Any atheists here who were once believers?
- Thread starter wegs
- Start date
Yes sad. Reminds me of the Scopes trial and the cautious merchant's sign:
In God we trust, all others, pay in cash.
and of the joke: What does the agnostic, dyslexic, insomniac do at night? Answer: He lies awake wondering if there is a Dog.
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
There is no "switching off". Your consciousness is the chemical process in your brain. If you believe in God...it's a chemical process in your brain that allows this. If you don't believe...there is nothing to switch off.
There isn't a God section of your brain.
Love is an emotion as is hate. I don't get your point there. Really, biology, chemistry, and physics textbooks are cheap when bought used somewhere. It's not hard to get up to speed on the basics of science these days. My degrees weren't in the sciences but it's an interesting subject and I can read
Pick any non-religious website and you can get some basic info on any subject relating to science as well.
I saw something about scanning the brains of people praying and the EEG was different than normal people, so there might be a "God section of your brain".
In other words, you can't list any non-Christian sources. Which means your sole source for information--or at least the information you actually believe--is from cranks. Not legitimate scientists, not textbooks or published articles, but from debunking websites.
Poor showing, Jan.
The concept is quite easy to understand. The actual mechanics of it require some education. Would you disagree with the workings of an internal combustion engine without knowing how one works?
Oh, I see. So you're one of the cranks who believes there's a difference between "micro" and "macro," then?
On what basis do you reject "macro" evolution?
I have no idea what that means, Jan. Is this an attempt to excuse your ignorance of evolution?
In what way, specifically, does it contradict observation?
Atheist worldview? Good grief, Jan. Charles Darwin wasn't an atheist, Jan. His theory is based on observations--naked-eye observations, and logic.
How could a scientifically-invalid and philosophically-weak theory give character and strength to an ideology?
More cowardice. What a surprise!
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
Or you could conclude that brain activity is different when we are praying than when we are dreaming, or running, or thinking, or talking...they would all be different.
There's a saying that comes to mind here and in other similar threads..."If all you have is a hammer every solution looks like a nail". Religion being the nail of course.
YES. the brain has many separate areas for different tasks, music, seeing, emotions, talking, both Wernica's and Boca's areas, especially the first would be required for all forms of praying the second only for praying out loud as that is where the motor commands of speech are generated.
Instead of EEG it was probably magnetic resonance imaging, MRI, that was used to find a localized area.
BTW MRI was original a Chemist's tool called NM(I or R) Nuclear Magnetic (Imagining or Resonance the second, with R, being much more common) but that name did not sell well in its more recent application areas.
I should have paid more attention to the documentary. There is so much going on all over the world who the hell can keep up with it all?
Engineering with a hammer is an art in itself. Some are good at it.
Yeah, the problem lies on both sides, though. Public schools needn't put down religion either, in order to seem politically correct. I'd like to think that most atheists and agnostics merely want to keep religion from playing a role in public education and government. To that end, I think they are right, but I thought this way even as a theist. On the flip side, religious people don't want their voices stifled; both sides deserve respect in their own ways, but the end result has to be what is best for public education/society, as a whole.
When the push pull stops, we might stop seeing these stories in the news. IOW, when will we as human beings stop taking sides and start working together to support our communities and society?
The pendulum never seems to settle in the middle, ever notice that?
*chuckle* I like that.
Last edited:
That's true - as I said I should have taken more notice.
elte
Valued Senior Member
Robittybob1, from what I've picked up about a "God center" in the brain is that the need to believe with no evidence in the supernatural has been selected into human DNA by evolution. It enabled people to overcome fear concerning doing dangerous things that were important for the survival of the species. This isn't so important in less intelligent life forms where instinct has more control over behavior.
Also, having higher intelligence demands knowing causation. For example, if the wind blows things but is invisible, then the imagination took over and filled in a cause, in that case, an invisible being. The being was not completely unlike the one that sent lightning bolts.
Also, having higher intelligence demands knowing causation. For example, if the wind blows things but is invisible, then the imagination took over and filled in a cause, in that case, an invisible being. The being was not completely unlike the one that sent lightning bolts.
elte
Valued Senior Member
Hi Wegs, about not ever believing in God, I think your case would be like mine where you believed very early on. Possibly, you began as an unbeliever, and believed sometime after toddlerhood when grown-ups told you about God. I recall staring at a crucifix on the wall very early in life with no idea of God. I was too young to even think deeply enough about causes for things that I didn't understand, so my "God center" didn't independently lead me to the idea of an invisible being who could do what basically amounts to magic.
So belief in God was an evolutionary advantage? Now that is very interesting. Like at some time in history to have a very hairy body might have been what kept humans alive, now it is frowned upon. OK there are periods of time where different features are advantageous to the survival of a species. Now that science explains most things, maybe the God center is not as beneficial, but If as an extension of this center we came to be able to foresee the future and to look back into the past I can see some perfect uses for it still.
I have often wanted to test my God Center out on the Madeleine McCann case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann
I believe I could get the result but will anyone let me?
