Losing my atheism (my new spiritual journey)

[jonathan180iq]

Just realized this was all goof...

In the back of my mind, I thought it might possibly be, given the use of tried and true religious arguments...but alas, I was suckered.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I don't see how my prior assumptions are any different to an Atheists?

What assumptions do atheists have?

 

[JoStories]

You're not upsetting me, you're confusing me. I cannot follow your example with the use of the word "natural mysticism". It doesn't make sense and therefore fails to communicate what you may wish to convey. The woman's experience is rejected by her pastor and this makes it natural mysticism? How? And why can't deity mysticism be considered natural? It's not "unnatural" nor uncommon. It happens all the time in mystical experiences. People naturally see visions of various deity forms. Your term makes no sense to me. And I too have studied this stuff for years, and have mystical experiences all the time, nature mysticism, deity mysticism, causal mysticism, and nondual mystical experiences. All of them are natural. What does your term specifically refer to? In what way could people use it? What category of experience is it?

First of all, I apologize for not being able to make myself clear. Now, to me, the example of that woman had everything to do with music and nothing to do with God. I think that part of the problem might be my view of what God is. I do not see God as a 'being' but rather something very like energy. If you wish to see music as God or the energy and that helps to make it make more sense, awesome. But for me, it is not the same kind of mysticism as St. Teresa of Avila or Hildegard of Bingen, etc. I have had my own set of mystical experiences that I don't equate as being about God but rather were more 'natural'. For example, as a child, my parents sent me to Europe for a solitary vacation to learn self sufficiency. I was 17 and I got lost in the Pyrenees. I thought I was going to die...I was a kid!....and sat down to wallow in my self pity. I had an experience that day that led me completely away from Christianity and all organized religion and to what I follow now, which has no name and an understanding of God that is difficult to explain. The pastor stating that this woman;s experience was heretical kind of reinforces my view of mysticism being intensely personal and not necessarily related to a "God" concept. It is about a communion with the universe on a soul level. I see how you are seeing this and I don't think we are that far off from each other but rather that I am merely not being as clear as I should perhaps. I hope this helps.

 

[JustWondering]

I guess I just don't understand why people make so much out of god, or to beliefs about it. Why would it even matter whether there is a god?

Believe, or do not. It changes nothing.

IMO there are two major factors to why a lot of religions (not all, so please don't come at me with my religion isn't like that!) are so popular.

1. Basic narcissism "God created the universe and all things but still has a special place and purpose set aside for humanity because we're just that awesome and important".

2. Comfort and Security "After I die I get to go live in a magical utopia in the sky and eat all the sky cake I want!".

 

[Mayflow]

When we look deeply into a flower, we see the elements that have come together to allow it to manifest. We can see clouds manifesting as rain. Without the rain, nothing can grow. When I touch the flower, I’m touching the cloud and touching the rain. This is not just poetry, it’s reality. If we take the clouds and the rain out of the flower, the flower will not be there. With the eye of the Buddha, we are able to see the clouds and the rain in the flower. We can touch the sun without burning our fingers. Without the sun nothing can grow, so it’s not possible to take the sun out of the flower. The flower cannot be as a separate entity; it has to inter-be with the light, with the clouds, with the rain. The word “interbeing” is closer to reality than the word “being.” Being really means interbeing.

The same is true for me, for you, and for the Buddha. The Buddha has to inter-be with everything. Interbeing and nonself are the objects of our contemplation. We have to train ourselves so that in our daily lives we can touch the truth of interbeing and nonself in every moment. You are in touch with the clouds, with the rain, with the children, with the trees, with the rivers, with your planet, and that contact reveals the true nature of reality, the nature of impermanence, nonself, interdependence, and interbeing. ` Thich Nhat Hanh

 

[LuisDantas]

IMO there are two major factors to why a lot of religions (not all, so please don't come at me with my religion isn't like that!) are so popular.

1. Basic narcissism "God created the universe and all things but still has a special place and purpose set aside for humanity because we're just that awesome and important".

2. Comfort and Security "After I die I get to go live in a magical utopia in the sky and eat all the sky cake I want!".

I suppose. But those are so transparent.

 

[Ouroboros]

This is genuinely bizarre. When I woke up this morning, I felt like my yesterday's experience never happened.
Maybe Satan and God are fighting for my soul, who knows?

Or, more plausibly, such mysterious conversions tend to take place at very special days of the year

Globdangit!!! April 1. You got me! LOL!

 

[bsdl]

it all goes back to the problem of evil in the world, in all of us. watch a coyote torture a mouse, your lovable kitty torture a mouse. Evil is the mess that negates the religious god of the big religions.

