Atheist Discussion Thread

[Verdance he/him]

4 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

So this is a fundamental misunderstanding regarding evolution and physics. The "improbability" number is taken out of context and does not mean what you think it means. The big bang is not a bang. Evolution most definitely does not function the way you think it does and there is a particle or element that exists without a cause. These and many more are concepts that are grossly misrepresented and misunderstood. Later today when I have the time to put it all together, I will explain all of it in much more detail as well as provide links to accredited physicists and biologists that explain the concepts far better than I will. 

 

Editing as I go along (also going to put the videos in spoilers so this whole post doesn’t become unwieldy):

How “improbable” the universe is

 

Big Bang is not a bang but an expansion with no center

 

Evolution and the Bombardier Beetle (also eyes and bananas!)

The Bombardier Beetle is just the latest in a series of examples that fall prey to the argument of incredulity. Basically because something is hard to understand, or not understood yet, then god. First it was a banana. That due to how it fits into the human hand perfectly, has a natural biodegradable wrapper, and tastes so good, it had to be designed. And in the banana’s case, it was, by humans. The original banana is very small, absolutely full of seeds, and rather bitter. Humans bred bananas over time into what they are today. Which actually branches off into another interesting factoid. A common reference for belief in god is because you cannot express it to someone who has never experienced it, and coffee is used as an example. If coffee ceased to exist, and a person had never had coffee, how would you convey to the person the taste of coffee? Thing is, we already do that. I highly doubt anyone in this thread has ever had a Big Mike banana, but it is highly likely every single one of us knows how it tastes. We humans have bred bananas to essentially be clones of themselves. It makes them easier to mass produce. The problem is due to a lack of genetic diversity, any pathogen or insect could evolve past its defenses and wipe it out. Which happened with the Big Mike banana. They used to be the main banana produced, sold and consumed. Till it got wiped out years ago. So how do we know how it tastes? Because artificial banana flavoring in all sorts of candies and baking recipes are mimicking that banana. Since it was the main one produced at the time, all the flavors for banana were made to be like it. The recipe never changed. That is why when you have banana flavored candy, you don’t think it actually tastes like a real banana. Because it does not taste like today’s breed of banana. It tastes like the Big Mike.

After writing about bananas, I am realizing how long this post is going to get lol, so I am going to try and be a bit briefer with my explanations and rely more on the videos. The eye is easy because it started out with photoreceptors that just distinguished light and dark. This was for bottom feeders to avoid predators that swam above them. When there is a shadow, hide, when there is light, safe. As the eye began to evolve to see vague shapes, that is advantageous to discern motion. Interestingly if you have poor vision and a bug is buzzing around, take off your glasses. The blurry vision will pick up the movement a lot easier than the focused vision. Then you can put your glasses back on to focus on the target and strike! Which is why binocular vision evolved. I have included an infographic that shows the progression as well as the first video in the second spoiler tag explains not only the beetle but the eye as well. 

 

  Hide contents

 

Regarding the beetle, again it is incremental changes. We have a volatile chemical in our body too! Hydrochloric acid to digest food! All the elements to produce the system and the chemicals are perfectly natural, are capable of existing in the beetle, as well as in its ancestors in varying capacities that over time produced the structure we see today. We are dealing with a time scale that is very very very vast. 

  Hide contents

 

 

 

 

Things can exist without a cause and other funky physics!

The point about bananas being bred to be easier for humans to eat displays intelligent design, though. 

 

4 hours ago, Hmmm lies said:

If the Bible was the first documentation of real events, that could be evidence, but I think what you're trying to get at is that the Bible, simply by being a religious text, does not have any more credence than any other text. For example, if the events described in Revelations did occur, then that would be evidence for the Bible being a reliable source, but that hasn't happened yet. Additionally, there are many books in the Bible, some which may be more reliable than others.

Hasn’t happened yet, so… 

the Bible doesn’t just reference real world places, it is intertwined with two thirds of the history of the world. 

4 hours ago, Denissimo said:

I think Pathfinder's points answer this pretty well, but if I may provide another point. Which I also mentioned in my very long post previously, but lets be honest: No one can be bothered to fully read that.
Why automatically jump to a monotheistic origin to explain this? Again, underdetermination. Evolution has been quantitavely proven through scientific observation and repeatable expirements. Heck, the fact that bacterial resistance is such a big problem in the antibiotic industry indicates how much biological organisms can evolve. Tack on a couple billion years, and you can get some pretty nutty stuff.
And thus I believe evolution to be more likely than the many alternative theistic explainations that can't be proven. Perhaps in reality, we are all being puppeteered by microscopic cosmic personifications of a badly worded eulogy.
Who knows. But that theory is difficult to prove, so I'll disregard it for now.

