Atheist you say?

by Rex B13 53 Replies latest jw friends

Abaddon

Frenchy; crownboy bought out one of the points I would have (thanks!).
Even if you believe that god will NOT punish people for failing to conform to its requirements, the absence of proof of the theory of god is still illogical.
If coming to know god is beneficial to a person, god's existence effectively being hidden still causes a delitrious effect, as it hinders people in coming to know god and thus getting the benefit.
Arguements about the search for god being all part of a big divine plan for humans, and that some people just don't get it, or aren't in the right incarnation, or whatever, are all fundamentally silly, as they reduce humans to chess pieces and god to a player, and I have yet to find a convincing moral arguement that would justify this behaviour on the part of a divine being, and such conceptualiasations of god are so distressingly petty and human as to defy belief.
Logically, the absence of proof of god indicates either there is no god, or it's playing games, or god is something removed from typical concepts of god, so far removed that we better come up with a new word, like the Force.
Rex; Your god is a psycho-terrorist!!!
He makes sure there is no proof, but expects us to believe in it anyway, as if we have nothing to lose by believing in god and everything to lose from not believing in god.
Nothing to lose by believing in god? How about self respect?! Spending one's life brown-nosing the extensively modified figment of a caveman's imagination JUST IN CASE? Pathetic!!
Rex, your god is an asshole. Note, I did not say god (if there is one) is an asshole. I said YOUR god is an asshole. Your concept of god is so deeply objectional in moral and logcal terms I want to wipe my computer screen when I read some of the stuff you write about it.
Oh, a reminder; that last sentence used hyperbole, it was not written in anger. You always think I'm angry as some modes of address seem alien to you, so you assume it's anger. I'm not. Incredulous at times, yes, angry, no.
You are a work of art though (irony);
Despite the various claims of laughter, I'm sure that each one of you found something within the post that made your new wall shake just a little. Some of you are forcing it a little, Abaddon plays at being cocksure yet she seems rather defensive to me.
Having shown overweening arrogance, you then say I am cocky!! That may well be true. My cat feels cocky when it reads the stuff you write (sarcasm). And I know I'm pretty (irony again), but I am a he.
Logical rules of argumentation, you say?
I see it used mostly to play word games and split hairs, which often obscures the meaning behind the words
Maybe YOU'RE missing something Rex. Maybe you're so afraid of a Universe where you live, and then die, and that's IT, that you put your mind through hoops to pretend it isn't so, and when you confront something even YOU (sarcasm) cannot fit through a hoop you just burble and resort to what is either terminological inexactitude, or unsupported re-iteration of subjective beliefs, like;
... Christianity has the most logical explanation for our existence, the most conclusive evidence for why we exist and the most historical evidence that a God-man walked the earth ...
Funny thing is you preface those statements with "You'd never believe that Christianity... ", and, for once, you're right!
Your lack of introspection is shown by statements like;
You guys just don't get it. Your world-view just keeps getting in the way. The cocoon you built for yourselves won't let you see.
Do you know why it is hysterical YOU say that?
Your final few sentences, by the way, is all the proof that one needs in proving that your god (as mentioned above), is an asshole;
You still think that there is some totally logical, rational (by human standards) set of explanations out there beyond JW land. Just like in the old days with the WTS, we think that 'all can be figured out and there are no mysteries', just like old mad-hatter Chaz Russell with his 'Divine Plan of the Ages'.
There are always too sides, there are no certainties (except in Christ), no one can prove nor disprove the existence of God. You cannot actually be an atheist for no one can know all....except God. All of your reasons for reviling Christianity are moot points. God will show mercy on whom He will show mercy, He need not provide explanations for His will, nor the reasons therin. His thoughts are not like ours. We see none of the big picture, thus we have no basis to set ourselves up as judges of His behavior.
It doesn't matter what we like or don't like about His actions (or inactions). We have no legitimate say in the matter. He has always determined the lengths of men's lives. He is sovereign Lord at all times. He just IS and we understand that as 'I Am', not "I have been' as the blasphemous NWT phrases His name.
Your god makes rational creatures with inquring minds and then denies a rational or or resolvable explaination of existence. See? An asshole. Oh, and if you cannot be an atheist because you can't prove god doesn't exist (let's ignore the lame logic), it follows, using the same lame logic you endorse, that you cannot be a theist as it's impossible (as you admit) to prove god exists.
So much for the man of faith routine. You cannot prove there is a god, and think that you'd best believe in it anyway in case there is one and it gets pissed. Wow! What faith you have! If I were god you'd be toast just for being a luke-warm cynic!! What does it say about vomiting the luke-warm out?
Kiss you petard goodbye Rex!
(the above is a combination of irony, sarcasm and hyperbole, just in case you think I am angry)
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
proplog2

