Apostates versus converts

D

domer76

Verified User
I listened to an interesting podcast this morning. Studies that looked at the differences between people who left their religion versus people who joined one.

People who left their religions did it after long and careful study. It was an arduous and difficult journey for most, to abandon everything they had been taught. And suffer the potential ostracism that followed. Ironically, it was the very religion that encouraged them to “seek the truth” that brought them to leave that faith. It was an intellectual decision rather than an emotional one. One didn’t choose to become an atheist. They merely discovered they were one.

The reverse was the case for those joining a religion. It was typically to fill some sort of an emotional or social need at some point in their lives. They had a crisis and the church people or their peers were comforting to them. There was no study of the faith or really knowledge of its teachings. Merely an emotional choice.

Makes perfect sense. Intellect versus emotion. Knowledge versus faith.
 
domer76 said:
I listened to an interesting podcast this morning. Studies that looked at the differences between people who left their religion versus people who joined one.

People who left their religions did it after long and careful study. It was an arduous and difficult journey for most, to abandon everything they had been taught. And suffer the potential ostracism that followed. Ironically, it was the very religion that encouraged them to “seek the truth” that brought them to leave that faith. It was an intellectual decision rather than an emotional one. One didn’t choose to become an atheist. They merely discovered they were one.

The reverse was the case for those joining a religion. It was typically to fill some sort of an emotional or social need at some point in their lives. They had a crisis and the church people or their peers were comforting to them. There was no study of the faith or really knowledge of its teachings. Merely an emotional choice.

Makes perfect sense. Intellect versus emotion. Knowledge versus faith.
Click to expand...
Joining a religion means one wants a social group. Not needing a social group is one reason many are not religious.
 
domer76 said:
I listened to an interesting podcast this morning. Studies that looked at the differences between people who left their religion versus people who joined one.

People who left their religions did it after long and careful study. It was an arduous and difficult journey for most, to abandon everything they had been taught. And suffer the potential ostracism that followed. Ironically, it was the very religion that encouraged them to “seek the truth” that brought them to leave that faith. It was an intellectual decision rather than an emotional one. One didn’t choose to become an atheist. They merely discovered they were one.

The reverse was the case for those joining a religion. It was typically to fill some sort of an emotional or social need at some point in their lives. They had a crisis and the church people or their peers were comforting to them. There was no study of the faith or really knowledge of its teachings. Merely an emotional choice.

Makes perfect sense. Intellect versus emotion. Knowledge versus faith.
Click to expand...
Leaving religion does NOT lead to atheism.

I left my religion...and atheism never crossed my mind. I would be making the same mistake I had made while indulging in religion. My reason for leaving was that there was no way I could KNOW that a GOD existed in any form, let alone with all the attributes assigned to the one I was "worshiping."

I also knew that there was no way I could KNOW there were no gods.

So I adopted what I saw at the intelligent alternative...agnosticism.

I've since refined that to a description rather than just use a descriptor, which could easily be mistaken.
 
domer76 said:
I listened to an interesting podcast this morning. Studies that looked at the differences between people who left their religion versus people who joined one.

People who left their religions did it after long and careful study. It was an arduous and difficult journey for most, to abandon everything they had been taught. And suffer the potential ostracism that followed. Ironically, it was the very religion that encouraged them to “seek the truth” that brought them to leave that faith. It was an intellectual decision rather than an emotional one. One didn’t choose to become an atheist. They merely discovered they were one.

The reverse was the case for those joining a religion. It was typically to fill some sort of an emotional or social need at some point in their lives. They had a crisis and the church people or their peers were comforting to them. There was no study of the faith or really knowledge of its teachings. Merely an emotional choice.

Makes perfect sense. Intellect versus emotion. Knowledge versus faith.
Click to expand...
rejecting your faith is likely proof you never had any........ignorance is not knowledge......cope.......
 
Ross Dolan said:
Leaving religion does NOT lead to atheism.

I left my religion...and atheism never crossed my mind. I would be making the same mistake I had made while indulging in religion. My reason for leaving was that there was no way I could KNOW that a GOD existed in any form, let alone with all the attributes assigned to the one I was "worshiping."

I also knew that there was no way I could KNOW there were no gods.

So I adopted what I saw at the intelligent alternative...agnosticism.

I've since refined that to a description rather than just use a descriptor, which could easily be mistaken.
Click to expand...
Sure. It doesn’t always mean full atheism, but the studies looked at the differences between the two types of decisions.

