Atheism vs Theism. If your wrong which is worse ?

[beajerry]

We are pattern-seeking animals.

Some see a pattern of God and it helps explain things to them.

Some see a pattern of science.

Some see a pattern of magic.

Etc. etc., etc.

The problem arises when you demand that others have your pattern of beliefs.
You can take someone by the hand and drag them to the North Pole looking for Santa, but in that futile search you’ll only make them colder, angrier, and frustrated. (* I am the Santa analogy master!*)
Or you can try and explain the meaning of your belief in Santa, i.e. you can explain your belief pattern. Whether they want to share that belief pattern or not is a choice.

Whether someone shares your pattern or not cannot be ‘fixed’ by a logic explanation (a literal reading and teaching). You can’t make someone have the same experiential meaning of a great song or poem or painting. You can help them appreciate why it has meaning to you, if they are interested, but if they are not then keep it to yourself.

So, to answer the OP: If you appreciate your friend’s belief system, then that’s nice. But it’s hers. Not yours. There is no better ‘mindset’.

[Aldebaran]

@Rashak Mani

IWhat is the worse mindset ?

1. To deny the divine creator that made you and neglect his “work” ? Cynicism and Negativity ?
   OR
2. To be delusional and to need to beleive in a non-existant God ? Beleiving and faith in non-existant mythos ?

Well I guess an atheist in general shall say that being a theist is “the worse mindset” and a theist in general shall see the opposite.
But in my opinion your 2-points choice is not a reflection of the daily reality.

1. You don’t need to be cynical nor negative to be a convinced atheist.
2. You don’t need to be “delusional” and you don’t have to feel any “need” to believe in God for being a theist.

I don’t consider myself “delusional” and I didn’t have a “need” to reach my conclusions about this. I just came to the conclusion that what people describe with “God” (or other words with the same meaning) exists.

Being an atheist I clearly think that not beleiving in God would hardly make Him angry or frustrated… as He should be above said feelings.

The picturing of the “angry God” is something that came to us from the OT.
In a way you can find a reflection of this also in verses of Al Qur’an, yet not with the same implication because always followed with reference to the infinite compassion and mercy of God.
The habit to picture God as having “human” feelings and “human” way of thinking/acting sounds to me the same as if you should give such human characteristics to the sky or the sea. I guess Christians do that because they believe “God created humans in his picture” and “Jesus was the human son of God”

Lack of faith combined with a good life and good morality make us heaven bound just like kneeling theists no ?

That could well be possible. As someone who follows a religion I can only say that I believe that humans can’t know other human’s motivations or beliefs because only God knows what is in people’s mind and heart.

The other side could argue better why not praying would make my life miserable and incomplete… and even if God doesn’t exist they like and feel better for praying…

I don’t think that praying because otherwise “your life would be miserable and incomplete” is the right state of mind to even think of starting to pray. It is a state of mind that is founded on a pure selfish egoism instead of honest devotion.

whilst I dwell in the negative energies of rationalism and cynicism.

I wuoldn’t know in which “energies” you dwell. To me a healthy dose of rationalism and ad bit of cynism now and then can work rather protective.

Are kids who beleive in Santa Claus happier than those who don’t… even though “everyone” gets Xmas presents ?

I can’t speak for that. Never experienced such beliefs
Salaam. A

[dangermom]

Catholics, Mormons and Unification Church types all consider themselves Christian–but they don’t consider each other Christian.

Well, I don’t know a thing about the Unification Church’s ideas, but Mormons certainly do consider Catholics to be Christian.

IMO, the only way to start to try to find out the answer to all this is to learn as much as possible, about everything. About every religion. Or lack thereof. And be willing to go with what you find out–be willing to give it a place in yourself. And then, ask God about it. Sort of: “God, if you exist, and you’re there, then please let me know. And, tell me what the truth is.” BUT, and here’s the tricky bit, IME God doesn’t just say “Hi there! Yep, I’m here, but don’t worry, I won’t ask anything of you.” He doesn’t tell you much until you’re willing to do something about it. If you find that God exists, and that he is good, then you have a responsibility to do as he asks. If you’re not willing to take that on, then finding out will only put a burden on you that you’re not going to work with.

