Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Atheists at what age did you discovered that there wasn't a "God"or that any deity did not exist? Was it through a life changing experience, your parents, your understanding of science, etc? Also, did you get ostracize or rejected by your family and friends once you told them that you were an Atheist? Have you ever suffer discrimination because of your belief or lack of?

I have yet to discover there is no god -- that would be impossible - like discovering there is no Zeus. I stopped believing in god as an adult when I learned about religion from an academic point of view. And of course, I never believed in Zeus. I was told he was a mythical character from the beginning -- a god people believed in long ago, but not anymore.

I learned there are many gods out there that people still believe in and that in some cases, e.g., Christianity, there are strong punishments for not believing (hell) and strong rewards for believing (heaven) but both are ideas, not actual places. And while there is no way to prove that God doesn't exist, there is no way to prove he doesn't. I learned lots of other things but those were the main reasons for no longer believing.

Speaking as a theist, I think this is the most sensible post in the thread and I agree that atheism is a system of belief, or organized non-belief, rather than discovering a scientific fact.

Also, there are still people who believe in Zeus, but that's neither here nor there.

+1. I'm another theist who has no patience with evangelical theology or posting in caps. I agree, however, that OP's concept of "discovering" atheism rests on the premise that it's a system of belief--in the non-existence of a God--that rests on something unprovable, i.e. the non-existence of God. The fact that atheism has no established tenets for how to behave doesn't take away from that.

This--inability to prove the non-existence of God--is the reason some atheist thinkers like Dawkins describe themselves as agnostic instead of atheist. I think Dawkins has said he's 99% atheist but there's always that 1% uncertainty so he's technically agnostic.

Just a small correction: many Christians don't actually believe that non-believers will be punished.

Poster deemed 'reasonable" here -- I don't think you're in a position to determine what OP meant by "discovering" atheism. I took it to mean, as op described, how different people came to be atheists. And as we've seen by the responses, it has happened in different ways. This is something I had already learned from meeting other atheists, but can see it would be a question for someone thinking about atheism for the first time, from the point of view of a believer.

As for Dawkins, he's being precise in a way most atheists and agnostics are not, in part, I think, because they (and most people) don't really understand the terms. Briefly, agnostic means not knowing and atheist means not believing. It does NOT mean "knowing" there is no god. Regarding any supernatural being, humans technically can't know for sure, because such beings are invisible.

Atheists don't believe in god the way they don't believe in other invisible beings, like fairies and gremlins and Santa. I know it offends religious believers to have god lumped in with that group, but being invisible and impossible to prove using the scientific method are the common elements of supernatural beings, irrespective of their importance in society. Atheists reject all of them. Technically, atheists are "agnostic atheists" - they don't know and they don't believe. And some will call themselves that. Some people who call themselves agnostic feel more comfortable in the "don't know" category. It doesn't sound as harsh and may imply that they are searching for god -- and maybe some of them are.

Atheism as been improperly defined as "Knowing there is no God." I don't know one atheist who thinks this way. Most are science-oriented and realize that God can't be proven. But atheists may also be as unmotivated to disprove god’s existence as religious people are unmotivated to disprove Santa’s existence. Speaking for myself, believing that god is real is as farfetched as believing fairy tales are real.

I suspect the idea of atheist certainty is sometimes taught in church (along with atheists being mean, bitter and without morals). It's easy to see how someone who doesn't believe in god but who is kind, pleasant and moral might prefer the term agnostic over atheist. I prefer the “atheist” and I know some people who formerly called themselves agnostic, are now using the term atheist. It's more precise and helps to show people that atheists do not fit the stereotype that society has placed on us.

You write that you "don't know one atheist who thinks" that atheism is "knowing there is no God." I'm not quibbling that you might not think that way, but just a quick glance through this thread will show posters who ask when you "discovered" there is no God, or that they have "100 percent certainty" that there's no God, and I've seen many posts on other threads that express this lack of belief in similar terms.

