Why are atheist so angry with God?

a reply to: cooperton
Your take on Pascal's wager relies on the assumption that your god is real and that their relationship with humankind is as it is told in the bible.

If that is not the case, then all your faith and your defense of that particular theology is just as pointless as atheism.

It is the reason for the saying, "You are almost as atheist as me, I just happen to believe in one less god than you".

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: daskakik

The difference is that some of us guys were once on the other side of the argument.

I've been on both sides too.

Pascal's wager shows that defending atheism KS pointless whereas defending theism insists on a greater power and therefore greater purpose for humankind

Don't you think greater purpose should be a democratic consensus and not a sovereign agenda that we play mysterious roles in?

a reply to: cooperton

Originally posted by cooperton
Pascal's wager shows that defending atheism KS pointless whereas defending theism insists on a greater power and therefore greater purpose for humankind

Pascal’s wager is really a Totalitarian coercive argument…along the lines of…you may as well take the chance to just believe and avoid potentially being destroyed in Hell etc…

If people just believed blindly that way, then nobodies heart would be truly in it…You’d just end up with a set of variable results…whereby some people took the chance, while others didn’t ect…

Plus, it’s not really a good way to build any type of heavenly kingdom, based on just allowing those in who didn’t want to fry…

For that reason, I don’t think much of Pascal as a philosopher…you should try Aristotle, Socrates or even Plato…

- JC

originally posted by: Joecroft

Pascal’s wager is really a Totalitarian coercive argument…along the lines of…you may as well take the chance to just believe and avoid potentially being destroyed in Hell etc…


If people just believed blindly that way, then nobodies heart would be truly in it…You’d just end up with a set of variable results…whereby some people took the chance, while others didn’t ect…

Plus, it’s not really a good way to build any type of heavenly kingdom, based on just allowing those in who didn’t want to fry…

For that reason, I don’t think much of Pascal as a philosopher…you should try Aristotle, Socrates or even Plato…

- JC

Plato agrees on a Monarch style Deity. If there is an objective good, then this is what God is, and also where we come from. Plato supposed this world was like a receptacle for new souls to come into being that was established by the Good Eternal Creator to create new conscious beings.

Plato called the mark before the target was struck when Christ came. In his cave allegory he describes the same Theology as Isaiah proposes, where we are in a shadow of death, aspiring for the light.

In the allegory, he says if anyone were to come from the light and try to teach the cave people about the truth, that person would surely be put to death. Hundreds of years later Christ came and fulfilled Plato's supposition on the world.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

Don't you think greater purpose should be a democratic consensus and not a sovereign agenda that we play mysterious roles in?

You'd be surprised at how simple and liberating Christ's law is. You're truly free to do what you want, rather than being enslaved to societal systems. Just love God and love other people as yourself. Paul goes into a lot of Theology about the liberation, how "everything is permissible but not everything is beneficial".

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: cooperton
Your take on Pascal's wager relies on the assumption that your god is real and that their relationship with humankind is as it is told in the bible.

If that is not the case, then all your faith and your defense of that particular theology is just as pointless as atheism.

Yes the part in bold is what Pascal's wager says... but then on the flip side if atheists are wrong, and theists are correct, then there is great benefit to the person who's been seeking out the divine through their life.
]

originally posted by: cooperton
Yes the part in bold is what Pascal's wager says... but then on the flip side if atheists are wrong, and theists are correct, then there is great benefit to the person who's been seeking out the divine through their life.

You missed the point, not all theists can be correct because not everyone believes in the same god.

You can be a theist and still lose the wager.

This was an interesting discussion with random quotes from religious writings that only indicate the lack of cognitive discussion. Quite enjoyable. I'll be over here happily sipping coffee and looking for access to Code 21 of the Matrix.

a reply to: DanielApollo

I don't know, it reads like a pissfest between the spiritually impaired and mentally impaired.

a reply to: cooperton


Man…talk about bypassing the main content of an entire post…it seems to be a trend around here…The majority of my post was addressing “Pascals Wager” and now you’re talking about Plato lol

I guess I have to acquiescence…oh well…here goes…wish me Luck…

Originally posted by cooperton
Plato agrees on a Monarch style Deity. If there is an objective good, then this is what God is, and also where we come from. Plato supposed this world was like a receptacle for new souls to come into being that was established by the Good Eternal Creator to create new conscious beings.

Plato believed in the immortality of the soul…which doesn’t exactly jive with Christian theology…Plato also proposed that all Souls were eternal and literally preexisted before being born…which again…goes against standard Christian theology…

Plato isn’t supporting your Christian position…

But if you look deeper into things though, you’ll find that many of Plato’s ideas actually influenced some aspects of Christian thinking…many scholars have been pointing this out for years!…

Originally posted by cooperton
Plato called the mark before the target was struck when Christ came.
In his cave allegory he describes the same Theology as Isaiah proposes, where we are in a shadow of death, aspiring for the light.