I agree somewhat with your second paragraph. I consider myself an Atheist, if one is to be honest, partly in preparation for eternal oblivion. If I'm right, then oh well. If I'm wrong, joy. Even if I'm cast down onto a crucifix in the 7 layers of hell, I'll be concious enough (through the crippling agony) to think
"Huh. Well thats interesting."
Which is to me, a joy beyond all this world could provide.

 

also revelation is insane, there’s so much metaphor in there that i haven’t thoroughly studied.

Daniel Chapter Nine is a great example of perfectly fulfilled prophecy.

4 hours ago, Honors cognitive shadow said:

Rly? Idk to me it makes perfect sense that over time single celled organisms would evolve and adapt to their environment, natural selection yk

Yeah and analogous structures help point to the fact that one’s environment helps drive evolution bc different organisms in similar environments often have the same characteristics even if they’re oceans apart

Also idk is it just me but I feel like if someone were to convince me to be religion they would need to do it without the use of the Bible bc I feel like that’s like if I said “oh yeah middle earth is real, how do I know? Oh well in the fellowship of the ring chapter 12 it states…”

A major part of apologetics revolves around the proof of the Bible. The difference is that LotR is fiction, and I believe the Bible is not. Most of the first half is historical nonfiction, and the second half is mainly theology. Telling me to have a conversation about my faith without the Bible is like telling you to have a conversation about science without any knowledge of science. Sola Scriptura. 
 

4 hours ago, Denissimo said:

I think Pathfinder's points answer this pretty well, but if I may provide another point. Which I also mentioned in my very long post previously, but lets be honest: No one can be bothered to fully read that.
Why automatically jump to a monotheistic origin to explain this? Again, underdetermination. Evolution has been quantitavely proven through scientific observation and repeatable expirements. Heck, the fact that bacterial resistance is such a big problem in the antibiotic industry indicates how much biological organisms can evolve. Tack on a couple billion years, and you can get some pretty nutty stuff.
And thus I believe evolution to be more likely than the many alternative theistic explainations that can't be proven. Perhaps in reality, we are all being puppeteered by microscopic cosmic personifications of a badly worded eulogy.
Who knows. But that theory is difficult to prove, so I'll disregard it for now.

I agree somewhat with your second paragraph. I consider myself an Atheist, if one is to be honest, partly in preparation for eternal oblivion. If I'm right, then oh well. If I'm wrong, joy. Even if I'm cast down onto a crucifix in the 7 layers of hell, I'll be concious enough (through the crippling agony) to think
"Huh. Well thats interesting."
Which is to me, a joy beyond all this world could provide.

 

I have not fully read the Bible, myself. Still studying the minor prophets and historical books of the OT. No one said you have to read the entire Bible. 

I think evolution could be possible, maybe not to the degree of forming intelligent life with the ability for abstract thought from… nothing. But natural selection causing the altering of species and adaptation to other environments is proven, especially by the Flood. Millions of species didn’t fit on the ark, they split off from proto species. 

Both secular and religious scientists point to evidence for the age of the earth. I am of the group of people that believes the universe is less than ten thousand years old, likely six or seven thousand (Not a joke).

also, the Divine Comedy and Paradise Lost aren’t real, but somehow have influenced popular opinion on heaven and hell in… some really stupid  ways. In case that was a serious reference.

[Pathfinder]

4 minutes ago, Verdance said:

The point about bananas being bred to be easier for humans to eat displays intelligent design, though. 

 

Hasn’t happened yet, so… 

the Bible doesn’t just reference real world places, it is intertwined with two thirds of the history of the world. 

also revelation is insane, there’s so much metaphor in there that i haven’t thoroughly studied.

Daniel Chapter Nine is a great example of perfectly fulfilled prophecy.

A major part of apologetics revolves around the proof of the Bible. The difference is that LotR is fiction, and I believe the Bible is not. Most of the first half is historical nonfiction, and the second half is mainly theology. Telling me to have a conversation about my faith without the Bible is like telling you to have a conversation about science without any knowledge of science. Sola Scriptura. 
 

The point about banana’s is it was said to be proof of god because of its innate nature to work so well for us to imply it was created for us. The thing is, it was, by us. Not god. I am still working on the other points but I have finished the banana, eye, and beetle. I will tag you once I have finished the others.

Regarding for final comment about apologetics, this gets back to what I have explained three times now and I am concerned will devolve into. This is not the Verdance states their personal religious beliefs and atheists respond thread. This is the atheist discussion thread. You are totally allowed to have your beliefs and respect them. However not in a single one of your posts have you asked or attempted to learn about the experience of atheists. You have only commented on your own. if you would like to discuss your beliefs and I go and list why I disagree with every single one of them, you can certainly PM me and I will be happy to, but that is not the purpose of this thread. Thank you!

[Verdance he/him]

6 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

The point about banana’s is it was said to be proof of god because of its innate nature to work so well for us to imply it was created for us. The thing is, it was, by us. Not god. I am still working on the other points but I have finished the banana, eye, and beetle. I will tag you once I have finished the others.

