OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 30, 2014, 01:33:34 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: If the Western view of God is the leading cause of atheism...  (Read 6501 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Super Apostolic Bros.
Is St. Andrew Luigi to St. Peter's Mario?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 227



« on: November 02, 2009, 12:20:15 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2009, 12:28:27 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

It was a Marxist state.  Where did Marxism come from?

The first official atheist state was Albania, the majority of which was Muslim.

But I think you are getting to Russia, which, had there been no Peter the so called Great ushering in the Great Western Captivity of the Church, where perhaps would have been no Bolshevik Revolution (whose leaders, btw got their name in Brussels and London, when they congregated).

And btw, the French First Republic was indeed the first such state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%AAte_de_la_Raison_1793.jpg

"The 20th of Brumaire [the religious calendar having been abolished] of year 2 of the French One and Indivisible Republic, the Feast of Reason was celebrated in the former church of Our Lady [Notre Dame]."

« Last Edit: November 02, 2009, 12:34:12 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #2 on: November 02, 2009, 02:05:18 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Super Apostolic Bros.
Is St. Andrew Luigi to St. Peter's Mario?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 227



« Reply #3 on: November 02, 2009, 02:13:10 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

It's an interesting viewpoint, but one that betrays an inherently Western eurocentric point of view. What then is to be made of India, which is still a majority-Hindu country or the Arab world, where secular ideas exist in so much as they were imported during a time of British rule? And I'm not sure if one can say that Chinese and North Korean atheism is of the same character as the Soviet/Western variety...
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #4 on: November 02, 2009, 02:45:41 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

A nice story, but without historical data to support it, e.g. no tribal society is known to have a pantheistic world view (unless for some reason you see animism as the same thing). It's a creation of higher civilizations, those upper classes you speak of.  Roman religion never got very personal, but remained someone animistic.  The Roman Empire in the East didn't have a Dark Ages, but still had a cult of saints, which it inherited from the Apostles.  "Age of reason once again resurrected?" When was it alive?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #5 on: November 02, 2009, 02:46:34 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

It's an interesting viewpoint, but one that betrays an inherently Western eurocentric point of view. What then is to be made of India, which is still a majority-Hindu country or the Arab world, where secular ideas exist in so much as they were imported during a time of British rule? And I'm not sure if one can say that Chinese and North Korean atheism is of the same character as the Soviet/Western variety...

You're right, I won't deny that it's a relatively Eurocentric view, because it assumes that western society has advanced further than any other society. But I don't think that assumption is too much of a stretch if you compare the evolution of both technology and political structures around the world. I would argue that, organically, India would be about 200 years behind European though if left to their own devices and in some ways it's a shame they weren't, because we've never really seen, on a large scale, the next step of a platonic theology, only of personified monotheism. Though the philosophies of some ancient thinkers such as Diagoras, Critias, Democritus, and Euhemerus suggest a similar path of philosophical evolution. But modern secular thought in India is no doubt largely the result of British influence.

While Chinese atheism is a bit different than what has been seen in the west, I still think it can be effectively argued that it has it's foundation in the writings of Karl Marx who was clearly influenced by enlightenment thinkers, though he differed from them in some important aspects, such as the notion of property rights. As for North Korea...yes, their atheism is different, technically it's an atheist state, but with people praying to the former dictator (and current dictator's father) Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-Il being essentially considered a god on earth by their propaganda, the society is run more like ancient Egypt with a Pharaoh-god.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,594


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2009, 03:11:25 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).
I think ialmisry touched on the answer by pointing out how Tsar Peter "the Great" brought in his predominantly Western ideas and enforced them upon Russian culture.  If Russia had remained truly Eastern in its world view, would it ever have become atheist?
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2009, 03:19:00 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

A nice story, but without historical data to support it, e.g. no tribal society is known to have a pantheistic world view (unless for some reason you see animism as the same thing).
[/quote]
My bad, it's animism when seen in tribes in Africa, it's pantheism when talked about by new-agers and hippies.

Quote
It's a creation of higher civilizations, those upper classes you speak of.

Or by Blake, if you want to argue that point, though I think his 'pantheism' was more artistic style than theology. I think it'd be fair to classify him as a deist like most of the early 19th century pantheists. They knew the supernatural wasn't the answer, but Darwin hadn't come along to help them figure out what the answer actually was.

Quote
Roman religion never got very personal, but remained someone animistic.

Never got 'very personal' but the deities were personified, at which point the upper classes started moving towards Greek thought and platonic theology, which I already included in my analysis.

Quote
The Roman Empire in the East didn't have a Dark Ages, but still had a cult of saints, which it inherited from the Apostles. 

It had a dark age, especially towards the end, the city itself was always a great beacon of civilization in the midst of a world gone to ruin, but because of this, because the remainder of the Empire fell, it became relatively isolated compared to ancient times, it slowly lost much of its cosmopolitan diversity. Without the influx of new ideas, the city stagnated, it preserved civilization within its walls but could do little to advance it. During the time of Constantine it was truly a cosmopolitan city, every culture of the Mediterranean and beyond was represented in the city, by the time of Leo the Wise, the city had diminished in influence, you had the local populations, Greeks, Bulgarians, Armenians, etc. represented, as well as a small Latin community, largely due to the remaining Roman interests on the Italian peninsula and in Sicily and a small German influence due to the Varangian Guard. But by the fall of the city it was almost entirely Greek.

But, I would argue that the cult of the saints was less related to this and more related to the fact that with the adopting of Christianity the platonic theology of Greece was maintained in the East. The One was identified as the Jewish God and the saints simply replaced the pagan deities.

Quote
"Age of reason once again resurrected?" When was it alive?

Amongst the social elite of ancient Greece and Rome. Philosophically we were on the verge of the modern era, but the technology and logistics of the day simply didn't allow for the maintaining of such a large empire in a peaceful state for a long enough period of time.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #8 on: November 02, 2009, 03:21:37 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).
I think ialmisry touched on the answer by pointing out how Tsar Peter "the Great" brought in his predominantly Western ideas and enforced them upon Russian culture.  If Russia had remained truly Eastern in its world view, would it ever have become atheist?

The 'what if's' of history. Smiley Perhaps had it not been for the reforms of Peter the Great and the related political unity, Russia would not have withstood Napoleon's invasion, and would have become a colony of the French Empire anyway. Wink
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #9 on: November 02, 2009, 06:27:34 PM »

Quote
If the Western view of God is the leading cause of atheism... then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 02, 2009, 07:16:00 PM »

I'm not sure why people think that belonging to the Orthodox Church somehow prevents one from leaving the Faith when even Demas, one of St. Paul's "fellow labourers" left the Church (2 Timothy 4:10), and I'm not sure why some think that Atheism is a "modern" or "Western" phenomenon when even the Old Testament talks about Atheists (Psalm 14:1).
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #11 on: November 02, 2009, 07:24:18 PM »

I'm not sure why people think that belonging to the Orthodox Church somehow prevents one from leaving the Faith when even Demas, one of St. Paul's "fellow labourers" left the Church (2 Timothy 4:10), and I'm not sure why some think that Atheism is a "modern" or "Western" phenomenon when even the Old Testament talks about Atheists (Psalm 14:1).
Very good points ozgeorge.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Super Apostolic Bros.
Is St. Andrew Luigi to St. Peter's Mario?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 227



« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2009, 12:52:54 AM »

I'm not sure why people think that belonging to the Orthodox Church somehow prevents one from leaving the Faith when even Demas, one of St. Paul's "fellow labourers" left the Church (2 Timothy 4:10), and I'm not sure why some think that Atheism is a "modern" or "Western" phenomenon when even the Old Testament talks about Atheists (Psalm 14:1).

I started this thread because it was based on a quote by a famous Greek iconographer (whose name escapes me).

The truth is there is no one massive reason why atheists deny God; it has been said there are as many atheisms as atheists. Several apostate Christians I know became atheists for purely emotional reasons. One, on top of that, had severe mental issues. On the flip side I reject the idea that being a man of science also means being an atheist, as I currently work in the scientific field, and some of my scientific/medical heroes are also Christians (Maxwell, Newton, Pasteur, and now, St. Luke of Simferopol).
Logged
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #13 on: November 03, 2009, 12:56:14 AM »

From a different perspective, it has been said that:

"The greatest single cause of atheism in the world today is Christians, who acknowledge Jesus with their lips and walk out the door, and deny Him by their lifestyle. That is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable." - Brennan Manning

I would say that such would be a poor reason for becoming an atheist, though there might be a grain of truth to it.
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2009, 03:33:57 AM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

The westernization of Orthodoxy. And so alot of bad ideas were transfered.

Latin was the theological language back then and probably still is in some parts. Alot of western ideas went east.