You’re reaching with those tie ins…because it’s a very common analogy…i.e stepping into the light/truth from out the darkness/lie etc…

But seriously, why would Plato be pointing towards Christ and Christianity as a whole…when he believed in the preexistence of Souls…because according to Christianity, only Jesus had preexistence…

Originally posted by cooperton
In the allegory, he says if anyone were to come from the light and try to teach the people of the cave the truth, they would surely be put to death. Hundreds of years later Christ came and fulfilled Plato's supposition on the world.

Muslims take certain verses from OT and try to make out that it was a prophecy of the coming of Mohamed…Mormons do something similar to try to prove the coming of Joseph Smith etc…They are all very flimsy tie-ins…with no real substance or proof behind them…Your quoted post above is on par with those types of supposed prophecies…

The first problem you have there, is that Plato could be alluding to his own truth and how it’s difficult for anyone else to perceive and see/understand it; to the extent where they would probably be put to death for going against the society norm…

The second problem is, you could take “Plato’s Cave Allegory” and state it’s a prophecy for anyone in history, who was put to death for trying to speak the truth…and try to make it work as a prophecy etc…

- JC

originally posted by: Terpene
I don't know, it reads like a pissfest between the spiritually impaired and mentally impaired.

Not believing in the bible doesn't automatically make someone spiritually impaired.

It isn't the only spiritual path out there.

a reply to: daskakik

I thought a roundhouse piss was due, sorry you got wet...

a reply to: Terpene
I was just trying to point out that it isn't a pissfest like you described because a person can be spiritual and an atheist or a theist but not of the abrahamic religions.

Heck, we even had another christian member at odds with the OP.

Why are atheist so angry with God?

Strange question considering that atheists don't accept there to be a God at all. So how can they be angry at something they don't perceive as existing, or ever having done?

No. The question is nonsense. Atheists are not angry with God, they are simply despairing at all the people who actually accept the thought of there being a God.

a reply to: daskakik

Yes, and I wasn't arguing with you. Of course being theist does not mean one is mentally impaired either.

did you know that there is a connection to how much chaos you can manage, in your workplace for example, and your intelligence?

a reply to: Terpene
I know you were not arguing with me, or anyone else.

I just piggybacked on your post to say that their is more than one flavor of spirituality and not all of them have a god figure.

originally posted by: Joecroft


Pascal’s wager is really a Totalitarian coercive argument…along the lines of…you may as well take the chance to just believe and avoid potentially being destroyed in Hell etc…

I apply it more generically to theism or atheism. Atheists doesn't look for a higher power, whereas theists do. If there is a higher power then the theist is at an advantage, whereas if there is no higher power then nothing matters anyway because we all return to eternal nothingness without a trace. If there's no higher Intelligence then nothing can guide us into a persisting form of consciousness... because if we're the highest consciousness we know of at the moment, and there is no Deity, then we're screwed because we don't know how to perpetuate our own consciousness after death

originally posted by: Joecroft
a reply to: cooperton

Plato believed in the immortality of the soul…which doesn’t exactly jive with Christian theology

Eternal life is one of the core promises of Christianity.. that means an immortal soul.

…Plato also proposed that all Souls were eternal and literally preexisted before being born…which again…goes against standard Christian theology…

No it doesnt...

"I knew you before I formed you in the womb" Jeremiah 1:5

“And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” John 15:27

But if you look deeper into things though, you’ll find that many of Plato’s ideas actually influenced some aspects of Christian thinking…many scholars have been pointing this out for years!…

The early Christians mention the wisdom of the Greeks... Paul was a key factor in spreading the news to them about Christ. Greece became a key point of conversion likely because they had much of the Theological knowledge (via Plato etc) to understand what Paul was saying.

But seriously, why would Plato be pointing towards Christ and Christianity as a whole…when he believed in the preexistence of Souls…because according to Christianity, only Jesus had preexistence…

Now that I showed you that Christians believe in an eternal soul, do you rescind this objection?

originally posted by: cooperton
"I knew you before I formed you in the womb" Jeremiah 1:5

This is supposedly what god told one person, Jeremiah. Not sure it applies to everyone.

If we go with the idea that God knows everyone that will be created, he can say he knew them or of them but that doesn't mean they existed before they were conceived.

“And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” John 15:27

This is Jesus talking to his disciples and from the beginning in this context could just mean the beginning of his ministry.

You post made me think of the "well of souls" but it seems to some it is the place where souls go to await judgment and to others it is where souls come from.

