Breaking down an atheist perspective

reply to post by Bigwhammy


ugh *headdesk*

that is a strawman

anyway, onto god's "wills"

in the statement from the picture (which always makes the grammar nazi in me scream "atheism!" the argument refers to "evil" in a more broad sense
it includes things like mudslides, tsunamis, hurricanes, etc

sure, you can give the "god didn't want to create an army of robots" argument, but you can't explain away all the unnecessary deaths from natural disasters with that argument, can you?

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


who says that mudslides, tsunamis, hurricanes and other catastrophes are evil?

If we live in a quantum universe, there may both be a God or there may not be a God at the same time.

Ah, think about that one 'ey

Therefore, we shouldn't really worry about it.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

sure, you can give the "god didn't want to create an army of robots" argument, but you can't explain away all the unnecessary deaths from natural disasters with that argument, can you?

How are the deaths unnecessary? I think people are under the impression that we deserve to live, and that when it is taken away in death, we feel we have been cheated. That some wrong or ill will has occurred. Death is a natural part of the universe, there is no necessary or unnecessary, everything just is.

The problem I see is in not the actuality of a God, but in in the interpretations of him. As long as one goes along with the religious concept of; an all loving God, we get into a bind. History just does not support it. The reason most atheists cannot abide him is that he is not so loving, which goes so contrary to many idealistic beliefs.

He loves us so much that he will allow millions to die in concentration camps, be murdered, die of terrible diseases and other tragedies?

This could be a hard reality: supposing God is not all loving? What if he does not love all of mankind? I don't love everyone, nor do most - if they are honest. What if believing in God is a survival of the fittest? If we are just lemmings or sheep, it might be by choice as to where we stand with God, or on the issue of a God. This is where free will comes in. A choice! Well, it is a case of; choices vs. consequences.


Let's put it out there: what if the reality is; only some care to know him while most are more caught up in the illusion of him? Religion becomes the God, science becomes the God, or we are gods. What is the actual truth? Have we been blinded? What if the simple truth is; that God just does not care about us as much as we in our narcissism would like to believe? Perhaps it takes some effort on our part to step away from the crowd to see him for who he possibly is, and the concept that he will acknowledge only those who will go to any lengths and will accept reality for what it is.

What other answer makes as much sense? I am through with Pollyanna allusions. I believe he exists, and I believe it is time we recognize who he is!

I wanted to add; there is a white elephant in the room and all religionists including atheists will not acknowledge it, or plainly don't see it.

All the above and everyone in-between want to make God fit their profile. Atheists want to believe that God is not at all loving, but evil, so he cannot therefore exist, and all Christians want to make excuses for him! If one does enough penance or service work, self-sacrificing, they can perhaps meet with Gods approval. Or they make him out to be a wimp and let him off the hook as one that does not have the strength, is very passive, or is an underachiever.

It is my experience that he can be very loving, but is also a God of accountability. As humans, we don't like that!

The white elephant could be telling us; that God is not what the atheists, nor what most religionists believe, but that his character could actually be somewhere in-between. And that it is up to us to use our "senses" to figure it out.

Originally posted by mattguy404
If we live in a quantum universe, there may both be a God or there may not be a God at the same time.

Ah, think about that one 'ey

Therefore, we shouldn't really worry about it.

you standing in the middle of the street. there is a car heading straight for you but because we live in a quantum reality it may or may not be there....

therefore, we shouldn´t really worry about it.

when reality meets philosophy next on sick sad world!

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Bigwhammy

 

sure, you can give the "god didn't want to create an army of robots" argument, but you can't explain away all the unnecessary deaths from natural disasters with that argument, can you?

satan, and by association man, challenged god.

the same arguement raised in eden is effectively the same arguement we have today which is ¨man doesnt need god¨

god, by permitting the rebellion and by proxy, suffering, is saying ¨ok, prove it.¨

2 corinthians 4:4 calls satan the god of this world.

in matthew, satan in an attempt to tempt jesus offers him the kingdoms of the world. if the kingdoms werent his, wouldnt jesus have replied something to the effect of ¨how can you offer what is not yours?¨

why would god GIVE the earth to satan? because satan is trying to prove something.

in the meantime, god provides a way for those who dont want to live in this type of world by providing the messiah and setting up a kingdom.

revelation is famous for mentioning armageddon (the end of this world, or system of this world). i can quote (if you want me to) a list of scriptures where god says he will not tolerate satan´s rule for long.

so why the ¨unnecessary deaths¨?

humans asked to be independant. why would god protect us? yes the bible does have situations where god saves someone from something. but they fall into one of two catagories. either 1, they prove god is the almighty (see the story of daniel and his friends being thrown in the oven. or 2, to show what god will do in the future on a grand scale (jesus didnt ressurect everyone, but he was displaying that god would do this in the future).

you must also remember that there are plenty of situations where the faithful were killed and god did not stop it. (abel, samson, isaiah, paul, etc etc)

inother words. pain, death, suffering, sickness, dishonesty, hunger, etc etc is something we must all tolerate until god steps in and says enough.