ICXC NIKA
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 03, 2009, 03:51:29 AM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

I agree with most of what you said here, the onlything I would add is that the seeds of Atheism existed in "some" greek philosophers centuries before the birth of Christ, and so it's not really an evolution in the sense of going to something that never existed before. Instead, I see it as an expansion and development of what existed before in the Naturalist/Materialistic greek philosophers of old.........for a number of westerners of the 17th to 20th centuries were reading these ancient materialist greek and Roman philosophers, and just borrowed alot of ideas..........and so I see it as a mixture of both.

Also you can't generalize all pagan religious systems as just simply being Pantheistic for that's not really true. But I agree with most of what you had to say.








ICXC NIKA
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 03, 2009, 04:39:48 AM »

I'm not sure why people think that belonging to the Orthodox Church somehow prevents one from leaving the Faith when even Demas, one of St. Paul's "fellow labourers" left the Church (2 Timothy 4:10), and I'm not sure why some think that Atheism is a "modern" or "Western" phenomenon when even the Old Testament talks about Atheists (Psalm 14:1).


The atheism found in the Old Testament didn't cause what we have today. What caused what we have today came from the west. Just like the science we have today came from the west. I'm sure other cultures had science as well, but it didn't cause what we have today in the world we live in. Roman Catholics were playing with Aristotle some 1,000 years ago, and it eventually turned into the animal we have today.

To be honest, the more I read about Paul Feyerabend, the more I find myself agreeing with him. The monopoly that secularism has on modern science today should be destroyed, and crushed into pieces of different variations(ways to do science).









ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: November 03, 2009, 04:48:50 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #17 on: November 03, 2009, 04:47:07 AM »

Quote
The westernization of Orthodoxy. And so alot of bad ideas were transfered.

Quote
The atheism found in the Old Testament didn't cause what we have today. What caused what we have today came from the west.

What ideas from the west causes atheism, in your view? I ask because most of my reasons for becoming an atheist when I did would have been the same had I lived in 10th century Constantinople (supposing, of course, I knew then what I know now).
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #18 on: November 03, 2009, 05:57:17 AM »

Quote
The westernization of Orthodoxy. And so alot of bad ideas were transfered.

Quote
The atheism found in the Old Testament didn't cause what we have today. What caused what we have today came from the west.

What ideas from the west causes atheism, in your view? I ask because most of my reasons for becoming an atheist when I did would have been the same had I lived in 10th century Constantinople (supposing, of course, I knew then what I know now).

I don't know if "semi-atheism" is a term, but it's a word I use in trying to describe what I saw in some denominations of western Christianity.

Now, there maybe more than just one reason why Atheism/secularism came to be what it is in our world today. But it probably wouldn't of happened if Protestantism didn't preceed it, and if Rome didn't embrace Aristotle as she did centuries before the Protestant Reformation. And.....And if the west didn't hold Saint Augustine in such high esteem to the point of embracing the theological errors of his later years.......which oddly enough was necessary in order for science to grow out of the western world, as well as for modern atheism to grow out of the western world.

It is my personal belief, that all these things played a role in the formation of modern secularism/atheism.


Recently, I was looking at the belief called "cessationism", and saw that it's not that hard to slip into full blown atheism if you believe miracles ceased with either the death of the last Apostle or with the formation of the canon of scripture.

It's easy to see why certain one time Calvinistic cities eventually turned into Rationalistic strong holds. It's also easy to see why a good number of the descendants of the puritans, eventually became deists, uniterians, universalists........etc.

For you are already halfway there anyway. And recently when I was arguing with a number of different Calvinists......both Reformed and nonReformed, I learned that for some the term "Omni-Presence" doesn't really mean "everywhere", for they rejected the idea that God's presence could exist in creation.

Now this may not be the case for "all" calvinists and Reformed. I don't want to generalize, but it's real easy for me to see someone who doesn't believe God's presence to be everywhere to eventually slide into full blown atheism.


And in the case of France, I would turn to the Jansenists in who were very similar to Calvinists. It is said by some that Jansenism(both religious and political)......in some form.....helped cause the atheism in France.


It's impossible to be an atheist if you are a Panentheist. You can simultaneously be an agnostic and a Theist as a Panentheist, but not really an atheist.










ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: November 03, 2009, 06:05:37 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #19 on: November 03, 2009, 07:08:39 AM »

jnorm888,

I'm curious as to whether you've read any books by Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Victor Stenger, or Dan Barker, or perhaps the two atheist/agnostic books compiled by S.T. Joshi? I ask because these are some of the authors I've read over the past 4 or so years, and their ideas about atheism, and Christianity generally, don't seem to match up with what you are saying. Now it's possible that I'm just not connecting the dots here, that's possible, but I'm not sure that that is the case.

In my own life, when I became an atheist in January 2006, I had read almost no atheist literature. I had read The Antichrist by Nietzsche, which I thought was rather silly at the time I read it. I had read a few issues of Skeptic Magazine, though that fine publication is as much agnostic as it is atheist. And I had run across a few "Bible contradictions" sites online, which may have been put together by atheists. But by in large, I became an atheist through reading Christian literature, almost all of which was Eastern Orthodox, with a heavy dose of the Church Fathers. Ozgeorge was describing me in a recent post when he said, in part: "Those who 'think their way' into the Church will not remain but will 'think their way' out of it again."

I believe it was Newman who said that "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant". In my own case, I found that to be deep in history was to cease to be a Christian--Orthodox or otherwise. I don't claim that it always works that way. I know on this forum (let alone in the rest of the world) that there are smarter people than I am, people who know the Fathers better than me, know theology better than me, etc. Nonetheless, for me, it was through my search of the deep wells of Orthodoxy that I became a non-believer. As I said in a post back in 2007: "I didn't deconvert because I read Dawkins or Nietzsche, but because I read Chrysostom and Popovich."

Now, maybe you would speculate that I didn't really understand Orthodoxy. There is the idea that if someone leaves your faith tradition, then they weren't really a part of it or a believer to begin with. Or maybe as ozgeorge said, I simply thought my way out of Orthodoxy. That seemed to be the theory of my priest and wife at the time, who complained, of all things, that I had been reading too many books. The atheists that I mentioned above (Harris, Dawkins, et al.) all took a radically different path than mine. Still, I didn't sense in their books what you are speaking of. But perhaps I am missing something, that's possible.

Quote
It's impossible to be an atheist if you are a Panentheist. You can simultaneously be an agnostic and a Theist as a Panentheist, but not really an atheist.

I'm not sure if this is directed towards me, or you meant it generally. I'm guessing it's directed towards me since I currently have panendeist (with a d, not a th) as my faith or religion. But I'm not an atheist now, and I would agree with you that you couldn't simultaneously be an atheist and a panendeist or panentheist. I'm sorry if I spoke in a way which seemed to indicate that I was an atheist. I meant that when I left Orthodox in the past I became an atheist. Sorry for any confusion on that.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2009, 07:13:09 AM by Asteriktos » Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #20 on: November 03, 2009, 08:22:47 AM »

jnorm888,

I'm curious as to whether you've read any books by Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Victor Stenger, or Dan Barker, or perhaps the two atheist/agnostic books compiled by S.T. Joshi? I ask because these are some of the authors I've read over the past 4 or so years, and their ideas about atheism, and Christianity generally, don't seem to match up with what you are saying. Now it's possible that I'm just not connecting the dots here, that's possible, but I'm not sure that that is the case.


No, I haven't read any of their books. I only watch and listen to their debates with different people....the last debate I saw was Barker and James White. And that was either September or October.

I mostly read, Dr. Alister Mcgrath, Dr. Peter Harrison, James W. Sire, Nigel Brush, and a handfull of others.

 

Quote
In my own life, when I became an atheist in January 2006, I had read almost no atheist literature. I had read The Antichrist by Nietzsche, which I thought was rather silly at the time I read it. I had read a few issues of Skeptic Magazine, though that fine publication is as much agnostic as it is atheist. And I had run across a few "Bible contradictions" sites online, which may have been put together by atheists. But by in large, I became an atheist through reading Christian literature, almost all of which was Eastern Orthodox, with a heavy dose of the Church Fathers. Ozgeorge was describing me in a recent post when he said, in part: "Those who 'think their way' into the Church will not remain but will 'think their way' out of it again."

I believe it was Newman who said that "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant". In my own case, I found that to be deep in history was to cease to be a Christian--Orthodox or otherwise.


I have an Orthodox friend who is also a convert who reads alot of atheistic stuff and he's close to where you are. Now I don't know if this has something to do with Apophatic theology or not. I've noticed two different sets of converts. Some like myself who were pretty much ignorant of Apophatic theology and so we came in for other reasons, and those who converted precisely because of Apophatic theology and mysticism.

