My name is Mason and after 32 years of being a dedicated Christian, I finally realized a week before Christmas 2013 that the gospel message doesn't make sense. I've watched hundreds of hours of youtube videos of both atheists and theists. My eagerness for truth is what ultimately lead me to my atheism, and this truth seeking part of me has only become stronger, so not only do I like discussing religion and why people believe it, but I now have burning questions of a wide variety of topics, most specifically controversial topics that people like to sweep under the carpet and not talk about, ie abortion, racism, gay rights etc. Nothing I post will be for or against anything (well, I'll try to keep my personal opinions out anyway), but rather a basis to discover people's opinions from all different angles and hopefully explore new ways to understand something rather than just accept without question what we've always known.

I look forward to getting to know you all

Mason

Welcome to the rough-and-tumble. Much to be learned here, if such things interest you.

Gidday Mason, and welcome!

G'day eh ( part Canuck adopted Aussie. )

Hello Mason.Welcome.
Nowt wrong with personal opinion, so long as one can defend it with reason and evidence.

Hi!

solidatheist wrote:My name is Mason and after 32 years of being a dedicated Christian, I finally realized a week before Christmas 2013 that the gospel message doesn't make sense.

Do you think there was there anything in particular that triggered your realisation or brought you to analyse the message in a different way?

solidatheist wrote:I've watched hundreds of hours of youtube videos of both atheists and theists. My eagerness for truth is what ultimately lead me to my atheism, and this truth seeking part of me has only become stronger, so not only do I like discussing religion and why people believe it, but I now have burning questions of a wide variety of topics, most specifically controversial topics that people like to sweep under the carpet and not talk about, ie abortion, racism, gay rights etc. Nothing I post will be for or against anything (well, I'll try to keep my personal opinions out anyway), but rather a basis to discover people's opinions from all different angles and hopefully explore new ways to understand something rather than just accept without question what we've always known.

I look forward to getting to know you all

Mason

LucidFlight, this is what I posted on my website in regards to giving in to rational thinking:

Why Did I Become Atheist?


One week before Christmas 2013, I was watching a video about a little girl who was born a boy. Her parents allowed her to be a girl, and this doco really moved me. I felt so much compassion for this little girl, as she was adamant that she wanted the hormone meds and gender reassignment surgery. What made me feel for her the most was the fact that unless she finds God and snaps out of the thought that she's a girl trapped in a boy's body, her ultimatum is eternal separation from God in Hell.
I actually started to pray for her, but then I stopped and thought about the fact that she was only about 10 years old, and surely God wouldn't allow this to happen to someone who doesn't understand fully the consequences of sin, especially that she probably hasn't even heard any Bible stories, or the Gospel message. Then I asked myself why God would allow her to be born a boy when she thought she was a girl in the first place, because then she's really got no choice but to stuff up and get a sex change probably before she gets a chance to hear about God.
This is the point when I stood back and realised I was trying to make the excuses for my own arguments. I thought about the Gospel, which is exactly as it is in this video that I posted, even though it's made entirely with sarcasm, it's absolutely true, and I tried to understand it from a non-believer's point of view. Now I am a big fan of Judge Judy, and I use a quote of her's a lot: "If it doesn't make sense, then it's not true." So when I ran the entire Gospel message through my mind, for the first time ever, it made no sense.
God created us for companionship, even though he lives in a perfect paradise called Heaven with millions of angels that worship him continuously. So God being lonely, he created us, knowing that most of us would stuff up and go to hell. But he created us anyway. God couldn't forgive our sins, so he had to send his one and only son to die on the cross to be the ultimate sacrifice to take the place of our own punishment in hell, even though most of us will still end up in hell, but that's our own fault. Now it's us Christians' responsibility to tell everyone else about it, because God isn't able to, even though he wrote a book about it. And get this, if we miss an obvious opportunity to tell someone about God, their blood is on our hands.
I can go on and on, but basically, this is what I played in my head, by Judge Judy's logic, it made no sense so it therefore isn't true.
At that stage, since I'd only not believed in Christianity for a few minutes at this stage, I still believed there is a God and there is a spiritual realm. Cut a long story short, it took me a week to realise that there isn't a God. Of any religion or any genius story teller.

