Why Atheism?
by The Aging Hippy
Editor's note: Printed as received.
Why Atheism?
This is a reply to the "Why are you an atheist" question posed on many Atheist/Christian discussion boards and is a compilation of various replies that outline some of the reasons why I and many others are atheists.
I'd like to clarify and expand on a few points about why I became an atheist and left Christianity and religion.
Incidentally, a lot of people misunderstand atheism; it's simply a lack of belief in God/s. Most people don't realise that atheism is the default position when we are born. No one is born a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew, a Jane, a Hindu or as a member of any other religious persuasion. In most cases we learn our faith and beliefs 'at our mother's knee' before our critical facualties are developed. This is another reason why it's so hard to question our faith ~ it forms part of our core beliefs and worldview.
I've also included a few links to pages on and off my site to articles you may find interesting.
When I started to apply reason and logic to my beliefs I found that the God of the Old Testament looks a great deal like the people who invented Him. He has a face, hands, feet, nostrils, bowels, likes the smell of burnt offerings.
He has the same human desires and emotions: He hates, loves, feels anger and compassion, has a chosen people and plays favourites. He's often angry, gets enraged easily, swears, pouts, destroys thing, shouts, deceives and often rests.
He had the same world outlook and the same beliefs about nature as the people who made Him. This God thought that the sun revolved around the earth, and that a day could be made longer by simply stopping the sun for a while.
He also seemed to have either a very earthy sense of humour or the very human trait of wanting to kick a man when he's down. Have a look at First Samual,chapters 5 & 6 at God's golden hemorrhoids.
Over the following centuries this God's anthropomorphic origin was downplayed as various influential leaders and church councils accorded Him a more and more transcendental nature, resulting in todays Chistian God who's omni-everything nature is self-contradictory, a Christian belief that 1+1+1=1 and an idea of attonment that is ludicrous.
Faith in some areas of life is commendable but when faith becomes the philosophical equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying"nananana" perhaps it's time to re-examine it.
Another point that made me think about Christianity is evolution and how our species developed. As there was no Adam and Eve, there was no Garden of Eden, no talking snake, no Original Sin, no Fall of Man, no reason God to appear as His own Son and be used for appeasement for His own mistakes on the cross. Even the Catholic Church has accepted evolution as proven.
Plus, there are thousands of differing religious belief structures which are more or less mutually exclusive and for the uncritical mind equally believable. Some of these belief structures do not involve deities. The major point here being which one? And if one, why one?
As history has progressed, the role of Gods has decreased as understanding has replaced supernatural explanations for natural events. If there is no God, and we did truly make Him up, then one would think it likely that in our stage of development, the hypothetical God would only be
responsible for those things which we do not currently understand. In other words, the remaining role of God or Gods in our modern society will only be necessary for the "possibly" supernatural parts of existence, and their roles will continue to decrees as time progress ~ the 'God of the Gaps' theory. This is what's happening.
2000 years ago God/s were necessary to explain lightning, but now we know lightning come from electrons in the clouds and the ground interacting. I do not see why this trend will not continue, as it has for hundreds of years now, until understanding will eventually replace all of the hypothetical God's reasons for existence, such as what happens after death and the origins of the universe. As the gaps in our knowledge decrease so does our need to believe that "God did it".
The Bible is not a reliable guide to Christ’s teachings. Mark,possibly the oldest of the Gospels, was written at least 30 years after Christ’s death, and the newest of them might have been written more than 200 years after his death. These texts have been amended, translated, and re-translated so often that it’s extremely difficult to gauge the accuracy of current editions—even aside from the matter of the accuracy of texts written decades or centuries after the death of their subject. This is such a problem that the Jesus Seminar, a colloquium of over 200 Protestant Gospel scholars mostly employed at religious colleges and seminaries, undertook in 1985 a multi-year investigation into the historicity of the statements and deeds attributed to Jesus in the New Testament. They concluded that only 18% of the statements and 16% of the deeds attributed to Jesus had a high likelihood of being historically accurate. So, in a very real sense fundamentalists—who claim to believe in the literal truth of the Bible—are not followers of Jesus Christ; rather, they are followers of those who, decades or centuries later, put words in his mouth.
I don't know if you've read the Gospel of Thomas, one of the books that didn't make it into the bible but it shows a Jesus very different from the idea most Christians have of Him.
Another thing about the bible that it is anti-intellectual and anti-scientific. For over a millennium bible based Christianity arrested the development of science and scientific thinking. In Christendom, from the time of Augustine until the Renaissance, systematic investigation of the natural world was restricted to theological investigation—the interpretation of biblical passages, the gleaning of clues from the lives of the saints, etc.; there was no direct observation and interpretation of natural processes, because that was considered a useless pursuit, as all knowledge resided in scripture. The results of this are well known: scientific knowledge advanced hardly an inch in the over 1000 years from the rise of orthodox Christianity in the fourth century to the 1500s, and the populace was mired in the deepest squalor and ignorance, living in dire fear of the supernatural—believing in paranormal explanations for the most ordinary natural events.