Also, your efforts to connect lack of belief in a Christian God with fairies and Santa and Zeus -- that it's all a lack of belief in all of it -- doesn't seem quite genuine to me. I've been reading this message board for a long time, and the Muslim threads almost never (if at all, but I can't recall one) invite atheist comment. I've never seen an atheist weigh in on the pagan threads. Or the Hindu ones. Or anything at all about Santa Claus. Again, there may be a rare instance, so I don't want to state it categorically, but I just can't bring to mind any times I've seen that.

But the Christian threads? Open season. So it sounds a bit magnanimous here in what you wrote, and I'm not impugning you if you actually feel that way, but it seems to me that puts you in a vast majority (but I bet even you don't respond on the Muslim posts or the pagan posts).

As a Christian, it's our worldview that this is because the Christian God calls for a moral accountability to someone other than self. Most of the Christians I know and have as friends struggle with many things that we have faith are sins because the Bible tells us that. It's not because we feel superior or want to beat people over the heads. In fact, many of the most sanctimonious people I encounter are just as puritanical from a secular perspective as many Christians are from a religious one. The difference with Christian belief in sin is that our guidepost comes -- or should come -- from the LORD. You might be a moral atheist, but the Bible says that none of us is righteous, and it's the acceptance of this as a fact for ourselves that leads Christians to love God, out of the mercy that He showed us in provided forgiveness through Christ. I'm sure there are Christians who believe out of a desire for "fire insurance," as one PP put it, but many of us love God because we know He's better than us but loves us anyway.

But for a moral atheist? What is your guidepost? How do you know it doesn't truly serve yourself rather than others? And when you fail, isn't it nice that there's no judgment for you for not acting morally toward others? A truly Biblically oriented Christian doesn't think he gets off free when he sins, and the Bible doesn't teach that. So we submit to the law of God and ask Him to help us do what he wants from us. Again, some of us are really bad at that -- and some say they're Christians when they're really not -- but that won't excuse even moral atheists from accounting for their own actions to the God who created them.

Anonymous wrote:PS -- I know some believers don't think atheists will be punished, but their religion - at least Christianity - teaches internal punishment.

Internal or eternal?

Eternal damnation is how I was raised, a very literal heaven with pearly gates and streets of gold and a literal hell with hellfire and brimstone, wailing and gnashing of teeth. But I've also heard taught that hell is just the absence of god.

Anonymous wrote:Like others, I never had a lightbulb, a-ha moment. I just never believed. I didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance in elementary school because I would not pledge anything "under g_d."

But, as you can see from my spelling of g_d, I did grow up Jewish - I identify as a cultural jew, and also have some habits or superstitions that I hold onto. I don't dislike religion or religious people - I've just never felt a connection either with the beliefs or feelings of there being a higher power.

Most of my Jewish friends are actually atheist, yet find find a strong connection with the community and find peace in the traditions.

I've started to identify as culturally Christian and model that mindset...but it doesn't work as well. Maybe if I was raised Catholic?

PS -- I know some believers don't think atheists will be punished, but their religion - at least Christianity - teaches internal punishment.

Like others, I never had a lightbulb, a-ha moment. I just never believed. I didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance in elementary school because I would not pledge anything "under g_d."

But, as you can see from my spelling of g_d, I did grow up Jewish - I identify as a cultural jew, and also have some habits or superstitions that I hold onto. I don't dislike religion or religious people - I've just never felt a connection either with the beliefs or feelings of there being a higher power.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Atheists at what age did you discovered that there wasn't a "God"or that any deity did not exist? Was it through a life changing experience, your parents, your understanding of science, etc? Also, did you get ostracize or rejected by your family and friends once you told them that you were an Atheist? Have you ever suffer discrimination because of your belief or lack of?

I have yet to discover there is no god -- that would be impossible - like discovering there is no Zeus. I stopped believing in god as an adult when I learned about religion from an academic point of view. And of course, I never believed in Zeus. I was told he was a mythical character from the beginning -- a god people believed in long ago, but not anymore.