Regarding for final comment about apologetics, this gets back to what I have explained three times now and I am concerned will devolve into. This is not the Verdance states their personal religious beliefs and atheists respond thread. This is the atheist discussion thread. You are totally allowed to have your beliefs and respect them. However not in a single one of your posts have you asked or attempted to learn about the experience of atheists. You have only commented on your own. if you would like to discuss your beliefs and I go and list why I disagree with every single one of them, you can certainly PM me and I will be happy to, but that is not the purpose of this thread. Thank you!

Good point

sorry for taking up the thread

Edited April 21 by Verdance

[Hmmm lies she/her]

1 minute ago, Pathfinder said:

Regarding for final comment about apologetics, this gets back to what I have explained three times now and I am concerned will devolve into. This is not the Verdance states their personal religious beliefs and atheists respond thread. This is the atheist discussion thread. You are totally allowed to have your beliefs and respect them. However not in a single one of your posts have you asked or attempted to learn about the experience of atheists. You have only commented on your own. if you would like to discuss your beliefs and I go and list why I disagree with every single one of them, you can certainly PM me and I will be happy to, but that is not the purpose of this thread. Thank you!

Heh, thanks for this. I forgot just how addicted I can get to arguing with people on the internet. Probably not healthy for me.

 

I'll try and bring this back on topic: 

Despite the fact that I'm completely irreligious, I sometimes enjoy religious parallels in media if it isn't an endorsement, but rather as like a cool reference. For example, if a group of 4 characters are based off of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, I think that's pretty cool. However, I recently thought about how I typically only see this with Christianity (and sometimes Buddhism), and haven't really seen this with other religions like Islam, Paganism, or Greek mythology. What do y'all think?

(Also not exactly the same thing, but I quite enjoy the video game ULTRAKILL)

[Verdance he/him]

11 minutes ago, Hmmm lies said:

Heh, thanks for this. I forgot just how addicted I can get to arguing with people on the internet. Probably not healthy for me.

 

I'll try and bring this back on topic: 

Despite the fact that I'm completely irreligious, I sometimes enjoy religious parallels in media if it isn't an endorsement, but rather as like a cool reference. For example, if a group of 4 characters are based off of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, I think that's pretty cool. However, I recently thought about how I typically only see this with Christianity (and sometimes Buddhism), and haven't really seen this with other religions like Islam, Paganism, or Greek mythology. What do y'all think?

(Also not exactly the same thing, but I quite enjoy the video game ULTRAKILL)

Ultrakill is also cool. i kind of love the old bible fanfiction

wdym you never see Greco-Roman stories? They’re the most commonly referenced stories ever!

i would love to see more Korean or Chinese mythology in pop culture.

[Hmmm lies she/her]

2 minutes ago, Verdance said:

wdym you never see Greco-Roman stories? They’re the most commonly referenced stories ever!

I see direct acknowledgment of that stuff. I'd like to see subtle references, like characters meant to parallel the Three Fates. And especially, I'd like to see more Egyptian myths referenced. 

[Pathfinder]

5 hours ago, Verdance said:

Good point

sorry for taking up the thread

@Verdance I have finished updating my post. Please check it out when you have an opportunity. I do have replies to your other post, but my intention was to expound on some very common misunderstandings about science. Further it would not be very fair play for me to respond to your claims when I already asked that such digression not be the point of the thread. I am happy and have no problem with discourse in both directions but not when it devolves as such. I would explain further, but I already wrote what my issue was in the prior post and you replied, so since I tend to over explain, I am trying to practice restraint in that capacity lol. 

I do hope and request that you please genuinely read what I wrote, and give some of the videos a watch. Again not trying to pull you away from your religion. I do understand that depending on your belief structure, simply watching or entertaining something counter to your belief is considered sinful. If that is the case, then I doubt you will give them a chance, and I guess I respect that but please know I did go through a lot of effort today to put together that information and link those videos. It is difficult to entertain another person’s perspective such as on religion, if they will not in good faith really learn and consider the opposing side. 

That is why I kept hammering away about trying to understand an atheist’s perspective. Not to turn you into one. I understand your perspective. I grew up in it to a degree. I have studied your holy book. My question for you, is do you understand my perspective? And if you don’t, why not learn a bit? Also included a TLDR for my earlier post below:

1. The improbability number does not take into account how probability actually works and also has an inherent bias. 

2. Big bang is not a bang, it is dense high temperature expanding. It did not start from nothingness as nothing does not exist. We do not know what was before observable time because how does one talk about before time? 

3. Evolution is an incremental process over a huge time frame. We are not the end goal. Evolution is not random but it is not guided. It is when a mutation occurs in a species that is either advantageous or deleterious based on the environment. A mutation that is advantageous in one environment is deleterious in another environment. 

