Atheism: Something Else In Disguise

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

A number of discussions on this board have brought home to me something I’ve understood for a while. Atheism – at least among those who choose to call themselves atheists, and especially among those who make a big deal of it – is misnamed. It’s not a belief that God or gods don’t exist.

It’s a belief that Christianity is full of shit, disguised as a belief that God does not exist. Consider:

  1. Look at any thread on this board in which self-styled atheists are railing against “religion” or “theism,” and examine the particulars they tacitly assume to characterize religion, or to describe God. In every case, you will find that the only religion which fits those characteristics is Christianity, and the only description of God which they seem to recognize is the Christian God.

  2. Try to present a religious idea which is emphatically non-Christian, and call that idea God. You will be taken to task by at least one self-styled atheist because what you are calling “God” doesn’t fit their preconceived (and completely Christian) notion of what “God” is. This is especially true if your description is sophisticated enough, and sufficiently consistent with science, that they are even inclined to agree with it.

  3. Carefully peruse this board and look for an atheist argument against any religion other than Christianity. But don’t waste a lot of time, because you won’t find one, or if you do, it will be presented off the cuff and half-heartedly.

In short, the “atheism” of those on this board (and I would say those off it as well), is actually a rejection of Christianity and nothing more.

Mind you, rejecting Christianity is completely understandable to me. When it comes to mind-jobs, thought control, authoritarianism, and what Jefferson called (in reference to the clergy) “every form of tyranny over the mind of man,” there is no belief system of comparable scope and size that comes close to it. But I would submit that anyone who calls himself an “atheist” and makes a big deal of it has actually not fully succeeded in rejecting Christianity. Because if they had, it wouldn’t prey on their minds the way it seems to. A rebel is not free: he is trying to free himself. And someone who calls himself an “atheist” and spends a lot of energy arguing against Christianity, is still plagued by a fear of Hell, and is trying to shout down the nagging voice in his head that whispers of that fear.

2

I completely agree.

I also think that the problems these atheists have with (the Christian notion of) God are also often directly linked to issues with having to conform to the norms of a society that, although claiming to value individuality, often pressures individuals to live a certain way, threatening them with certain consequences.

Westerners consider a personal God who, like an authoritarian father, punishes you if you don’t do what you’re told.

Are the parents, and society, really right? Are their “suggestions” on how to live really valid for those wishing to live a more ethical existence while still managing to take their destiny into their own hands?

Atheism seems like a pretty logical next step for those that are beginning to reason about the world for themselves, once realizing that those in authority have made them feel ashamed and guilty for actions that, outside the context of a Christian God, don’t warrant regret.

This “Obey Christianity” is accepted by most Christians, and once these people are obeying what their group tells them is right, they are quick to enforce the rules to others, especially their children.

But I think many of these children, once growing up, decide (very reasonably) that the beliefs that have held them down, that have hurt them, are bogus.

They then have beef against the ultimate excuse for all the negative behavior, without actually looking at the unethical behavior for what it is (which can be painted as coming from any kind of belief system, theist or not).

Then, only pushing to remove the religion form their lives, they pass on the same bad, hurtful habits that have brought them to feel so strongly against the religion.

3

In defense of the typical atheist here, they all seem to be English speakers, and a majority are from the United States, so a Christian conception of God is likely all they’ve been exposed to.

I like your point two:

I am a Christian myself, so I don't of course run into atheists bamboozled by my non-traditional conception of God. Mine is rather boring in it's traditional claims. But I have run into something that parrallels it, and that's the atheist's conception of the [i]Christian[/i], which is something that I seem to not fit into. 
 There are many, many atheists who will tell you first and foremost that what they hate about Christianity is that nature of how Christians practice it- it's irrational, it's illogical, the people who follow it are sheep, or not 'awakened'.  In fact, I would say that the very existence of the term "Free-thinker" exists as a back-handed way to imply all these things about the Christian. I have been told on several occaisions that I don't fit into that mold. This illicits a couple different responses. 
The first, would be to ignore it. The atheist tries to have a rational conversation with me, a Christian, about how Christians are incapable of having rational conversations.  At first it was discouraging, then it was funny, and now, it's just tiring and I try to avoid it. 
The second, would be to treat the intelligent Christian as the exception that proves the rule. These days we've managed to force 'free-thinkers' into tacking 'Most' in front of their insults now, such as "[i]Most[/i] Christians are brain-dead sheep doing what they are told without reflection." The first time I saw "with the exception of Uccisore and a couple others" as a clause in the middle of a statement like that, I was flattered a bit. Now, I see it for what it is, and I don't care for it. If one has to address this rationally, the answer is that painting the thinking Christian as the exception ignores the fact that anything exceptional about us is a pure result of the rich tradition of philosophy and scholarly thinking that exists with Christianity, which has molded us- some more moldy than others. 