Bart Ehrman calls himself both atheist and agnostic. One is belief. One is knowledge.
 
domer76 said:
Sure. It doesn’t always mean full atheism, but the studies looked at the differences between the two types of decisions.

Bart Ehrman calls himself both atheist and agnostic. One is belief. One is knowledge.
Click to expand...
It is ironic that agnostics claim to have knowledge of what is possible to know.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
rejecting your faith is likely proof you never had any........ignorance is not knowledge......cope.......
Click to expand...
Those that rejected their faith were typically head over heels believers. To their core. Evangelical. Hallelujah, praise Jesus, Bible thumping believers.

Then, they began to exercise some real thought and observation rather than accepting everything that had been fed to them.

As I said and these studies validate. Knowledge over faith. Intellect over emotion.
 
Hume said:
It is ironic that agnostics claim to have knowledge of what is possible to know.
Click to expand...
I’m along the same lines as Ehrman. Except this. The Christian god, as he is described, does not exist. In that way, I’m atheist. No fucking way is there an intervening, personal, reward and punishment kind of god that is omni-everything, yet requires worship. Total bullshit.

However, is there a different kind of god? I don’t know.
 
domer76 said:
I’m along the same lines as Ehrman. Except this. The Christian god, as he is described, does not exist. In that way, I’m atheist. No fucking way is there an intervening, personal, reward and punishment kind of god that is omni-everything, yet requires worship. Total bullshit.

However, is there a different kind of god? I don’t know.
Click to expand...
I am persuaded by Aristotle's description of god as thought or intelligence. Not a personal being.
 
domer76 said:
Sure. It doesn’t always mean full atheism, but the studies looked at the differences between the two types of decisions.

Bart Ehrman calls himself both atheist and agnostic. One is belief. One is knowledge.
Click to expand...
Not sure I understand that. Would you expand on it a bit.

Is atheism the result of belief...or of knowledge?

Is agnosticism the result of belief...or of knowledge (or the lack of knowledge)?
 
Ross Dolan said:
Not sure I understand that. Would you expand on it a bit.

Is atheism the result of belief...or of knowledge?

Is agnosticism the result of belief...or of knowledge (or the lack of knowledge)?
Click to expand...
Agnosticism is the belief that knowledge is not possible.
 
Hume said:
It is ironic that agnostics claim to have knowledge of what is possible to know.
Click to expand...
No they do not...at least this agnostic doesn't.

I have no idea if we can ever KNOW if gods exist or not.

So your irony is misplaced.

That is one of the reasons I prefer not to describe myself using a descriptor. I write my position out completely.

I do not know if any GOD (or gods) exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect that gods cannot exist…that the existence of a GOD or gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that at least one GOD must exist...that the existence of at least one GOD is needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction on whether any gods exist or not...so I don't.

(When I use the word "GOD or gods" here, I mean "The entity (or entities) responsible for the creation of what we humans call 'the physical universe'...IF SUCH AN ENTITY OR ENTITIES ACTUALLY EXIST.)

Most people say it sounds like an agnostic position.
 
Ross Dolan said:
Not sure I understand that. Would you expand on it a bit.

Is atheism the result of belief...or of knowledge?

Is agnosticism the result of belief...or of knowledge (or the lack of knowledge)?
Click to expand...
Atheism is the belief that no gods, or in my case, the Christian god, exist.

Agnostic refers to knowledge. With respect to these gods, can we know the unknowable? Nope. Again, in my case, I don’t know that some other power does not exist.

Neil DeGrasse-Tyson puts it well. He keeps looking for the evidence of a god, but has yet to see any. He’s not quite so blunt as others, but his conclusion is the same.
 
Hume said:
Not surprised. You have no interest in epistemology.
Click to expand...
What makes you think that?

Why are you being so rude about this?

Give me a link to any reputable dictionary or encyclopedia that states: "Agnosticism is the belief that knowledge is not possible."
 
Ross Dolan said:
What makes you think that?

Why are you being so rude about this?

Give me a link to any reputable dictionary or encyclopedia that states: "Agnosticism is the belief that knowledge is not possible."
Click to expand...
I am making the statement.

Rude? You clearly have no knowledge of epistemology. What would that offend you?
 
Hume said:
I do not know the whole history of the term "atheism." But from what I have read, it is only used by Christians to refer to non-Christians.
Click to expand...
The etymology of atheist is well established. It comes to us from the Greek through the French. Essentially it is: "a" (without) + "theos" (a god) and equals "someone without a god."

It has been changed in recent times (post 1950, for the most part) to erroneously mean "a" (without) + "theism" (a belief in a
God) equals "someone without a belief in a god."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top