Got anything more concrete?

a reply to: cooperton

Originally posted by Joecroft
Pascal’s wager is really a Totalitarian coercive argument…along the lines of…you may as well take the chance to just believe and avoid potentially being destroyed in Hell etc…

Originally posted by cooperton
I apply it more generically to theism or atheism.

“Pascals Wager” is a argument into accepting the Christian faith…so why would you be using it generically to theism or atheism…? And better yet, how would anyone know in advance you were using it that way!

Originally posted by cooperton
Atheists doesn't look for a higher power, whereas theists do. If there is a higher power then the theist is at an advantage, whereas if there is no higher power then nothing matters anyway because we all return to eternal nothingness without a trace.

But “Pascals Wager” isn’t about finding out whether there is a Creator/God or not…it’s about accepting Christianity and the God of the Bible through a persuasive argument…

Originally posted by Joecroft
Plato believed in the immortality of the soul…which doesn’t exactly jive with Christian theology

Originally posted by cooperton
Eternal life is one of the core promises of Christianity.. that means an immortal soul.

True, but eternal life is only for believers in the Christian faith…Plato came before Jesus and believed everyone had an immortal soul without any conditions attached…which is a big difference…

Originally posted by Joecroft
…Plato also proposed that all Souls were eternal and literally preexisted before being born…which again…goes against standard Christian theology…

Originally posted by cooperton
No it doesnt...

"I knew you before I formed you in the womb" Jeremiah 1:5

“And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” John 15:27

Look, I can’t compete with the ever-changing beliefs that come from various different Christian denominations…Most Christians don’t believe in a preexisting Soul…

If all souls have preexistence, then that would create a problem in terms of the Christian understanding of “salvation”…What denomination of Christianity do you belong to…?

ETA--- Think about it…No preexisting Souls are going to want to incarnate here…when there’s a chance their Souls could get destroyed…

- JC

originally posted by: Joecroft

But “Pascals Wager” isn’t about finding out whether there is a Creator/God or not…it’s about accepting Christianity and the God of the Bible through a persuasive argument…

I think it is more than just Jews/Christians that have historically, and currently, worship the Most High God. Christ so happens to be the firstborn of that Apex God.

"The one who is physically uncircumcised yet keeps the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker"

Romans 2:27 shows a consistent theme in Christian Theology where the self-righteous are often the most condemnable.

Jesus primarily debated against the self-righteous hypocrisy of the Jewish elites of the time. To put things in perspective, The first person In the Bible that He confessed that He was the Messiah was a Samaritan woman with 5 ex-husbands.

Look, I can’t compete with the ever-changing beliefs that come from various different Christian denominations…Most Christians don’t believe in a preexisting Soul…

Are you referring to reincarnation? Plato was big on that like you said. The only noted reincarnation in the Bible was Elijah, who apparently became John the Baptist. Elijah in the Old Testament never died but instead ascended to heaven, and was eventually re-incarnated as John the Baptist. I think reincarnation is the exception rather than the norm. So many self-righteous spiritualists suppose they're the reincarnation of some iconic figure, but it is probably their soul's first go. Consider how small the population in the past was... even if reincarnation is the norm, there wouldn't be enough historic Souls to accommodate the number of living humans at the current time.

If all souls have preexistence, then that would create a problem in terms of the Christian understanding of “salvation”…What denomination of Christianity do you belong to…?

ETA--- Think about it…No preexisting Souls are going to want to incarnate here…when there’s a chance their Souls could get destroyed…

- JC

Yeah I would bet that the only Souls that can reincarnate are the ones that ascended into heaven. Look at the fallen angels / Nephilim, they were in heaven and wasted their lofty position to incarnate into condemnation. This shows that conscious psyches that are in heaven do have the ability to incarnate, but at great consequence because they defy the natural order.

originally posted by: daskakik

This is Jesus talking to his disciples and from the beginning in this context could just mean the beginning of his ministry.

If our souls are eternal, then there is no debt to time, and therefore time itself is transcended. Or at least the decay aspect of time. If something is eternal it cannot die. So this must be the case for eternal beings. This is why God has been called the Alpha Omega.

The beginning of our eternal life is the end of our temporal life. So the beginning and the end are therefore the same. Because once you are born again into eternity, you will have no end. This is exactly the point of the following discussion between Christ and His disciples:

The disciples say to Jesus: "Tell us what our end will be." Jesus says: "Have you then deciphered the beginning, that you ask about the end? For where the beginning is, there shall be the end. Blessed is the man who reaches the beginning; he will know the end, and will not taste death!"

a reply to: cooperton
But you can't say with certainty what beginning Jesus is talking about in John 15. It isn't clear that he means the beginning of eternal life but we do read that he met and chose them at the beginning of his ministry and they had been with him since that beginning.

Like I said, do you have anything else that is more concrete?