A note that will pain most atheists

[Mathematician]

I've had an experience with Flying Invisible Unicorns. I'm quite offended others who haven't had such experiences dismiss the existance of such wonderful beasts.

Do you catch what I'm saying?

 

[Booko]

And, not having a "religious experience" isn't the only reason, or even the major reason that people are atheists.

It wasn't even a consideration in my being an atheist for years.

The Calvinists I was raised among were not much for emotional shows (such things were rather frowned upon) and thought visions were more suitable for those crazy papists.

I don't recall anyone ever discussing visions of anything. I'm still in that church several weeks out of the year when I'm visiting mum, and still don't hear anything of the sort.

The emphasis is on study of the Scriptures, adherence to the commandments, prayer, fellowship, and being of use in the world.

 

[gnomon]

- I will preface this post by saying that I am not christian, I am not sure God exists. But I have had epiphanic visions of God before, I just can't be sure that they're true.

Okay.

I think it's kind of funny when people who have never had a religious experience say, "I don't believe in God."

It would make more sense for a person to say that they never had a religious experience but they do believe in God.:sarcastic

Now, there are many people who have had religious experiences who come out atheists. That is fine, since they have had a revelation but still decided to keep their beliefs.

That or they are being rational.

All I'm saying is, before a person has such an experience, he or she has NO RIGHT to say that God doesn't exist. Even if God indeed doesn't exist, nobody can deny that *religious experience* exists. So these atheists should HAVE a "vision of God" before they speak.

Certainly religious experience exists. However, anyone who attempts to make a statement of fact, such that God exists or the many religious doctrines devolved from God, must expect that such assertions can be challenged logically.

Most atheists, of course, are simply anti-Christian. They declare that Christians have manipulated and killed people for centuries. This is true, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

Generalization. Invalid.

An atheist declares: "well I don't believe in aliens, yet I've never seen them:"

Strawman.

It is true that if you ask the skies to see an alien, you will not see one. (edit: But visions of God are different from experience in the everyday world. Anybody, with a REASONABLE EFFORT can see the vision theists attribute to god, even if you don't believe. No matter how much effort you expend, you will probably not see aliens. Also, searching for this religious experience will do NO HARM, unlike trying to personally understand insanity (or searching for aliens).)

I have personally witnessed the devastation people can go through searching for a "religious" or "spiritual" experience can do to a person in a very poor circumstance.

Let's be very clear here. I'm not talking about imagining a rational conception of what God would be (as if religious people pray to that!). If an atheist has never had a vision of God, his or her opinion is simply uninformed. Considering how common it is to have a religious experience, the opinion is probably lazy too. (edit: <--- reasonable effort)

Their opinion has most likely been informed through experience and extensive research. I would hardly call that lazy. You might also want to look into the research on epilepsy of the frontal lobe and how it coincides with religious experience.

What would you say of an art critic who had never seen even a picture of the Mona Lisa but said "it's an ugly painting." You'd say, "You've only heard people call it ugly, and formed an opinion by hearsay. It is not hard to see a picture of this thing. With a very minimal effort, like finding a picture in any art book, you could have an *informed* opinion, rather than an uninformed one.

Of course, that art critic could then physically observe the Mona Lisa.

I'm not asking you to fly to Paris just to see it!"

(It doesn't matter if the person likes or dislikes the Mona Lisa without having seen it. It only takes a few seconds to google the Mona Lisa and see for yourself (reasonable effort)!)

Can someone Google God?

Another atheist declares, "well, this is just a sneaky way of saying, 'if you don't believe what I believe, you're wrong.'"

No, I'm saying go look for YOURSELF. Once you've seen this epiphanic vision, which any fool can summon, your opinion will be just as informed as mine. At that point, if you think God doesn't exist, like I do some of the time, then you would be not a whit less informed than I am.

I've looked for God. I've prayed to God. I've prayed in a way that would shame most religious folk. I've prayed long before I loaded that damn shotgun and put it in my mouth.

A fourth speaks, "people who believe in God are just gullible."

And?

I don't think I'm alone when I say that the man who believes what he sees with his own eyes is less gullible than the man who accepts hearsay as fact, and believes himself smarter than all the world. It's true that a vision of God could be an illusion, but also it could not be an illusion. I don't know. All I'm saying is that everyone can and should see for themselves.

No kidding. I think that is what they do.

Atheists DON'T have to accept hearsay (whereas judges, psychiatrists, and UFO skeptics do). Atheists can see for themselves without unreasonable effort, and without harm.

The question left in my mind is, do they know how or where to look?

The Christians are largely responsible for this problem. They speak as if God's presence were self-evident, obvious, ubiquitous. It may be, but many atheists honestly and truly cannot perceive this God.

Garbled nonsense.

