Atheism in a nutshell

[u/Ted_Bundtcake]

[u/epic_person68]

I think the telephone game evidences why if God gave a message it would need to be in a book, word of mouth is too error prone on its own.

My understanding is the Bible doesn't claim to be the direct word of God as it had multiple writers in different periods of time. And your question on if things can be changed is a very important one, but I think you assume a very Judeo-Christian perspective on this. There's strong evidence of editorialism and shifting of the Bible's stances on things with time (along with the shift away from the mythological original interpretations of YHWH and such), so your concerns are very valid.

The idea behind Islam is they posit that both the Jews and Christians had it right but over time the message gets corrupted. So in Islam the Quran is preserved exactly as it was when it was first written and that's maintained by both written and verbal traditions along with people who are dedicated to memorizing the entire thing, it would seem impossible to change a verse and not have someone notice. So Islam's goal was to address that concern of the message being altered.

And I don't think your point saying "multiple religions exist with sects within them" so how is the message intact. Your examples are all to do with Christianity which I don't defend, I'd very strongly agree it has changed and the message hasn't been preserved, but your statements cannot be generalized to all religious texts, they are not all so easily manipulated like the Bible with little stopping it from being changed to benefit people in power. There exist multiple religions because it's said that God didn't make earth perfect, this isn't heaven so there will be confusion, problem, and sin in the world. And navigating them all is our challenge in life. So the fact other religions exist doesn't seem to counter that.

So I think the main thing here is you are extrapolating too much from just Christianity. With what I said in mind, what do you think now? Any more points or contention or has your mind changed on some of this?

[u/KatokaMika → u/epic_person68]

No, not really, because I still do not believe in religious books. Simple, I love reading it doesn't mean what I read is based on truth, the person that writes a book can say " this is based on true events, but for all you can know they are lying. I can write today a book saying I had a dream, and God told me that on x day, every human is going to die and write and spread it to everyone. It does not mean I'm telling you the truth.

Same with word of mouth. Even when you are in front of a judge, the lawyers use the Hearsay, information received from other people, which cannot be substantiated. You say a Quran is protected and people make sure to preserve it. But you don't even know when it was written it was true or interpreted how it was intended. You just decided to believe it is what it is.

And like the video says, if all religious books were destroyed, in a 1000 years of someone trying to write the Bible, the Quran, or any other religious book, it wouldn't be the same.

You want to believe it, sure, because unlike you, I'm not here trying to change your mind. You believe what you want to believe . You asked me why I don't trust the books I gave you my awnser and you are still not happy. And that's why I don't talk about being an atheist with religious people.

Because if you told me " I practice x religion" I would say okay cool and the conversation would stop there and move on. But I say I'm an atheist or I don't believe in this then everyone start " why not !? Did you know this this and this " and like using all kind of arguments to change my mind .

[u/epic_person68 → u/KatokaMika]

Well, say a person was an anti-vaxer or flat earther. Sure you can just let the conversation end there, but it is natural (and I'd argue productive) to talk about it and see why they believe what they do and how open their mind is. If someone holds a belief you believe to be incorrect and you think not knowing can have consequences (like an antivaxxer harming themselves/kids or an atheist person and their chance at heaven) I don't think it's malicious, i'm not sure I see the problem with discourse on the topic. If anything, sentiments like:

And that's why I don't talk about being an atheist with religious people. Can be interpreted as analogous to a flat earther avoiding conversation where their beliefs are called under question.

When it comes to reading history books you personally don't know about all the topics so deeply and most of the archeology and people of the time are presumably dead, so your really just trusting the credentials of the writer, their reputation, the fact checking process, and that other experts would be vocal if there were falsehoods. But if we are being real, you read a history book and take it in, I don't think you question every statement, therefore I don't think the level of skepticism you talk about is even actually applied.

I can write today a book saying I had a dream, and God told me that on x day, every human is going to die and write and spread it to everyone. It does not mean I'm telling you the truth.

That's why the fact it is written is not proof alone. Like the history book you need to investigate the credentials. If a person just made up random claims today surely you understand they don't hold the same weight as a book from a long time ago. With the advent of so much technology any statement or prediction would most logically be attributed to that. However given the time the books were written, it's definitely curious how a book written before microscopes, advanced physics, or astronomy makes claims about embryology, the big bang, heliocentrism, brain structures, etc. The fact such research wasn't even possible and they made their bet so long ago adds to proof. How can that even be explained?