Now I don't know what you read in Orthodoxy that caused you to be an Atheist, but I never gave up cataphatic theology when I converted. I'm not saying you gave it up, for I really don't know your expereince......I only know my own. Now I am learning more about Apophatic theology, but I really can't see myself only using Apophatic means.

But I can see how an Orthodox Christian can slide into atheism through some statements made in using apophaticism.....like....we can't say even the term "God exist".....and stuff like that.

So I can see that happening. It's just that when I was thinking about atheism I wasn't even thinking about that......my mind was focused on how it happened in the western world and how that form of atheism eventually influenced the east as well as the rest of the planet.

I never really took those apophatic statements seriously, and so I kind of ignored that it could actually lead someone into atheism.




Quote
I don't claim that it always works that way. I know on this forum (let alone in the rest of the world) that there are smarter people than I am, people who know the Fathers better than me, know theology better than me, etc. Nonetheless, for me, it was through my search of the deep wells of Orthodoxy that I became a non-believer. As I said in a post back in 2007: "I didn't deconvert because I read Dawkins or Nietzsche, but because I read Chrysostom and Popovich."

If you still remember how this happened I would be more than willing to listen to your side of the story.




Quote
Now, maybe you would speculate that I didn't really understand Orthodoxy. There is the idea that if someone leaves your faith tradition, then they weren't really a part of it or a believer to begin with. Or maybe as ozgeorge said, I simply thought my way out of Orthodoxy. That seemed to be the theory of my priest and wife at the time, who complained, of all things, that I had been reading too many books. The atheists that I mentioned above (Harris, Dawkins, et al.) all took a radically different path than mine. Still, I didn't sense in their books what you are speaking of. But perhaps I am missing something, that's possible.

No, I would never say you were never Orthodox, but then again, I've only been Orthodox for 2 years now...it will be 3 in April. So who am I to say such a thing? I would love to be Orthodox for the rest of my life, but It would be naive to think that I couldn't change 5,10,15, years down the road. For if such a thing could happen to Tertullian, than such a thing could happen to all of us.

The semi-atheism I spoke of is in the air we breath........well now the air is becoming more and more atheistic. But it's in the air (society, philosophy, theology, work place, school, culture.....etc)

What I was talking about was the western world in general and the atheism I saw that eventually came to be.



Quote
Quote
It's impossible to be an atheist if you are a Panentheist. You can simultaneously be an agnostic and a Theist as a Panentheist, but not really an atheist.

I'm not sure if this is directed towards me, or you meant it generally. I'm guessing it's directed towards me since I currently have panendeist (with a d, not a th) as my faith or religion. But I'm not an atheist now, and I would agree with you that you couldn't simultaneously be an atheist and a panendeist or panentheist. I'm sorry if I spoke in a way which seemed to indicate that I was an atheist. I meant that when I left Orthodox in the past I became an atheist. Sorry for any confusion on that.


I was saying that in general, for I'm a Panentheist, and this is why I said that we could simultaneously be both agnostic and Theistic because of the Essence vs Energies distinction.













ICXC NIKA
« Last Edit: November 03, 2009, 08:28:24 AM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2009, 10:41:29 AM »

Can some one please explain to me how accepting Augustine and using Aristotilian language lead towards atheism?  Huh
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Super Apostolic Bros.
Is St. Andrew Luigi to St. Peter's Mario?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 227



« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2009, 11:43:20 AM »

I don't think it's Augustine and Aquinas (I think this is who you really meant when referring to Aristotle?) so much that lead to atheism. Rather it's the idea that God is some divine bully sitting in heaven with a billy club waiting to smite whoever goes out of line slightly.

I would argue rather it's not just the view of God, but the view of man that leads to atheism. If man is his own supreme being, who can will whatever laws of good and evil he sees fit, he has no need for God.

Personally I find the divine billy club-wielding God comforting when these types of people (inevitably) go out of line. I also find him terrifying, but in a good way.
Logged
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2009, 12:00:53 PM »

Can some one please explain to me how accepting Augustine and using Aristotilian language lead towards atheism?  Huh

Philosophically, I believe they do and I think the 'missing link' is Descartes. The cornerstone of his Philosophy, derived from his philosophical tradition, was to question every belief one holds. Now, I would argue that he never honestly questioned the existence of a deity, which is a large reason why he came to the conclusions he did; but for the development of western thought, his conclusions aren't as important as his methodologies. This is essentially how I came to atheism, eventually I came to the conclusion that the belief in a deity was simply unnecessary to explain my existence and the material world based upon this methodology and my knowledge of modern science. At that point, it simply became silly to hold on to a fundamental axiom what was essentially useless...for psychological reasons it took probably a year for me to fully dispense with any religious belief and I moved through more liberal Christianity, Deism, and Agnosticism before I ended up as an Atheist trying to compromise logic and emotion, but once that logical conclusion was reached atheism was inevitable.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2009, 12:02:41 PM »

I don't think it's Augustine and Aquinas (I think this is who you really meant when referring to Aristotle?) so much that lead to atheism. Rather it's the idea that God is some divine bully sitting in heaven with a billy club waiting to smite whoever goes out of line slightly.

I would argue rather it's not just the view of God, but the view of man that leads to atheism. If man is his own supreme being, who can will whatever laws of good and evil he sees fit, he has no need for God.

Personally I find the divine billy club-wielding God comforting when these types of people (inevitably) go out of line. I also find him terrifying, but in a good way.
Boogey man theology. God was so angry with the world that He sent His Son to be tortured to death so God could vent, and now God feels so much better.  Not much redemption there.

And what comfort do you get from them being wacked.  Do you not understand the Spirit to which you (supposedly) belong?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2009, 12:08:52 PM »

Can some one please explain to me how accepting Augustine and using Aristotilian language lead towards atheism?  Huh

Philosophically, I believe they do and I think the 'missing link' is Descartes. The cornerstone of his Philosophy, derived from his philosophical tradition, was to question every belief one holds. Now, I would argue that he never honestly questioned the existence of a deity, which is a large reason why he came to the conclusions he did; but for the development of western thought, his conclusions aren't as important as his methodologies. This is essentially how I came to atheism, eventually I came to the conclusion that the belief in a deity was simply unnecessary to explain my existence and the material world based upon this methodology and my knowledge of modern science. At that point, it simply became silly to hold on to a fundamental axiom what was essentially useless...for psychological reasons it took probably a year for me to fully dispense with any religious belief and I moved through more liberal Christianity, Deism, and Agnosticism before I ended up as an Atheist trying to compromise logic and emotion, but once that logical conclusion was reached atheism was inevitable.
Interesting, an absurdity as logical conclusion.

Your existence isn't required to explain anything: maybe you don't. It could just be a monkey typing out shakespeare on the internet.  You claim to be a mathematician, what are the odds?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #26 on: November 03, 2009, 12:22:41 PM »

Can some one please explain to me how accepting Augustine and using Aristotilian language lead towards atheism?  Huh

Philosophically, I believe they do and I think the 'missing link' is Descartes. The cornerstone of his Philosophy, derived from his philosophical tradition, was to question every belief one holds. Now, I would argue that he never honestly questioned the existence of a deity, which is a large reason why he came to the conclusions he did; but for the development of western thought, his conclusions aren't as important as his methodologies. This is essentially how I came to atheism, eventually I came to the conclusion that the belief in a deity was simply unnecessary to explain my existence and the material world based upon this methodology and my knowledge of modern science. At that point, it simply became silly to hold on to a fundamental axiom what was essentially useless...for psychological reasons it took probably a year for me to fully dispense with any religious belief and I moved through more liberal Christianity, Deism, and Agnosticism before I ended up as an Atheist trying to compromise logic and emotion, but once that logical conclusion was reached atheism was inevitable.
Interesting, an absurdity as logical conclusion.

Your existence isn't required to explain anything: maybe you don't. It could just be a monkey typing out shakespeare on the internet.  You claim to be a mathematician, what are the odds?
I would have to agree with you. I think that those who profess atheism have abandoned reason for fables.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #27 on: November 03, 2009, 12:45:18 PM »

Can some one please explain to me how accepting Augustine and using Aristotilian language lead towards atheism?  Huh

Philosophically, I believe they do and I think the 'missing link' is Descartes. The cornerstone of his Philosophy, derived from his philosophical tradition, was to question every belief one holds. Now, I would argue that he never honestly questioned the existence of a deity, which is a large reason why he came to the conclusions he did; but for the development of western thought, his conclusions aren't as important as his methodologies. This is essentially how I came to atheism, eventually I came to the conclusion that the belief in a deity was simply unnecessary to explain my existence and the material world based upon this methodology and my knowledge of modern science. At that point, it simply became silly to hold on to a fundamental axiom what was essentially useless...for psychological reasons it took probably a year for me to fully dispense with any religious belief and I moved through more liberal Christianity, Deism, and Agnosticism before I ended up as an Atheist trying to compromise logic and emotion, but once that logical conclusion was reached atheism was inevitable.
Interesting, an absurdity as logical conclusion.