I learned there are many gods out there that people still believe in and that in some cases, e.g., Christianity, there are strong punishments for not believing (hell) and strong rewards for believing (heaven) but both are ideas, not actual places. And while there is no way to prove that God doesn't exist, there is no way to prove he doesn't. I learned lots of other things but those were the main reasons for no longer believing.

Speaking as a theist, I think this is the most sensible post in the thread and I agree that atheism is a system of belief, or organized non-belief, rather than discovering a scientific fact.

Also, there are still people who believe in Zeus, but that's neither here nor there.

+1. I'm another theist who has no patience with evangelical theology or posting in caps. I agree, however, that OP's concept of "discovering" atheism rests on the premise that it's a system of belief--in the non-existence of a God--that rests on something unprovable, i.e. the non-existence of God. The fact that atheism has no established tenets for how to behave doesn't take away from that.

This--inability to prove the non-existence of God--is the reason some atheist thinkers like Dawkins describe themselves as agnostic instead of atheist. I think Dawkins has said he's 99% atheist but there's always that 1% uncertainty so he's technically agnostic.

Just a small correction: many Christians don't actually believe that non-believers will be punished.

Poster deemed 'reasonable" here -- I don't think you're in a position to determine what OP meant by "discovering" atheism. I took it to mean, as op described, how different people came to be atheists. And as we've seen by the responses, it has happened in different ways. This is something I had already learned from meeting other atheists, but can see it would be a question for someone thinking about atheism for the first time, from the point of view of a believer.

As for Dawkins, he's being precise in a way most atheists and agnostics are not, in part, I think, because they (and most people) don't really understand the terms. Briefly, agnostic means not knowing and atheist means not believing. It does NOT mean "knowing" there is no god. Regarding any supernatural being, humans technically can't know for sure, because such beings are invisible.

Atheists don't believe in god the way they don't believe in other invisible beings, like fairies and gremlins and Santa. I know it offends religious believers to have god lumped in with that group, but being invisible and impossible to prove using the scientific method are the common elements of supernatural beings, irrespective of their importance in society. Atheists reject all of them. Technically, atheists are "agnostic atheists" - they don't know and they don't believe. And some will call themselves that. Some people who call themselves agnostic feel more comfortable in the "don't know" category. It doesn't sound as harsh and may imply that they are searching for god -- and maybe some of them are.

Atheism as been improperly defined as "Knowing there is no God." I don't know one atheist who thinks this way. Most are science-oriented and realize that God can't be proven. But atheists may also be as unmotivated to disprove god’s existence as religious people are unmotivated to disprove Santa’s existence. Speaking for myself, believing that god is real is as farfetched as believing fairy tales are real.

I suspect the idea of atheist certainty is sometimes taught in church (along with atheists being mean, bitter and without morals). It's easy to see how someone who doesn't believe in god but who is kind, pleasant and moral might prefer the term agnostic over atheist. I prefer the “atheist” and I know some people who formerly called themselves agnostic, are now using the term atheist. It's more precise and helps to show people that atheists do not fit the stereotype that society has placed on us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Atheists at what age did you discovered that there wasn't a "God"or that any deity did not exist? Was it through a life changing experience, your parents, your understanding of science, etc? Also, did you get ostracize or rejected by your family and friends once you told them that you were an Atheist? Have you ever suffer discrimination because of your belief or lack of?

I have yet to discover there is no god -- that would be impossible - like discovering there is no Zeus. I stopped believing in god as an adult when I learned about religion from an academic point of view. And of course, I never believed in Zeus. I was told he was a mythical character from the beginning -- a god people believed in long ago, but not anymore.

I learned there are many gods out there that people still believe in and that in some cases, e.g., Christianity, there are strong punishments for not believing (hell) and strong rewards for believing (heaven) but both are ideas, not actual places. And while there is no way to prove that God doesn't exist, there is no way to prove he doesn't. I learned lots of other things but those were the main reasons for no longer believing.

