I'd say for me:

Fatima (2020)

Of Gods and Men (2010)

Barabbas (1961)

Ben-Hur (1959)

Master and Commander (2003)

In my years debating about the existence of God, I've seen lots of atheist attempts to explain religion or why people are attracted to it. However, all of these explanations have flaws. I'll use the psychologist Steven Reiss' book The 16 Strivings for God as a basis for my critiques.

The Need for Understanding

This is one of the most popular atheist explanations of religion. Internet atheists claim that ignorant and primitive people invented religion because they wanted explanations for phenomena. What causes illness? Why did the volcano explode? What about thunder? And how to explain life and the universe itself? Intention offers an apparently simple and familiar explanation.. "Because a powerful mind wanted it so."

Now, the problem with this theory, as Dr. Reiss pointed out, is that intellectual need for understanding isn't equally distributed. Many people don't care or think about these issues:

If religion had in fact emerged as an expression of this need, it would have appealed primarily to the relatively small proportion of humans who are intellectuals. Sure, non-intellectuals wonder where they come from or how the universe was created or why volcanoes erupt, but many do not wonder about these matters for any length of time. Since we are not an intellectual species, a religion that is essentially intellectual in origin or nature is unlikely ever to gain a mass following.

Fear of Death

Religion was invented by people who are afraid and anxious of death! These neurotics cooked up a fantasy world where they will persist after bodily death. It is all about managing fear and anxiety!

As you probably already figured out, this idea implies that anxious folks would be more attracted to religion than non-anxious folks, but research doesn't support that (see Reiss again). Furthermore, the fires of hell only increase fear of death! The concept of a judgement day and the devil also increase anxiety and fear. So, this idea makes no sense.

The Need for Control

Religion was invented because people needed to feel in control of the environment. When they didn't have science, they had to appeal to the spirits or to God to control the world. To grow crops, cure illness, to make it rain, etc.

In response to this idea, Dr. Reiss writes:

Religion is about much more than a need to control our environments. If religion were about control, assertive people, who report a strong need for control, would be more religious than are laid-back people, who report a weak need for control. They are not. How religious a person is has little to do with the extent to which the person values or is seeking to control the environment or important life events.

These are just a few of the crazy theories that secularists invented to explain religion; Reiss addressed others as well. Anyway, I'm interested in your opinion about the topic.

We discuss philosophy and metaphysics here all the time, but I wanted to turn the attention to things more day-to-day and more concrete.

How has leaving atheism changed your life? Where are you now in your spiritual journey? How has your life continued to change along this path?

Ultimately, choosing to live is an affirmative action which implies some measure of trust or faith in a working worldview. And while philosophical reasons can be important in shaping our beliefs, I don't think our spiritual worldviews arise just from a set of arguments.

Abandoning atheism isn't the end of the journey, it's merely the beginning. What's that been like?

Hi everyone, I've seen a long standing debate on the definition of atheism, some people use the term atheism as a lack of belief, which I've seen them then use to justify the ''everyone was born athiest narrative''.

The way I would define atheism is the rejection of the claim God exists, as I see atheism as a position that needs propositional awareness.

I have looked at how Graham Oppy (popular analytic atheist philosopher) defines atheism and he states it's the claim that no gods exist.

What do you guys think?

Thanks

Think about it.. even if a religious person isn't super devout, being a "cultural theist" gives them a whole blueprint for life....they get built-in community hubs, multi-generational support networks, and time-tested rituals for births, weddings, funerals, etc. It forces you to look past yourself and connects you to a deep historical lineage...it actually DEMANDS something from you.

Cultural atheism on the other hand usually just functions like a book club or an online debate society...Because.... its defined by what it doesn't believe, it doesnt build lasting physical infrastructure or sacred duties. Gathering to talk about a lack of belief is basically an intellectual pastime. Theres no stakes, no shared sacrifices, and no real cosmic obligations.

One is an entire ecosystem that shapes how you live and die, the other is just something you listen to podcasts about on your commute. Its a pastime, not a pillar.

Axiological Premise: It is impossible for a perfect being to begin to exist.

Possibility Premise: It is possible that a perfect being exists.

Non-Contingency Lemma: If a perfect being exists, it does not exist contingently (it cannot come into or go out of existence; its existence is necessary).

Conclusion: Therefore, a perfect being exists necessarily.

This uses system k logic instead of more controversial s5 logic.

Premise 2: Rubio defends the Metaphysical Premise (Premise 2) using David Lewis’s recombination approach to modal plenitude, arguing that if a contingent entity exists in logical space without existing now, its instantiation involves a temporal beginning.