There is a difference between an actual god and a possible god. All of the proof I've seen from theists is an attempt at establishing the possibility of god. An actual god would require extraordinary evidence.
rhett

Wow, Musolini told god that if he's out there to kill him. God didn't do it right away but he sure killed Musolini years later. Guess that showed him. Never mind the fact that he would have died years later anyways.
HEY GOD, IF YOU'RE REALLY OUT THERE COME KILL ME.
Ok, I've just typed this next line means I'm still alive. Guess what, I'm going to die someday. Does that mean that it was god who killed me years later for what I just typed? No, it means I shouldn't have stepped out in front of that bus like a moron.
Like I posted earlier this afternoon in a different topic, if god really has spoken to humans, why didn't he do it more clearly? Why haven't the billions of people in asia all converted to Christianity?
I believe the Harrison quote is totally pointless. There is nothing more urgent search or important than the search for god to a cultist, not to me. Just because some one (famous or cult member or not) says something doesn't make it true. Some people will say that time's not wasted when you're wasted all the time. For those people its very true because the most important thing to them is getting high. That doesn't mean that I'm not going to finish this post to go score a high because I don't believe that saying (I don't even do drugs myself).
Who the f**k needs god to live a good life? I don't. I'll try to treat people fairly and justly because that's what I want done to me and I'm try not to be a jerk very often. That's not because I believe the bible or any other holy book.
I don't need to fight
To prove I'm right
I don't need to be forgiven.
Rex B13

Hi Skeptic,
I've a question for you......
You make judgements on the basis of evidence and possibly intuition if you are like most people. Do you have enough evidence to judge God, assuming He is God as revealed in Jesus Christ?
Think about it.
BTW, the 'naturalism' idea is the only one from Lewis' works, the original post is an essay. Maybe you should read some of his books. They might set you to thinking and he is not a 'literalist' regarding scripture.
Later,
Rex
Grout

Some people just enjoy breaking things, painting graffiti, poking caged animals with sticks, and pushing emotional buttons to see the results. These people are "trolls".
Trolling has an opportunity cost ... not to mention the "boy who cried wolf" effect. Personally, I know I won't take Rex as seriously as I might have.
--
Chip Salzenberg: Free-Floating Agent of Chaos
GWEEDO

Rex
Do you have enough evidence to judge God, assuming He is God as revealed in Jesus Christ?
We can judge the bible cant we!!! The bible is corrupt and full of perversions. You must turn to the the Koran, Rex. It is the only way for you infidel soul will be saved.
Abaddon

Rex avoids the issues!! Rex avoids the issues!!
Bok bok bok bok!!!
You big Christian CHICKEN!!!
Come on Rex, bring it on... or do you perhaps realise you can't answer the questions and only believe in god BECAUSE YOU WANT TO, not because of any form of external evidence, despite your posturing. Want respect? Admit the facts.
Your illogicity and selective blindness brightnens my days. It reminds me how far most of us have come, and how glad we should be... you are my poster boy Rex; send us a JPEG, PLEASE!
Yes, I know you have feelings too, I am teasing you, but if I didn't like you I'd ignore you... so don't be too hurt that despite the fact I like you, I think your opinions in areas of belief are ludicrous! You'll just have to 'put up' with me not agreeing with you, like I have to 'put up' with you disagreeing with me.
All the best
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
Frenchy

Abaddon:
Yes, crownboy did bring up a valid point. I didn’t say that people would not be punished for failing to conform to his requirements, though. I said I don’t believe they will be punished for disbelief in Him and his son. It’s possible to reflect God’s qualities while professing disbelief in Him just as much as it is possible to believe in His existence while at the same time exhibiting all the things that He hates. It think that concept is well illustrated in Paul’s words in the second chapter of Romans:
“For whenever people of the nations that do not have law do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not having law, are a law to themselves. They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused. This will be in the day when God through Christ Jesus judges the secret things of mankind, according to the good news I declare.”
I don’t understand your statement: “the absence of proof of the theory of god is still illogical.” Do you mean to say that absence of proof for the theory of God makes belief in him illogical? I have stated many times that the existence of God cannot be proven anymore than can it be proven that He cannot exist. Is it illogical to believe in God? I don’t think so. But if you ever find God, it will not be in an equation or a formula, not literally, that is. Once God is found, he can be ‘seen’ in many things after that.
Abaddon: “If coming to know god is beneficial to a person, god's existence effectively being hidden still causes a delitrious effect, as it hinders people in coming to know god and thus getting the benefit.”
Very good point and a subject deserving of it’s own place. Just one brief point and we can discuss this at greater length if you like. Mark 4: 22 quotes Jesus as saying: “For whatever is hidden is meant to be disclosed, and whatever is concealed is meant to be brought out into the open.” There is evidently a purpose in the difficulty of finding God.
Abaddon: “and such conceptualiasations of god are so distressingly petty and human as to defy belief.”
I agree that misconceptions of God by humans are very petty and some are quite unbelievable. And you’re right also about a lot of the arguments trying to explain ‘the big picture’ are plain silly. Of course, that does not make God silly or petty anymore than what people believe about you has to necessarily have that effect on you.
Abaddon: “Logically, the absence of proof of god indicates either there is no god or it's playing games” Not necessarily. “…or god is something removed from typical concepts of god, so far removed that we better come up with a new word, like the Force.” God is not, (cannot) be what everyone thinks him to be. There are too many conflicts. What’s wrong with the word “god”?
Abaddon: “Nothing to lose by believing in god? How about self respect?! Spending one's life brown-nosing the extensively modified figment of a caveman's imagination JUST IN CASE? Pathetic!!”
Self respect is not sacrificed by believing in God. In some cases it is restored by such a belief. I think you have hit on something crucial with this particular comment, however, in the phrase: “JUST IN CASE?” Perhaps there is where you answer lies.
Abaddon