Speaking as a theist, I think this is the most sensible post in the thread and I agree that atheism is a system of belief, or organized non-belief, rather than discovering a scientific fact.

Also, there are still people who believe in Zeus, but that's neither here nor there.

+1. I'm another theist who has no patience with evangelical theology or posting in caps. I agree, however, that OP's concept of "discovering" atheism rests on the premise that it's a system of belief--in the non-existence of a God--that rests on something unprovable, i.e. the non-existence of God. The fact that atheism has no established tenets for how to behave doesn't take away from that.

This--inability to prove the non-existence of God--is the reason some atheist thinkers like Dawkins describe themselves as agnostic instead of atheist. I think Dawkins has said he's 99% atheist but there's always that 1% uncertainty so he's technically agnostic.

Just a small correction: many Christians don't actually believe that non-believers will be punished.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an atheist country (USSR), flirted with the idea of being religious when we moved here, but it never clicked.

I don't discount some sort of higher power/things we don't understand, but the idea that there is a human-like God "up there" who requires adoration and obedience seems laughable to me. Either there is a God that is all-powerful and all-knowing, in which case why would he/she even bother to care about individual humans, in which case in turn why would I bother to care about him/her, OR this deity is somehow not all-powerful and dependent on us for existence, but that's not what most religions teach us, so it seems like a weird logical lapse.

In any case, I take comfort in the material world, in treating other people around us with respect and humanity, not in the idea that there is something out there that personally cares about me, yet has created a world full of suffering and injustices.

PP, may I respectfully (and I mean that) suggest that one does not "flirt with the idea of being religious." Perhaps that is where you got off on the wrong foot.

And how sad to have to take comfort in the material world.

Not pp. but you are quite clearly projecting your own fears and anxieties on atheists - or at least this atheist in particular.

It was incredibly freeing and liberating for me when I finally acknowledged that there were no gods, no religion, and no afterlife. It made me feel comfort in my own capacity to try and have greater control over my life. It brought me peace that while there are some unsavory people (due to their own choosing, not blaming it on "the devil"), there are also many wonderful kind, generous, and loving people - of their own choosing and volition (not because of some god). People are capable of creating a tremendous amount of good in this world - we're complicit beings in our life. And that's all we have- the here and the now - so it encourages me to make it count in *this* one life.

It was hugely freeing to me to come to this realization, and brought me a tremendous sense of peace. Not sadness in the slight!

This is my experience as well.

I take Christians at their word that they experience peace and joy in their faith. However, I see their faith as a chosen practice. and there are many practices that lead to a state of joy and peace. It's the practice of letting go. For Christians the letting go means letting God handle it, for Buddhist it's letting go of the attachments that lead to suffering. Nearly all religions share similar guidelines of how to go about doing that, which to me shows the common thread of humanity. When we tap into that, however we get there, we can find peace.

The difference with religions is that the consequences of not accepting the path comes with stiff consequences. Which begs the question for me, how much is belief really just fire insurance?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an atheist country (USSR), flirted with the idea of being religious when we moved here, but it never clicked.

I don't discount some sort of higher power/things we don't understand, but the idea that there is a human-like God "up there" who requires adoration and obedience seems laughable to me. Either there is a God that is all-powerful and all-knowing, in which case why would he/she even bother to care about individual humans, in which case in turn why would I bother to care about him/her, OR this deity is somehow not all-powerful and dependent on us for existence, but that's not what most religions teach us, so it seems like a weird logical lapse.

In any case, I take comfort in the material world, in treating other people around us with respect and humanity, not in the idea that there is something out there that personally cares about me, yet has created a world full of suffering and injustices.

PP, may I respectfully (and I mean that) suggest that one does not "flirt with the idea of being religious." Perhaps that is where you got off on the wrong foot.

And how sad to have to take comfort in the material world.

Not pp. but you are quite clearly projecting your own fears and anxieties on atheists - or at least this atheist in particular.

