Perchance

This isn't happening to me currently, but I was curious as to what everyone thought:

I've read a lot of "testmonies" from theists- and former theists- who described their faith wavering, and how they engaged in activities like reading the Bible, praying, associating with other theists, and so on, in order to "save" their faith. Whether or not it works seems to depend on the person.

Do you think that, if an atheist or agnostic thought that he or she might be seeing 'truth' in theism, should he or she read as many religious books as possible, or go and read atheist arguments and proofs and spend time with atheists- offline or online- instead?

Personally I think it should probably be both. After all, I suppose there could be a perfect religion out there for a wavering atheist, and just becuase I can't, for example, think of any that would fit me, that doesn't mean there aren't faiths for other people.

What do you think? Does intellectual honesty demand that we look at all religions and try to come up with reasons for rejecting them, or is looking at atheist materials to bolster our convictions enough?

-Perchance.

frostymama

I think that person should be honest with themselves. I am not one who thinks that all theistic beliefs are inherently harmful and transform a person ind a raving asshole. I may not agree with them, but I don't think that a person remaining a theist after a crisis of faith is the most horrible thing they can do.

Personally I tried to explore several different sides when I was having one of those crisises of faith. I read as much as I could about various forms of Christianity. I also explored various pagan paths and Judaism and Islam to some extent. I finally came to the conclusion that I could not be intellectually honest with myself if I merely traded one mythos for another.

I probably haven't answered the question with all of my rambling (I tend to do that a lot. LOL), but there is my $.02

southernhybrid

I guess it's a highly personal decision. When I deconverted from an evangelical version of Xianity, I had no idea that I was heading toward atheism. I thought there must be a better religion than Xianity so I explored most of the major world religions. For several years I flirted with the idea of becoming a Bahai, one of the most tolerant, peaceful religions I've ever studied. I prayed and had many interesting discussions with friends about religion and agnosticism. I never thought about reading atheist materials because I was so convinced there was a religion out there that was true. I at least believed there was a strong possibility that some sort of nice, benevolent god must exist.

In the end I still had a problem with the religious dogma and eventually realized I had been offered no convincing evidence for the existence of god. My total deconversion from Xianity to strong atheist took almost ten years. I'm glad that I learned so much about other religions. Oddly enough, during this time I never read a single atheist book or studied evolution. My arrival at atheism was based only on investigating religion which eventually led me to believe that all religions were the inventions of men.

I think individuals should do whatever independent investigation they need to reach a conclusion about religion. I don't care if people need a religion to find purpose in their lives as long as they also learn to be tolerant of individuals with other viewpoints.

frostymama

Oh. I forgot about that one. I looked into a ton of different religions (some more seriously than others). I still came to the same conclusion. There just wasn't any reason to trade Xianity in for another religion ... when there still wasn't any evidence that the other religion was any less mythical.

[ September 15, 2002: Message edited by: frostymama ]</p>

Brian63

My personal opinion is that it is *far* more important for atheists to be freethinkers than it is for them to be atheists. In other words, people (atheists included) should seek out truth, and if they believe that truth is reflected in Christian theism, than they should be Christians. If it is not reflected in Christian theism, they should not be Christians.

I consider myself to be a freethinker first, atheist second. To date I have not found convincing enough evidence for the existence of God, but I am open to the possibility of such and will change my beliefs should the evidence warrant it.

Brian

Jobar

Well said, Bryan.

I've told theists coming here to preach that the only thing we worship, or seek, is truth. That is what freethinkers do, IMO.

If someone came up with some incredibly powerful new religion which was consistent with all known scientific facts, and which proved or strongly pointed to the existence of a god, I would accept it. My lack of belief is purely a function of the lack of evidence presented for any existing religion's notion of a personal god. My own self-honesty would require it.

Those of you who have been following my posts concerning pantheism in EoG know that I consider it a consistent and truthful worldview- that is as simple to understand as quantum mechanics ( ). However, since I don't claim to know ALL truth, I cannot claim that pantheism is perfect truth. So in that sense, I maintain my skeptical attitude- and my status as a freethinker.

southernhybrid

You're right, Brian.

Brian63

Thanks southernhybrid.

Jobar, I spell my name with an 'i' usually, but thanks for the compliment as well. I have a lot of admiration for you for willing to be a minority among a minority (pantheist among atheists). Actually, pantheism is something I'd like to study up on at some point in the future, and I may need to use you as a reference when that day comes (although currently there are several interesting threads in EOG about it).

Brian

[/derailment]

Starboy

Let's assume that there were "truths" in christianity. Those "truths" are probably the same "truths" as you would find in thousands of religions and philosophies that litter the history of mankind. The deciet of Christianity is they try to convince you that their "truth" is the only "truth".

Starboy

Perchance

Thanks for your responses, everyone.

I consider myself a nonbeliever who would reconsider if I could find a religion that:

a) was consistent with the natural world.

b) could give me insights I had not experienced before (why adopt it if it offered nothing that could not be learned through naturalism?)

c) encouraged its adherents to be as skeptical as freethinkers usually are; one of the fatal qualities of most religions I've looked at so far is that they demand there be certain truths that are impervious to questioning.

d) if focused on a god, provided strong proof of the existence of that god, and gave a good reason for worshipping it (rather than just fear).

I suppose that I was partially curious to see what other nonbelievers would reconsider if they found a religion that fit them.

I used to say that I would reconsider if I had a powerful theistic experience, but now that I think about it, just because I have a powerful experience doesn't mean that that religion is real... and I hope that I would retain enough pride in myself not to convert just because something happened to me that I could not immediately explain.

-Perchance.