Frenchy; Sorry if I mis-stated what you meant regarding no punishment by god for disbelief. But, it begs the question; "If you don't believe in god, and are, for example, homosexual, and see this as a natural thing, what if you doing this natural thing is, unbeknownst to you, something god objects to?" I don't think god cares, if he exists, whether someone is a homosexual, by-the-way, it's an example of a behaviour that can be seen as natural by many atheists but is seen as un-natural by some theists.
Paul's statement, to me, is doublethink. I take it you are familiar with 1984? Basically I find it very unsurprising that most cultures share basic taboos. These taboos would have evolved without a god in any developing culture, as they are required for a culture to develop. Concepts of property and the sanctity of human life, pair-bonds, etc., are things without which a culture is unstable. So Paul, to me, is saying;
"Whenever you see people doing what people would do even if there were no god, it proves that there is a god."
Sorry, it doesn't work for me!
You say;
"Do you mean to say that absence of proof for the theory of God makes belief in him illogical?"
Yes, that is what I think. And, if I may digress, I am VERY happy to accept the concept of spirituality. If you find god in the sunrise, and in the smile's of babies, or the subtle curve of your girlfriend's back, or a galloping horse, that is great. I find in these things such as these a sense of wonder, a sense of the other, a transcendence of the mundane. But I don't call it 'god', as I see no evidence of intelligence or personality, and I would use 'god' to define a divine being with intelligence and personality. I really object sometimes to the way certain theists (not you) try to corner the market in spirituality.
You argue with scriptual backing "There is evidently a purpose in the difficulty of finding God."
Very good arguement, but it is insubstansive IMO, as it doesn't answer what that purpose might be. As this difficulty unavoidably prevents some from knowing god, if there is one, it attacks the concept of god being caring if this were true.
As I see it, it is god's responsibility to make the running. He made us. It's his job.
Say I made little people and kept them in my back yard, and made sure that they could find evidence for them having evolved from cats, and made sure they could find no proof for my existence. Say I inspired individual little people to write books claiming (without any proof) to have details of me and my plan, and loads of other little people wrote other books claiming the same thing that I hadn't inspired.
Would it be reasonable for me to expect the little people to be responsible for finding out the truth that I had obscured?
I don't think so, but you're free to disagree. If there is a god, and he thinks it's reasonable, well, I'm shafted, but I must be true to me before I can be true to anything lese, and believing that god would act in an unreasonable fashion is something I cannot do and be true to myself.
You ask what's wrong with the word god.
Vishnu, Shiva, Ahura-Mazda, Qualetelotl(sp?), Coyote, Allah, the nameless Seikh concept of god, the Jew's YHWH, the modified version of this promulgated by Christianity, Thor, Loki, oh the list is endless. All of these are gods. There is as much proof for Loki as there is for YHWH. Then we have concepts of the divine, such as held by Buddists, new-age conceptualisations of god as 'Mother Nature', for want of a better word, diffuse concepts of a creative demi-urge.
God means so many things to so many people it is essentialy a meaningless word, but I think (and this is the only thing I can fault you on, as you seem to be very open minded and informed) when you say god you mean the Christian god. Thus, when you say god, you know what you mean, but I have to emphasise this is just a coincidence of space and time and genetics. You could have just celebrated the Hindu festival of lights if you'd been born elsewhere, and be a devotee of Krishna.
The fact you exclude other concepts of god and even have to ask what's wrong with the word god suggests you haven't considered, if your idea of god happens to be true, what happens to those born elsewhere raised with concepts of god they think are just as true as you think yours is.
This flips us back to the reality, that people living in ignorance of the truth about god are unavoidably done harm if there is such a thing as truth about god, and that thus, lack of proof of god is illogical if god cares.
Of course, if you are supporting the existence of a god that accepts all who look for it in whatever way, and gives those who don't have a chance to look for it another chance, then I think you have a lovely concept of god... but you still can't prove it. However, if you believe that, then me sincerely not believing in god and doing my best in life will do me no harm, as I'll get another chance.
Your advice is, essentially, to believe in god "JUST IN CASE", as you say "Self respect is not sacrificed by believing in God". DO you mean if I pretend to believe in god even though I don't just in case god will be happy with me. I think not!!!
I agree if there IS one, you do not sacrifice self-respect by belieiving.
But if there ISN'T, I think you do lose self respect by believing, and I cannot be true to god if I am not true to me by trading my self-respect for a comforting belief in a nice idea that is roughly what would have evolved as humanity rose from ignorance, even if there were no god.
Thank you for a very well considered and refreshing response.
Gyles
(edited for typos)
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
Frenchy