 

[thepenofareadywriter]

I know that this might sound surprising to whom knows my worldview, but I am seriously reconsidering my atheism (and naturalism).

I have been thinking a lot recently about the Universe and the place we occupy in it. And I asked myself the question: is that really all so pointless? Do we really evolve, live, die and that's it? Isn't maybe possible that humanity occupies a special place in the great scheme of things?

If we collect all the arguments that hint at the possibility of God, we cannot really see one that sets the issue. But all of them could give us some cumulative pieces of evidence all pointing to a possible trascendent reality. This is also the process we use to provide evidence in science.

For instance, the amazing effectivity of mathematics to describe the Universe is something I could not really explain as a naturalist. How is that possible that mathematics applies so perfectly to the fabric of reality if there is not a mind behind all this?

I also considered the fine tuning argument as one of the strongest ones in support of a non natural origin of conscious beings. The chances of life are so negligible that it seems really a stretch to believe that consciousness can arise out of unconscious processes. We should expect a Universe just filled with dead things and not one with life. Especially not one with introspective life, or life that goes beyond the immediate survival instincts: i.e life that can give the Universe itself a meaning.

But the key moment was this morning. And it was not a mere rational analysis. I just had a look out of my window. When I saw the mountains, the lake, the majesty and the beauty surrounding me, I experienced a moment in which I felt one with everything. All the long term pointlessness of my naturalistic view vanished. That was stunning and something I never felt before. I don't know if that can be considered a mystic experience, but it felt like one.

At the moment, I am a bit confused and still thinking about it. My Christian friend thinks that God is claiming me back, and, for the first time since a long time, I cannot definetely rule that out.


Ciao

- viole

maybe you just got a wiff of the the rose... click on link>>> the pen of a ready writer - YouTube

 

[Serenity7855]

I know that this might sound surprising to whom knows my worldview, but I am seriously reconsidering my atheism (and naturalism).

I have been thinking a lot recently about the Universe and the place we occupy in it. And I asked myself the question: is that really all so pointless? Do we really evolve, live, die and that's it? Isn't maybe possible that humanity occupies a special place in the great scheme of things?

If we collect all the arguments that hint at the possibility of God, we cannot really see one that sets the issue. But all of them could give us some cumulative pieces of evidence all pointing to a possible trascendent reality. This is also the process we use to provide evidence in science.

For instance, the amazing effectivity of mathematics to describe the Universe is something I could not really explain as a naturalist. How is that possible that mathematics applies so perfectly to the fabric of reality if there is not a mind behind all this?

I also considered the fine tuning argument as one of the strongest ones in support of a non natural origin of conscious beings. The chances of life are so negligible that it seems really a stretch to believe that consciousness can arise out of unconscious processes. We should expect a Universe just filled with dead things and not one with life. Especially not one with introspective life, or life that goes beyond the immediate survival instincts: i.e life that can give the Universe itself a meaning.

But the key moment was this morning. And it was not a mere rational analysis. I just had a look out of my window. When I saw the mountains, the lake, the majesty and the beauty surrounding me, I experienced a moment in which I felt one with everything. All the long term pointlessness of my naturalistic view vanished. That was stunning and something I never felt before. I don't know if that can be considered a mystic experience, but it felt like one.

At the moment, I am a bit confused and still thinking about it. My Christian friend thinks that God is claiming me back, and, for the first time since a long time, I cannot definetely rule that out.


Ciao

- viole

I have not read the rest of this thread through fear of ruining this demonstration of magnimonious grandeur. To hear that you are, once again, recognising the existence of deity is extremely moving and sacred. Everything you have said here is how I feel. Wow, what a testimony builder these words are to anybody with a morsel of doubt in their lives. My explanation is that you have found God again and he has embraced you in his loving arms, but it is you who have taken the first step, and your epiphany was with the Holy Ghost, who testifies of the truth to all men, if they will but listen. Well done viole, and God bless you because I know that you must be living a life that allows for this to happen. "Only my elite will recognise the masters vouce"

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

I have been thinking a lot recently about the Universe and the place we occupy in it. And I asked myself the question: is that really all so pointless? Do we really evolve, live, die and that's it? Isn't maybe possible that humanity occupies a special place in the great scheme of things?

If there were no minds, there would be no 'scheme of things.' The whole idea of the great scheme of things is predicated by subjectivity. The fact that a mind exists begs its self as the central theme of existence. Remember Einstein? Relativity? Basically, being the center of one's own attention, is not an argument for some supernatural being creating a "you" and "a world centered on you."

If we collect all the arguments that hint at the possibility of God, we cannot really see one that sets the issue. But all of them could give us some cumulative pieces of evidence all pointing to a possible trascendent reality. This is also the process we use to provide evidence in science.

