.......the findings he describes lead to one critical conclusion: perhaps it is atheists, not God, who truly do not exist.
Posted on 07/15/2014 9:37:28 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
For some, “God doesn’t believe in atheists” is just a clever (nor not-so-clever) jab directed against the faithless in our culture. But based on the findings of secular researchers, the statement may not be so far from reality.
That is because multidisciplinary research is increasingly backing the idea that human beings are hard-wired to believe in God, according to Science 2.0 writer Nury Vittachi in an article titled, “Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke.”
“[A]theism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think,” Vittachi cites avowed atheist Graham Lawton as writing in New Scientist. “They point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.”
Even atheists hold to several tacitly religious concepts, including the existence of an immortal soul, according to Lawton. The article also cites another atheist researcher who demonstrated that all people engage in internal monologue, regardless of whether the person to whom their thoughts are directed is actually present.
Equally demonstrable is the intrinsic human tendency to believe in divine justice. Vittachi describes both religious and non-religious persons as possessing the innate sense that “If I commit a sin, it is not an isolated event but will have appropriate repercussions.” This sense of cosmic justice is credited for the popular belief in “karma.”
This idea, he writes, is played out on a number of differently levels—including narrative literature, where even atheist authors invariably write stories that “exist to establish that there exists a mechanism or a person—cosmic destiny, karma, God, fate, Mother Nature—to make sure the right thing happens to the right person.”
Even the staunchest nontheists are not exempted from such habits, according to the writer. “If a loved one dies, even many anti-religious people usually feel a need for a farewell ritual, complete with readings from old books and intoned declarations that are not unlike prayers,” Vittachi writes. “In war situations, commanders frequently comment that atheist soldiers pray far more than they think they do.”
According to the writer, atheists tend to exhibit the same sociological, psychological dependence on the intangible as religious folk do, even if the former reject the existence of anything supernatural. “Statistics show that the majority of people who stop being part of organized religious groups don’t become committed atheists, but retain a mental model in which ‘The Universe’ somehow has a purpose for humanity,” says Vittachi.
While Vittachi attempts to connect all these theistic proclivities to an evolutionary source, missing one key bit of evidence: it is the biblical Christian worldview, not the secular humanist worldview, which accurately predicts a human bent towards belief in God.
In Romans 1:18-23, the apostle Paul writes that “what can be known about God is plain to them”—that is, all men—and that “his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” He then goes so far as to state that all such people “knew God” (v. 21). The implication, thus, is that man innately assumes the existence of his Creator until he convinces himself to think otherwise.
This biblical teaching is not unique to Paul. Proverbs 9:10 says, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding,” echoing the same sentiment of other Old Testament passages. In essence, one cannot truly possess wisdom and knowledge if one denies the essential fact of existence: that the transcendent God is the ultimate measure of reality.
While Vittachi may be a few steps short of walking down the aisle at the next altar call, the findings he describes lead to one critical conclusion: perhaps it is atheists, not God, who truly do not exist.
.......the findings he describes lead to one critical conclusion: perhaps it is atheists, not God, who truly do not exist.
“When a man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes in global warming.”
ping for later.
New tagline...
William Blackstone:
“Good and wise men, in all ages...have supposed, that the deity, from the relations, we stand in, to himself and to each other, has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is, indispensably, obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever...This is what is called the law of nature, which, being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, is, of course superior in obligation to any other. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries at all times. No human laws are of any validity, if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid, derive all their authority, mediately or immediately, from this original.”
Alexander Hamilton:
“Upon this law, depend the natural rights of mankind, the supreme being gave existence to man, together with the means of preserving and beautifying that existence. He endowed him with rational faculties, by the help of which, to discern and pursue such things, as were consistent with his duty and interest, and invested him with an inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety.
“Hence, in a state of nature, no man has any moral power to deprive another of his life, limbs, property, or liberty; nor the least authority to command, or exact obedience from him....
“Hence also, the origin of all civil government, justly established, must be a voluntary compact, between the rulers and the ruled; and must be liable to such limitations, as are necessary for the security of the absolute rights of the latter; for what original title can any man or set of men have, to govern others, except their own consent? To usurp dominion over a people, in their own despite, or to grasp at more extensive power than they are willing to entrust, is to violate that law of nature, which gives every man the right to his personal liberty; and can, therefore, confer no obligation to obedience.”
“When human laws contradict or discountenance the means, which are necessary to preserve the essential rights of any society, they defeat the proper end of all laws, and so become null and void.”
I don’t believe in .atheists.
Most atheists just don’t like God.
Uuuuhhh I think these “scientists” are morons. Plenty of atheists exist that don’t hold any “tacitly religious” idea. None of the atheists I know believe in the soul, partly because we all know if we did we wouldn’t be atheists.
But you are a soul.
If you weren’t you wouldn’t be here.
It’s kinda self-evident.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Maybe in your beliefs. I don’t see a soul here, that’s a religious non-scientific concept that’s unprovable and not useful. So I don’t believe in it, and I’m not interested in it. What’s actually self evident is that mystic beliefs rely on circular logic, another reason I have nothing to do with them.
Kind of like the premise of the American claim to liberty and self-government, right?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...”
As Christians we believe our souls are our minds, our wills, our emotions, created free, in the image and likeness of God.
What exactly do you think you are if you’re not a soul endowed with a mind, a will, and emotions?
Actually if you throw out the Creator part it still stands pretty well. There’s a self evident truth that people are all roughly equal, should be treated as such, and if you don’t give them a government that treats them well they will eventually over throw you.
Well, there are no dead atheists, that’s for sure...
An accident of stardust...
So... what moral claim could one accident of stardust make on another?
What right would one accident of stardust have to tell another one that it is “wrong”?
No right. No right whatsoever.
Actually, the opposite is true. Throw out "the Creator part" and it crumbles into dust.
You're pretty much proving the article to be correct.
Chemical reactions in an evolved portion of the anatomy makes up the mind and will. Emotions are primarily the result of lower portions of the mind (and even the body, and just genetic code) manipulating higher portions of the mind. The genes want to perpetuate, the body has a whole section devoted entirely to genetic immortality, the lower mind makes us fall in love so that we can acquire a breeding partner.
It’s all pretty straight forward stuff actually. Pretty well explained these days backed up by experimentation, and manipulable through drugs (both with and without supervision). Religions were designed by pre-scientific people to explain things they didn’t understand. But a lot of that stuff is very understandable now. There are identifiable chemical reactions to these things now, we can look at a brain scan and say “this guy is happy, this one is depressed, this one is in the early infatuation stage of love, this one is in the long haul comfortable partner stage”. It ain’t tough, and it ain’t mystical.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.