One thing that fundamentalism has accomplished is that it has forced academics and educators to explain to the confused students the history of the anti-science movement. Over the last 10-20 years the textbooks have had to set aside a page or two to this subject. Quite a few initiatives have been undertaken in teacher's associations, various societies of science professionals and the government organizations such as National Academy of Sciences, in order to try to counter the disinformation spread by Creation Science activists.
Some of this has been construed as anti-religious activism by scientists. It has led to the banning of books containing these explanations, and publishers have been forced to remove the material or lose their market. It effectively produced censorship in some cases. And as you know there have been countless lawsuits in the states controlled by Republican legislatures resulting from laws which, besides the main charges in the complaints, have encouraged the textbook selection committees to toe the party line.
If not for the dirty political tactics of the fundies I don't think any of this controversy would exist. There might still be some fear and loathing of atheism by Christians (as often expressed by Jan Ardena) but I doubt the atheists would have much of an axe to grind against religion, except for the remaining issues of abortion, stem cell research, climate science and gay rights. Beyond that would be those atheists scarred by clerics or indoctrination or for some other reason holding some kind of grudge. But I suspect it wouldn't involve science at that point.
I mention this since I'm guessing that any disparagement of religion by public schools is assumed to be coming from the science classrooms. This is probably not the case. Surveys have shown that some 40% of science teachers are religious, and we can expect that they are going to uphold their beliefs in front of the students should any religion-bashing arise. The remaining 60% are held in check by the somewhat rigid laws enacted to ensure that this kind of thing doesn't happen (rules anticipating backlash from atheist teachers).
Of course this has been going on for nearly 100 years now and it does seem to be losing steam. It remains to be seen whether the fundies are going to regroup and try some new tack to keep the pressure up. But it's hard to imagine what they are going to use for ammunition since it appears to have petered out.
In word, it's fundamentalism that is giving religion such a bad reputation.
Bells
Staff member
Aww man..
Please tell me you aren't saying you are psychic, or, sorry, you have a "God Center" and able to help find Madeleine McCann through the use of spirits and whatnot? You cannot be serious!
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
I don't think people are as religious as the polls suggest. In this country it's hard to find many people who will say they don't believe in God but there are many who don't follow a religion. That is where all the control and nonsense generally comes from.
So, if many (maybe even most) people say they believe in God or are "spiritual" but don't believe in religion and don't necessarily even "know" that there is a God but are just "open" to there being something else. In that scenario God is already gone except in name.
Everyone has certain "feelings" of awe when walking in nature. Many of us don't call that God and attribute supernatural characteristics to that feeling. Many do just because religion is so ingrained into our culture. It's really just a cultural thing for many. That will pass over time as well.
I doubt if more than 25 percent truly believe in the reality of a God. There may not be a direct correlation between belief and education or intelligence but I think there is a relationship there.
It's just that there are a few highly educated people who still cling to these beliefs but not many.
If it's not about intelligence it's at least largely about education. I think that's pretty obvious from many of these discussions.
So, if many (maybe even most) people say they believe in God or are "spiritual" but don't believe in religion and don't necessarily even "know" that there is a God but are just "open" to there being something else. In that scenario God is already gone except in name.
Everyone has certain "feelings" of awe when walking in nature. Many of us don't call that God and attribute supernatural characteristics to that feeling. Many do just because religion is so ingrained into our culture. It's really just a cultural thing for many. That will pass over time as well.
I doubt if more than 25 percent truly believe in the reality of a God. There may not be a direct correlation between belief and education or intelligence but I think there is a relationship there.
It's just that there are a few highly educated people who still cling to these beliefs but not many.
If it's not about intelligence it's at least largely about education. I think that's pretty obvious from many of these discussions.
I have openly directed people to read another thread on the Wooden Boats Forum where I set out to solve the biggest mystery in NZ to date, the Scott Watson Case where two people go missing and the innocent person Scott Watson is convicted of their murder. But at the time of his trials the Lord told me twice to go and help, but it was at least a year later when his appeals failed that I started out to do it.
It is briefly outlined in http://forum.woodenboat.com/showthr...ual-Guidance-assists-in-Scott-Watson-s-Pardon
It took 10 years of research to solve the case, but as yet my findings have not been accepted but all the interested parties know about my discoveries.
Ten years out of my life to complete that mission! So I am reluctant to do that again, but the Madeleine McCann mystery does intrigue me too, but as yet I have not been told to go and do it.
Bells
Staff member
/Speechless....
No.. just.. NO!
Perhaps you should keep such.. ermm.. stories, to the appropriate forum (ie not Religion).
I'm still optimistic in the Scott Watson case for the father of the murdered girl is willing to help clear his name if he can speak to him face to face and convince him he is innocent. That will be hard for Scott but not impossible.
Parapsychology? and religion are very intertwined.
Bells
Staff member
Let me rephrase it..
If you wish to take the Woo to the Woo Woo level, then please post in the appropriate forum (ie not the religion forum or any of the science forum, as you seem to have taken to spreading your Woo in the science subforum as well).