Your existence isn't required to explain anything: maybe you don't. It could just be a monkey typing out shakespeare on the internet.  You claim to be a mathematician, what are the odds?

'cognito ergo sum'

I may not know what, for certain, but something I identify as me exists and exists in an environment where I can consistently interact with it using the principles of science. I know that what I observe as light travels at a constant velocity in a vacuum, I know that two masses attract each other relative to a certain constant, and so forth. What I observe as light or mass could, theoretically, be figments of my imagination or something implanted in my 'mind' whatever that might be. But, I know that using these principles developed I can effectively and consistency interact with my environment, the only environment that I've ever known and, quite frankly, the only one that even matters. Even if I am a brain in a jar, the outside world wouldn't matter to me, I can't interact with it, I can't observe it, I can't really have anything to do with it whatsoever, so it's completely irrelevant and would be utterly irrational to base either my beliefs or actions on the possibility of its existence.

It is consistency, not purpose, that matters for logic.

Now your existence, on the other hand, is certainly up for debate. Wink
« Last Edit: November 03, 2009, 12:46:52 PM by GiC » Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,378


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2009, 01:08:21 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

Interesting. Based on this "hypothesis," do you believe the world will eventually reject all religion completely?
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2009, 01:11:45 PM »

Can some one please explain to me how accepting Augustine and using Aristotilian language lead towards atheism?  Huh

Philosophically, I believe they do and I think the 'missing link' is Descartes. The cornerstone of his Philosophy, derived from his philosophical tradition, was to question every belief one holds. Now, I would argue that he never honestly questioned the existence of a deity, which is a large reason why he came to the conclusions he did; but for the development of western thought, his conclusions aren't as important as his methodologies. This is essentially how I came to atheism, eventually I came to the conclusion that the belief in a deity was simply unnecessary to explain my existence and the material world based upon this methodology and my knowledge of modern science. At that point, it simply became silly to hold on to a fundamental axiom what was essentially useless...for psychological reasons it took probably a year for me to fully dispense with any religious belief and I moved through more liberal Christianity, Deism, and Agnosticism before I ended up as an Atheist trying to compromise logic and emotion, but once that logical conclusion was reached atheism was inevitable.
Interesting, an absurdity as logical conclusion.

Your existence isn't required to explain anything: maybe you don't. It could just be a monkey typing out shakespeare on the internet.  You claim to be a mathematician, what are the odds?

'cognito ergo sum'

Sure about that?  The Buddhists dispute it:
http://books.google.com/books?id=_WduwVbiLSsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=what+the+buddha+taught#v=onepage&q=cogito&f=false

Quote
I may not know what, for certain, but something I identify as me exists and exists in an environment where I can consistently interact with it using the principles of science. I know that what I observe as light travels at a constant velocity in a vacuum, I know that two masses attract each other relative to a certain constant, and so forth. What I observe as light or mass could, theoretically, be figments of my imagination or something implanted in my 'mind' whatever that might be. But, I know that using these principles developed I can effectively and consistency interact with my environment, the only environment that I've ever known and, quite frankly, the only one that even matters. Even if I am a brain in a jar, the outside world wouldn't matter to me, I can't interact with it, I can't observe it, I can't really have anything to do with it whatsoever, so it's completely irrelevant and would be utterly irrational to base either my beliefs or actions on the possibility of its existence.

Yet you decide to deny its existance.  What happens when it knocks the jar over? Shocked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0_1F0_20mE

Quote
It is consistency, not purpose, that matters for logic.

So as long as it is consistent nonsense, it's logical.  That makes sense.

Quote
Now your existence, on the other hand, is certainly up for debate. Wink
My existence is irrelevant.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2009, 01:13:18 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

Interesting. Based on this "hypothesis," do you believe the world will eventually reject all religion completely?
LOL.  Such was the conventional wisdom of the '70s (and before that, much of snob society of the 1800s). Didn't quite work out that way.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
GiC
Resident Atheist
Site Supporter
Merarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Mathematician
Posts: 9,490



« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2009, 01:26:16 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).

Atheism certainly has it's foundation in western thought, though I think it's more a natural evolution of theology than a reaction against it. People's gods tend to change as their society changes, pantheism is the rule for most tribal societies, as their thinking becomes more sophisticated they personify these deities, then they start to merge them together either arriving at a monotheism by demoting some of the lesser gods and emphasizing one or take the approach making the gods a sort of demi-gods subjected, like humanity, to some overarching concept as seen in Platonic Paganism and much of modern Hinduism. With the decline of the ancient civilizations and the descent of Europe into the dark ages we saw additional emphasis on personification of deities again and even the supplementing of them with the cults of the saints. As an age of reason was once again resurrected in the west we saw a move towards abstraction again, first with the development of deism, then a reduction of the 'supreme being' to simply reason, and, finally, the dismissing of religious pretenses and modern atheism. Of course, these changes have generally happened in the upper class, they were really the only people at that time who had the luxury of sitting around and actually practicing philosophy, only slowly do the ideas trickle down to the masses, generally first taking hold in urban environments and slowly moving out to more rural areas.

Interesting. Based on this "hypothesis," do you believe the world will eventually reject all religion completely?

Probably not, baring widespread genetic engineering. There's an evolutionary tendency to want certainty and security and with our current neurological composition I believe there will always be a portion of the population that turns to some form of spirituality, if not organized religion. I do see the eventual death of organized religion and I do see spirituality being something confined to a small minority of the population, though probably not in our life time.
Logged

"The liberties of people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them." -- Patrick Henry
pensateomnia
Bibliophylax
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Posts: 2,346


metron ariston


« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2009, 01:33:26 PM »

Interesting. Based on this "hypothesis," do you believe the world will eventually reject all religion completely?

Unlikely. Aside from the hypothesis being far too Hegelian from a methodological point of view, there is lots of research going on now in evolutionary biology, paleoanthropology and neuroscience that suggests otherwise. J. Wentzel van Huyssteen gave his Gifford lectures on this, which are published by Eerdmans, in case such things are of interest to you.
Logged

But for I am a man not textueel I wol noght telle of textes neuer a deel. (Chaucer, The Manciple's Tale, 1.131)
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2009, 01:58:24 PM »

jnorm888

Quote
If you still remember how this happened I would be more than willing to listen to your side of the story.

Actually I'm working on something that would help explain it, but I don't think this would be the best time and place to discuss it. I think there are certain limits to what I should say here, especially being in the "Faith Issues" section. And I don't want to be accused of trying to lead people out of Orthodoxy. For now I'll just say that my problems were with a wide variety of issues, from the usage of certain authorities (Scripture, Tradition, Ecumenical Councils), to the existence of certain things (hell, demons), to other problems I encountered.


Super Apostolic Bros.

Quote
Personally I find the divine billy club-wielding God comforting when these types of people (inevitably) go out of line. I also find him terrifying, but in a good way.

Huh You find such a God comforting because... you believe we'll get our punishment in hell?
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
Paisius
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Multi-Jurisdictional
Posts: 816


Reframed


« Reply #34 on: November 04, 2009, 12:17:01 PM »

...then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

(And yes I do realize some consider the French First Republic the first of such states).
I think ialmisry touched on the answer by pointing out how Tsar Peter "the Great" brought in his predominantly Western ideas and enforced them upon Russian culture.  If Russia had remained truly Eastern in its world view, would it ever have become atheist?

A lot of it had to do with corruption in the Church as well. I think it's important to remember that although the communist state was atheist huge numbers of Russians remained faithful to God. Atheism was forced on the Russian people by a murderous totalitarian regime. That is something categorically different from what we see in modern western societies. I think that is evidenced by the resurgence of Orthodoxy in post-soviet Russia.


Yours in Christ
Joe
Logged

"Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?" - Milton Friedman
Super Apostolic Bros.
Is St. Andrew Luigi to St. Peter's Mario?
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 227



« Reply #35 on: November 06, 2009, 04:21:23 AM »

jnorm888

Quote
If you still remember how this happened I would be more than willing to listen to your side of the story.

Actually I'm working on something that would help explain it, but I don't think this would be the best time and place to discuss it. I think there are certain limits to what I should say here, especially being in the "Faith Issues" section. And I don't want to be accused of trying to lead people out of Orthodoxy. For now I'll just say that my problems were with a wide variety of issues, from the usage of certain authorities (Scripture, Tradition, Ecumenical Councils), to the existence of certain things (hell, demons), to other problems I encountered.


Super Apostolic Bros.

