Atheists and the faithful, hope and resignation. Is this the difference?

I don't know how you presume that "faithful" people have a resignation of those things. Where did you get this information?

I don't know where you live but many of the medical practices where I live are Christian. Dental offices also.

The thing I see as relevant though, if people stuck to the 10 commandments and always kept them, most disease, war and suffering wouldn't exist.

Actually, as a practicing Roman Catholic who is faithful to the teachings of the Church, I would say that you have it backwards. I would argue that those who have faith in God are the ones who are hopeful about the future. Christianity teaches that there will eventually be an end to all human sinfulness and an eternal kingdom ruled by God. Atheists, on the other hand, seem (from my perspective) to have nothing to offer except complaints about religion.

Some Christians believe that there will be a rapture in which Jesus will remove his church from the earth and leave all of the non-believers behind. This, in my opinion, is a position of hopelessness. Why bother to try to make a difference when Jesus will just snatch you up at some point and take you away? Most Christians (including Catholics) reject this idea, which is based on a flawed and wishful interpretation of one line of Scripture.

The fact is that humanity is sinful and disease, war and suffering are inevitable realities until humanity ceases to exist. But faith in a just and merciful God gives one not only hope for salvation but also the will and the call to do one's part to end or reduce the suffering and torment. Unfortunately, many ignore the call and cause more suffering and torment in the name of religion. That's a travesty but an inevitable consequence of human sinfulness. But those who recognize the call will work for the better of humanity.

It does make sense, WP, that atheists have more hope for the future. Tho, I did meet some christians and other theists online and off-line that has just as much hope for the future. Just my experience.

I think it is largely on how the theist interprets their sacred texts, and how far they take it (liberal to fundamentalist). Some conservative theists DO care about the environment---tho, in my experience, they are few and far in between. More moderates and liberals tend to take on that environmental view.

I apply the Serenity Prayer (sans the word "god") to the difference of hope and resignation. SOME situations I simply cannot change, and others I can. Unfortunately, a lot of fundamentalist theists (any religion) "resigned" the environmental problems to "god's plan" and tend to not do anything about it even if they were SHOWN how they can contribute. I don't agree with that attitude. It is very self-defeating and frankly, selfish.

Pre-millennialist Christians tend to believe that there is nothing that humans can do and therefore, the only job of the Church is to get the message out and hope some get saved. Post-millennialist Christians on the other hand DO believe that they can bring about positive change, and so the job of the church in their vision is not only to save souls, but to improve society. This idea is what is behind the whole "Social Gospel" movement.

Now, that's just Christians. I am a Hindu, and as a Hindu I believe that we are in an age called the Kali Yuga, which is a dark age, and yet it does not stop me from one minute from trying to improve the world. We can create a "satya yuga" (the good age of truth) WITHIN the "kali yuga" by our good actions. And in fact, I believe the world can be improved, and HAS been improved in at least some areas. More people are far more tolerant of others than they used to be. People live longer than they used to and in better conditions. Slavery is much rarer, and so on. So there are positive changes, and we can continue to make them. I also want to point out that in Hindu belief, our world is what we make of it. If it is bad, that is our responsibility to make it better. The law of karma is at work (cause and effect) and God is not going to do the work for us if we do not do the right actions.

Jewish people work on something they call "Tikkun Olam" which is repairing the world. By fulfilling the commandments, and giving charity, and contributing to good causes, and having love for neighbor, they seek to make the world a better place. They even believe that they can bring the Messiah by their good actions. So of course, they are motivated to try to do their best.

Buddhists that I have known tend to work very diligently on improving conditions in the world. They believe (as do I) that eventually all will reach the ultimate salvation, and so this is a very positive future view.

So, I think that coming from the perspective of someone who lives in a world dominated by Christians, your theory makes some sense, but I don't think it applies across the board (even for Christians).