In Alexandria in the year 415, the great female scientist and head of the Alexandria Library, Hypatia, was beaten to death by Catholic monks who considered her scientific work heretical. They then burnt down the library ~ the greatest depository of books, literature and the acculated wisdom of centuries and helped to bring in the 'Dark Ages'. Just think where humanity could be now if it wasn't for the Dark Ages.
Check what happened to Galileo for going against the teachings in the bible by suggesting that the earth was not the centre of the universe. The same pressure would have been put on Darwin but by then the Church was waning in power. In 1996 the Church accepted the truth of Galileo work and forgave him for being right.
There is not one, solid Christian dogma or faith. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia there is close on 34,000 seperate denominations, each insisting that their interpretation is the right one and having discussed religion with many theists most of them cannot answer the most simple inconsistencies in their belief systems. Most of them make great sacrifice for their belief systems and therefore undergo dissonance when confronted with ideological impasses. This leads to a inclination to not think about the inconsistencies, it's better to bury the dissonance and use avoidance behavior rather than confront the dissonance and move your belief system accordingly, which may cause much extra dissonance.
However, ardent followers of one religion or sect have no difficulties in seeing and pointing out the absurdities of other religions while remaining totally oblivious to the absurdities of their own. If the could apply the same reasoning and logic to their own beliefs there would be a lot more atheists.
A couple of examples: Mormons say that Jesus was transported to America after the resurrection but if you ask a Buddhist about it they will say that they don't believe in the resurrection.
Muslim suicide bombers believe that they are martyrs and will enter a paradise complete with 79 virgins. Ask a Lutherian if they belive that the bombers are in heaven.
Or how about the Aztecs killing children, skinning virgins or cutting out hearts to satisfy an invisible feathered serpent. Do you believe in invisible feathered serpents?
So, if most believers realize that other religions are false, why do they think think that their own brand is any different. Why not take the final step and admit that if other peoples beliefs are false and the gods they worship are imaginary it's logical to assume that their faith is based on similar, imaginary grounds?
A lot of testimony about the existence of a supreme rightness or God comes from Christians and Muslims who claim to have felt God due to this spiritual ecstasy they had felt during a "religious experience". However, I also have felt similar feelings to what they described as I sit upon a country hill at night underneath a cloudless sky and can "feel" Earth as a giant spaceship speeding through the Galaxy. I become so overwhelmed by the immensity and beauty of it all that I stare for hours. However, I still understand the basic principles behind how the whole of the universe exists, and not having a god there takes nothing away from its beauty.
If there is a God, how did such a being come into existence? The Big Bang Theory is, on the surface, a remarkably simple idea. However, I have heard no such ideas about the creation of God. As to the concept of God being eternal, this concept can easily be applied to the universe just as flawlessly since no testable evidence is ever offered to back any clams of God's origins.
Some believe that belief in an all-powerful being is intellectual weakness as is the requirement for an afterlife to avoid the fear of death. I think it's a form of intellectual laziness. It's so much easier to say "God did it" rather than looking for more reasonable explainations.
Much of the work of religion seems to be based on guesswork or pure creativity. The age of the Earth, the age of Homo sapiens, history as it happened over the thousands of years seem to differ from religion to religion and, most importantly, differ from the objective findings of archeologists, geologists, biologists etc.
Why make a distinction between Santa Claus, Easter Bunny, God, the Cookie Monster, or distinctly pink invisible unicorns. If you belive in something supernatural by faith, why no every other supernatural thing?
The very concept of an omnipotent and or perfect being is logically flawed. Although logic can not be used to prove a negative, it can be use to disproof something that cannot stand up to basic logical rules.
Religions have played their role in history. They were one of the major cultural influences in uniting peoples into close-nit communities. It enabled the survival of the species through some of it's toughest tests. But we have reached adolescence now and we must give up our childhood fantasies. We must quickly reach maturity before we become another teenage drink/driving or drug overdose or suicide statistic in the Universe's intelligent race survival book. I'd like to be a part of the maturing process not the part that holds on to childhood days.
Since the beginning, religions have attempted to make predictions about the future and have been invariably wrong. Despite this appalling track- record, religious leaders continually predict the date of some Armageddon or future mundane event. Some of the evangelical types have told their flock, "God has told me to raise 3 million by next week". This is blatant fleecing and nothing more.
Believing in anything with a conviction that precludes questioning isbeyond my capacity. I simply can't do it. I have an inquiring mind and I have found my beliefs to be wrong before so why not again in the future. To believe beyond question in a supreme, all-loving deity, or anything else for that matter, seems absurd to me for the mere reason that it asks you to suspend reason.