4. Natural things can come into existence without a cause. 

 

Edited April 21 by Pathfinder

[Usseewa ✾ She♡Her ✾]

i wish i had time to read all this

and contribute 

[Honors Spectral Image She/her]

8 hours ago, Verdance said:

The point about bananas being bred to be easier for humans to eat displays intelligent design, though. 

 

Hasn’t happened yet, so… 

the Bible doesn’t just reference real world places, it is intertwined with two thirds of the history of the world. 

also revelation is insane, there’s so much metaphor in there that i haven’t thoroughly studied.

Daniel Chapter Nine is a great example of perfectly fulfilled prophecy.

A major part of apologetics revolves around the proof of the Bible. The difference is that LotR is fiction, and I believe the Bible is not. Most of the first half is historical nonfiction, and the second half is mainly theology. Telling me to have a conversation about my faith without the Bible is like telling you to have a conversation about science without any knowledge of science. Sola Scriptura. 
 

I have not fully read the Bible, myself. Still studying the minor prophets and historical books of the OT. No one said you have to read the entire Bible. 

I think evolution could be possible, maybe not to the degree of forming intelligent life with the ability for abstract thought from… nothing. But natural selection causing the altering of species and adaptation to other environments is proven, especially by the Flood. Millions of species didn’t fit on the ark, they split off from proto species. 

Both secular and religious scientists point to evidence for the age of the earth. I am of the group of people that believes the universe is less than ten thousand years old, likely six or seven thousand (Not a joke).

also, the Divine Comedy and Paradise Lost aren’t real, but somehow have influenced popular opinion on heaven and hell in… some really stupid  ways. In case that was a serious reference.

Hm ok I see that I suppose but what if I was like “I believe that the Bible is fiction and lord of the rings is not” does that make lotr true bc i believe it?

8 hours ago, Hmmm lies said:

Heh, thanks for this. I forgot just how addicted I can get to arguing with people on the internet. Probably not healthy for me.

 

I'll try and bring this back on topic: 

Despite the fact that I'm completely irreligious, I sometimes enjoy religious parallels in media if it isn't an endorsement, but rather as like a cool reference. For example, if a group of 4 characters are based off of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, I think that's pretty cool. However, I recently thought about how I typically only see this with Christianity (and sometimes Buddhism), and haven't really seen this with other religions like Islam, Paganism, or Greek mythology. What do y'all think?

(Also not exactly the same thing, but I quite enjoy the video game ULTRAKILL)

Heheh ok this is entirely unrelated but I’m running dnd campaign rn and we’ve got the four horsemen of the apocalypse and Jesus as our characters it’s so awesome

Also I would like to say I know next to nothing abt the Bible and I have tried church, three times all Methodist bc most of the other brands in this area of the U.S. would shoot me, but what i gathered from the sermons was love people and be nice which i wholeheartedly agree with but uh i also learned that in kindergarten and I didn’t feel a need to repeat that again so I didn’t go back after the third time

I did like singing tho 

[Verdance he/him]

4 minutes ago, Honors cognitive shadow said:

Hm ok I see that I suppose but what if I was like “I believe that the Bible is fiction and lord of the rings is not” does that make lotr true bc i believe it?

Heheh ok this is entirely unrelated but I’m running dnd campaign rn and we’ve got the four horsemen of the apocalypse and Jesus as our characters it’s so awesome

I’ll take this somewhere else if you really want an answer, but no, my belief doesn’t prove the Bible, but history and science can support the Bible.

 

[Honors Spectral Image She/her]

Just now, Verdance said:

I’ll take this somewhere else if you really want an answer, but no, my belief doesn’t prove the Bible, but history and science can support the Bible.

 

Okkkk pm me? I promise I don’t want to fight lol I just don’t often find religious people who actually agree with me on most things and are open to discussion!!!

[CoderDrag0n8 He/Him]

14 hours ago, Verdance said:

I think that there are far more logical leaps to make assuming that incredibly complex organisms simply came into existence through evolution by accident, creating things like complex protein systems in the immune systems, functioning organs like eyes which cannot be simplified to a point where they could just appear by accident, or other similar mechanisms with many moving parts. The bombardier beetle is a classic example that many theologians use to support intelligent design. 

I also don’t believe that religion can or should be conclusively proven. There’s necessity for an amount of faith in things not seen needed in my beliefs, which conclusive proof would undermine.

2 things.

1. That's not how evolution works. Evolution is, basically pavlog's dogs, but with mutations, species, and incredibly long lengths of time. If a mutation does well, there is more of it, it eventually becomes the dominant gene, oh look theres another mutation, hey now there are quite a few different genes and now it's a different species than it was before, isn't that interesting

if you want to know more, I suggest looking (and actually looking, not trying to confirmation bias yourself (which isn't a jab against you, humans in general confirmation bias quite a lot, just making sure you aren't misreading my intentions)) for some online (or nearby bio teacher) info on evolution

2. That's not how statistics work. If you flip 100 coins, most likely, they will be 50-50. But they could be 100-0. That's just how statistics work. If it is statistically impossible, that means that it is realistic.