A message to all the Athiests, please watch this:



Pretty much somes it all up.

-Jimmy

[edit on 21-4-2008 by jimmyjackblack]

reply to post by jimmyjackblack


Man, I listened to the whole thing. She is awesome! Sums up some of the characters around here to a Tee! I love this woman.

reply to post by jimmyjackblack


She almost had me at hello...

But then she started talking about how I don't know what I communicate and that is about where I had to leave it. She has no idea who I am am what I think and say, so for her to take my athiest label and automatically disregard my thoughts as nonsense....well, she is committing the same fallacy that many are guilty of.

This is how I see it...everyday and what is in front of me. I don't spend a lot of time ruminanting on God because, in my experience, he is just a ploy to induce obedience. He is the end all be all judgement on morality and how the people behave towards other people.

I treat people face to face and as they require. I get to know people and then determine how they should be addressed and communicated with. Am I perfect? Hell no. Will god make me perfect? Again, hell no.

Do I want to be? No...because then I would be 'god' and couldn't call myself an athiest....

reply to post by MemoryShock


You may wanna listen to it, because honestly she talks about exactly what you're saying lol .

reply to post by MemoryShock

She has no idea who I am am what I think and say, so for her to take my athiest label and automatically disregard my thoughts as nonsense....well, she is committing the same fallacy that many are guilty of.

Not really. Basically she says an opinion can't really stand up to a personal testimony. Why should we care about your opinion when we have a relationship with the King of the universe? Sorry, you are welcome to your opinion, you have a right to it, but it doesn't garner respect. She has a personal relationship with God. So do I.

All atheism is... is an opinion.

Originally posted by Parabol
First, God is not willing to prevent evil, so the original statement is flawed. God is capable of preventing evil, but chooses not to.

To quote:
"Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent."

Why worship a spectator?

Bigwhammy,

You have a close and personal relationship with an entity that answers to "god." Unfortunately you have absolutely no way of knowing whether it's actually the "god" you want to have a relationship with. Seems awfully prideful to me, that someone who's religion revolves around the concept of mankind being inherently sinful, beastly, and of profoundly poor judgment, automatically assumes that whatever they worship is, in fact, "god."

Maybe you evaluate this relationship frequently, I dunno.

[edit on 23-4-2008 by TheWalkingFox]

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Not really. Basically she says an opinion can't really stand up to a personal testimony. Why should we care about your opinion when we have a relationship with the King of the universe? Sorry, you are welcome to your opinion, you have a right to it, but it doesn't garner respect. She has a personal relationship with God. So do I.

All atheism is... is an opinion.

So is a subjective interpretation of words printed in a book by a man/woman/men/women.

I thank you for granting me the option of having an opinion. It is very christian of you. As an athiest...do you not find it very "christian" that you are granted the same option?

The difference is this...I don't care about trying to tell you the 'error of your ways'. I don't perceive that you have an error beyond the personal attacks of others' beliefs.

But a trend I have noticed recently is that christians on this board seem to feel the need to impose their beliefs on others.

A question:

Can we perhaps discuss the definition of 'symbolism' without a literal belief being expressed by either party?

That is why I am here...to discuss as objectively as possible a subjective topic.

Nothing of the 'Final Word' can be proven. Period. So how is the 'Final Word' nothing more than someone's opinion?

And yet another question qualified by a statement.

Jeseus had a life. Why does he need mine as well?

Originally posted by MemoryShock

So is a subjective interpretation of words printed in a book by a man/woman/men/women.

No she is talking about a personal living breathing relationship with a supernatural God. Really. It is that fantastic of a claim. And the indwelling of the Holy Spirit alters the ability to comprehend those words in a profound way.

I thank you for granting me the option of having an opinion. It is very christian of you. As an athiest...do you not find it very "christian" that you are granted the same option?

I didn't grant you that option God did. The lawmakers ensure right to express it.

The difference is this...I don't care about trying to tell you the 'error of your ways'. I don't perceive that you have an error beyond the personal attacks of others' beliefs.