Unless you want the truth, and are willing to do whatever you can to get it, I do not think that you will find it out. But hey, that’s just me. …So what was the question again?

[Lightnin]

@II Gyan II

Name 3 other possible beliefs.

Zeus, Shiva, Odin, the IPU…

[CurtC]

Lightnin’ wrote:
Zeus, Shiva, Odin, the IPU…

Any one of these falls squarely into the “god” side of the dichotomy. Hell, all of them together fall on that side.

Doc Nickel wrote:
If you are a theist, and are wrong, there is no penalty or punishment. You die and simply cease to be.

Not necessarily. You could go your whole life believing in the Christian god, then die and find out that Thor is really it, and boy is he mad!

[DanBlather]

@II Gyan II

Name 3 other possible beliefs.

1. There are many gods (Greek Gods, Roman Gods)
2. We are all god
3. We are a science experiment of an alien race
4. It is unknowable if there is a god
5. There was a God but now it’s dead
6. God created us and then left us alone

But really, you missed my point. Even if you think there are two main branches, God or No God, then the Pascal’s wager argument only works if you believe in the “right” god in the “right” way. You can choose to believe in all of them, but the first commandment says you are screwed if you do that.

[Thudlow_Boink]

@Drethelin2

Religion in my opinion is a bad thing. There is no good that was ever done by religion that outweighs the great evil it has done and continues to do.

Wow, that’s a whole Great Debate all by itself. I’m almost tempted to start a whole nother thread to ask for your evidence or argument for this.

But one thing did occur to me: if you mean your first sentence to be a logical consequence of the second, it’s not the only logical consequence. A religious person might say, “The true religion has done a lot of good while false religions have done great evil. So it isn’t religion that’s bad, just false religion.”

[Urban_Ranger]

@Thudlow Boink

A religious person might say, “The true religion has done a lot of good while false religions have done great evil. So it isn’t religion that’s bad, just false religion.”

That is just a variant of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

[Doc_Nickel]

@CurtC

Not necessarily. You could go your whole life believing in the Christian god, then die and find out that Thor is really it, and boy is he mad!

[Ned Flanders]

I’ve even stayed Kosher just to be on the safe side!

[/Flanders]

@Thudlow Boink

“The true religion has done a lot of good while false religions have done great evil. So it isn’t religion that’s bad, just false religion.”

-And that would open yet another new thread; How can you tell the difference between an “authentic” religion and a “false” one?

[Urban_Ranger]

@Rashak Mani

Now NOT DISCUSSING the existence or not of God… but OUR positions in respect to beleiving or not. What is the worse mindset ?

1. To deny the divine creator that made you and neglect his “work” ? Cynicism and Negativity ?
   OR
2. To be delusional and to need to beleive in a non-existant God ? Beleiving and faith in non-existant mythos ?

To me, there are two mutually exclusive POV a person can adopt when dealing with such metaphysical (mythical, etc.) issues:

1. Reject any and all assertion until it is proven true.
2. Accept any and all assertion until it is proven false.

You can ask your religious friend whether she believes in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Ten Feet Banana, Umguf the Invisible with Pink Polka Dot Unicorn, Zeus, Odin, Ra, Ralph the Snake God, Brahma, the Buddha, the Celestial Emperor, the Monkey God, etc., etc. There is as much tangible proof for these entities as YHWH.

[duffer]

Wow, so many posts I want to respond to I’m thinking of a new thread. One where I state my religious stances, how non-Christians may view them, get some honest and civil debate, and of course learn just exactly how long the horns are measured on my deceased mother’s head. This may be a long self-debate. So, I’ll do a general answer to the posts I remember.

First, comparing Santa Claus to God or Jesus is ludicrous. I can see the point you were making, but please use a better comparison. Santa is based on a Saint, but the crux is his spirit. How do you think the name “Santa” came to be known so well? The image of Santa was wildly different a century ago, it wasn’t about getting great presents. It was about the spirit of giving. More on this if I do start a new thread.