It was incredibly freeing and liberating for me when I finally acknowledged that there were no gods, no religion, and no afterlife. It made me feel comfort in my own capacity to try and have greater control over my life. It brought me peace that while there are some unsavory people (due to their own choosing, not blaming it on "the devil"), there are also many wonderful kind, generous, and loving people - of their own choosing and volition (not because of some god). People are capable of creating a tremendous amount of good in this world - we're complicit beings in our life. And that's all we have- the here and the now - so it encourages me to make it count in *this* one life.

It was hugely freeing to me to come to this realization, and brought me a tremendous sense of peace. Not sadness in the slight!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was 9.

I saw my parents decorate and wrap gifts for us during the holidays that year. There was always a "Santa Claus" is coming and you better be good or else you won't get presents theme and then I found the gifts and realize my parents were doing it. And when I realized that adults were putting in so much effort into making "Santa Claus" real- including the concept that only believers get presents- I asked my Sunday school teacher about it. In class. In front of everyone. Loudly.

And the question wasn't whether Santa was real, but whether the efforts in making us believe in Santa was different than with the efforts in making us believe in Jesus. The teachers weren't able to answer this question. She just said both Jesus and Santa were testaments of goodness and faith.

And therefore - by a lack of an answer to how they were different confirmed the lie by equating them with goodness. And also told a young girl that it's okay to lie for the greater good.

Which as we know by the New Testament, is not true. Hypocrisy and lies are hated by god.

So I just lost it and told my dad that I didn't want to celebrate Christmas anymore or go to church. When he asked why and I told him, he told me that we would still celebrate Christmas as a family but with no church. But I wasn't allowed to tell my little brother, who also figured it out later from someone else.

I got tons of presents every year thereafter, even as a heathen, FWIW. Nothing changed but we did have more fun as a family- just no mention of god. We aren't allowed to talk about our lack of churchgoing with grandma though.

So sad that a probably well-meaning teacher made such a careless, false remark that set you on this path, PP.

I thought the Sunday school teacher reacted pretty well to what must have been an unexpected and tricky question. The Santa and God stories DO have goodness in common. The teacher was non-specific in a way that wouldn't shake the faith of kids who believed in God and Santa, but wouldn't fool a kid who didn't. As for the "path" that pp was set on -- sounds like it worked out fine for her family. No more pretending to each other about their beliefs, while protecting Grandma and little bro -- until he figured it out on his own.

Santa Claus questioner here.

I gave a very abbreviated synopsis of the Sunday school teachers response and what happened that day. She really did try but was caught by quote about lying and the comparison of Santa and Jesus- most kids don't ask how the faith/belief in Santa is different from the faith in Jesus. Or if a belief in a lie results in gods hate.

As for my path, I volunteer, fundraise and support charities including those run by churches. My kids went to christian preschools. And they started questioning God and Santa Claus at about 7 or so. And I did what my dad did- I refused to lie to my kids and told them them that their belief is theirs to choose but being kind and good- the prevention of unnecessary human suffering- is a commonality in life. They chose goodness over god.

I still believe the validity of certain lessons in the Bible and think it would be a comfort to go back. I put my faith in good works- because we have been so lucky in our lives.I teach my children to be kind and gentle. To value others. To recycle. To be good stewards of our planet. I try to do what Jesus would do without the fear of eternal damnation- because that is too much like the Santa Claus lie. Instead I try to be charitable to others, lead a good altruistic life and I read the Bible once a week now because it's fun to quote it.

But I do not believe in God or Santa Claus. I love Christmas and family time. Honestly, if corruption and hypocrisy didn't run amok in religion I would be Christian still. But for now, I will try to be good and do good in the precious life I have been given.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in a pretty non religious place and no one I knew really took religion or god seriously, in fact it was weird if you did, and it still a functioning society with laws and justice etc. I find all the current religious ideas of god very lacking. I used to want to be religious, but now I'm very much at peace as an atheist. like the PP I find the universe/nature awe-inspiring.