“Your advice is, essentially, to believe in god "JUST IN CASE", as you say "Self respect is not sacrificed by believing in God". DO you mean if I pretend to believe in god even though I don't just in case god will be happy with me. I think not!!!”
I once held a very narrow concept of God. I have always been intrigued by the concept of God, that is, the supreme being responsible for all that exists, the creator. When I speak of God without further clarification, I’m speaking of that One. I use the masculine pronoun not because I think God is a man rather than a woman but because it’s fairly common to use the masculine even when speaking collectively of both sexes. I use the personal pronoun because I view God as a person and not some ‘blind’ force or energy that merely fuels the fires of creation.
In my desire to know Him better, I began to define him by allowing myself to believe what others, who know no more than myself about Him, tell me all about Him. I read, meditate upon, and often quote scriptures from the Bible. I have a deep respect for it and view it as inspired. (Not necessarily in the conventional meaning of the term but that’s another subject.) God is not in the Bible although I believe that we are able to get brief glimpses of…what?…a reflection of him much in the same manner that Moses only got to see a small and vague reflection of God’s glory, His back, so to speak. But, I digress.
Scripture can be taken so many different ways. I don’t arrogantly insist that my view is correct (although I used to!) and I’m open to other considerations. In my quote from Romans I see (an opinion that differs from your own) that God’s qualities are in all of us, regardless of what we may or may not profess. I don’t say these things in order to convince others (proselytize) but merely to clarify my own, personal convictions. I hope that all who read what I write will take it in that spirit. By stating my position I do not in any way wish to belittle what others think nor even so much as insinuate that I am right and they are wrong.
You said, concerning the belief in God (if I’m wrong please correct me) “If there is a god, and he thinks it's reasonable, well, I'm shafted,” I do not believe that God will punish someone for disbelieving His existence. Sometimes the journey is more important than the destination. You have looked for evidence of His existence. That is more than a lot of people have. Your disbelief is a result of reasoning on your part about the matter and so I respect your opinion because it is your own. All of us who debate whether or not there is a God make that journey. We are all obliged to think about it. I think that’s the big part of it.
For the sake of clarity I will say that my concept of God is not the typical concept by mainline ‘Christians’ because I do not exclude ‘non-Christians’. I do believe that God is a person and so, in that way, I am imposing a limit on my definition of him. I do not give him a name to the exclusion of all others, however.
You said: “Of course, if you are supporting the existence of a god that accepts all who look for it in whatever way, and gives those who don't have a chance to look for it another chance, then I think you have a lovely concept of god...” Thank you, for that is the way that I feel about God.
You said: “Your advice is, essentially, to believe in god "JUST IN CASE", as you say "Self respect is not sacrificed by believing in God". DO you mean if I pretend to believe in god even though I don't just in case god will be happy with me. I think not!!!” I’m sorry if I gave that impression but that is not what I meant. I don’t see how someone can, to himself, pretend to believe. That would be self-deception and of course, God would certainly be able to see that. Why would one want to do that if he is sincere? What I do say is that a person should seriously CONSIDER the existence of God. That’s all. I would not ridicule someone for their conclusions.
You say: “I agree if there IS one, you do not sacrifice self-respect by belieiving.
But if there ISN'T, I think you do lose self respect by believing,” Perhaps this is yet another factor in the equation. Fear of being wrong (losing self-respect) should not be the factor in our search for God. Do I ever consider the fact that I could be wrong and there is really no God? Absolutely. Can people live normal, healthy, productive lives and never give God a second thought? Absolutely. Do I believe that I have some sort of advantage over my fellow humans by believing in God? Absolutely not. Then why do I bother? Because I must, it’s who and what I am.
Thank you very much for your responses, I truly appreciate them. I look forward to hearing from you again. It’s so very nice to be able to talk to someone of a different viewpoint in such a civil, intelligent manner.

Atheist you say?

Share this