Quote
Personally I find the divine billy club-wielding God comforting when these types of people (inevitably) go out of line. I also find him terrifying, but in a good way.

Huh You find such a God comforting because... you believe we'll get our punishment in hell?
I was thinking about people who are totally depraved. And no, I do not mean that in a Calvinist sense... I mean, "laugh as I murder your family and rape your dog" depraved. "Hitler" depraved. People who are so vehemently disgusting that it gives pause to those who deny traditional standards of good and evil.

Then again, who knows their fate beyond the grave?
Logged
GammaRay
The Awful Preacher
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


Alexandros Papadiamantis


« Reply #36 on: November 07, 2009, 02:17:50 PM »

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.
I think that your case is a bit of a special one though. Wink

Anyway, it's not the Orthodox interpretations that keep you from becoming an atheist. But most atheists nowadays have been let down by Western theology. I believe that an atheist has more chances of converting/not leaving if he is closer to Eastern Christianity.

Concerning the OP, I don't think that we can count Russia. That was a "conform or die" dechristianization, not a choice.
Logged

Though I've walked the valley of the shadow of the death, I've fallen not. Not completely. Not yet.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #37 on: November 23, 2010, 09:50:46 AM »

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.
I think that your case is a bit of a special one though. Wink

Anyway, it's not the Orthodox interpretations that keep you from becoming an atheist. But most atheists nowadays have been let down by Western theology. I believe that an atheist has more chances of converting/not leaving if he is closer to Eastern Christianity.

Perhaps, though I think a case can be made in the opposite direction: upon being exposed to Orthodoxy, someone has been exposed to the best version of Christianity there is. If even this version fails, then where has a person to go?
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,254

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #38 on: November 23, 2010, 10:50:50 AM »

In my personal experience, I think there is definitely a correlation between what became of Western theology and atheism.  I was an atheist for a little over a year having abandoned the Protestant Evangelical brand of Christianity, assuming that all there was left was Roman Catholicism.  My problems were much the same as those I read about in the "New Atheist" literature.  Sin, punishment, divine wrath, etc.  I was actually hoping that a coherent atheistic worldview would be readily available to fill that void, so I devoured books by Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens, but was ultimately disappointed so I then veered into agnosticism.  But then I started to dig into history and became convinced of the resurrection and was subsequently exposed to Orthodoxy for the first time, and my whole life changed.

What I find in Orthodoxy is what I always wished existed when I was an Evangelical.

I know people leave the Church for various reasons, but when speaking of this current rise in a vocal atheism, just by looking at their language and context I think it's pretty clear that it's a specifically Western brand of theology they're rejecting.  The God Delusion is pretty much solely attacking Thomas Aquinas.
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA (Old Calendar)
Posts: 6,789



« Reply #39 on: November 23, 2010, 11:58:46 AM »

In my personal experience, I think there is definitely a correlation between what became of Western theology and atheism.  I was an atheist for a little over a year having abandoned the Protestant Evangelical brand of Christianity, assuming that all there was left was Roman Catholicism.  My problems were much the same as those I read about in the "New Atheist" literature.  Sin, punishment, divine wrath, etc.  I was actually hoping that a coherent atheistic worldview would be readily available to fill that void, so I devoured books by Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens, but was ultimately disappointed so I then veered into agnosticism.  But then I started to dig into history and became convinced of the resurrection and was subsequently exposed to Orthodoxy for the first time, and my whole life changed.

What I find in Orthodoxy is what I always wished existed when I was an Evangelical.

I know people leave the Church for various reasons, but when speaking of this current rise in a vocal atheism, just by looking at their language and context I think it's pretty clear that it's a specifically Western brand of theology they're rejecting.  The God Delusion is pretty much solely attacking Thomas Aquinas.

If the West is the problem, then why are you Western Rite?
Logged
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #40 on: November 23, 2010, 01:13:32 PM »

...I won't deny that it's a relatively Eurocentric view, because it assumes that western society has advanced further than any other society. But I don't think that assumption is too much of a stretch if you compare the evolution of both technology and political structures around the world....

You found the reason here. Atheism is a product of higher society. It is so because as a society/group becomes more comfortable and educated, the the tendency is to reject everything else. It's a development of : "I'm comfortable, I don't need external comfort. I've learned the world, if I can't 'learn it', it isn't real. 
Logged


I'm going to need this.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,728


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #41 on: November 23, 2010, 01:16:52 PM »

I don't think the Western world is the cause of all issues and sundry.  Roll Eyes There are atheists in the East, as well.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Sleeper
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,254

On hiatus for the foreseeable future.


« Reply #42 on: November 23, 2010, 01:21:13 PM »

If the West is the problem, then why are you Western Rite?

The West isn't the problem, what has become of Western theology is.  

The Western Rite's aim is to bring the Western tradition and expression back to canonical Orthodoxy.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 01:23:23 PM by Sleeper » Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #43 on: November 23, 2010, 01:48:25 PM »

I had no idea Asteriktos is/was atheist, are you still as such?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #44 on: November 23, 2010, 02:37:04 PM »

Depends on how you define atheist. Over the years I have several times been told I was an atheist when I wasn't, and also been told that I wasn't an atheist when I was. Seems like a fairly unstable word. Though I suppose that would go with my username (if not log in name), now wouldn't it?  Smiley
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #45 on: November 23, 2010, 02:42:18 PM »

Depends on how you define atheist. Over the years I have several times been told I was an atheist when I wasn't, and also been told that I wasn't an atheist when I was. Seems like a fairly unstable word.

Considering that for a long time you have flaunted your dabbling in various non- or anti-Christian ideas, that is, when you're not broadcasting your waverings and perpetual indecision, can you really blame anyone for throwing his hands up and assuming you're an atheist?
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #46 on: November 23, 2010, 02:43:42 PM »

I don't think the Western world is the cause of all issues and sundry.  Roll Eyes There are atheists in the East, as well.
Yeah. Anyone remember the communist bolck?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #47 on: November 23, 2010, 02:51:38 PM »

Depends on how you define atheist. Over the years I have several times been told I was an atheist when I wasn't, and also been told that I wasn't an atheist when I was. Seems like a fairly unstable word.

Considering that for a long time you have flaunted your dabbling in various non- or anti-Christian ideas, that is, when you're not broadcasting your waverings and perpetual indecision, can you really blame anyone for throwing his hands up and assuming you're an atheist?

No, I couldn't blame such a person. But in this case I am talking about deeper philosophical beliefs. There are Christians who think that there is no such thing as atheists, that people who call themselves atheists are just confused theists who are mad at God. Likewise, there are atheists who think that any time you show even the slightests doubt, that it demonstrates that you must be an atheist in your heart of hearts, and that you're just staying a Christian because you haven't quite broken the emotional ties.
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 2,843



WWW
« Reply #48 on: November 23, 2010, 04:02:37 PM »

To be honest, I don't think that the theological mistakes of Western Christianity can be blamed by the current trends, not, at least, in a direct sense.

The West is the most succesful civilization that ever existed. I'm sorry, but it's not the Church's work to create civilizations, nor can it be judged over the its social engineering success. You know there is a succesful church somewhere because it produces saints, not philosophers, artists, scientists or more just societies.

In the fields of science and politics, the West is a model to be followed. In my opinion, the greatest achievements of the West are in the political fields. Hellenic democracy, the English-American ethos of restraining central power (at least a couple of centuries ago), the European-born concept of federalism (of which the most developed is the one in Switzerland), division of powers, a capitalist economy that is not over regulated nor un-regulated and based on the freedom to trade, the respect for freedom of speech, these all are the actual "secret" of the West. Not that we don't have bright achievements in arts and sciences. We do. But it is our particular political "phleroma" that has made the difference.

Atheism is on the rise today, in my opinion. for the same reason individualism in excess is: a globalized society, where we have access to everything, but to nothing that matters. Once we stop making sense out of the world, or of the society around us, we stop seeing God. It's a crisis of meaning in a world that is so fluid that people don't have much anything solid to hold to, thus,in a way or another, leading then to think that we are fluid ourselves, existing for a couple of seconds and fading into non-existance once again, like "everything else".
Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #49 on: November 23, 2010, 04:05:55 PM »

To be honest, I don't think that the theological mistakes of Western Christianity can be blamed by the current trends, not, at least, in a direct sense.

The West is the most succesful civilization that ever existed. I'm sorry, but it's not the Church's work to create civilizations, nor can it be judged over the its social engineering success. You know there is a succesful church somewhere because it produces saints, not philosophers, artists, scientists or more just societies.