8 hours ago, Verdance said:

The point about bananas being bred to be easier for humans to eat displays intelligent design, though. 

 

Hasn’t happened yet, so… 

the Bible doesn’t just reference real world places, it is intertwined with two thirds of the history of the world. 

also revelation is insane, there’s so much metaphor in there that i haven’t thoroughly studied.

Daniel Chapter Nine is a great example of perfectly fulfilled prophecy.

A major part of apologetics revolves around the proof of the Bible. The difference is that LotR is fiction, and I believe the Bible is not. Most of the first half is historical nonfiction, and the second half is mainly theology. Telling me to have a conversation about my faith without the Bible is like telling you to have a conversation about science without any knowledge of science. Sola Scriptura. 
 

I have not fully read the Bible, myself. Still studying the minor prophets and historical books of the OT. No one said you have to read the entire Bible. 

I think evolution could be possible, maybe not to the degree of forming intelligent life with the ability for abstract thought from… nothing. But natural selection causing the altering of species and adaptation to other environments is proven, especially by the Flood. Millions of species didn’t fit on the ark, they split off from proto species. 

Both secular and religious scientists point to evidence for the age of the earth. I am of the group of people that believes the universe is less than ten thousand years old, likely six or seven thousand (Not a joke).

also, the Divine Comedy and Paradise Lost aren’t real, but somehow have influenced popular opinion on heaven and hell in… some really stupid  ways. In case that was a serious reference.

The thing about prophecies is that... they're kinda vague...

If you make a prophecy vague enough, then someone in the future who knows future events who is reading & believes in the prophecy, they will convince themselves it came through.

I'm just saying, prophecies are a whole thing.

I also personally choose to believe that if there was an omnipotent perfect god, they would not penalize non-believers, which is what you find 99.99999% of all christian gods (I say this because every single christian I have ever talked to has given me a different version of the story, and so in my opinion, they are each (even if mostly the same) at least slightly different gods. Of course, I am not trying to say that christianity is polythestic (thats a different arguement) nor am I trying to be offensive and I apologize if I am) do, in fact, do that, which I morally disagree with.

Just now, Honors cognitive shadow said:

Okkkk pm me? I promise I don’t want to fight lol I just don’t often find religious people who actually agree with me on most things and are open to discussion!!!

I quite enjoy seeing these sorts of disscussions & participating in them, so keeping it in this thread would make me happy, please.

Once again, I am sorry if I have offended you, @Verdance

[Through The Living Grub He/Him]

Um, hope it's fine if I add my two clips here. This is mostly based on my beliefs in the LDS church, and not all of it is church cannon but instead my personal opinions based on my upbringing. I do plan to see if any resources were posted in this thread for the sake of understanding.

8 hours ago, Verdance said:

also revelation is insane, there’s so much metaphor in there that i haven’t thoroughly studied.

Daniel Chapter Nine is a great example of perfectly fulfilled prophecy.

I'm gonna say this again just to avoid any accidental problems (sorry, but I'm paranoid). My beliefs, and I'm not attacking anyone, just adding to this discussion.

I believe that the Book of Mormon comes from the descendents of Joseph, the grandson of the prophet Abraham. I believe that there is a verse at the end of Genesis that says this will happen. 

Spoiler

Genesis 49:22 King James Version

Joseph is as a fruitful bought, even a fruitful bought by a well; whose branches run over the wall:

Religion is basically impossible to prove. Only prophets who have seen God can say "I know He exists", and they're all dead (or immortal but not publicly preaching that afaik *cough 3 Nephites and, I think, Paul cough*) I have my beliefs, but I can't prove it because the Bible is a shaky resource in scenarios like these, other denominations say the BOM is a lie by Joseph Smith, and my personal beliefs are based on emotional experiences instead of fact. 

3 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

3. Evolution is an incremental process over a huge time frame. We are not the end goal. Evolution is not random but it is not guided. It is when a mutation occurs in a species that is either advantageous or deleterious based on the environment. A mutation that is advantageous in one environment is deleterious in another environment. 

One more thing I want to say on this sub-topic, non doctrine belief by the way, God created man using evolution, then stuff changed. I cite physical differences between Europe and Asia, as well as cancer, poor eyesight, disabilities, allergies, and things in that umbrella. It is not definitive, but I believe that God uses natural processes to create miracles.

I just want to thank people here for the new insights. I don't get input from this viewpoint at all, and it is an interesting question.

[Verdance he/him]

15 minutes ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

2 things.