In the end, I say that the religion or non-religion which is right for the person is the one that makes him or her the best person they can be in this life. If their religion causes them to feel resigned and not help, then that is not good. But if it causes them to do all they can to help others, then that is good, whether one is an Atheist, Christian, Hindu, or Pastafarian. ;-)

Good question and I hope you get some good answers from both sides.

I am an atheist. I think you know my answer because you have replied to some of my questions.

I believe that since there is nothing out there for us as far as a god, it is up to us to make the world better. All we have is our future and our own free will to change it. We also know that we have to do it ourselves and can't rely on a god or prayer.

You are also right in thinking that theists do get stuck assuming that evil and destruction on earth are part of their god's plan and have resignation to let it continue happening. That is a sad and dangerous thing.

Wouldn't it be great if there were strong atheists in politics. They wouldn't let those god beliefs get in the way.

Thanks again for asking!

Well I'm a Christian and I do have faith in God. And I do believe whatever his will is it will be done.

But we also want to find ways to end disease, wars and any suffering. I don't wish anyone to suffer, so of course I'd want to end those things. We all just have to try our best and if it's Gods will we'll find a way, if it's not we won't.... but that doesn't mean we try any less or we're not putting as much effort in it.

I see too that many are not concerned of the future because the end is near anyway.

I do not see this here as you do, but I feel you are correct, just knowing Christians and ex-Christians who share there life in religion openly.

But I do know a lot of Christian doctors. Are there few Christian scientists?

I agree it often does look that way on the surface. However in reality those who put their faith in God have a greater hope. They may not be able to explain some things or even understand them, but they have a confidence because they know there is something higher than them who not only understands all but also controls all. The faithful can have peace because they know they don't have to solve all of the world's problems on their own. They have God to ultimately do the job. They need only submit to Him and be willing to let Him use them to carry out His plan. They are not as worried as athiests because they don't have to be. They know they are not in control, and that pressure is not on them.

Athiests, and/or unbelievers don't have that luxury. As far as an unbeliever is concerned, there is no higher power, therefore all of the world's pressures and problems (disease, war, suffering) are basically on them (man). here is no one greater to take on the problems.

The bible says "Cast your cares on the Lord and He will sustain you..." (Psalms 55:22)

There are countless other verses in the Bible that tell us to trust God and not worry.

Matt 6:25-34

Prov. 3:5-6

But again, the athiest does not have the luxury of having someone to provide for them.

In a sense the athiest is like the prodigal son. (Luke 15:11-31). In the story a father has two sons. The father is very wealthy and the sons are well taken care of and enjoy the life of comfort and luxury. However one son decides tht he no longer wants to live under his father, so he goes away to live his own life. The lost (prodigal) son is like the unbeliever in that the unbeliever rejects his father (God) and goes at it alone. That son is independent of the father and in control of his life. On the other hand, the believer is the other son who stayed with his father. Read the story and you'll get my analogy.

Basically the athiest is living his life in such a way that he (not God or anyone else) is in control. He enjoys independence, but with it comes the pressures of not having anyone to turn to.

On the other hand, believers remain under their father (God) they submit to Him, but it's out of a deep love (not bondage). In turn, they enjoy the security of knowing they have the God who created the universe caring for them. They are dependent on God, but it is also a deep love relationship. Because God is not man, He is able to do what no one else can. He fills the believer with a joy and a peace. The believer does not worry because his(or her) trust is in the lord and not him(her) self.

Anyway the differences in their attitudes and behaviors. comes out of this.

Atheists think of ways to solve the problems by themselves. They do not have time to sit down and do the pure worrying. The faithful put everything in God's hand and thus don't have to worry too much.

debate here, no, if the religious fanatics have their way, satan is the cause of disease, and it is to be treated by a holy man placing hands

my son would be dead now in a world like this, the tumor infesting his brain,

thankfully, some atheist or non religious fanatic, had the good sense to say disease is not caused by satan, and tried some xrays on people who had the disease my son has