What do you do when you can't be an open athiest

[Themgclgopher13]

So I'm an atheist
18:53:06 But I want to become a lead role in an organization.
18:53:42 but "I believe in God" or whatever is in thier affirmation
18:54:29 If people know I'm an atheist I'll get black balled in representing them
18:55:05 Am I wrong for thinking of the universe as the word "God"
18:55:32 that way I can say the affirmation? Without lieing
18:55:47 but isn't that enabling myths?
18:56:03 and the whole God concept?
18:56:08 responder: That's more like Stephen Hawking's idea of 'God' being the majesty of the universe
18:56:18 doesn't it make me a hippocrit?
18:56:36 Is it wrong?

 

[bluejatheist]

Welcome to LoR

Real quick, a tip for writing out a chat log,
1: Edit the post, then Highlight the text, then click the "code" button in the post edit screen
2: Maybe erase the parts where I posted, that way its just your description without me interrupting


cheers

 

[Dogma's Demise]

Okay well, first off I'd recommend not revealing so much information about yourself. You've already provided quite a bit to narrow it down and (possibly) compromise your identity. I mean just imagine if someone from that organization read this, even if they can't exactly figure out who it is. You want them to start getting paranoid over an "atheist infiltration" or something?


Now if you do get involved in this, I mean is religion even a relevant part of what you're going to do? Can't you just stay silent and then you're neither actively endorsing nor speaking out against religion? Exactly how much of your principles do you have to crush here besides that affirmation thing?

 

[Laurens]

If you don't believe in God, then there is nothing wrong with telling a small lie to avoid a fuckload of hassle...

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

So I'm an atheist
18:53:06 But I want to become a lead role in an organization.
18:53:42 but "I believe in God" or whatever is in thier affirmation
18:54:29 If people know I'm an atheist I'll get black balled in representing them
18:55:05 Am I wrong for thinking of the universe as the word "God"
18:55:32 that way I can say the affirmation? Without lieing
18:55:47 but isn't that enabling myths?
18:56:03 and the whole God concept?
18:56:08 responder: That's more like Stephen Hawking's idea of 'God' being the majesty of the universe
18:56:18 doesn't it make me a hippocrit?
18:56:36 Is it wrong?

Welcome to LoR!

Firstly, I have no doubt that the "God" to which they refer is a particular religion's one...

It's quite alright to admit that you don't believe in a anthropomorphic God, which is what all religions' "holy" books do.

Thus, you can still claim a belief in a "First Cause" - God by another name to those who infer it as such - whilst actually meaning a quantum fluctuation, or whatever you consider to be the "First Cause" of the cosmos.

Sophistry, perhaps - but better than damaging your standing in the community and your career.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Themgclgopher13]

Good point Dogma demise, I edited it and hopefully and most likely no one read it. But I don't call myself an athiest anyway, I'm a secular humist, who believes in promoting the good and selflessness that creates a better soiciety. I used to not care about my identity, but now I have to keep it private because I do not want people to prejudge me. However if they know the person I am now (after my death and revival) they would know I am a good person.

No religion is not really a big part just in that little clause. What matters most is promoting a successful and mature individual for people to become. So I feel, no, it's not that important. It is, but it isn't. And finally yes, I can just not touch religion, only one sentence involves God, but it does say, and worship said God however one sees right or something like that.

Thanks Laurens!

James that was awesome, I do believe in a first cause, however was there a first cause or i the universe continuously being recycled, over and over and over forever?

Peace and Goodness,

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Good point Dogma demise, I edited it and hopefully and most likely no one read it. But I don't call myself an athiest anyway, I'm a secular humist, who believes in promoting the good and selflessness that creates a better soiciety. I used to not care about my identity, but now I have to keep it private because I do not want people to prejudge me. However if they know the person I am now (after my death and revival) they would know I am a good person.

No religion is not really a big part just in that little clause. What matters most is promoting a successful and mature individual for people to become. So I feel, no, it's not that important. It is, but it isn't. And finally yes, I can just not touch religion, only one sentence involves God, but it does say, and worship said God however one sees right or something like that.

Thanks Laurens!

James that was awesome, I do believe in a first cause, however was there a first cause or i the universe continuously being recycled, over and over and over forever?

Peace and Goodness,

There's nothing wrong with calling yourself a "Christian Humanist" - since Jesus' message was one of compassion and he worked in the community, helping the poor, the sick and the needy.

And what better principle epitomises Humanism than the second commandment: "Love thy neighbour as thyself"?

As for your question regarding the "First Cause"...

It depends on how one thinks about the cosmos - Brian Greene's latest book, The Hidden Reality, might help you explore the various possibilities which the latest research by physicists considers possible!

Personally, if one considers quantum froth/foam to be the "First Cause" - assuming a naturalistic cosmos(!) - then each stable(!) quantum fluctuation would result in a universe, including ours.

I think of it like fireworks - where you see multiple explosions (bearing in mind that the universe(s) are "expansions", rather than "explosions") occurring in the "past", "present" and with further ones in the "future".

Martin Rees' book, Just Six Numbers explains the basis of what constitutes a "stable" quantum fluctuation.

And one should not forget Lawrence Krauss' current book, A Universe From Nothing!

Kindest regards,

James