This is pretty much me. I had a close friend in middle school who was mildly religious and I joined her at church a few times out of curiosity and also went on a youth group trip. I liked the sense of community but never bought into the "faith" side. Around that same time I had some extended family members join a "born again" church and to me it they seemed like they went mad. Even now I really don't understand some of their actions. And they've been very hateful to me and other members of my family.

PP here - I can relate to that. Praying in tongues the whole bit, raving on about sin and how god will punish us all for our sins and how every natural event is because god is angry...yeah. it seems very odd to me too.

that said, I've known some religious people in my life who are fantastic people.

Well...

1. The speaking in tongues thing as it's practiced in pentecostal churches is not modeled on anything biblically. You can see the references to it in Acts as speaking a known language. This is not what is practiced in this strain of Christianity.
2. God will indeed punish unforgiven sin, but He gave us a way to be forgiven through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. However, Christians are told to judge fellow believers, because believers are both a living temple of God and because they are a testimony of their belief. But we are not told to judge unbelievers. You can see this in 1 Corinthians 5:11-12. We are all sinners, and Christians are told to offer the good news of Christ's forgiveness, not condemnation.
3. Jesus said bad things will happen in this world, but he cautioned people against thinking that everything is a judgment, as in Luke 13:1-5.

The problem is that many believers haven't learned Christian theology enough to represent it at all points. We are supposed to learn and know this so we can be good witnesses for the faith. But the solution is not to not believe but to learn what Christianity truly teaches.

I assume this is the reason that Trump enjoyed 80% of the evangelical vote?

I know, this is not a political threat...I'm sorry to bring it up. I promise I am not making assumptions about how you personally vote, PP. It's just I'm the atheist that great up evangelical (though it was called "fundamentalist" in the 90s) and so I do have a solid base of knowledge about what the Bible teaches. A Christian's life is their testimony and the strongest witness to the "truth" of the Bible. I still believe that, actually. In that the way one acts is a testament to what is in their hearts. And I do believe the message of Christ is worthy of following, I just lack the faith part.

And so with that, I am absolutely disgusted and appalled at the marriage of politics and modern American Christianity. It's not all Christians, obviously, but it's nearly all that I grew up knowing. And their testimony of late has made me even more at peace with state of nonbelief.

PP, I don't know you or what is in your heart. But as you are in an atheist here representing Christianity, I just need to make sure you understand how Christians are being perceived.

This is a nice, reasonable response. My belief is that we should put our trust in the LORD, not in men. I didn't vote in this last election. Both candidates were extremely distasteful to me. It was disheartening to see evangelical leaders stand up publicly with Trump, but it would also have been disheartening to see them stand up publicly with Clinton. But not everyone who professes a faith is a faithful disciple of that faith, or even genuine in their belief. I'm not judging them, or anyone else. Christians will indeed answer to Christ for how they lived out their faith here on Earth. But doing so poorly again reflects poorly on them, or it shows a lack of spiritual maturity. What it doesn't mean is that Christianity isn't true. We're all hypocrites to some extent. No one faithfully lives out their convictions at all times, and we should have humility about that in ourselves and not forget that about ourselves when we look down on others.

But if you look at the Gospel message of the Bible, our salvation is not based on how well we do being good or not being bad; it's based on whether we have faith in Christ. So it's good to focus on our faith and not worry so much about politics. We have to vote our consciences, and sometimes there are bad choices on both sides. Picking the lesser of two evils doesn't make you a bad Christian, but putting your faith in politicians might.

Different PP - the above is a nice, reasonable response too, describing a Christian perspective. It doesn't apply to atheists who don't believe in the Lord so therefore would not place trust in him. Atheists also would not look to the Bible for guidance and don't seek salvation, which is another concept in which they don't believe.

She was responding to me and even while we have different perspectives I can respect where she is coming from.