Too often in the past has religion been used as an excuse for the great evils of human beings. Kings have promised the subjects that they rule by divine right or that they themselves are descendant from Gods and are therefore Gods themselves. Torture, genocide, racism, slavery, polygamy, invasions, mass rape, and war, have all been justified under the auspices of divine authorization. This represents to me that religion is a powerful tool used by those smitten with power for unscrupulous ends, I do not want to be associated with such vile acts any more than being human already implicates me.
Rules in the bible forbid Christians from questioning god, why would a all powerful god forbid curiosity, which He Himself supposedly placed in human beings as part of their nature?
Too often the church does backflips when they make errors. If the church hierarchy were truly led by a divinity, as most claim, they would not make such glaring errors. It is because of this desire to maintain a divine public image that the church is loath to admit to mistakes until the mistake is shown to be ludicrously obvious e.g. Galileo, evolution, etc.
If someone point out the problems with each individual denomination under the Christian umbrella, Christians will often defend by saying "Oh well, THEY'RE not Real Christians, but my church or I AM". This applies almost 100% of the times when talking about church history with Protestants, "The Catholics are more of a idol worshiping cult, THEY'RE NOT TRUE CHRISTIANS". This is so common that for each claim of true Christianity there is probably over a thousand other denominations chastising them as not real Christians. These "real Christians" all act according to their Very own doctrine. It is prudent that Christians learn to accept the fact that social terms of this nature are not defined by the people who experience them but by fair observers. Christians should abide by the "common" definitions that's used by all peoples, and not choose to make up what they personally think a "Christian" are or are not.
Church teachings are sexist,judgmental, arrogant, inconsistent, homophobic, filled with authoritative commands rather than rational explanations and are therefore not conducive to learning or a good life philosophy.
The Bible has literally thousands of ambiguities, inconsistencies, falsehoods, and ascriptions to God of horrific, puerile behavior. Anyone who does not acknowledge that this is true really is not reading the Bible
seriously or has a major mental block in the way of them seeing it. Besides that there are multiple versions of this book. It is constantly being updated ("rewritten") to suit the leaders of the church responsible for the particular version that produce it. Most of the times various Churches change the contents of the Bible by false and/or inaccurate translations, but sometimes it's done outright, such as the Nicaea Ecumenical Council circa 300 CE.
Excuses that Christians offer for Bible inconsistencies are extremely weak. If you do not think the bible is inconsistent, type "bible contradictions" into Google.
The anthropocentric view is a dangerous view for humans to have at this point of time. Humans, even some non-theists, believe for some reason that the universe is here for them and that we will not be destroyed because there is some purpose. This abrogates responsibility. In order for our species to survive, and personally I think that this would be a good eventuality, we must realize that the universe is as ignorant of us as any other piece of space dust and cares naught whether we propagate and fill the universe or extinguish in a nuclear blase. We are responsible for our own survival. We cannot look to some all-powerful Daddy to come in, and save our self-righteous butts, especially as, according to the bible He was quite willing to wipe out everything with a great flood.
Religions promote an anthropocentric view, to the detriment of our species. It is for this reason (not this reason alone keep in mind) that I oppose the spread Christianity and any other anthropocentric religion.
If God had written the holy word, why did he write some of it allegorically and other parts literally without marking the allegorical parts clearly to distinguish them from the literal sections? So many automatically interpret the verses in which ever way that will suit their propose with out any kind of proof what so ever ~ even religious reasons. Basically, if the Bibles are meant to be a manual for life, they are extremely poorly written and are highly confusing and are unclear on the most basic points. I am sure a God could do a much better job. It makes much more sense that they are not the works of a God but are the works of people attempting to keep control of their flock.
Any single one of these reasons can shore up a good argument against religion, but in collaboration they shore up their strength in order to make only one option available to me in my choice between theism and atheism.
Here's a poem for you:
God's will
It was that phrase, amongst others, plus the mind-set behind it that helped me,many years ago, to first question, then reavaluate and finally abandon my Christian faith.
From Tess ~ The Happy Humanist
An airplane faltered, then fell from the sky;
Eighty-nine died. A collective sigh.
"It's God's will"
A terrible flood, but all were saved
by rescuers strong, fearless and brave.
"It's God's will"
A child was starved, beaten, then died.
They buried her deep, and adults cried.
"It's God's will".
A little one found ~ he wasn't quite dead.
The people thanked heaven, and then of course said,
"It's God's will".
Millions can suffer in earth's darkest holes,
Yet millions keep saying that God's in control.
The greatest good, or the greatest ill,
"Why don't you know? It's all God's will".
"God's will" is a phrase they mindlessly use,
So no matter what happens, God can't lose!
Absurd contradictions their intellects kill.
We atheists work with a human will.
Sifted through reason, the finest of screens,
This is what God talk really means:
All of us born to a world cold and stark;
Most remain "children crying in the dark"
Author's website: http://worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/
Original Article: http://worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz56.shtml
Author's e-mail: aginghippy1@ntlworld.com
Editor's Comment: The orignal article site may be found above. It is recommended, in as much as it contains many linked keywords that do not appear here (due to my laziness).
Back