1. That's not how evolution works. Evolution is, basically pavlog's dogs, but with mutations, species, and incredibly long lengths of time. If a mutation does well, there is more of it, it eventually becomes the dominant gene, oh look theres another mutation, hey now there are quite a few different genes and now it's a different species than it was before, isn't that interesting

if you want to know more, I suggest looking (and actually looking, not trying to confirmation bias yourself (which isn't a jab against you, humans in general confirmation bias quite a lot, just making sure you aren't misreading my intentions)) for some online (or nearby bio teacher) info on evolution

2. That's not how statistics work. If you flip 100 coins, most likely, they will be 50-50. But they could be 100-0. That's just how statistics work. If it is statistically impossible, that means that it is realistic.

The thing about prophecies is that... they're kinda vague...

If you make a prophecy vague enough, then someone in the future who knows future events who is reading & believes in the prophecy, they will convince themselves it came through.

I'm just saying, prophecies are a whole thing.

I also personally choose to believe that if there was an omnipotent perfect god, they would not penalize non-believers, which is what you find 99.99999% of all christian gods (I say this because every single christian I have ever talked to has given me a different version of the story, and so in my opinion, they are each (even if mostly the same) at least slightly different gods. Of course, I am not trying to say that christianity is polythestic (thats a different arguement) nor am I trying to be offensive and I apologize if I am) do, in fact, do that, which I morally disagree with.

I quite enjoy seeing these sorts of disscussions & participating in them, so keeping it in this thread would make me happy, please.

Once again, I am sorry if I have offended you, @Verdance

Nah you good im taking it to PMs tho so apologies if i dont respond to any of that

PM me if you want to talk about this but this is definitely my last post here for now

[Hmmm lies she/her]

1 hour ago, CoderDrag0n8 said:

I quite enjoy seeing these sorts of disscussions & participating in them, so keeping it in this thread would make me happy, please.

Understandable, but this does seem to be an uncommon sentiment. There's always the general religious thread for that.

[CoderDrag0n8 He/Him]

1 minute ago, Hmmm lies said:

Understandable, but this does seem to be an uncommon sentiment. There's always the general religious thread for that.

Alas. Well, let us continue on!

[NameIess]

@Pathfinder, you'd mentioned a kind of harm related to people deconstructing back on page 2. could you perhaps PM me some more information about that? I looked at the website you linked, and there seems to be quite a lot of information on a great many topics, and I couldn't narrow down exactly what you may have been talking about.

@Verdance, if you were making a group PM do continue the discussion, I'd be interested in being there, although I'm not certain if I'll be very active in it.

[Verdance he/him]

1 minute ago, NameIess said:

@Pathfinder, you'd mentioned a kind of harm related to people deconstructing back on page 2. could you perhaps PM me some more information about that? I looked at the website you linked, and there seems to be quite a lot of information on a great many topics, and I couldn't narrow down exactly what you may have been talking about.

@Verdance, if you were making a group PM do continue the discussion, I'd be interested in being there, although I'm not certain if I'll be very active in it.

Didn’t think of a group PM, i have two single PMs on this right now, but if anyone else is interested I can set one up.

[Aeoryi she/her]

I normally see this kind of thing as a waste of time but I suppose I will request to be added to such a PM should it be made

[Pathfinder]

11 hours ago, NameIess said:

@Pathfinder, you'd mentioned a kind of harm related to people deconstructing back on page 2. could you perhaps PM me some more information about that? I looked at the website you linked, and there seems to be quite a lot of information on a great many topics, and I couldn't narrow down exactly what you may have been talking about.

@Verdance, if you were making a group PM do continue the discussion, I'd be interested in being there, although I'm not certain if I'll be very active in it.

Hi Nameless! Thank you for that question! When you click the link, scroll to the bottom, select “Unshackled”. That is a YouTube series. An example of a video that discusses a this in particular is “Healing from Religious Trauma”. I have linked the video below in a spoiler with the explanation on how “not all christians” is harmful to religious abuse survivors. The reason I kept things vague in the beginning is as I explained later, I did not want this to devolve. I will explain why I felt it would devolve and why I felt that devolution would be harmful.

So let’s say I posted a thread discussing Oreo Reeses. And @Verdance posted on that thread that Dark Chocolate Reeses is actually the best Reese’s and why. I can guide the conversation back to Oreo Reeses which is the topic of the thread or I can reply as to why I do not like Dark Chocolate Reeses (which I genuinely do not like dark chocolate lol). Verdance will understandably upon being told why I do not like it, will want to reply on why they do like it. And then the rest of the post will be Verdance saying why they like Dark Chocolate Reeses while I say why I like Oreo Reeses, but instead of both sides being heard, we would be talking past each other. Further as the thread is focused on Oreo Reeses, there are going to be a lot more people that like Oreo Reeses on that thread than like Dark Chocolate Reeses. At least potentially initially. So it will end up being Verdance saying they like Dark Chocolate Reeses, while a whole bunch of people are telling Verdance why they do not like Dark Chocolate Reeses and why they like Oreo Reeses. Seems a bit unbalanced and might make Verdance feel ganged up on. Other Dark Chocolate lovers might feel Verdance is being unfairly ganged up on, and then join in. Now a thread that was meant to discuss Oreo Reeses, is focused on discussing Dark Chocolate Reeses, when there is also a whole host of other flavor Reeses out there that can be discusses too, and this thread just happen to want to discuss Oreo Reese’s. (Minor pre-empt, just because the analogy is regarding all Reese’s, does not mean I am treating atheism as a religion. My perspective, and I feel it is very much supported, is it is not a religion)

