by venus 43 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
My feeling is that it developed this way:
1. No belief in gods
2. Animism
3. Polytheism
4. Monotheism
I believe that the first atheists would have appeared at stage 2.
"Zog say touch special stone, catch much mammoth. Me say Zog full of woolly rhino shit."
There has to be a concept of a thing before you can disagree with it. There would be no Fox hunt saboteurs without fox hunting.
David_Jay,
I was clearly disagreeing with “The Cambridge study (and others like it) providence evidence that atheism grew just as naturally and even independently of religion.”
Atheists' declared stand has always been this: ‘If God exists, why is His influence not seen on the lives of believers [most of them are hypocritical], and why do we find suffering in the world?’
These two questions arise from a view that people would be influenced by truth. But the fact is that people may or may not be influenced by truth. For example, those who smoke cigarette know that it is injurious to their health, and yet this knowledge has no influence on them. Existence of prison is a testimony to the fact that the society does not like violation of its rules, yet existence of prison in all the countries does not exert any influence on people who are bent on breaking the laws. That means God exerting no influence on the believers is not a case against His existence. People would behave the way they like whether God exists or not—some believers may act righteously and some believers wickedly, and some atheists may act altruistically and some atheists wickedly.
That God does not do anything to correct the misconception too does not prove his non-existence. Let me tell you: I were God, I would not provide any proof that I exist because I want people to reach their own conclusion self-motivated.
Onager,
If belief in God were creating good citizens, everyone would have accepted God even if he were not real. Everyone accepted electricity without even labeling it American electricity, UK electricity, Russian electricity …etc. because electricity is good.
If belief in God were not creating good citizens, some would doubt the existence of God which means atheism would only appear after decay of theism.
Venus,
I do not advocate beliefs or faith in deities.
I don't subscribe value to mentally assenting to any concept, as if making a claim to a creed, declaring faith in a doctrine, or exercising credulity have value.
The love of my life was an atheist. (She is gone now.) Her family is entirely composed of atheists. Like the Cambridge Study, none of them, including my wife, became atheists due to religion. They never belonged to one. Their parents never did either.
I'm Jewish. Many practicing Jews are atheist and agnostic. My own dealings with the monotheistic concept of my people is not one of belief, definite not in Christian terms. In fact, Judaism itself is not a religion of beliefs. It is something you practice.
The point of the study is that history shows that humanity has always been intelligent enough to live without a belief in gods. Ancient historical data proves this. Not everyone in history who was an atheist did so due to examining religion. The study suggests that many people just applied their innate logic from the start and found no need to look further and examine religion as well. My beloved never gave a passing thought to religion and was still firm in her convictions all her life.
If you have a different view, that is fine. Jews don't proselytize. We aren't concerned with what you believe or don't believe. We aren't interested in converting people into theists, nor do we have concepts like Christians such as if you don't believe in God that you are doomed. We don't have an original sin concept, no need to be saved or save others.
I personally don't care what you do or do not mentally assent to. I value people not on their beliefs (which are just mental concepts) but due to who they are, how they act, etc.
I don't know why you are arguing against my personal conviction on this: Atheism exists because some people choose logic over superstition; atheism is not dependent on the existence of religion and rejecting it. Some people do become atheists by rejecting religion, but not everyone does.
And for those who need it spelled out a little clearer:
PERSON 1: I think there is a God.
PERSON 2: I don't think is a God.
PERSON 1: I think you're wrong for not thinking God exists.
PERSON 2: I think you're wrong for thinking God exists.
3rd PERSON: Who gives a shit what either or you think? There's a whole world outside your head to live in and bring your gifts to. There's even people out there who you can help and ways to make this a better world regardless of what concepts you want to hold in your head. Stop arguing over believing and not believing and prove how enlightened you claim to be by your actions, not your arguments. Words mean crap.
David_Jay,
I agree with what you said: "Some people do become atheists by rejecting religion, but not everyone does."
"Onager,
If belief in God were creating good citizens, everyone would have accepted God even if he were not real. Everyone accepted electricity without even labeling it American electricity, UK electricity, Russian electricity …etc. because electricity is good.
If belief in God were not creating good citizens, some would doubt the existence of God which means atheism would only appear after decay of theism.
4 hours ago venus"
Venus,
Er, You know that the UK has different electricity to the USA don't you?
The gods are humans attempts at explaining the world around us. At the moment that one person ascribed a supernatural cause to a natural phenomenon and someone else didn't believe him, atheism was born.
David_Jay says that the state of everyone before this was also atheism but I think it is something purer than that. Proto-atheism maybe. What is it called if you don't have a belief in gods but you also don't even have a concept of gods to not have a belief in?
For example read this sentence:
There is an alien race called the Boqtic. They are like insects in appearance and are very good mechanics.
Now, having read that sentence you (I hope!) do not believe that the Boqtic exist. You are Aboqticist.
But what was your belief before you read that sentence.?
Onager wrote:
David_Jay says that the state of everyone before this was also atheism
No, David Jay said no such thing.
I didn't say anything about what came before or after this or that. And I didn't use the term "atheism" in anything more than a general sense, such as "opposed to religion or theism in general." I wasn't trying to be exhaustive in my use of the term.
One thing the historical data lacks is any suggestion as to whether religion came before atheism (or whatever label you want to use) or vice versa or simultaneously. None of my comments were concerned with that.
But Venus is not wrong that today a large number of those who chose to be atheist do so due to religion's horrible record. This is also one reason Jews cannot accept Christianity. Jesus was a wonderful teacher and had a beautiful message, but Christianity has a history of persecuting, torturing, and murdering my people. Like the atheist that is an atheist because of religion, a lot of Jews are more than happy enough to reject Christianity due to its record.
Some humanist/atheist Jews practice Judaism not because of a belief in God but because of a disbelief in Christianity's determination to snuff out our culture. I'm not one of them, but I understand a defiant stand of solidarity. And I also see Venus' view that religion sure does a good enough job on its own to produce people who don't want anything to do with their beliefs.
"Her family is entirely composed of atheists. Like the Cambridge Study, none of them, including my wife, became atheists due to religion. They never belonged to one. Their parents never did either."
Sorry David Jay, that's how I interpreted this comment of yours.
So, as this thread is about the origins of atheism, having read the sentence in my previous email:
You are aboqticist now, but what were you before you read my post?
Or did you wig out as soon as you read "David_Jay says"?
Is your question for me or Venus?
As for me, what am I after reading your sentence? Well being Jewish, we don't put much value in "beliefs" like non-Jewish peoples often do.
That also means we don't have opinions about not believing in things either. We are concerned with dealing with what is before us, living in the now, and with the advent of the post-denominational/post-rabbinical age of Judaism which began in the late 20th century, I don't subscribe to the concept of debating about concepts which have no practical application.
I was not whatever you said before, and thus am not anything (having to do with that subject) now.