The point of my post is this: if you are an atheist, are you willing to look? Red pill or blue pill...

There's an extraordinarily idiotic documentary out there called "What the Bleep Do We Know" you might like.

I'm not saying God exists. I don't know. I want to know if you're willing to look for yourself.

So just rendered yourself moot.

Based on experience, I'm betting the prospect of looking makes you fairly uncomfortable, which is why I will most likely receive a bunch of uncomfortable sounding non-sequiturs, high sounding abstractions that boil down to fear. Who among the atheists here has the openness of mind to look for themself?

Post if you are ready.

The Purple Knight

Attempting to safeguard your own opinion is rather pathetic. I personally consider myself the most reasonably open minded person on this forum. That's irrational and I'll admit that. When you've been through the experience of harrowing mental disorders and drug addiction you will reach out for every avenue in absolute earnestness and honesty.

Besides, your whole thread is meaningless once you realize that atheism is not a bar to religious belief. Atheism is defined merely by one who is without belief in God. God, a divine and personified creator, is not necessary for a religious definition.

Jesus Christ! Sometimes I get tired of this.

 

[Willamena]

I've had an experience with Flying Invisible Unicorns. I'm quite offended others who haven't had such experiences dismiss the existance of such wonderful beasts.

Do you catch what I'm saying?

yeah; you fib a lot.

 

[Mathematician]

It's pointless to debate on a presumption. I don't mean to be rude, but I'm very skeptical of anyone who claims to have experienced a higher power. So far no one's claim has been observable. Most cases brought to the attention of professionals have even been refuted by scientific evidence, such as NDEs.

yeah; you fib a lot.

Hey, I only said one experience. :flirt:

 

[Prometheus]

All I'm saying is, before a person has such an experience, he or she has NO RIGHT to say that God doesn't exist. Even if God indeed doesn't exist, nobody can deny that *religious experience* exists. So these atheists should HAVE a "vision of God" before they speak.

Who says I don't have that right? You? I have the right to believe whatever I want for whatever reason I want and so do you.

Also, I have "religious experiences" all the time. I just don't call them that since you don't need religion to have them. All you need are emotions.

Most atheists, of course, are simply anti-Christian.

Can you back up that most Atheists are anti-Christian? Do you have the results of a survey or something?

They declare that Christians have manipulated and killed people for centuries. This is true, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

That isn't the reason I don't believe in God. It's the reason I don't like religious faith. God's existence is a separate issue entirely.

An atheist declares: "well I don't believe in aliens, yet I've never seen them:"

I believe in aliens. They may be single celled organisms, but as big as the universe is I can expect that the probability of alien life existing is very high.

***The Rest of the Post***

Does spending 2 years of study, prayer and faithfulness with dozens of nights spent crying myself to sleep because I didn't feel God count as "reasonable effort?"

 

[Ryan2065]

I don't quite get this... So in order to first believe something does not exist you need to experience it? If you had a religious experience where you thought you felt god it would be even more illogical to think he does not exist than if you did not have one. If you took this experience and said it was made up in the mind rather than given to you by God then you probably won't take much from the experience because you know you yourself gave you that experience.

How are we to know what is or is not a religious experience? God could be playful, mean, nice, a child. Each of these personalities that God could have would give the person a different religious experience. Hey, there could even be more than one God!

So these atheists should HAVE a "vision of God" before they speak.

Why are atheists so different in this regard from everyone else? By this logic, before you discount any God as being false you must first feel what the believers feel and then still say it is false.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God
So, it is illogical to believe any one faith until you have had a religious experience from all these possible personalities of God and decided on which one is true.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

- I will preface this post by saying that I am not christian, I am not sure God exists. But I have had epiphanic visions of God before, I just can't be sure that they're true.

I think it's kind of funny when people who have never had a religious experience say, "I don't believe in God."

Now, there are many people who have had religious experiences who come out atheists. That is fine, since they have had a revelation but still decided to keep their beliefs.

All I'm saying is, before a person has such an experience, he or she has NO RIGHT to say that God doesn't exist. Even if God indeed doesn't exist, nobody can deny that *religious experience* exists. So these atheists should HAVE a "vision of God" before they speak.

If they have never had a "religious experience," what reason do they have to believe in the supernatural, let alone God.

Most atheists, of course, are simply anti-Christian. They declare that Christians have manipulated and killed people for centuries. This is true, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

Strawman. And this declaration about Christians is a documented fact.

An atheist declares: "well I don't believe in aliens, yet I've never seen them:"

It is true that if you ask the skies to see an alien, you will not see one. (edit: But visions of God are different from experience in the everyday world. Anybody, with a REASONABLE EFFORT can see the vision theists attribute to god, even if you don't believe. No matter how much effort you expend, you will probably not see aliens. Also, searching for this religious experience will do NO HARM, unlike trying to personally understand insanity (or searching for aliens).)