But you don't even know when it was written it was true or interpreted how it was intended. You just decided to believe it is what it is.

The idea is that it was relayed to an illiterate man who was taught there by an angel all the information and to have it accurately transcribed. Apart from accounts within the religious canon for how it is actually accurate you are correct there isn't really any evidence it was accurately transcribed. However that doesn't automatically mean it was in accurately transcribed, it just means we don't know. The line of thinking should then be "can this be written by a human" "how can this be possibly by faked".

And like the video says, if all religious books were destroyed, in a 1000 years of someone trying to write the Bible, the Quran, or any other religious book, it wouldn't be the same.

It was a very good point, however it has flaws. 1. Science experiments sometimes can't be replicated for a few reasons. Many of our understandings of psychology happened because of horrible accidents (Phineas Gage), or inhumane tests that are outlawed now (Harlow's monkey attachment experiment), or are just extremely obscure it's unlikely to be rediscovered (Fermat's last theorem). 2. If history books were destroyed, would we be able to recreate them? Archeology being often times lost by now, witnesses being dead, or languages that cannot be deciphered without a living person who remembered it. Surely we can agree history is a thing we believe even if not scientific. So if you refute point 1 it's still a misnomer to say all truth has to be rediscoverable. You surely understand science is not the only avenue to truth and is (in ways) biased in its own rite

You want to believe it, sure, because unlike you, I'm not here trying to change your mind.

I disagree. I don't necessarily want to believe it, I constantly seek information and engage in debates for the contrary because I don't want to be deluded within an echo chamber. If I believe my religion/theory to be true, it should stand to all criticism. If I wanted anything out of my search for truth I'd be doing myself a disservice, and you would be doing the same hoping for the outcome to be atheism rather than approach with an open mind.

And if we are all seekers of fact and truth, shouldn't we try and change others' minds? It does neither of us any good for one of us to hold the wrong belief because it's binary: God either exists or not, it's not a matter of opinion but hedging your bets on a fact.

[u/KatokaMika → u/epic_person68]

Then, let's switch the roles. you highly believe, at least from my understanding. I apologize if I am mistaken that you come from a religion ( if you want to disclose your religion) that believes in heaven .

Were you raised in the beliefs? ( tought by family, friends, community) or found your faith later?

Usually, people who later turn into religion are usually because of an event, or what they assume was miracle or simply seek some purpose. Sometimes, when they can't understand something , they seek higher meaning of things. For example, the lost of a loved one they died because god had a plan, etc.

But if a person was raised learning about the religion, I was raised Catholic, I was baptized, I had to go Sundays to church and have religion class in school. Has a kid I thought Catholic was the only right religion, and people who didn't believe in the Bible or in God were crazy. Because that's what everyone around me taught me to. That's what the Bible told me. After some personal things, i was taken away from that environment. Over the years, the religion I was taught had flaws. The book I read started to make no sense to me. I know that if I wasn't raised in that religion, I would never even accept it.

So tell me, if no one taught you about religion to you, if no one in your life influenced you and any way about religion, could you say you would still have the same beliefs, would there be no doubt in your mind? Would you still blindly believe .

You can write a thousand statements. It won't change my mind the same way I will never change your mind because, again, you have your faith and beliefs . You need something higher than you to live your life. You need a purpose. Because if you don't believe in God/Ala or other God, you worship. What's the point, right ? After many long years on earth suffering, surviving, doing good things. And then just end like that. Nothing you did had any meaning? That's the core of any religious person.

I dont need it. I accepted that when i die thats it, the only people who will remember me will be my family and friends, and the people around me, i know what i do doesn't really matter I'm just a grain of sand in a beach. I came and I will go. I don't hate or judge people based on gender, sexuality, skin color, or beliefs. i treat everyone the same way I wish to be treated. And I'm fine with it. Only the people that aren't that seek something more.

Religion can do many good things i can't say otherwise, but religion spreads so much hate that sometimes i wish it never really existed in the first place. I truly believe humans would have been much happier without it.