"different pp" here -- yes, I know and understand. I did not intend to speak for you. This is an open forum. Anyone can respond to a post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in a pretty non religious place and no one I knew really took religion or god seriously, in fact it was weird if you did, and it still a functioning society with laws and justice etc. I find all the current religious ideas of god very lacking. I used to want to be religious, but now I'm very much at peace as an atheist. like the PP I find the universe/nature awe-inspiring.

This is pretty much me. I had a close friend in middle school who was mildly religious and I joined her at church a few times out of curiosity and also went on a youth group trip. I liked the sense of community but never bought into the "faith" side. Around that same time I had some extended family members join a "born again" church and to me it they seemed like they went mad. Even now I really don't understand some of their actions. And they've been very hateful to me and other members of my family.

PP here - I can relate to that. Praying in tongues the whole bit, raving on about sin and how god will punish us all for our sins and how every natural event is because god is angry...yeah. it seems very odd to me too.

that said, I've known some religious people in my life who are fantastic people.

Well...

1. The speaking in tongues thing as it's practiced in pentecostal churches is not modeled on anything biblically. You can see the references to it in Acts as speaking a known language. This is not what is practiced in this strain of Christianity.
2. God will indeed punish unforgiven sin, but He gave us a way to be forgiven through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. However, Christians are told to judge fellow believers, because believers are both a living temple of God and because they are a testimony of their belief. But we are not told to judge unbelievers. You can see this in 1 Corinthians 5:11-12. We are all sinners, and Christians are told to offer the good news of Christ's forgiveness, not condemnation.
3. Jesus said bad things will happen in this world, but he cautioned people against thinking that everything is a judgment, as in Luke 13:1-5.

The problem is that many believers haven't learned Christian theology enough to represent it at all points. We are supposed to learn and know this so we can be good witnesses for the faith. But the solution is not to not believe but to learn what Christianity truly teaches.

I assume this is the reason that Trump enjoyed 80% of the evangelical vote?

I know, this is not a political threat...I'm sorry to bring it up. I promise I am not making assumptions about how you personally vote, PP. It's just I'm the atheist that great up evangelical (though it was called "fundamentalist" in the 90s) and so I do have a solid base of knowledge about what the Bible teaches. A Christian's life is their testimony and the strongest witness to the "truth" of the Bible. I still believe that, actually. In that the way one acts is a testament to what is in their hearts. And I do believe the message of Christ is worthy of following, I just lack the faith part.

And so with that, I am absolutely disgusted and appalled at the marriage of politics and modern American Christianity. It's not all Christians, obviously, but it's nearly all that I grew up knowing. And their testimony of late has made me even more at peace with state of nonbelief.

PP, I don't know you or what is in your heart. But as you are in an atheist here representing Christianity, I just need to make sure you understand how Christians are being perceived.

This is a nice, reasonable response. My belief is that we should put our trust in the LORD, not in men. I didn't vote in this last election. Both candidates were extremely distasteful to me. It was disheartening to see evangelical leaders stand up publicly with Trump, but it would also have been disheartening to see them stand up publicly with Clinton. But not everyone who professes a faith is a faithful disciple of that faith, or even genuine in their belief. I'm not judging them, or anyone else. Christians will indeed answer to Christ for how they lived out their faith here on Earth. But doing so poorly again reflects poorly on them, or it shows a lack of spiritual maturity. What it doesn't mean is that Christianity isn't true. We're all hypocrites to some extent. No one faithfully lives out their convictions at all times, and we should have humility about that in ourselves and not forget that about ourselves when we look down on others.

But if you look at the Gospel message of the Bible, our salvation is not based on how well we do being good or not being bad; it's based on whether we have faith in Christ. So it's good to focus on our faith and not worry so much about politics. We have to vote our consciences, and sometimes there are bad choices on both sides. Picking the lesser of two evils doesn't make you a bad Christian, but putting your faith in politicians might.

Different PP - the above is a nice, reasonable response too, describing a Christian perspective. It doesn't apply to atheists who don't believe in the Lord so therefore would not place trust in him. Atheists also would not look to the Bible for guidance and don't seek salvation, which is another concept in which they don't believe.