In the fields of science and politics, the West is a model to be followed. In my opinion, the greatest achievements of the West are in the political fields. Hellenic democracy, the English-American ethos of restraining central power (at least a couple of centuries ago), the European-born concept of federalism (of which the most developed is the one in Switzerland), division of powers, a capitalist economy that is not over regulated nor un-regulated and based on the freedom to trade, the respect for freedom of speech, these all are the actual "secret" of the West. Not that we don't have bright achievements in arts and sciences. We do. But it is our particular political "phleroma" that has made the difference.

Atheism is on the rise today, in my opinion. for the same reason individualism in excess is: a globalized society, where we have access to everything, but to nothing that matters. Once we stop making sense out of the world, or of the society around us, we stop seeing God. It's a crisis of meaning in a world that is so fluid that people don't have much anything solid to hold to, thus,in a way or another, leading then to think that we are fluid ourselves, existing for a couple of seconds and fading into non-existance once again, like "everything else".
I also think that atheism is on the rise because of the lack of clear thinking.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Alveus Lacuna
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA (Old Calendar)
Posts: 6,789



« Reply #50 on: November 23, 2010, 04:41:38 PM »

I had no idea Asteriktos is/was atheist, are you still as such?

Generally agnostic is a more appropriate label, but it really depends on the day that you ask him. Sometimes he's Orthodox, other times agnostic, but I would say that he tends to fluctuate between only those two on a moment-by-moment basis. I don't recall, for example, him ever being into Hinduism or whatever.
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #51 on: November 23, 2010, 04:57:53 PM »

I also think that Asteriktos genuinely wants to be a good Christians. He just has struggles with his faith.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #52 on: November 23, 2010, 05:28:14 PM »

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.
I think that your case is a bit of a special one though. Wink

Anyway, it's not the Orthodox interpretations that keep you from becoming an atheist. But most atheists nowadays have been let down by Western theology. I believe that an atheist has more chances of converting/not leaving if he is closer to Eastern Christianity.

Perhaps, though I think a case can be made in the opposite direction: upon being exposed to Orthodoxy, someone has been exposed to the best version of Christianity there is. If even this version fails, then where has a person to go?

Is it the "version" of Christianity that fails, or is the fault with the person?
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,728


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #53 on: November 23, 2010, 05:58:17 PM »

I don't think the Western world is the cause of all issues and sundry.  Roll Eyes There are atheists in the East, as well.
Yeah. Anyone remember the communist bolck?

There's still China, of course.   Roll Eyes
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,299


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #54 on: November 28, 2011, 09:47:48 PM »

As seen in the article "Preachers Who Are Not Believers", by Daniel Dennett and Linda LaScola, one of the causes of atheism (in Western forms of Christianity) is an over-reliance on scripture understood in a literal, fundamentalist manner.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Carl Kraeff (Second Chance)
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,547



« Reply #55 on: November 28, 2011, 10:34:32 PM »

As seen in the article "Preachers Who Are Not Believers", by Daniel Dennett and Linda LaScola, one of the causes of atheism (in Western forms of Christianity) is an over-reliance on scripture understood in a literal, fundamentalist manner.

I think that disappointment is the starting point for their apostasy. If Baptists, disappointment that even after conversion, a Christian may still sin, thus negating the once saved, always saved doctrine. For others, it may be the realization that sola scriptura is meaningless as an operational doctrine because they realize that it is never the scripture itself but one's own interpretation that one believes in and relies upon. In either case, their religion becomes subjective, leading to the elevation of self over the Church and eventually (and I think naturally) over God.
Logged

Michal: "SC, love you in this thread."
wasamwillbe
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 87



« Reply #56 on: December 05, 2011, 03:35:46 AM »

I am going to go out and prove how new a convert I really am, so please forgive me beforehand. 

"Atheist" is a title made by man, no? We either serve God or ?  Didn't the serpent tempt Eve to take the fruit because if she did, she would no longer need to rely on God.  It is all our struggle to serve self, or God. Do we acknowledge our need for him or indulge the carnal? To deny the existence of God is the indulgence of the flesh, the carnal, that this is it, there is nothing more, no spirit, no soul.  It is believing the deceitful whisper of the serpent that we have no more need of God because our "reason" has no proof of him.

So is   "the Western view of God the leading cause of atheism" ? I can't say if the word "atheism" was used pre "western view", but it seems to me it is like asking if the "jehovah witness" are new, their heresies are old, they claim their belief goes back to Adam.  Perhaps they are right, just not the way they mean.

Is atheism ( or denial of God) not our struggle as individuals?  Our salvation most certainly is not in the "Western View", it is the Orthodox way or practice.

I hope this makes sense.




Logged

"We no longer knew whether we were in heaven or on earth,"
Golgotha
Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 95



« Reply #57 on: December 05, 2011, 06:26:49 AM »

I think a lot of it has to do with comfort. Western countries are comfy. "Why do I need God if I'm comfy?" some say.  "There are no atheist in fox holes." is one of my favorite phrases.  

A concept of Orthodoxy that has blown my mind is self denial. I didn't find this much in my Western experiences. ASCETICISM. If we want a healthy mind we must exercise it. Certain mental exercises can reduce the chances of getting Alzheimer's. I feel it is the same for our spiritual life.

There was a recent thread, "Black Catholics' survey finds strong ties, strong engagement in church" http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,41408.msg675361.html#msg675361 I think the reason for this is because historically African Americans have faced way more adversity than whites. For many, faith in God, is what is getting them through it all.

I know the economic recession is terrible and I hope we get out of it soon, but I also hope that many Westerners can use it as an opportunity to grow in Christ.

« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 06:28:38 AM by Golgotha » Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,728


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #58 on: December 05, 2011, 12:06:05 PM »

Duplicate, sorry.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2011, 12:07:25 PM by biro » Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,280


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #59 on: December 09, 2011, 11:44:26 PM »

I definitely see a connection between atheism and western theology. I'm a recent convert into Orthodoxy and I grew up in an extremely Protestant home. I think the issue many people have is that in our Western world we place so much of an emphasis on empirical reasoning and knowledge. And then, combining that with literalist Protestant interpretations which, sorry to offend anyone, are sometimes absurd. Such as a 6,000 year old Earth or literal Creation or rejection of evolution. While on the other hand, Orthodoxy has never really had this problem because our theology is so mystical and philosophical compared to empirical. Anyway, getting back on track, I hope I am not scapegoating, but I think that Protestantism is one of the leading causes of atheism, because everything is taken literally and combining that with western thought that demands reason, we see that it could not have been literal and atheists have a hard time trying to understand how Protestants can believe this against all reason.

On the other hand though, then you have Roman Catholicism, albeit, they are not as silly as some Protestant denominations, but, they devote so much time in trying to find empirical explanations to mysteries about God and miracles and all. One of the atheists in here said somewhere that one of the Church Fathers said that a person cannot think their way into the Church or else they will think their way out, I think that he may have had a point, provided the context is correct. For example, let's admit it, there are some things about God and the universe that we can understand, whether empirical, abstract or philosophical. But, there are certain things that we truly never will be able to understand about God, religion and miracles and everything. I think what the Church Father meant, and it is a relevent issue in today's society, is when we try to find answers to these certain problems. What is going to happen is that we are going to craft together an explanation that seems rational, and we will think our way into the Church because of this, but then, just as we thought of an explanation, we will also think even more and will eventually realize how our original explanation was insubstantial and does not make sense. This is perfectly natural because we are talking about the most confusing, deepest questions in the world here. We are bound to make mistakes. Therefore, we are going to leave the Church because of this.

I think that this is what the Father was talking about. Orthodox Christians on the other hand have the distinction between God's essences and His energies.The parts we can understand are through His energies, but the parts we cannot understand are associated with God's essence. When I converted, this is one of the primary things that drew me towards Orthodoxy. I recognized that no matter what you are, there are some questions we can understand and some that we cannot. And I appreciated the honestly and realized that no worldview is without its own mysteries. I think that one of the reasons why people may reject Orthodoxy is that we, as humans, do not like accepting the things we cannot understand. We like to think that we can come to know and understand everything about our world. But, that usually fails. Because when Christians try to do that, mostly in Catholicism or Protestantism, it only leads to pseudo-science, logical fallacy and delusion, as any atheist would agree. I am no stranger to the atheist literature in today's times, and, to be honest, it is no different than the arguments used all throughout history. However, getting on topic, most of these books are aimed at refuting these absurd logical claims about Christianity that Protestants and Catholics make.