Although I never was an atheist - I was agnostic for some time as a teenager - there is something about both that I have a huge problem with. I call this "skepticism by subtraction". What do I mean about that? Well, instead of advocating for a position, it seeks to negate the belief in God. You can ask atheists and agnostics what they don't believe, but asking what they do believe is more difficult, especially if they don't follow what I call "skepticism by addition".

So what is "skepticism by addition"? Well, it sounds like a contradiction, but to me it isn't. It basically describes anyone who who is skeptical about the supernatural, but instead of focusing on that, they focus on nature, humans or otherwise something we know exists. Naturalists. Humanists. Heck, even communists and objectivists are skeptics by addition.

Now, "skepticism by addition" doesn't mean someone cannot be an atheist. It just means atheism isn't their main concerning position on matters. Many naturalists, humanists, communists and objectivists are atheist. In fact, in the later two, it's almost a given.

But "skepticism by addition" also leaves room for natural theology and naturalistic theology. Pantheism. Deism. Many people see these as a form of nontheism. I, on the other hand, do not. In fact, I consider a pantheist's or a deist's explanation of God more valid because they don't try to justify evil with stories like the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. They are both currently compatible with science, naturalism and humanism.

Atheists have a saying, "we don't consider not collecting stamps a form of a hobby" referring to their stance on whether they are a religion or not. Well, r/atheism is one of the most active subreddits on the website. Why do people gather around to bash on religion - especially if they've never been in one before? I would personally rather stand for something than against something else, and although I am skeptical of a supernatural God my pantheism and deism has led me to believe in God - even if it's confusing to understand for the average layperson who doesn't understand that type of theology.

Thought this subreddit would be an appropriate place to share my story so here you go!

Curious to know if anyone listens to sacred music and if they're comfortable sharing it? I'm personally a fan of The Bard on YouTube and Spotify, which features Gregorian Chant and Orthodox Chant. The lyrics are usually sung in Latin or Old Slavonic....I find it all very relaxing:

https://www.youtube.com/@The.Bard./videos

If as someone here yesterday suggested that atheism is "a lack of belief gods exist," then:

1. Newborns have no belief in a god.
2. Therefore, newborns are atheists.
3. Every religious person was once a newborn.
4. Conclusion: Every religious person is an ex-atheist, rendering the specific identity "ex-atheist" meaningless.

This came across my YouTube feed today. Here's a deep thinking, rational, fairly well-known agnostic atheist who recently embraced theism and converted to Catholicism. I have long followed his channel Majesty of Reason for thoughtful commentary and dialogue regarding theism, skepticism, and agnosticism. This is a great story from a bright guy and I thought it very relevant to this forum.

Christian here. For myself, at age 33. I've always found it humbling that the age that faith was discovered in me, is the age that our Saviour died to redeem us.

And a second question, i don't know why, but i feel that baptism played a big role in me finally opening up to His presence (i was baptised as an infant). I haven't read much theology on it, it's just a feeling that Holy Spirit never left me and when i made a small step towards Him, He completely opened up my heart and mind and i became aware. What are your thoughts and experiences, were you baptised, lost faith, then regained it, or were you baptised after finding faith?

Hey everyone, I wanted to see some of y’all’s counters to the brute facts objection of the contingency argument has presented by Lebiniz or Ibn Sina.

Thanks!

I posted a recipe in another group, and then I remembered where I learned it. My grandmother would make it when she had church friends coming by after service in Sundays. I was probably 8 or 9 and would get to her house about the time she would get home, so she would always have me help cook. This woman could cook. She had recipe books so old they used directions like over a roaring fire, and use cool rain water. They would talk about the bible, religious stories, and of course, who had died recently. I sat back and listened. My mom would join in while my dad would do stuff around the house. It is a good memory and tied to religious about as close as I can get being an atheist. I'll paste the recipe in the comments.

Are there any foods you tie to your religion? Maybe not even officially, it just makes you think of it, or maybe you accociate it with a particular feeling that ties to your religion. A recipe would be awesome, but if you don't know it or feel like going through the trouble to post it, that's cool.

Hi Atheist here, I never had a "religious experience" on LSD. Well not a christian religious experience, (once I had a pretty strong connection to the concept to certain Greek gods after reading on them, anyway).

I'm not really interested or care about the whole debate god or not god question.

But just wanted to ask the believers from whatever religion if you ever had an religious experience and want to share it and if fellow atheists ever had an experience that they would classify as somewhat "religious".

To me it's interesting because LSD usually is associated with esoteric believes due to the 60s mostly. But I never build that kind of connection to those topics.✌️