Next, I know it’s popular to start in on the Catholic Church about the Priest scandal. I defy anyone to cite a current events joke from a comedian that wasn’t written to a base view of the situation. My best friend was one of the abused and made a good amount of money. 10% was tithed to the Church. I guess no other profession has pedophiles in its ranks? We know they are, but you never hear of lawyers, doctors, laborers, teachers et al taking advantage of kids? Wonder how Karla Faye Tucker feels about this.

Look, I’m Catholic. But I can admit I have yet to be Confirmed (age 30) though I plan to in the near future. I was baptized and received First Communion. My faith, while very strong, is hampered by my laziness.

My take was always this. If you believe in God and Christ the savior, you agree with me. If you believe in God under any religion, we’ll see each other in Paradise. It doesn’t matter the form you follow, as long as you believe that He does exist.

If you don’t believe, my teachings mandate me to try to convince you of His message. But I don’t. Like I said, I’m kinda lazy. Though I guess you could say posts to the internet would be the same, but I won’t try to hammer it home. The point is, I’m supposed to try, but I don’t want to create animosty doing it. If you’re on the fence and willing to listen, I’ll tell you why, sans selling, that I believe. If you approach me wearing a Satan Rules t-shirt and have an inverted cross in your ear, I’ll give you a nod of the head and keep going.

As far as those that don’t believe, I try to believe this is Purgatory. Where you would be purged of your sins. (I think of it as a big waiting romm with no torture) The biggie being hubris. God doesn’t like when we think we’re more important than Him. But it obviously happens, as “witnessed” on these boards. What I believe of God is that He is all-forgiving.

As a Catholic, and more importantly a Christian (there is a difference) I believe Christ died for all of our sins. Hence, his begging for the forgiveness of the High Priests while on the cross. How much more forgiving can you get?

AN ASIDE: Anyone that wants to blame Jews for the death of Jesus, is ignoring His request. Hate someone for a valid reason. (then forgive )

Hindu, Muslim, Cristian, Bhuddist ( I think), Roman, Greek, etc. This is all the same God. There seems only a difference in how to appease the humans in charge of laying down the laws of how best to follow Him. But He remains the same. Only He is infallible. (Though Catholics agree the Pope is also).

And yeas, even Odin is the same entity, though as a Packer fan, it would disturd me greatly. Lastly, the 3 main gods in Hinduism and other plural-theistic religions are essentially just the different sides of humanity represented in each. They all represent the same God.

Thanks for your time, and yes, I should probably have started a new thread.

[Doc_Nickel]

Yes, you should have started another thread, because you didn’t necessarily answer the question, instead delving into what’s known as a “drive by witnessing”.

First, comparing Santa Claus to God or Jesus is ludicrous.

It is not. Both are quasi-religious figures that, while greatly represented in literature and interpretive imagery, do not exist. While both may have been originally based on actual persons, we have, over the centruies and millennia, attributed far more to them, and updated/modified/interpreted their teachings or purposes to the point of unrecognizability.

Both are believed-in by millions, but all such belief is entirely without proof.

We know they are, but you never hear of lawyers, doctors, laborers, teachers et al taking advantage of kids?

Such things happen, but get less “press” since the clergy is supposedly above such things, a class of person that, by their own doctrines, is held to a higher standard than the average truck driver.

The priest is supposed to be a Man of God, a helper and a protector, like the fireman, the police officer and the doctor, except even moreso. It is essentially a major violation of trust.

While it’s accepted and normal for a Hollywood starlet to have married, divorced and remarried half a dozen times, the same habits in, say, a Senator or city Mayor are viewed somewhat less charitably.

Lastly, the 3 main gods in Hinduism and other plural-theistic religions are essentially just the different sides of humanity represented in each. They all represent the same God.

An interesting point (though it furthers the hijack.) So, do you agree with this:

There are also amazingly coincidental similarities between Jesus and the Hindu Savior Krishna as well.