So now that I explained why I kept my response to Verdance vague at that time, why I felt it would devolve, and why I feel that devolution could cause problems, I have explained below why “not all christians” is harmful to trauma survivors as well as included the link to the video.
 

Spoiler

As explained in the video, surviving trauma from religion leaves the individual raw, uncertain, scared, and doubtful of almost everything. In a lot of these cases, they are surrounded by individuals still in the faith, and still perpetuating the very abuse the survivor is trying to get away from. By stating “not all christians”,  it can trigger the abuse survivor. It can call up the abuse and make them relive it. It can make them feel attacked, that they are the problem and if they just had the “right” version, they would not have been abused. This can cause further self doubt because they were taught the version that abused them was the “right” version. That could cause them to seek another religion and there be a very real chance that the new religion also abuses them, perpetuating the all the harm that was already done. Finally it makes abuse survivors feel invisible, belittled, and ignored. But as I said the link to the video is from abuse survivors themselves sharing their experiences, so that will clearly say it better than anything I could.

 

I will close out this post with saying I do understand why Verdance said what they said and why. I also understand why you reached out to me, and why you want a PM forum to discuss that further. I really do. But I will put to you the same challenge I put to Verdance. Do you understand me? Do you understand my perspective? Not asking you to leave your religion, but coming onto an atheist discussion thread, have you come to build your understanding of the atheist experience?

[NameIess]

On 4/22/2026 at 11:27 AM, Pathfinder said:

Hi Nameless! Thank you for that question! When you click the link, scroll to the bottom, select “Unshackled”. That is a YouTube series. An example of a video that discusses a this in particular is “Healing from Religious Trauma”. I have linked the video below in a spoiler with the explanation on how “not all christians” is harmful to religious abuse survivors. The reason I kept things vague in the beginning is as I explained later, I did not want this to devolve. I will explain why I felt it would devolve and why I felt that devolution would be harmful.

So let’s say I posted a thread discussing Oreo Reeses. And @Verdance posted on that thread that Dark Chocolate Reeses is actually the best Reese’s and why. I can guide the conversation back to Oreo Reeses which is the topic of the thread or I can reply as to why I do not like Dark Chocolate Reeses (which I genuinely do not like dark chocolate lol). Verdance will understandably upon being told why I do not like it, will want to reply on why they do like it. And then the rest of the post will be Verdance saying why they like Dark Chocolate Reeses while I say why I like Oreo Reeses, but instead of both sides being heard, we would be talking past each other. Further as the thread is focused on Oreo Reeses, there are going to be a lot more people that like Oreo Reeses on that thread than like Dark Chocolate Reeses. At least potentially initially. So it will end up being Verdance saying they like Dark Chocolate Reeses, while a whole bunch of people are telling Verdance why they do not like Dark Chocolate Reeses and why they like Oreo Reeses. Seems a bit unbalanced and might make Verdance feel ganged up on. Other Dark Chocolate lovers might feel Verdance is being unfairly ganged up on, and then join in. Now a thread that was meant to discuss Oreo Reeses, is focused on discussing Dark Chocolate Reeses, when there is also a whole host of other flavor Reeses out there that can be discusses too, and this thread just happen to want to discuss Oreo Reese’s. (Minor pre-empt, just because the analogy is regarding all Reese’s, does not mean I am treating atheism as a religion. My perspective, and I feel it is very much supported, is it is not a religion)

So now that I explained why I kept my response to Verdance vague at that time, why I felt it would devolve, and why I feel that devolution could cause problems, I have explained below why “not all christians” is harmful to trauma survivors as well as included the link to the video.
 

  Reveal hidden contents

As explained in the video, surviving trauma from religion leaves the individual raw, uncertain, scared, and doubtful of almost everything. In a lot of these cases, they are surrounded by individuals still in the faith, and still perpetuating the very abuse the survivor is trying to get away from. By stating “not all christians”,  it can trigger the abuse survivor. It can call up the abuse and make them relive it. It can make them feel attacked, that they are the problem and if they just had the “right” version, they would not have been abused. This can cause further self doubt because they were taught the version that abused them was the “right” version. That could cause them to seek another religion and there be a very real chance that the new religion also abuses them, perpetuating the all the harm that was already done. Finally it makes abuse survivors feel invisible, belittled, and ignored. But as I said the link to the video is from abuse survivors themselves sharing their experiences, so that will clearly say it better than anything I could.