And, on top of this, many of the atheist authors do not honestly understand Christianity, at least Orthodoxy, and usually just attack strawmen or crazy Protestant conventions. It is amazing. As I studied Orthodox theology more, I realized that 60% of the atheistic doubts to Christianity were answered by this. And, I honestly feel bad for my atheist peers because Western Christianity is feeding them absurdity andyou cannot blame them for rjeecting it, the only issue is that they are associating all Christianity with these absurdities. I did not convert until a few months ago, right now I'm fifteen years old. A few years ago I was an atheist leaning towards Buddhist concepts about the world.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 12:06:38 AM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,728


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #60 on: December 09, 2011, 11:49:52 PM »

 Roll Eyes Sure, because the 'Eastern view of God' never causes atheists- never mind all those atheists in Japan, China, India and so forth. There's an awful lot of growth in atheism over there, too. Then again, that doesn't fit in with the premise that 'the West' is the source of everything bad, so I guess I'd better get used to hearing this particular broken record some more.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #61 on: December 09, 2011, 11:52:26 PM »

I definitely see a connection between atheism and western theology. I'm a recent convert into Orthodoxy and I grew up in an extremely Protestant home. I think the issue many people have is that in our Western world we place so much of an emphasis on empirical reasoning and knowledge. And then, combining that with literalist Protestant interpretations which, sorry to offend anyone, are sometimes absurd. Such as a 6,000 year old Earth or literal Creation or rejection of evolution. While on the other hand, Orthodoxy has never really had this problem because our theology is so mystical and philosophical compared to empirical. Anyway, getting back on track, I hope I am not scapegoating, but I think that Protestantism is one of the leading causes of atheism, because everything is taken literally and combining that with western thought that demands reason, we see that it could not have been literal and atheists have a hard time trying to understand how Protestants can believe this against all reason. On the other hand though, then you have Roman Catholicism, albeit, they are not as silly as some Protestant denominations, but, they devote so much time in trying to find empirical explanations to mysteries about God and miracles and all. One of the atheists in here said somewhere that one of the Church Fathers said that a person cannot think their way into the Church or else they will think their way out, I think that he may have had a point, provided the context is correct. For example, let's admit it, there are some things about God and the universe that we can understand, whether empirical, abstract or philosophical. But, there are certain things that we truly never will be able to understand about God, religion and miracles and everything. I think what the Church Father meant, and it is a relevent issue in today's society, is when we try to find answers to these certain problems. What is going to happen is that we are going to craft together an explanation that seems rational, and we will think our way into the Church because of this, but then, just as we thought of an explanation, we will also think even more and will eventually realize how our original explanation was insubstantial and does not make sense. This is perfectly natural because we are talking about the most confusing, deepest questions in the world here. We are bound to make mistakes. Therefore, we are going to leave the Church because of this. I think that this is what the Father was talking about. Orthodox Christians on the other hand have the distinction between God's essences and His energies.The parts we can understand are through His energies, but the parts we cannot understand are associated with God's essence. When I converted, this is one of the primary things that drew me towards Orthodoxy. I recognized that no matter what you are, there are some questions we can understand and some that we cannot. And I appreciated the honestly and realized that no worldview is without its own mysteries. I think that one of the reasons why people may reject Orthodoxy is that we, as humans, do not like accepting the things we cannot understand. We like to think that we can come to know and understand everything about our world. But, that usually fails. Because when Christians try to do that, mostly in Catholicism or Protestantism, it only leads to pseudo-science, logical fallacy and delusion, as any atheist would agree. I am no stranger to the atheist literature in today's times, and, to be honest, it is no different than the arguments used all throughout history. However, getting on topic, most of these books are aimed at refuting these absurd logical claims about Christianity that Protestants and Catholics make. And, on top of this, many of the atheist authors do not honestly understand Christianity, at least Orthodoxy, and usually just attack strawmen or crazy Protestant conventions. It is amazing. As I studied Orthodox theology more, I realized that 60% of the atheistic doubts to Christianity were answered by this. And, I honestly feel bad for my atheist peers because Western Christianity is feeding them absurdity andyou cannot blame them for rjeecting it, the only issue is that they are associating all Christianity with these absurdities. I did not convert until a few months ago, right now I'm fifteen years old. A few years ago I was an atheist leaning towards Buddhist concepts about the world.

James do yourself a favor by doing others a favor.

Use white space.

More than you normally would in English stylistics.

People ain't just reading this stuff on computer screens.

They read it on smaller devices with tiny screens.

Your posts will be read more often and easily.

FWIW.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Jason.Wike
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,046


« Reply #62 on: December 09, 2011, 11:57:12 PM »

I second that. I don't mean to be rude but when there aren't paragraphs I just don't read something, it is too difficult to parse. I think they call it 'wall of text.'
Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #63 on: December 09, 2011, 11:59:05 PM »

I second that. I don't mean to be rude but when there aren't paragraphs I just don't read something, it is too difficult to parse. I think they call it 'wall of text.'

Really "paragraphs" are too long for a chat board of this sort.

For most discussions at least.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,280


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #64 on: December 10, 2011, 12:08:25 AM »

There, I broke it into paragraphs. You gents happy now?  Tongue
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #65 on: December 10, 2011, 12:15:36 AM »

There, I broke it into paragraphs. You gents happy now?  Tongue

Easier to part the Nile than for me to achieve such a state.

Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Shiny
Site Supporter
Muted
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #66 on: December 10, 2011, 02:11:45 AM »

I realized that 100% of the atheistic doubts to Christianity were answered by this.
Fixed that for you.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,299


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #67 on: May 01, 2012, 11:40:21 AM »

I think the Western view of God had an impact on Teresa MacBain.

Quote
Teresa MacBain has a secret, one she's terrified to reveal.

"I'm currently an active pastor and I'm also an atheist," she says. "I live a double life. I feel pretty good on Monday, but by Thursday — when Sunday's right around the corner — I start having stomachaches, headaches, just knowing that I got to stand up and say things that I no longer believe in and portray myself in a way that's totally false."

MacBain glances nervously around the room. It's a Sunday, and normally she would be preaching at her church in Tallahassee, Fla. But here she is, sneaking away to the American Atheists' convention in Bethesda, Md.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #68 on: May 01, 2012, 11:49:08 AM »

What an unfortunate situation.  Undecided
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,028


« Reply #69 on: May 01, 2012, 12:32:20 PM »

In a way, it's not really so unfortunate. The lady is no longer at war with herself, and an atheist is no longer leading the congregation. Sounds like a win-win to me.

But there are some things that are very revealing, like when she says that what she misses most about her old life is the music and the friendships, and of course not God. I suppose it would be hard to miss God if you do not believe in Him, but one wonders just what many people are doing in church (in any part of the world) if what they get out of it is music and friends. I can listen to religious chant on my own, and I can call friends on my own, whether they're friends from church or not. What I can't do is be transformed by the body and blood of Jesus Christ on my own. That's the problem of religion for many people: It doesn't really offer anything that can't be satisfied by other experiences outside of church, usually without the associated downsides (as mentioned in the article: fear of not being "good enough" for God, dreading Sunday morning, etc). Is that the fault of the West in general? I don't know. I wouldn't make such a strong connection, but I do know that if I had stayed a Roman Catholic I would have ended up an agnostic (which was what I was before I was RC), perhaps eventually moving on to atheism. I felt like I had sort of reached the end of the road as far as my experience of Christianity in the RC...that I could go no further because their way of being Christian did not involve the whole life.

So it's not Western societies' fault (I still live in a Western society Smiley), but certainly somebody out there revived the dualism of the Gnostics and recast it as mainstream Christianity, and they are at fault. And to the extent that so many believers have done the same (even while still calling themselves Christian, be they Orthodox, Catholic, or whatever), they too are at fault. You nourish atheism when you divide the spiritual from the physical world. How else do you think the lady in that NPR story can found an atheist ex-pastors' organization for, as her website puts it, "former clergy who do not hold supernatural beliefs"? Supernatural? It wouldn't make sense to think of religion in such terms if you had not divorced God completely from the natural world. Certainly this is not something God did when He took human flesh and truly lived among us, complete and 100% real (as in, existing in the natural world) in His humanity and His divinity, without compromise, mixture, or confusion.

This is why, by the way, I don't feel the contradiction between science and religion that many apparently do. They may answer different questions or have different standards or conceptions of evidence, but they don't exist on different ontological planes unless you make them do so. I'm happy as a linguist and I'm happy as a Christian, and what is unfortunate to me is that when I tell people that they think I must of course be compromising one or the other. Sorry, but I won't cede "free thought" to the new atheists, no matter how reasonably or dispassionately some of you try to present your arguments. Wink
Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #70 on: May 01, 2012, 12:36:56 PM »

Very unfortunate. Prayers.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,146


Truth, Justice, and the American way!


« Reply #71 on: May 01, 2012, 12:38:56 PM »

In a way, it's not really so unfortunate. The lady is no longer at war with herself, and an atheist is no longer leading the congregation. Sounds like a win-win to me.

