Atheists - is there anything about faith that appeals to you, would you like to believe?

[Italiangreyhound]

Hi, I've been reading a few threads and I've heard atheists say stuff in the past about belief in God. Stuff like they don't believe in God but they would like to or they can see why it would maybe give peace or would be nice etc. I am just curious how atheists feel a bout this and if they want to talk about it?

I am a Christian, I hope I am an open and tolerant person and I would not want to cause offence. I am just curious, as we come into Easter if anyone wants to chat about this.

If not, may I wish you a peaceful and happy Easter, even if all it means to you is some chocolate eggs.

That wasn't as offensive as the next sentence, Ellie- "Being able to put down irrational Christians makes you feel good about yourself. I am glad to provide that service to you."

That is the bit I took particular exception to.

Sorry, Seeker I missed that bit. I thought the "pride" bit was bad enough.

Even worse.

OK - I'll try. Not because I think you'll accept it, but because other people follow these threads and it might be helpful to them.

Atheism is NOT a belief. It's the lack of one.

A person who actively believes in a god or gods is a theist. Someone who does not actively believe in a god or gods is an a-theist.

So, atheism says nothing at all about any other beliefs, just that you lack this particular one.

There's nothing remotely irrational about not believing in something for which no evidence has been produced. In fact, it's the ONLY rational position to take.

So you are wrong. And no, it's not just my opinion.

BTW - there's absolutely nothing I believe for irrational reasons. Nothing.

If you could demonstrate that something I believe is for irrational reasons, guess what I'm going to do? I'm going to stop believing it.

But you have admitted that your faith is irrational. Good for you.

And secularism means having no religious or spiritual content. So in a secular state,people are free to hold whatever beliefs they want or none, but there is no religious involvement in the way the state functions or is governed.

How do you know you have free will? Because God told you that you do? Right......

Hi EllieArroway, yes I saw that film and I liked it.

I'm sorry if my analogy of love doesn't suit you or you loath it. It's the one that fits what I want to say. I would also say I have proof God loves me, but that won't convince you. But as we have all admitted in one way or another we don't expect each other to change our views based on the things we will say. What argument about God would convince you? Yes, I am being lazy but if you don't like my argument I might as well see what would suit you better!

You said Love is an emotion I would say that as well as an emotion I think love is an action. I love Jesus because he first loved me.

The love and faith analogy works fine for me, and as it is me who has to live by it then I see no reason to change it. But I like to talking to you so I have read on.

I know many Christians who work in places... etc .... My argument was not to say we/Christians were better than atheists or Hindus, Muslims, or others, my argument was to say we were not all bad. At times it seems that the weight of evil done in the name of God is poised like a cartoon bolder set to obliterate any good we might do! I do not think that is the case.

Yes, evil has been done and it makes me immensely sad and angry, but good has been done too. And why are atheists infinitely more moral? That makes no sense to me. It is not a promise of a pat on the head that motivates many Christians (I cannot speak for all), it is a desire to do good things. I have no doubt many atheists are motivated in the same way.

An atheist doing good things does it simply because it's the right thing to do and not to impress a celestial dictator or because we're part of his gang. How can you speak for all atheists or for all their motivations?

Where do you get the 9 times out of 10 statistic from?

I also don't think you can know how many Christians have and have not looked at their faith and analyzed it from a critical or neutral position. I know I can't say how many have and I expect I know as many as you do.

What is the Watchmaker thing??

My last comment is directed at anyone at all. I am nervous on this thread because I sense anger, perhaps anger directed at people of faith not necessary here on the thread. It makes me feel cautious of what I say; I am maybe apologetic almost because I don't want to upset anyone. It is interesting though. I expect in real life I do know some atheists but conversations of this sort are very far behind in my history. I have been a Christian 30 years today! Just thought I would share that. Please save your commiserations for my 'deluded' state!

My question to anyone might be - where we can find the common ground? Or can there be one? Have there been any activities where people of faith have worked alongside atheists for the common good?

The closest I can find in my memory banks is of a Chinese Christian who told me the church outside China did not seem to understand the persecution Chinese Christians (and a lot of other people in China, I know) are under. Yet in human rights organisations which were secular groups he found that common ground of understanding.

Oh I had better just say that I sense anger on both sides, the theists and the atheists, so I am in no way making a jab at anyone, I am just saying that iI sense this and as a person who doesn't much like confrontation it makes me feel cautious. And again I am not specifically saying on this thread against others on this thread, I mean against others who have an opposing view outside this thread. Any anger may indeed be justified and yet for me I am keen to find a peaceful path if one exists.

Italian, just to share on your question about where people of all our no faith can agree, I think it happens all of the time in almost every sphere of life. I work in child welfare law and I know there are many Christians, Jews, muslims at last one buddhist, two people who hold traditional Native beliefs and atheists. These differences are nothing compared to out mutual desire to help children who have suffered abuse and neglect. The children have different backgrounds too, but they all deserve our help.
I think many non Christians don't take claims of persecution of Christians very seriously because of the actual power Christian groups and churches gave had and do have in the world. There are still political barriers to getting what you wantbut from a secular perspective it appears Christians complaining about mifromatment is like white men complaining about discrimination. Its vet different to be a powerhouse losing that power than to be a minority who is gaining a teeny tiny foothold in the world. Does that make sense?

