me.  Best wishes.

Oh my gosh, your post here, it just...I needed to read this. You have no idea. Hearing that I'm not crazy for going through this ''process'' multiple times is beyond comforting. Thank you

[pocaracas]

For the past two years, I have been dating an atheist fellow. (odd isn't it?)

And this is because he is somehow attractive. 
He is the one who has been introducing me to memes and other content about atheism.
I have been honestly trying to see his side, as he attended church with me once. (although he says he despises religion/church)

I totally accept science as a method of discovering truth, but it can only test things that fall under natural law. As such, it's not equipped to make judgments on anything supernatural. Science also doesn't answer many of the "whys" that humanity considers. Science is great, but if you rely only on science for all your answers, you're living in a box. Any thing that doesn't fit into the natural criteria is not considered. Anyway, as far as examining the compatibility of science and faith, the website below is excellent and you ought to check it out.

http://biologos.org/about-us/

A "why" question presupposes a reasoning behind a certain action.
A "how" question expects only a mechanism. These are the questions that science poses... Although we often mistake these for "whys".
Mankind can pose many questions, many whys... Some, in an anthropomorphic attempt to understand the world around us, attribute a thinking reasoning to the world, or parts of it. Should we honestly do this? No... Are many (our rather most) somehow trapped in thinking like this? Yes, sadly.
The natural world that science probes is reality. Anything off limits to science is not real.
If the universe turns out to be controlled by some thinking entity, then that entity is a part of reality and thus accessible to science... No matter how elusive it may be.

[downbeatplumb]

I totally accept science as a method of discovering truth, but it can only test things that fall under natural law.  As such, it's not equipped to make judgments on anything supernatural.  Science also doesn't answer many of the "whys" that humanity considers.  Science is great, but if you rely only on science for all your answers, you're living in a box.  Any thing that doesn't fit into the natural criteria is not considered.  Anyway, as far as examining the compatibility of science and faith, the website below is excellent and you ought to check it out.

http://biologos.org/about-us/

Science works great on real things, the supernatural is not a real thing. None of it.

[Crossless2.0]

I've fucked Christian men in the ass, Christian men have fucked me in the ass, I have given Christian men blow jobs, and Christian men have given me blow jobs . . .

Vorlon: Pursuing the ecumenical ideal, one orifice at a time.

[Whateverist]

I totally accept science as a method of discovering truth, but it can only test things that fall under natural law.  As such, it's not equipped to make judgments on anything supernatural.  Science also doesn't answer many of the "whys" that humanity considers.  Science is great, but if you rely only on science for all your answers, you're living in a box.  Any thing that doesn't fit into the natural criteria is not considered.  Anyway, as far as examining the compatibility of science and faith, the website below is excellent and you ought to check it out.

http://biologos.org/about-us/

Science works great on real things, the supernatural is not a real thing. None of it.

Put another way "real" and "natural" are synonyms.  A synonym for "supernatural" would be the "alternative real".

---

I just realized who you are lol looking at your name change.  
And yes, probably. I will say that I envy people who grew up without any religious parenting or guidance whatsoever because what we are taught as kids no matter how hard we try, there's always a slight residue left over. (when it comes to the negative stuff)

Oh, my mom is a -complete- wooster...crystal healing and pagan gods, reads the cards..the whole bit.  She burns twigs to purge ghosts, lol.  My family is a mix of catholics, baptists, and literal bible salesman.  I went to a private school operated by the church.  I can draw down the godhead in a ritual circle, perform sympathetic magic, plumb the catechism, and recite the bible from memory.  My power went out last night in the big storm..and I spent two hours recounting norse creation myths and danish hero legends to my kids to keep them entertained.  I sing hymns beautifully and with conviction.

I got alot of religious guidance.  

It just never took..or it took so well in whole that I could very accurately see that all of these different traditions..purportedly about gods..were about human beings.  I suppose it helped that while my family had plenty of religion they lacked the compulsion to religion urge.  

Or, at least..that's what I think happened....could have been in the milk.  There was alot of fluoride in the water too...maybe, in addition to making frogs gay it turns people into atheists?  

I just made the connection .. your mother wasn't Sookie Stackhouse by any chance, was she?

[Lek]

I totally accept science as a method of discovering truth, but it can only test things that fall under natural law.  As such, it's not equipped to make judgments on anything supernatural.  Science also doesn't answer many of the "whys" that humanity considers.  Science is great, but if you rely only on science for all your answers, you're living in a box.  Any thing that doesn't fit into the natural criteria is not considered.  Anyway, as far as examining the compatibility of science and faith, the website below is excellent and you ought to check it out.

http://biologos.org/about-us/

A "why" question presupposes a reasoning behind a certain action.
A "how" question expects only a mechanism. These are the questions that science poses... Although we often mistake these for "whys".
Mankind can pose many questions, many whys... Some, in an anthropomorphic attempt to understand the world around us, attribute a thinking reasoning to the world, or parts of it. Should we honestly do this? No... Are many (our rather most) somehow trapped in thinking like this? Yes, sadly.
The natural world that science probes is reality. Anything off limits to science is not real.
If the universe turns out to be controlled by some thinking entity, then that entity is a part of reality and thus accessible to science... No matter how elusive it may be.

This is why I say you're living in a box.

[Simon Moon]

The natural world that science probes is reality. Anything off limits to science is not real.

I have to disagree with the bolded part above.

It is possible that there is something off limits to science, that actually may exist. But since there is no way to test and verify it, there is no warrant to believe it is real.

The non testable and non verifiable are indistinguishable from non existence, but they still might exist.

[Astonished]

The natural world that science probes is reality. Anything off limits to science is not real.

I have to disagree with the bolded part above.

It is possible that there is something off limits to science, that actually may exist. But since there is no way to test and verify it, there is no warrant to believe it is real.

The non testable and non verifiable are indistinguishable from non existence, but they still might exist.

Agreed, if it's beyond the ability of science to test or verify, it's utterly irrelevant and no one can pretend they know anything about it because the only mechanism which we know of to go about finding out things is unable to be utilized. It's when people pretend to know it exists, know its attributes, and yet can't say HOW they know this, that we've got problems. Unfortunately that's exactly how everyone behaves when it comes to that type of unknown woo.

[Lek]

I've fucked Christian men in the ass, Christian men have fucked me in the ass, I have given Christian men blow jobs, and Christian men have given me blow jobs . . .

You have a (barf!) wonderful lifestyle Vorion.