But there are some things that are very revealing, like when she says that what she misses most about her old life is the music and the friendships, and of course not God. I suppose it would be hard to miss God if you do not believe in Him, but one wonders just what many people are doing in church (in any part of the world) if what they get out of it is music and friends. I can listen to religious chant on my own, and I can call friends on my own, whether they're friends from church or not. What I can't do is be transformed by the body and blood of Jesus Christ on my own. That's the problem of religion for many people: It doesn't really offer anything that can't be satisfied by other experiences outside of church, usually without the associated downsides (as mentioned in the article: fear of not being "good enough" for God, dreading Sunday morning, etc). Is that the fault of the West in general? I don't know. I wouldn't make such a strong connection, but I do know that if I had stayed a Roman Catholic I would have ended up an agnostic (which was what I was before I was RC), perhaps eventually moving on to atheism. I felt like I had sort of reached the end of the road as far as my experience of Christianity in the RC...that I could go no further because their way of being Christian did not involve the whole life.

So it's not Western societies' fault (I still live in a Western society Smiley), but certainly somebody out there revived the dualism of the Gnostics and recast it as mainstream Christianity, and they are at fault. And to the extent that so many believers have done the same (even while still calling themselves Christian, be they Orthodox, Catholic, or whatever), they too are at fault. You nourish atheism when you divide the spiritual from the physical world. How else do you think the lady in that NPR story can found an atheist ex-pastors' organization for, as her website puts it, "former clergy who do not hold supernatural beliefs"? Supernatural? It wouldn't make sense to think of religion in such terms if you had not divorced God completely from the natural world. Certainly this is not something God did when He took human flesh and truly lived among us, complete and 100% real (as in, existing in the natural world) in His humanity and His divinity, without compromise, mixture, or confusion.

This is why, by the way, I don't feel the contradiction between science and religion that many apparently do. They may answer different questions or have different standards or conceptions of evidence, but they don't exist on different ontological planes unless you make them do so. I'm happy as a linguist and I'm happy as a Christian, and what is unfortunate to me is that when I tell people that they think I must of course be compromising one or the other. Sorry, but I won't cede "free thought" to the new atheists, no matter how reasonably or dispassionately some of you try to present your arguments. Wink
I don't understand your characterization of Catholicism. For me, there is not Christianity apart from the Church.The faith can't be practiced apart from the Church. For me, it's Catholicism or agnosticism.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,028


« Reply #72 on: May 01, 2012, 12:45:12 PM »

Of course you don't; you're not me. Were you me, you would have made my decision and would now be counting down the days to your baptism into the Orthodox faith. Grin

Point being: In the wider context of the post, I was making the point that while I can't blame some sort of nebulous "West" for atheism, my own personal experience of Western theology (in the RCC, but of course the lady in the story was Methodist, John Shelby Sprong was/is Anglican, etc.) was certainly heading in that direction more than to salvation or Theosis or whatever you'd call the alternative. I think many people (both those who became atheists and those who became Orthodox, and probably still others who I can't conceive of, like the many new Muslim converts) could tell similar stories.
Logged

Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,299


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #73 on: May 01, 2012, 12:49:35 PM »

Insofar as "Western" Christianity (in certain circles) tends to really emphasize eternal hell, then it can easily lead to a counter-reaction, to atheism, as clergy-turned-atheist/agnostic/skeptic DeWitt notes:

Quote
DeWitt’s transition from true believer to total skeptic took 25 years. It began, he said, with the idea of hell. How could it be, as he had been taught and preached, that a loving God would damn most people to eternal fire? “This thing called hell, it began to rock my world,” he said.

From there he read about universalism -- the idea, scorned by most fundamentalist Christians, that salvation is universal, and all people will be restored in their relationship with God without any action on their own part. After universalism, he discovered the idea, supported by some neuroscientists, that God is actually our inner dialogue.

“I went from God loves everybody to God saves everybody to God is in everybody,” he said. “When you come from where I come from ... it’s not too long before you are” at the American Atheists convention.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 12:50:11 PM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,280


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #74 on: May 01, 2012, 01:47:24 PM »

It was a Marxist state, and where did Marxism come from and which conception of God was Marx aware of when he spoke ill of religion? The western version. Likewise, in Russia, even though it was not the first atheist state, many Bolsheviks wanted to modernize Russia and the West has always been the pinnacle of modernization, so, what does all this tell you?
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #75 on: May 01, 2012, 04:30:58 PM »

Quote
If the Western view of God is the leading cause of atheism... then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.

Of course, you should remember that, while you were familiar with Orthodox views, you were nonetheless still brought up in, taught within, and permeated by, western culture (whatever that is).
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,651



« Reply #76 on: May 01, 2012, 04:33:34 PM »

Quote
If the Western view of God is the leading cause of atheism... then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.

Of course, you should remember that, while you were familiar with Orthodox views, you were nonetheless still brought up in, taught within, and permeated by, western culture (whatever that is).

Are you, uh... Are you talking to yourself?

I also feel the need to tell you that I promise I'm not stalking you around the forum.
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,358


« Reply #77 on: May 01, 2012, 04:49:41 PM »

Quote
If the Western view of God is the leading cause of atheism... then why did an Orthodox country become the first atheist state?

I would also add that I became an atheist even though I was an Orthodox Christian and was familiar with Orthodox views.

Of course, you should remember that, while you were familiar with Orthodox views, you were nonetheless still brought up in, taught within, and permeated by, western culture (whatever that is).

Are you, uh... Are you talking to yourself?

I also feel the need to tell you that I promise I'm not stalking you around the forum.

This is good. The concept of stalking + that avatar is somewhat disturbing. So cute and cuddly... I bet it's hiding something!

But yes, I often respond to myself years later  Grin  When I say that I'm skeptical, I don't just mean I'm skeptical of what other people say... I'm also more than happy to critique my own claims (to a fault).
Logged

There are many foolish priests out there.
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,133


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #78 on: May 01, 2012, 09:54:03 PM »

Most modern atheism is taught through schools, television (such as the history channel speaking of the big bang, evolution etc.), and people not wanting to be accountable for what they do.

Also I think lying to children has contributed, as Santa Clause (a mythical good being) is known as truth, and later you find out its fake.

Then there are the God blamers - "How could God let my puppy die".

There is a lot that contributes to atheism, but I do believe that the media is contributing the most to the cause.

Western Christianity, though I disagree with on several levels, I don't believe cause people to become atheists.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,350



« Reply #79 on: May 01, 2012, 09:59:18 PM »

It was a Marxist state, and where did Marxism come from and which conception of God was Marx aware of when he spoke ill of religion? The western version. Likewise, in Russia, even though it was not the first atheist state, many Bolsheviks wanted to modernize Russia and the West has always been the pinnacle of modernization, so, what does all this tell you?

Dude, you really need to chill out on this whole "Eastern" thing.

It is Coke and Pepsi. Same metaphysics in two slightly different tastes.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,728


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #80 on: May 01, 2012, 10:04:02 PM »

It was a Marxist state, and where did Marxism come from and which conception of God was Marx aware of when he spoke ill of religion? The western version. Likewise, in Russia, even though it was not the first atheist state, many Bolsheviks wanted to modernize Russia and the West has always been the pinnacle of modernization, so, what does all this tell you?

Nothing.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,028


« Reply #81 on: May 01, 2012, 10:31:42 PM »

I am also confused by what James is trying to prove. Because of the association of the West with modernism, therefore the West is in trouble or at fault...or something. Furthermore, if it has always been so, then what do we make about Rome's Orthodox period (which was not just a few years under influence of the Greeks in Italy or what have you, but many, many centuries in places far away from "Eastern" societies)?

Really, this reasoning reminds me of the most ignorant Islamic fundamentalism, not Christian Orthodoxy.

"While writing a thesis for the University of London in 1948, I paid considerable attention to Islamic societies -- Turkish, Iranian, Afghanistan and Pakistan. When I look at Turkey and Pakistan, I would say that Pakistan is much more religious than Turkey. This is partly because Pakistan uses Arabic characters to write Urdu while Turkey opted for Latin at the rise to power of Kemal Ataturk. Somalis today do not take their religion half as seriously as the Pakistanis. What would happen to us twenty years from now if we were to use Roman characters?" -- Somali intellectual Maxamuud Axmed Cali, quoted in David D. Laitin "Politics, Language, and Thought: The Somali Experience", on the Somali national script issue. These same religious folk in Somalia created a slogan to campaign against the use of the Latin script in the 1960s-1970s. I think some of you would agree with it: Latiin laa diin, or "Latin is faithless" -- meaning "Latin = Western = Godless". There ya go...a good "Eastern" mindset for you fetishists. Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: May 01, 2012, 10:33:40 PM by dzheremi » Logged

Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #82 on: May 02, 2012, 01:14:14 AM »

*whispers* hyperdox Herman
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Tags: atheism 
Pages: 1 2 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.289 seconds with 110 queries.