Why Do You No Longer Believe in God?

by Tenacious 212 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Viviane

  Evidentialism is an epistemological position

  How does that help us?
• 

  _Morpheus

  Now im going to have start hitting dislike on viv's posts just for the visuals 😝
• 

  stuffwotifink

  We are all evidentialists
  

  Nope. Lots of people are no such thing.
  
  

  that doesn't convince me there is any value in epistemology.
  

  I wasn't trying to convince you. Your opinion of epistemology doesn't effect me, one way or the other.
  
• 

  James Mixon

  I read the Bible.
• 

  cofty

  On a scale of 1 to 10 my dislike of pedantic discussions about semantics is a 10

  Evolution happened we know this with a level of certainty that is every bit as great as our knowledge that the earth is not flat. Why would anybody who already accepts this to be true want to debate whether this belongs in the set of facts or beliefs?

  I read the article on epistemology a while ago. It was outrageously tedious.
• 

  The Rebel

  Viviane (Q) " So you don't want your accountant knowing how maths works?

  The Rebel ( A) if my accountant was any good I would own more than a pair of shoes.

  The Rebel.
• 

  EndofMysteries

  Science is constantly changing. 50 years from now what is taught now may be 'old light'.

  With all the advances in science, still no 'fact' answer on where we came from and how we and all life on Earth came to be, just theories.

  The order of science, the code of genetics and DNA, I'm still more leaned towards belief we came from a creator. A creator could be an all powerful supernatural force that created the universe down to an advanced biological lifeform which wouldn't explain the origin of life but take us a step closer.

  If as most religions and faiths teach, that an all powerful creator and we are being tested, in line with OP's post, the scripture talking about God allowing things to see into the heart, the lack of concrete evidence that would make the entire world unable to dispute him and direct commands of his, I could see the wisdom in if he was going to award eternal life, one way to see into a heart is allowing people to doubt his existence or him caring at all what they do, freeing one to be as good or bad as they choose.
• 

  done4good

  I know you will probably get many flippant responses to this question, however this is a fair question, and deserves a fair answer. Yes, it is true that no one is born believing. Neither was I, however I know that is not what you are asking. Most here were believers at one point, as I was. Becoming an atheist was not an overnight decision, and just like making a decision to join another religion, should not be a decision made in a hasty manner.

  After leaving the JWs, I considered myself a christian in the non-denominational, broad sense. I had many questions, and spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours researching the answers to those questions. While most questions started out from a religious context, in order to make sense of the complete picture I always considered both historical and scientific sources of information, alongside the religious sources. I soon found many inconsistencies in both the historical and scientific realms that simply did not align with what I understood christianity to be. Even most of the christian doctrine itself was very shaky, at best.
  

  That in of itself did not break my faith, however it certainly was cause for a level of concern. In short, the research I did particularly in the area of physics really drove home the point that my understanding of things religiously could not be true. I considered myself agnostic for about 5 years.

  Nothing really changed beyond that other than my understanding of the definition of atheism. Atheism is simply to not believe, which was an understanding I really came to 5 years prior when I declared myself an agnostic.

  d4g
  
• 

  cofty

  Science is constantly changing. 50 years from now what is taught now may be 'old light'. - EOM

  This is a deepity.

  Of course science makes constant progress. The rate of progress is astonishing. However there is a great deal that we now know that will never change. The earth is not flat. The earth rotates on it's axis. Humans evolved from non-human ancestors over millions of years. All of these statements are not going to change significantly even in a thousand years of further research.

  "Science is constantly changing" is the rallying call of the intellectually lazy who like to make shit up and pretend it's just as valid as actual science.

  With all the advances in science, still no 'fact' answer on where we came from and how we and all life on Earth came to be, just theories.

  So? How long have we been exploring that question using the scientific method? Look at the amazing progress that has been made. Unless you have read the latest hypotheses in abiogenesis you just look silly contemptuously dismissing it as "just theories".

  The order of science, the code of genetics and DNA, I'm still more leaned towards belief we came from a creator.

  What a strange thing to say. The strongest evidence for unguided evolution is to be found in genetic research.
  
  
• 

  cappytan

  What a strange thing to say. The strongest evidence for unguided evolution is to be found in genetic research.

  ^^^^This. Anyone that points to DNA as "proof" of a creator and evidence against evolution has no idea what the science behind evolution actually says. They're being intellectually dishonest.