Sorry for the typos, my phone isn't being helpful today

Monsterchild that is wonderful to hear, yes, I am pleased theists and atheists are working together and joined in their mutual desire to help kids.

I totally get where you are coming from re persecution. In my mention above I was speaking of the persecution of believers in China (and I know that people of many other faiths are also persecuted too in many counteries). I was thinking of people who might suffer torture or lose their lives, not of people who were n the majority group.

And people of no faith persecuted for political reasons, I am speaking of all that type of persecution.

I didn't spot any typos, monster, mine is full of them and I have no excuse except I am dodging the ironing to get on mumsnet!!

I'm not sure I understand your question Italian, you wondering why Christian groups didn't believe that China was persecuting Christians but secular grouips did, and why that was?

I see the Christians are once again doing a wonderful job of demonstrating why rational people don't believe in gods and why a lot of people object to religious privilege.

There's plenty of common ground for theists and atheists, just not when it comes to the existence of god (obviously?).

One of the interesting things I've noticed about the religious is that they seem to fall generally into two categories (and I'm sure there are exceptions before anyone kicks off!) firstly there are those who simply believe because they are comforted by the idea of an afterlife or an overseeing father figure and secondly, those who genuinely believe that they have experienced god directly and therefore 'know' that he exists. What I find fascinating though is that it is extremely rare that someone with no belief has these 'religious' experiences causing them to convert to religion (and yes, I'm sure you all know someone to whom this has happened in order to make a counter argument). I can be pretty certain that the atheists on this thread will never experience god because whatever it is that the religious think they are experiencing would not be something which would generally convince an atheist. It convinces the religious because they WANT to believe.

Monster no, my question was about areas where atheists and theists work together well, for a common cause and you answered that beautifully. My comment about China was that a long time ago, maybe 20 years ago a Christian Chinese guy was talking about how some Christian groups did not understand about persecution in China but secular human rights groups did. It was for me an interesting moment of understanding. I am not just saddened when Christian groups are persecuted. I was just observing about it and not really asking about it.

Pedro are you saying there are people who are religious, or that way inclinded and then they start to believe in God? Just asking.

Generally the religious already, but those who turn to religion only after an 'experience' of god are rarely atheist, they are likely to be, perhaps, those who are more inclined to be religious in nature.

Is this your experience Pedro or have you read some studies on this?

My experience, I'm offering an opinion (sorry if that wasn't clear).

I'd be very surprised if there were any more than a tiny minority of 'proper atheists' (for want of a much better phrase) who have been converted by an experienced of god.

This Pedro I would imagine is because for you the experience is all one way, from the person's perspective. because I would feel it is/was also down to God, I would see it as perfectly possible for a person to be a total Atheist and then have an experience of God. I would expect that that is the type of thing there is little empirical evidence for.

Anyway, good to chat. I have changed some of my views. Not about God but about atheists!

Yes, you are all teaching me things and I am grateful.

Italian

The Watchmaker analogy is here.

Any tension or anger on the thread has not come from "both sides" - and it's actually only come from one person. I think it's reasonable to express a bit of frustration with someone who raises an issue then resolutely refuses to engage further with it. And there was a rather spiteful personal attack against Seeker who didn't even respond in kind - she just pointed out the offensiveness of it and that she took exception, as we all would have done.

I'm sorry if my analogy of love doesn't suit you or you loath it It's not a question of it not suiting me - it's just a very poor analogy. You tried to advance the argument that love is taken on faith. It's not, which I showed. So the analogy fails at the first hurdle.

The existence of God and various other woo issues are the only things that we take "on faith". We have no use for it in any other area of our lives. Ordinarily we rely on reason and evidence, and we're right to.

You said Love is an emotion I would say that as well as an emotion I think love is an action I said that emotions manifest in behaviour, which would include actions. In any event, behaviour and actions are evident....therefore evidence.

I love Jesus because he first loved me Always assuming he exists/existed, of course.

I would also say I have proof God loves me, but that won't convince you Proof would convince me, since it is, by definition: "Evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement". I suspect you're right, your "proof" wouldn't convince me because it probably wouldn't turn out to be "proof" at all. I'm willing to be proven wrong though.

My argument was not to say we/Christians were better than atheists or Hindus, Muslims, or others, my argument was to say we were not all bad. At times it seems that the weight of evil done in the name of God is poised like a cartoon bolder set to obliterate any good we might do! I do not think that is the case Nobody has said that Christians are all bad, least of all me. But if you're acknowledging that doing good to help people is not unique to Christianity and never has been, then why bring it up at all? If Christians are helping people because they are Christians, then my point stands......would they not bother if they weren't? And if they are doing it because they are simply being decent human beings, then their religious affiliations are neither here nor there.