 And now, I will illustrate the situation I discribed above by doing it myself. Navigator, it seems to me that most non-traditional conceptions of God being with a claim to anti-rationalism- many new spiritual traditions are interested in aims other than truth, to the extent that they deny the existence or accessibility of any spiritual truth as one of a few, if not the only dogma they possess. This leads to a general lack of interest in the kind of discussion the angry young atheist is looking for.  That is to say, atheists fight with Christians because they know Christians will put up a fight back.  It's true that people like Dawkins seem to have very little to say to the Hindu, the Shinto, Druids and so on. But in fairness, they have had characteristically very little to say to people like him, too.
4

12.17.06.1791

While I agree completely with your argument Nav, should it not be considered that most people who become Atheists were once Christians? From the standpoint of what was taught to them all their life up to the point of changing lanes, how can it be assumed that they would observe the potential validity of other faiths once the initial faith had been rejected? Thus, if other faiths, with no prior spiritual experiences having not rendered a valuable perspective, were below the initial faith which had been granted unequalled attention compared to other points of view, the other faiths would be shunned as possibilities of discussion through the course of Atheism, while the only real reference of spiritual life was with the initial faith which had been rejected; Chrisitianity, being the majority belief system, is clearly the source of most Atheistic resent.
Of course, there is a question that needs to be asked. You don’t see many, if any, ex-Muslim Atheists… Why are most Atheists inherently ex-Chrisitans? What is it specifically about Christianity that gets on people’s nerves enough for them to reject the faith completely?

5

I think the misconception comes from the theistic camp, that propogate the myth that ‘atheists’ must be ‘god haters’, or indeed concerned with abrahamic mythology in some respect. This misconception has been repeated to the extent that people have started to adopt this position, which isn’t rightly atheism, for themselves under the atheism banner. A direct oposition to abrahamic mythology might be compatible with atheism, but the two are not mutually exclusive.

6

Fortunately, I will no longer burden myself with the term “atheist.”

I am now a “bright.” Thanks turtles! :smiley:v

the-brights.net/

7

I think we should bring polytheism back into the mix. If not just as a thought experiement so certain people can actually consider the definitions they are using and where they actually stem from.

I had someone say to me the other day: How can you have intelligent design in an athiestic framework? This wasn’t a dumb person…

All this dualism is restrictive, apparently.

8
  1. Why polytheism?
  2. Do complex systems imply a designer?

I know these are asides, so I apologize to the original poster for being a bit off-topic.

9

And I said, “Let me be a Bright”- and I was! :slight_smile:

I like the website. Bright certainly is a more descriptive & accurate term than ‘atheist.’

10

  1. I thought I stated, but to get people thinking outside of the box again.

  2. I think they can, depending on your definition of complex. For instance a component in our universe such as DNA, to anyone who’s really studied it, effectively -is- a tool or program. The only thing which makes this type of example differ from some computer algorithm is the material being used, and to a large degree – the complexity.

I subscribe to the old ‘find a watch in the desert’ thing. The watch is obviously made by some sort of intelligence, but the desert, the fact that matter can even exist – where did these things come from?

Think of a god hierarchy wherein some create small universes of matter from within consciousness, and gain the total knowledge (every possible combination for the existence of matter)? What if there were gods within the matter universes who created different creatures for whatever purposes? What if there were creatures who created small universes of semi self-propogating digital data? What if there were others beyond the formers, who operate under some premise that it receives input from the very fact that these multiple universes exist instead of there simply being a negation. What if the single most god is ultimately the triad of existence/negation/other.

There you just did the thought experiment? Don’t you feel refreshed?

11

12.18.06.1797

Haven’t people already done that? Consider for a moment, the whole revolution of all things New Age coming into being and recognition within the last 30-40 years is a testament of reversal in the evolution of spiritual belief. Many people have come to the realization that monotheism doesn’t work, at least for them, and have come to the conclusion to have nothing to do with it. As a result, some have progressed the evolution of belief to the point of non-belief as Atheists. Meanwhile, others have chosen to go back to the belief structures of their ancestors prior to the militant take-over by monotheism, specifically Christianity in most cases. The reasoning for going back to these older religious beliefs may be constituted by the reasoning that before monotheism came to them through military force, they were happy with their polytheism and it worked for and with them.

Interestingly enough, revival isn’t needed in some parts of the world as it has always existed there; surviving against the pressure of monotheism. Hinduism is not only the oldest religion in the world, but a polytheism that is so loose that a person could practically be a Christian and a Hindu at the same time.

12

Ah yes, you’re so bright for naming yourself after a website…

I’m a google, no, I’m an ebay, no, I’m cockzilla…

13

Technically, if I were naming myself after the website, I’d be a the-brights.net. :slight_smile:

And cockzilla…that doesn’t sound like a very enlightening movement to be a part of, but to each his own.

14

Uccisore, as per normal, is on the money.

15

I am saddened that most Christians worship an infanticidal God, and find such actions morally acceptable with the caveat that we cannot possibly know God’s purpose for doing such things.

Things such as these are my main concern about Christianity.

16

Is this some emotive version of the Problem of Evil, which has been discussed to death already, or a reference to something else?

17

Something else.

18

Care to enlighten us?

19

I’m interested to see if a Christian forum member will.

20

I’m a Christian forum member, and I haven’t the foggiest idea what you are talking about.