What if your friend was about to ride over the edge of the cliff? Would you warn him?

But a trend I have noticed recently is that christians on this board seem to feel the need to impose their beliefs on others.

Impose how? More like defend. I have experienced mostly the opposite. I see atheists always demanding proof of God, trying to impose lack of belief. All sorts of attacks on the Bible and Jesus very existence. I will defend that stuff if I feel up to it. It gets old, the same things, like zeitgeist and macro evolution, debunked over and over. We see the board different because we perceive what is personal to us, probably not a true reflection of the board either way.

Christians final motivation is for others to receive eternal life. It's really not about winning a debate.

A question:

Can we perhaps discuss the definition of 'symbolism' without a literal belief being expressed by either party?

That is why I am here...to discuss as objectively as possible a subjective topic.

Nothing of the 'Final Word' can be proven. Period. So how is the 'Final Word' nothing more than someone's opinion?

Ahh see but it has been proven to many of us beyond a reasonable doubt. If you want to know the final truth it is available. That what Monica was discussing if you watch the whole thing. You can not ask .a demanding way, you have to approach with humility. You can know

And yet another question qualified by a statement.

Jeseus had a life. Why does he need mine as well?

He doesn't. What ever gave you the idea he needs anything?

He wants the very best for us all. But He allows us the freedom to choose our way. He gave us instruction in his word as to what is best. Unfortunately, good is often the enemy of best.



[edit on 4/23/2008 by Bigwhammy]

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

You have a close and personal relationship with an entity that answers to "god." Unfortunately you have absolutely no way of knowing whether it's actually the "god" you want to have a relationship with

See this is what I just was talking about to MS. How do you presume to know I have no way of knowing? YOU have no way of knowing what you are saying about my experience with God. I have many relatives and friends around me that see him work in my life too and validate my experience.

you know, that quote from the OP doesn't actually disprove god...

there could be an all knowing, all powerful, all good, yet incompetent god

good intentions, the knowledge needed to put it forward, and the power to do it...yet always messing things up...

reply to post by Bigwhammy


I'm curious about your methods, actually.

Madness,

An incompetent god could not be all-knowing or all-powerful. Another option is that there is an all-powerful, all-knowing being that delegates to incompetent underlings - a layer of divine middle management, if you will.

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
It is that fantastic of a claim.

Fantastic is a word I would use to describe such a claim...

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I didn't grant you that option God did. The lawmakers ensure right to express it.

Well if the option to have an opinion is not a kindness from you to me...then why did you even mention it in the first place?

I can appreciate the fact that you are passionate about your belief system...but giving me inane truths such as the fact that I am allowed to express an opinion and then irrationally associating that basic fact with your belief system is fallacious at best and quite irrelevant.

Your god does not get to take responsibility for my opinion...I cultivated it myself through much thought...prior to even knowing your online personality.

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
What if your friend was about to ride over the edge of the cliff? Would you warn him?

Absolutely. A very imminent danger. Does your analogy work? Hardly. Again, irrational association. I give people the respect they deserve until they prove otherwise. If I behave in such a fashion that I am more or less living the Golden Rule...then why should it matter when I say that there is no god? And before you go on the whole pride tangent, I give credit to the people around me. The whole of humanity is a more realistic attribution of my person than an invisible man...

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Impose how? More like defend.

Tomatoes, Tomaatoes...we can spin this all day long, can't we?

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I have experienced mostly the opposite. I see atheists always demanding proof of God, trying to impose lack of belief.

I have yet to request, much less demand, proof of god. I do not require it. I require an adherance to respectful discussion...especially if there is an insistence on discussing with people whom disagree with you.

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
We see the board different because we perceive what is personal to us, probably not a true reflection of the board either way.

That, my friend, is it in a nutshell....subjective vs objective.

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Ahh see but it has been proven to many of us beyond a reasonable doubt. If you want to know the final truth it is available. That what Monica was discussing if you watch the whole thing. You can not ask .a demanding way, you have to approach with humility. You can know

I do know...that there is so much more reason to attenuate to what is happening around me and to explore and research the physical world around me as opposed to using my imagination to explain things...that is not to say that I never use my imagination to explain something...but that I make concession for it and acknowledge it when it happens so that I don't confuse myself...

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
He wants the very best for us all. But He allows us the freedom to choose our way.

I live most every day with the assumption that I have the freedom to choose my way. It seems like an elementary concept to me...so much so that I don't feel the need to discuss that fact in favor of discussing that which the freedom has presented me with...(usually.. )



[edit on 23-4-2008 by MemoryShock]