Both were called a God and the Son of God.
Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man.
Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity.
Their adoptive human father was a carpenter.
A spirit or ghost was their actual father.
Krishna and Jesus were of royal descent.
Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star.
Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna’s parents stayed in Mathura.
Both withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted.
Both were identified as “the seed of the woman bruising the serpent’s head.”
Jesus was called “the lion of the tribe of Judah.” Krishna was called “the lion of the tribe of Saki.”
Both claimed: “I am the Resurrection.”
Both referred to themselves having existed before their birth on earth.
Both were “without sin.”
Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine.
They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent.
Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole.
Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead.
Both selected disciples to spread his teachings.
Both were meek, and merciful.
Both were criticized for associating with sinners.
Both encountered a Gentile woman at a well.
Both celebrated a last supper.
Both forgave his enemies.
Both descended into Hell, and were resurrected. Many people witnessed their ascensions into heaven.

(Source: “The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors,” by Kersey Graves)

(Taken from here.)

If so- by your own admission they’re basically just different interpretations of the same Godhead- then which version is more correct, since, similarities aside, there’s a great deal of differences.

[Urban_Ranger]

@duffer

Hindu, Muslim, Cristian, Bhuddist ( I think), Roman, Greek, etc. This is all the same God. There seems only a difference in how to appease the humans in charge of laying down the laws of how best to follow Him. But He remains the same. Only He is infallible. (Though Catholics agree the Pope is also).

You are going to have a hard time reconciling the teachings of various religions. Esp. when a lot of those gods are not infallible.

@duffer

Lastly, the 3 main gods in Hinduism and other plural-theistic religions are essentially just the different sides of humanity represented in each. They all represent the same God.

I am not getting what you are saying here. Are you trying to say that these deities are human inventions? If so, why not your god?

[IWLN]

If he doesn’t exist, you’ll never know it and if he does, he might actually appreciate people who held out for proof instead of the one’s who made up all the incorrect details. He might value integrity. There is no correct religion. Man created religion. A belief in God isn’t something you can choose to have or not have, so it would be a pretty vindictive God who would punish someone for not having enough evidence. I think I give God more credit for decency and fairness than most religions do. Live a good life and try to help people along the way. If he doesn’t exist, you had a good life. If he does, you have nothing to fear. Worrying about death adversely affects your life, it does nothing to change death.

[robo99]

@Drethelin2

As far as theism goes, Religion in my opinion is a bad thing. There is no good that was ever done by religion that outweighs the great evil it has done and continues to do.

Well, I used to think that when I was a kid but I’ve studied enough history to know that causes and effects over the history of mankind are very difficult to determine. Heck, we can’t even get 20th century history right. Whether religion on a whole was good or bad is really impossible to know. All we can say is that religion was a natural development in our species - so there’s little point in theorizing various “what-ifs” with respect to it.

[Marley23]

Yeah dood, its like quantum mechanics or something. (Where the hell are my keys?)

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle prevents you from simultaneously knowing where your keys are and when you last had them.

Hindu, Muslim, Cristian, Bhuddist ( I think), Roman, Greek, etc. This is all the same God.

That’s a popular modern view to take of it, but it’s a matter of opinion. To start with, Buddha wasn’t a god at all. (Although I think some Buddhists do view him as such.) However, the mythicized version of his birth does have some elements in common with Jesus’s, and Buddha came first. How you can reconcile gods like those of Greece and Rome (I’d presume the Norse and Egyptian gods fit as well?) is beyond me. There are mythical elements common to each, again, but in terms of how they behaved and told their people to behave you’d probably find as many differences as similarities. I know the standard thing to do there is say ‘the things in common are the big ones and the differences are small,’ but I don’t know enough about those mythologies to comment on whether or not it’s true.

[Meatros]

@Doc Nickel

If so- by your own admission they’re basically just different interpretations of the same Godhead- then which version is more correct, since, similarities aside, there’s a great deal of differences.

I’ve heard some contradictory things in reference to the list you presented; it could be my faulty memory, but I could swear that the list is part of Kersey Graves ‘16 cruxified saviors’), which was discredited-IIRC. Then again, I had a rough weekend and I’m mighty tired so I could be 100% wrong.