***?

Let's be very clear here. I'm not talking about imagining a rational conception of what God would be (as if religious people pray to that!). If an atheist has never had a vision of God, his or her opinion is simply uninformed. Considering how common it is to have a religious experience, the opinion is probably lazy too. (edit: <--- reasonable effort)

Lemme get this straight.

Assume for a moment that there is no god. Are you saying that they must FORCE themselves to knock themselves into some kind of a trance just to have some kind of credibility?

Now assume that there is a god. If they haven't had a "religious experience," that is the byproduct of the god's not giving this experience, either by choice or lack of ability.

What would you say of an art critic who had never seen even a picture of the Mona Lisa but said "it's an ugly painting." You'd say, "You've only heard people call it ugly, and formed an opinion by hearsay. It is not hard to see a picture of this thing. With a very minimal effort, like finding a picture in any art book, you could have an *informed* opinion, rather than an uninformed one.

I'm not asking you to fly to Paris just to see it!"

(It doesn't matter if the person likes or dislikes the Mona Lisa without having seen it. It only takes a few seconds to google the Mona Lisa and see for yourself (reasonable effort)!)

Objection. We know that the Mona Lisa exists. We don't know that God exists.

Another atheist declares, "well, this is just a sneaky way of saying, 'if you don't believe what I believe, you're wrong.'"

No, I'm saying go look for YOURSELF. Once you've seen this epiphanic vision, which any fool can summon, your opinion will be just as informed as mine. At that point, if you think God doesn't exist, like I do some of the time, then you would be not a whit less informed than I am.

So Isaac Asimov, Thomas Edison, or any other atheist that has never been knocked into a spiritual trance is automatically a moron?

A fourth speaks, "people who believe in God are just gullible."

I don't think I'm alone when I say that the man who believes what he sees with his own eyes is less gullible than the man who accepts hearsay as fact, and believes himself smarter than all the world. It's true that a vision of God could be an illusion, but also it could not be an illusion. I don't know. All I'm saying is that everyone can and should see for themselves.

Um, yeah it *could* be an illusion. :sarcastic

Atheists DON'T have to accept hearsay (whereas judges, psychiatrists, and UFO skeptics do). Atheists can see for themselves without unreasonable effort, and without harm.

The question left in my mind is, do they know how or where to look?

You just lost me here. Is it a bad thing to deny hearsay?

FYI, in a court of law, hearsay is not admissible as evidence.

The Christians are largely responsible for this problem. They speak as if God's presence were self-evident, obvious, ubiquitous. It may be, but many atheists honestly and truly cannot perceive this God.

The point of my post is this: if you are an atheist, are you willing to look? Red pill or blue pill...

I'm not saying God exists. I don't know. I want to know if you're willing to look for yourself.

I am not convinced that you understand the process of becoming an atheist. Many atheists deconverted from Christianity, and frankly, it's rather presumptuous to show such arrogance toward what is often an EXTREMELY arduous and painful process.

Based on experience, I'm betting the prospect of looking makes you fairly uncomfortable, which is why I will most likely receive a bunch of uncomfortable sounding non-sequiturs, high sounding abstractions that boil down to fear. Who among the atheists here has the openness of mind to look for themself?

Post if you are ready.

The Purple Knight

No offense, but the bigger question is why you have such a bone to pick with atheists. They have made their decision based on evidence, or really, the lack thereof.

Back to the process of leaving the faith--chief, I've read some deconversion stories that could make a grown man cry. The hurt and pain caused by Christians left behind, who masqueraded their harrassment in the name of love, only made the deconverts decide that they were doing the right thing. And in those dark moments, sometimes that was all they had.

So. I sense you are on a path of exploration, and I'm not sure if this is the type of response you were anticipating. Therefore, I'll say this: Understand how the process works, and understand that atheists are humans just like you and me. There's nothing wrong with them; in fact, I commend them for having the guts to live life without having to rely on a distant god in the sky.

Approach atheism from that point-of-view, and I think that all of this will start to make sense.

 

[Chevalier Violet]

"I will preface this post by saying that I am not Pastafarian, I am not sure the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. But I have had epiphanic visions of the Flying Spaghetti Monster before, I just can't be sure that they're true.

I think it's kind of funny when people who have never had a religious experience say, "I don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster."

Now, there are many people who have had religious experiences who come out atheists. That is fine, since they have had a revelation but still decided to keep their beliefs.

All I'm saying is, before a person has such an experience, he or she has NO RIGHT to say that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist. Even if the Flying Spaghetti Monster indeed doesn't exist, nobody can deny that *religious experience* exists. So these atheists should HAVE a "vision of the Flying Spaghetti Monster" before they speak.