Can't say I follow this. You may be speaking to some degree of hypothesis formation; but this is far short of providing evidence. Science does not end at begging questions; it starts there.

For instance, the amazing effectivity of mathematics to describe the Universe is something I could not really explain as a naturalist. How is that possible that mathematics applies so perfectly to the fabric of reality if there is not a mind behind all this?

How is it possible that mathematics could not perfectly apply to reality. Mathematics is at it's core nothing more than counting. How can you count something, and be amazed that the number you arrive at is the count of the thing you counted? If I count grains of sand, micrometers, angles, lightyears; If I add, subtract, and divide; If I apply calculus or statistics: I am doing nothing more than describing what I am looking at. It may be interesting that humans have developed the capacity to describe their surroundings in quantitative jargon, but there would still be 8 planets around the sun whether anyone was capable of counting or not.

I also considered the fine tuning argument as one of the strongest ones in support of a non natural origin of conscious beings. The chances of life are so negligible that it seems really a stretch to believe that consciousness can arise out of unconscious processes. We should expect a Universe just filled with dead things and not one with life. Especially not one with introspective life, or life that goes beyond the immediate survival instincts: i.e life that can give the Universe itself a meaning.

You are confusing probability with chances. The probabilities are infinitesimally small, but the chances are infinite. That kind of cancels out and nullifies the argument. I.e. If there is a 1 in a billion probability of a particular outcome of a certain event, but 50 billion chances for that outcome, it is not a certainty that the outcome will occur.

But the key moment was this morning. And it was not a mere rational analysis. I just had a look out of my window. When I saw the mountains, the lake, the majesty and the beauty surrounding me, I experienced a moment in which I felt one with everything. All the long term pointlessness of my naturalistic view vanished. That was stunning and something I never felt before. I don't know if that can be considered a mystic experience, but it felt like one.

Awesome. I fell like this frequently. But I never had a 'pointlessness' of my naturalistic view. How does this experience relate to giving up your atheism?

At the moment, I am a bit confused and still thinking about it. My Christian friend thinks that God is claiming me back, and, for the first time since a long time, I cannot definetely rule that out.


Ciao

- viole

Best wishes.

 

[Typist]

IMO there are two major factors to why a lot of religions are so popular.

1. Basic narcissism "God created the universe and all things but still has a special place and purpose set aside for humanity because we're just that awesome and important".

2. Comfort and Security "After I die I get to go live in a magical utopia in the sky and eat all the sky cake I want!".

Taking each of your points:

1) Atheism is also human-centric, as it depends on the rules of human reason being binding on all of reality. If we don't make that assumption, then we have no basis upon which to debunk god claims. When we consider how small we are, and how large reality is, and consider that we are a half insane species only recently living in caves, a notion that the rules of human reason are binding in all of reality is pretty narcissistic and speculative, especially given that we have no clue what the phrase "all of reality" even refers to.

2) The pursuit of a magical utopia is hardly limited to theism. Our modern culture is based on the belief that human reason and science are going to make things better and better and better, apparently without end. While there is good evidence for this belief in the short run, it's also easy to make a case that we are digging our own grave with science, nuclear weapons being just the easiest example.

The relationship western culture has long had with religion has been transferred largely in tact to the new gods of human reason and science. It's like we are dating a new girl or guy, but seek the same things from the new partner that we wanted from the last one.

Religions have been very popular for a very long time for the simple reason that they largely work in addressing some fundamental human needs. We may wish we didn't have these needs, but the fact that atheism relies on faith as much as theism does shows that we do.

 

[Desert Snake]

What assumptions do atheists have?

That there is no deity or deities.
If you mean the other definition, as in just a lack of belief, or no opinion, then, all the same, or different, or similar, assumptions as anyone else.

 

[Maranatha]

I know that this might sound surprising to whom knows my worldview, but I am seriously reconsidering my atheism (and naturalism).

I have been thinking a lot recently about the Universe and the place we occupy in it.

<Snipped>

Ciao

- viole

I have been through almost exactly the same experience that you've described here. I was a 'hardcore' atheist / materialist once too. Once this type of experience happens, there is normally no turning back. It's not anything (for me, anyway) that really 'fits' into just one (existing, organised) 'religion', just a sudden awareness, a sudden gratitude, a sudden appreciation of beauty; (including the beauty in humanity, amongst all the desolation and cruelty).

Don't let the reductionist atheists and materialists put you off the scent - you're onto something! What is happening to you does not mean that you suddenly have to use labels like 'god' - but simply that you are starting to open up to consciousness - that mystical thing that physicalism can never account for. There is as little proof that the brain gives rise to consciousness, as there is that God exists!