She was responding to me and even while we have different perspectives I can respect where she is coming from.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was 9.

I saw my parents decorate and wrap gifts for us during the holidays that year. There was always a "Santa Claus" is coming and you better be good or else you won't get presents theme and then I found the gifts and realize my parents were doing it. And when I realized that adults were putting in so much effort into making "Santa Claus" real- including the concept that only believers get presents- I asked my Sunday school teacher about it. In class. In front of everyone. Loudly.

And the question wasn't whether Santa was real, but whether the efforts in making us believe in Santa was different than with the efforts in making us believe in Jesus. The teachers weren't able to answer this question. She just said both Jesus and Santa were testaments of goodness and faith.

And therefore - by a lack of an answer to how they were different confirmed the lie by equating them with goodness. And also told a young girl that it's okay to lie for the greater good.

Which as we know by the New Testament, is not true. Hypocrisy and lies are hated by god.

So I just lost it and told my dad that I didn't want to celebrate Christmas anymore or go to church. When he asked why and I told him, he told me that we would still celebrate Christmas as a family but with no church. But I wasn't allowed to tell my little brother, who also figured it out later from someone else.

I got tons of presents every year thereafter, even as a heathen, FWIW. Nothing changed but we did have more fun as a family- just no mention of god. We aren't allowed to talk about our lack of churchgoing with grandma though.

So sad that a probably well-meaning teacher made such a careless, false remark that set you on this path, PP.

I thought the Sunday school teacher reacted pretty well to what must have been an unexpected and tricky question. The Santa and God stories DO have goodness in common. The teacher was non-specific in a way that wouldn't shake the faith of kids who believed in God and Santa, but wouldn't fool a kid who didn't. As for the "path" that pp was set on -- sounds like it worked out fine for her family. No more pretending to each other about their beliefs, while protecting Grandma and little bro -- until he figured it out on his own.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an atheist country (USSR), flirted with the idea of being religious when we moved here, but it never clicked.

I don't discount some sort of higher power/things we don't understand, but the idea that there is a human-like God "up there" who requires adoration and obedience seems laughable to me. Either there is a God that is all-powerful and all-knowing, in which case why would he/she even bother to care about individual humans, in which case in turn why would I bother to care about him/her, OR this deity is somehow not all-powerful and dependent on us for existence, but that's not what most religions teach us, so it seems like a weird logical lapse.

In any case, I take comfort in the material world, in treating other people around us with respect and humanity, not in the idea that there is something out there that personally cares about me, yet has created a world full of suffering and injustices.

PP, may I respectfully (and I mean that) suggest that one does not "flirt with the idea of being religious." Perhaps that is where you got off on the wrong foot.

And how sad to have to take comfort in the material world.

The posters who left religion or never took it up don't sound sad to me or present themselves as being sad. Perhaps your sympathy is misplaced.

Regarding the material world -- we all live in it, religious or not. Many parts of it are beautiful and many experiences we have in it with other humans are very meaningful.

Anonymous wrote:I grew up in an atheist country (USSR), flirted with the idea of being religious when we moved here, but it never clicked.

I don't discount some sort of higher power/things we don't understand, but the idea that there is a human-like God "up there" who requires adoration and obedience seems laughable to me. Either there is a God that is all-powerful and all-knowing, in which case why would he/she even bother to care about individual humans, in which case in turn why would I bother to care about him/her, OR this deity is somehow not all-powerful and dependent on us for existence, but that's not what most religions teach us, so it seems like a weird logical lapse.

In any case, I take comfort in the material world, in treating other people around us with respect and humanity, not in the idea that there is something out there that personally cares about me, yet has created a world full of suffering and injustices.

PP, may I respectfully (and I mean that) suggest that one does not "flirt with the idea of being religious." Perhaps that is where you got off on the wrong foot.

And how sad to have to take comfort in the material world.