And why are atheists infinitely more moral? That makes no sense to me We're not - and I didn't say we were. We would be if it was the case that Christians are only doing good because they are Christians. Doing good for it's own sake is clearly more morally sound than doing it because it's the rules of the club you belong to or you want God to be pleased with you.

We know, by the way, that when Christians give up their faith and become atheists, they don't stop doing good things which suggests that it's not really the Christianity that compelled them before so much as simply being someone who cares about others. Christians do themselves something of a misjustice, I think when they put their charitable deeds down to being a Christian.

How can you speak for all atheists or for all their motivations? Well, right back at you. You appear to be speaking for all Christians. You are being quite disingenuous, I think - the point is not what their motivation is but what it is not. It is not for the hope of a heavenly reward or because they want to impress someone in the sky - if it was, then they would not actually be atheists.

Where do you get the 9 times out of 10 statistic from? Ah, so evidence and demonstrating the fact of something does matter then? You won't just take it on faith? Shame.

You're right though - it's not a scientific fact. It's based on my personal experience. But I also think it's common sense.

Critical thinking means the evaluation of evidence. Christianity is not supported by ANY evidence, therefore critical thinking cannot possibly lead a genuinely questing person to believe that it is true. It is only possible to be a Christian if you adopt a faith position, and since critical thinking is the exact opposite of taking something on faith then the one cannot lead to the other.

I also don't think you can know how many Christians have and have not looked at their faith and analyzed it from a critical or neutral position Shall I be honest....even though it'll make you cross? Well, Dr House said it best and I'm awfully sorry, but I agree with him......"If Christians understood reason, there wouldn't be any Christians".

Actually, he and I are being slightly unfair - Christians do understand reason as well as anyone. They just completely ignore it when it comes to believing in their God. Such belief comes from an emotional place, not an intellectual one.

I have been a Christian 30 years today! :)

Have there been any activities where people of faith have worked alongside atheists for the common good? Blimey - of course there have.....and are! The Red Cross is a secular organisation - with atheists, Christians, Muslims etc all working together. Religion, or the lack of it, is irrelevant.

Oh, and I agree with Pedro. My experience is also that the kind of experiences that Christians tend to claim as proof of God would not be enough to convert any atheist, or even make us bat an eyelid, generally.

And I am highly sceptical of devout people who claim they "used to be an atheist". If they were, it can only have been because they never really thought about the issue either way, and so they were still on factory settings.

People who have confirmed their atheism (or gained it) by properly looking at the matter tend to acknowledge and understand the need for evidence, logic and reason. Throwing all of that out of the window to go for "faith" instead seems highly unlikely. Not impossible of course. Nothing is.

Strange though that God generally only proves himself to people who already believe in him and don't need proof. He needs to direct a bit more attention to us annoying rational types. Bring us down a peg or two, eh?

Ellie, I was not talking about tension on the thread between members of the thread, although I have seen this on mumsnet in general, I was talking in general about anger being expressed, I am fairy sure I have seen anger from different quarters and that makes me feel tense. I am explaining myself not pointing fingers at anyone else.

the argument that love is taken on faith No that actions of love are an expression of love and that my faith is built on receiving that love. I am not trying to prove a point, I don't think I will convince you but I must say it as I see it, I try and say what I mean, if you don't agree with me that is fine. I don't think I have fallen at any hurdles, I am not in race. I am trying to help you see things from my point of view just as you are trying to help me see things from your point of view.

Love is a verb as well as a noun and for me evidence of love is evidence. But it could not be put under a microscope in a lab and explored that way.

But the 'proof' I believe has been evidence for some (people of the Christian faith, not all of them but some of them) so it is a form of evidence but an evidence you don't agree with. Which is fine, of course.

The whole doing good argument is just a circular one so let's not go there, (I mean I am not going to because I am off swimming in a minutes), so it seems you don't think all Christians are bad and that is fine by me.

You implied that atheists were more moral because they did things out of the good of their heart where as Christians/people of faith did it for a pat on the head from God. That is what you seemed to be saying, if that is not the case then please forget I said that.
I am not speaking for all Christians, I am sorry if I gave that impression, I can only speak for myself and for those who I know in respect to what I am talking about.

I apologise if what I said about you speaking for all atheists was offensive.

Where do you get the 9 times out of 10 statistic from? Of course evidence is important to me, I have evidence of God?s love for me.... and so the circle goes round... what else can we say about faith or lack of it. Faith for me is about the evidence of my experiences and my faith/belief.

Dr House doesn?t make me cross. I don?t know who he/she is. I am not offended by the thoughts that we are not logical/critical etc. I guess I just feel differently from you and Dr House.

It is good talking to you, despite what you may think some of us Christians do want to learn and think (in a critical way!).

Oh *Ellie, be careful what you wish for.... I am doing a lot of winking around you today Ellie, it is a good sign, it is the sign of friendship on my planet (joke!)