The feeling that you mentioned about 'feeling at one' - take this as your leading. Look at the unarguable truths that Buddhism points at - dependent origination and inter-being of all things. Feeling at one is a very natural experience to have when you consider these.

Welcome to life!

 

[Spiritual Philosopher]

// My Christian friend thinks that God is claiming me back, and, for the first time since a long time, I cannot definetely rule that out.//


"God" cannot claim anything from anyone, because, "God" is NOT Physical, but, Spiritual.

"God" is without five human senses!

 

[Maranatha]

Is this the Christian God you are talking about or some other?

With all due respect, this is the sort of narrow labelling and 'fitting things into boxes' type thinking that stifles people's spritiual growth. Even if the Christian God exists, he is not a Christian! Christianity is a humanly constructed set of beliefs, doctrines and theology - just like Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, and yes, my own Quakerism to a degree. Look at nature, look at the stars, look into the eyes of child - here you will find God; and here is reality.

 

[Tiapan]

Still don't see why you need a mythical fiction just to explain reality, a lot has happened and accumulated in 4.5 billion years, and yes it is all amazingly natural.

 

[JustWondering]

Taking each of your points:

1) Atheism is also human-centric, as it depends on the rules of human reason being binding on all of reality. If we don't make that assumption, then we have no basis upon which to debunk god claims. When we consider how small we are, and how large reality is, and consider that we are a half insane species only recently living in caves, a notion that the rules of human reason are binding in all of reality is pretty narcissistic and speculative, especially given that we have no clue what the phrase "all of reality" even refers to.

I've heard this argument before and its nonsense. We all live in the same reality and it has obvious rules and characteristics that can be plainly observed and measured. By your argument Odin, Ra, and Zeus can exist, why not?

2) The pursuit of a magical utopia is hardly limited to theism. Our modern culture is based on the belief that human reason and science are going to make things better and better and better, apparently without end. While there is good evidence for this belief in the short run, it's also easy to make a case that we are digging our own grave with science, nuclear weapons being just the easiest example.

Modern Science and Medicine doesn't make claims that you live on after death in a perfect world without suffering for all eternity if you take the right medication before you croak. While various religions make claims that if you fully devout yourself and your resources to (insert religious organization or leaders name here) you are rewarded with a eternal afterlife free of all worries and suffering. I hear one religion rewards its most devoted with virgins to do with as they please in the hereafter. Why not? Its not like all the nonsense they spout has to be proven true with little things like evidence or even common sense.

Religions have been very popular for a very long time for the simple reason that they largely work in addressing some fundamental human needs. We may wish we didn't have these needs, but the fact that atheism relies on faith as much as theism does shows that we do.

Again, another nonsensical argument. An atheists "faith" is generally based on what evidence and logic can demonstrate is real (which rules out most god concepts, ghosts, leprechaun's, etc...) whereas a theists faith is belief in something's existence (anything their imaginations can conjure) that lacks ANY evidence or sound arguments to demonstrate it actually exists/ever existed.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Taking each of your points:

1) Atheism is also human-centric, as it depends on the rules of human reason being binding on all of reality. If we don't make that assumption, then we have no basis upon which to debunk god claims. When we consider how small we are, and how large reality is, and consider that we are a half insane species only recently living in caves, a notion that the rules of human reason are binding in all of reality is pretty narcissistic and speculative, especially given that we have no clue what the phrase "all of reality" even refers to.

This argument doesn't really make much sense, since atheism does espouse any form of rules or a particular kind of logic. It is merely the reaction of disbelief to the claim "a God exists"; such a position doesn't require believing that "the rules of human reason are binding in all reality", it merely requires not believing a particular proposition.

2) The pursuit of a magical utopia is hardly limited to theism. Our modern culture is based on the belief that human reason and science are going to make things better and better and better, apparently without end. While there is good evidence for this belief in the short run, it's also easy to make a case that we are digging our own grave with science, nuclear weapons being just the easiest example.

And how would one make this case?

The relationship western culture has long had with religion has been transferred largely in tact to the new gods of human reason and science. It's like we are dating a new girl or guy, but seek the same things from the new partner that we wanted from the last one.

The difference being that reason and science demonstrably work better at expanding our understanding of the Universe and providing tangible benefits. To use your analogy, it's like we've met a new partner with whom a relationship is actually mutually beneficial, and who supplies all of our needs, whereas all of our past partners have been useless, abusive drunks.

Religions have been very popular for a very long time for the simple reason that they largely work in addressing some fundamental human needs. We may wish we didn't have these needs, but the fact that atheism relies on faith as much as theism does shows that we do.

In what way does atheism rely on faith?

 

[Mayflow]

Well I think by definition, that "Atheist" means to have faith that there are no higher deities. Agnostics just kind of like shrug and say "We really don't know"