Fascinating stuff. Thank you, Mason. Also, a thank you to Judge Judy.

I bet that's a sentence you never thought you'd type, LF?

welcome, Mason!

Don't take this the wrong way, but I find it impossible to get my head around the idea of that stuff ever making sense! I do though, think it's rather awesome when someone's intellect can overcome their conditioning.

I also recommend not applying Judge Judy's rule to quantum mechanics.

lol

virphen wrote:
I also recommend not applying Judge Judy's rule to quantum mechanics.

I was going to mention this, but thought best not to, seeing as we are only a few months in to Mason's new lease on thinking.

I do believe Judge Judy's saying is absolutely true though. If it doesn't make sense, then it's not true. If it doesn't make sense that God lived in the sky in the bible, yet Christians claim he lives in a different dimension, then it's obviously not true.

And quantum physics... if we were to say that common sense doesn't apply to quantum physics, then we need to define what common sense is. Just because we don't understand a phenomenon doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. It only means it doesn't comply with what we regard as sense until we understand it.

Mason

this truth seeking part of me has only become stronger,

tip of the day....

use the word evidence instead of truth - truth has a whole lot of garbage tagging along with it.

The sooner you drop the theist language the easier to deal with a wonderfully complex universe sans skydaddies...

solidatheist wrote:And quantum physics... if we were to say that common sense doesn't apply to quantum physics, then we need to define what common sense is. Just because we don't understand a phenomenon doesn't mean it doesn't make sense. It only means it doesn't comply with what we regard as sense until we understand it.

Science does not have to make sense, so it is lovely when it does. Science only makes descriptive models of natural phenomena, and then proceeds to test the emergent predictions of that model to destruction. If and only if the model passes these tests does it become tentatively accepted and is subject always to further review in the light of future evidence. Thus QM is valid science, even if we can't understand it. Perhaps the fact that we are evolved animals gives us only a very limited insight into the working of the universe, especially with regards to very large or small-scale phenomena outside of everyday experience. That is why we do not rely on our intuition, but test our notions in science.
In religion of course, there is no fair testing, and bollocks is believed according to tradition and often in ignorence of what science has to say on the matter. Religious ideas often gain popularity because they are amazing, and many don't worry about the reasons for their belief may be flawed, and is certainly evidence-free.
Nature is even more amazing than religion, and has the added bonus of being true, at least in a scientific sense. And just because we do not understand QM or cannot [yet] name a mechanism does not mean it is false and some religious notion is true.

Macdoc wrote:Mason

use the word evidence instead of truth - truth has a whole lot of garbage tagging along with it.

Yes evidence is required to prove things, but at the end of the day, truth is what is important, not theories based on hypothesis.

Hello Mason. Nice to virtually meet you.

truth is what is important,

again....listen to the tip....you will rarely find the word "truth" used in a science conversation....it smacks of absolutism and that is one thing those without sckydaddys have to deal with ....uncertainty.
When you shift memes abruptly as you have some of the reinforcing language from the old meme will persist.
Evidence and theory and process are forever moving and uncertain....let's face Newton was pretty solid ...then EInstein came along and Einstein's theories are still being explored and challenged and so far batting 100% but open to new understandings.

Certainty is hard come by in a world where our minds and accumulated bodies of knowledge are what we rely on to deal with the world we are born into and we step onto a plane knowing that we don't know everything about aerodynamics but trusting that scientists, engineers and authorities have reduced the risk and uncertainty and continue to do so as an ongoing process.

Many shy away from uncertainty that preferring the comfort of handed down "truths " of religion which as you have found are hogwash.

Spend some time in the science forum and in particularly read Cali's posts - they at times may make you cringe but you will always learn.

If we need to cater for the religious people by politically correctly saying nothing we know is actual truth, then that's your call. 2 + 2 = 4 and no one is going to tell me otherwise. If evidence leads to something that is unquestionably truth, then it's truth. Should we disregard all the evidence that overwhelmingly proves evolution to be true just in case some religious bigot is offended? Should we allow religious people to be the only ones to rightfully claim ownership of 'truth'? Are we going to beat around the bush about everything we know just to satisfy some religious people?