[Rashak_Mani]

OK guys lets not get off track… We are discussing which position lends itself to more ridicule or “wrongness” when wrong.

One of the main points she put was that God would only enter my life if I let him in (yep apparently God is polite it seems about meddling with my daily existence). Not beleiving meant keeping him out in a way… but that when he came knocking I should be ready to allow Him in. (simplified version of the argument). Now on a logical basis I should be ready for any experiences without letting prejudice bar God… being a hardcore atheist means being as close minded as Mel Gibson ?

Also I very frequently criticize people who “close” themselves to new experiences… especially as regards sexual experiences. If your only into the missionary position and you would never attempt oral sex for example your in my “very limited person” list. Her criticism hit me on this point especially. God being so strong and pervasive (in theory) what kind of person can’t feel Him/Her ? I would in a sense be excluding from my experience something way bigger than sexual freedom ? To remain logically coherent I should “try” no ? Since I was raised with no religion I can honestly say that I have never even honestly attempted to beleive in God… as many theist might not have attempted to honestly doubt God’s existence.

Well how do I go about beleiving in fantastic dieties is beyond me at this moment... what really bothers me is feeling I might be "conservative" and closed minded in my beliefs. Naturally I do feel I am an atheist for good reasons... I just haven't "tried" the other side.

It was interesting to see a theist with good reasoning and logic… very few and far between do I meet one. Plus she is no fan of religion too. She just likes God mostly. I guess my major hates are clerics and established religions.

As for the girl I didn’t get her… (yep someone asked)

So back to the issue… being an atheist and closing out the beauty of God and his creation makes for “close minded” label ? We atheists should ponder on this a bit. Its very easy for us to see that beleiving in Santa/Thor/God is “silly” and a crutch for the less rational. Should we be bothered by the possibility of being wrong ? How can we determine we gave the issue “equal” merit ?

[Anduril]

IMO, atheism is worse. Nothing compares to the self-assuredness one feels as a theist. To be blissfully unaware, is really all that - blissful. Imagine knowing your purpose in life and knowing that doing this and that will secure you eternal bliss in paradise. How can you beat that?!? But, it’s not as if atheists can do anything about it. I know it really sounds “Matrix-y” but I believe there is a point of no return for atheists. Once you realize that religion is merely myth, there can be no returning. You may do everything that’s expected, but at the back of your mind, you know that it’s just for show.

How I would love to become blisfully unaware once more, to be so sure of my purpose, to be so sure of my place in the scheme of things. No matter how hard I try, I can not recapture that feeling anymore. Right now, I cling tenuously to a pantheistic worldview so that I can make some sense of the world. But it really doesn’t compare to the self-assuredness I felt as a theist.

[lekatt]

@Ee-At-Oes

Of course kids who believe in Santa Clause are happier. There is no doubt that Christians are happier than Atheist if they truly believe what they preach. I was a Christian in my teens and early 20s and being agnostic now I have to say my feelings about my death have changed dramatically.

Used to be as I had no fear of it whereas now this may be all I have so I tend to dread death.

If you are one of those blessed people who can believe what is so clearly a faerie tale to me then I envy you. If death can be not avoided then let us be happy while we are here.

The true question is; Is happiness really THAT important? I agree it’s important to a degree but westerners tend to make it the be all - end all. To be a religious person you trade in your openmindedness and lust for knowledge for happiness it seems.

There are days that I think I would gladly train my superbrain for a feeling of peace and I often wonder if it is possible to have both but ironically the search for truth is more important than happiness for those of us who reserve judgement until all the facts are in.

-Mocara

“I guess I need a quote…oh…maybe that’ss be my quote.” - Mocara

If you wait until all the facts are in, you will wait forever. Most of the objections held forth by disbelievers are aimed at the doctrine of God, and not God Himself.
If you want to feel peace and calm again indeed look for truth. Truth will set you free is correct. But truth is not one-sided, there is much false doctrine held by science. One of the most glaring is the notion they know anything at all about the psyche of mankind.

Love