 

 

I will close out this post with saying I do understand why Verdance said what they said and why. I also understand why you reached out to me, and why you want a PM forum to discuss that further. I really do. But I will put to you the same challenge I put to Verdance. Do you understand me? Do you understand my perspective? Not asking you to leave your religion, but coming onto an atheist discussion thread, have you come to build your understanding of the atheist experience?

Thanks for the information! I understand not wanting this to devolve into an Atheism vs. Christianity or Atheism vs. religion thread, that sort of discussion would be better held elsewhere.

To answer your question, probably not. I understand some parts of an atheist worldview. I can understand and agree with wanting to base a worldview on evidence, even if I don't agree with where the evidence leads. I don't, however, really know what it would be like to live as an atheist.

Did I come onto the thread to build my understanding of the atheist experience? I was curious about a specific point that had come up here related to the atheist experience, so, yes, probably.

[Pathfinder]

On 4/27/2026 at 1:26 AM, NameIess said:

Thanks for the information! I understand not wanting this to devolve into an Atheism vs. Christianity or Atheism vs. religion thread, that sort of discussion would be better held elsewhere.

To answer your question, probably not. I understand some parts of an atheist worldview. I can understand and agree with wanting to base a worldview on evidence, even if I don't agree with where the evidence leads. I don't, however, really know what it would be like to live as an atheist.

Did I come onto the thread to build my understanding of the atheist experience? I was curious about a specific point that had come up here related to the atheist experience, so, yes, probably.

That is great! Thank you for your candor and contribution! If you have any other questions for myself or others regarding our experiences I am more than happy to answer and discuss! Thanks again!

[Rynturning_Light She/Her]

Hey all! I've got a really random question, but as people who don't hold religious beliefs, do y'all have any symbols that like give you hope or reassurance or anything?

It's no secret that each religion has, in some form, have symbols or icons that like represent or inspire that religion. For example, Christianity's cross is commonly worn by Christians. Usually to represent their faith, but also to inspire/remind of confidence in that faith.

I've been struggling with my mental health recently and, as an Atheist, I don't really have one of those symbols, but it has gotten me thinking about non-religious symbols that could inspire those feelings of contentment or hope in non-religious people.

For me, I've been wearing around my phoenix necklace more. I like the story of the phoenix and what it represents, and while it might not have a religious connotation or connection (at least to me), it kinda helps to remind me that these hardships only serve to lead me to the next point in my life.

Probably really corny, but I'm curious if anyone else has stuff like that. Important symbols or icons to them that have no religious influence or meaning but still kinda hold the same place as religious symbols

[Kansas Stormcursed he/him]

4 minutes ago, Rynturning_Light said:

Hey all! I've got a really random question, but as people who don't hold religious beliefs, do y'all have any symbols that like give you hope or reassurance or anything?

It's no secret that each religion has, in some form, have symbols or icons that like represent or inspire that religion. For example, Christianity's cross is commonly worn by Christians. Usually to represent their faith, but also to inspire/remind of confidence in that faith.

I've been struggling with my mental health recently and, as an Atheist, I don't really have one of those symbols, but it has gotten me thinking about non-religious symbols that could inspire those feelings of contentment or hope in non-religious people.

For me, I've been wearing around my phoenix necklace more. I like the story of the phoenix and what it represents, and while it might not have a religious connotation or connection (at least to me), it kinda helps to remind me that these hardships only serve to lead me to the next point in my life.

Probably really corny, but I'm curious if anyone else has stuff like that. Important symbols or icons to them that have no religious influence or meaning but still kinda hold the same place as religious symbols

The yin-yang, which I guess technically relates to religion but I get it from the martial arts perspective

[Hmmm lies she/her]

3 hours ago, Rynturning_Light said:

Hey all! I've got a really random question, but as people who don't hold religious beliefs, do y'all have any symbols that like give you hope or reassurance or anything?

It's no secret that each religion has, in some form, have symbols or icons that like represent or inspire that religion. For example, Christianity's cross is commonly worn by Christians. Usually to represent their faith, but also to inspire/remind of confidence in that faith.

I've been struggling with my mental health recently and, as an Atheist, I don't really have one of those symbols, but it has gotten me thinking about non-religious symbols that could inspire those feelings of contentment or hope in non-religious people.

For me, I've been wearing around my phoenix necklace more. I like the story of the phoenix and what it represents, and while it might not have a religious connotation or connection (at least to me), it kinda helps to remind me that these hardships only serve to lead me to the next point in my life.

Probably really corny, but I'm curious if anyone else has stuff like that. Important symbols or icons to them that have no religious influence or meaning but still kinda hold the same place as religious symbols

Pride flags fulfill that role for me in a sense, and I don't think that's corny at all.