Most atheists, of course, are simply anti-Pastafarian. They declare that Pastafarians have manipulated and killed people for centuries. This is true, but it doesn't mean that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist.

An atheist declares: "well I don't believe in aliens, yet I've never seen them:"

It is true that if you ask the skies to see an alien, you will not see one. (edit: But visions of the Flying Spaghetti Monster are different from experience in the everyday world. Anybody, with a REASONABLE EFFORT can see the vision theists attribute to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, even if you don't believe. No matter how much effort you expend, you will probably not see aliens. Also, searching for this religious experience will do NO HARM, unlike trying to personally understand insanity (or searching for aliens).)

Let's be very clear here. I'm not talking about imagining a rational conception of what the Flying Spaghetti Monster would be (as if religious people pray to that!). If an atheist has never had a vision of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, his or her opinion is simply uninformed. Considering how common it is to have a religious experience, the opinion is probably lazy too. (edit: <--- reasonable effort)

What would you say of an art critic who had never seen even a picture of the Mona Lisa but said "it's an ugly painting." You'd say, "You've only heard people call it ugly, and formed an opinion by hearsay. It is not hard to see a picture of this thing. With a very minimal effort, like finding a picture in any art book, you could have an *informed* opinion, rather than an uninformed one.

I'm not asking you to fly to Paris just to see it!"

(It doesn't matter if the person likes or dislikes the Mona Lisa without having seen it. It only takes a few seconds to google the Mona Lisa and see for yourself (reasonable effort)!)

Another atheist declares, "well, this is just a sneaky way of saying, 'if you don't believe what I believe, you're wrong.'"

No, I'm saying go look for YOURSELF. Once you've seen this epiphanic vision, which any fool can summon, your opinion will be just as informed as mine. At that point, if you think the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist, like I do some of the time, then you would be not a whit less informed than I am.

A fourth speaks, "people who believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster are just gullible."

I don't think I'm alone when I say that the man who believes what he sees with his own eyes is less gullible than the man who accepts hearsay as fact, and believes himself smarter than all the world. It's true that a vision of the Flying Spaghetti Monster could be an illusion, but also it could not be an illusion. I don't know. All I'm saying is that everyone can and should see for themselves.

Atheists DON'T have to accept hearsay (whereas judges, psychiatrists, and UFO skeptics do). Atheists can see for themselves without unreasonable effort, and without harm.

The question left in my mind is, do they know how or where to look?

The Pastafarians are largely responsible for this problem. They speak as if the Flying Spaghetti Monster's presence were self-evident, obvious, ubiquitous. It may be, but many atheists honestly and truly cannot perceive this the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

The point of my post is this: if you are an atheist, are you willing to look? Red pill or blue pill...

I'm not saying the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists. I don't know. I want to know if you're willing to look for yourself.

Based on experience, I'm betting the prospect of looking makes you fairly uncomfortable, which is why I will most likely receive a bunch of uncomfortable sounding non-sequiturs, high sounding abstractions that boil down to fear. Who among the atheists here has the openness of mind to look for themself?

Post if you are ready."

How is this any more ridiculous than what you posted?

Mmmm, I'm a pastafarian.

Well, I doubt you actually want a serious answer, since you seem to be more interested in mockery. But the difference is quite simple:

I have seen God. So have a lot of people.

and you have never seen this Pasta monster because you are joking. If you are not joking well then I would wait until a lot of other people had seen this as well to take you seriously.

But I'm pretty sure that you are simply trying to make an ironic point.

When I say that I have perceived something God-like, that felt real, was not a dream, and did not feel like a delusion. Whatever this thing is, it seems that anyone can see it.

Have you ever wondered, why can't I?

If finding this God doesn't seem worthwhile, that's fine with me. I don't think you're a bad person or that you'll go to hell or something like that. Personally, I believe that we're all going to heaven so I think that everyone should see life as an opportunity, and live it to the fullest in the way that we see fit. So enjoy atheism.

All I'm saying is that if you're not going to look, I would consider changing my title to agnostic.

CV

 

[Chevalier Violet]

You do realize you made a huge jump with that, don't you? "I don't believe in God" and "God doesn't exist" are two COMPLETELY different statements.

And how would you suggest I have an experience with god? I've tried most of the mainstream ways. Perhaps I should take some hallucinogens?
Most Christians, of course, are simply anti-atheist.

How is my statement less of a gross generalization than yours?
Uh... why is the declaration of fact something bad? And how does this even relate to your original statement of atheists saying "I don't believe in God"?
Bull. I tried to find a deity for years and never did. I meditated, prayed, did rituals, went to churches, whatever. None of these got me a religious experience, even when I was actively trying to believe.
So now not only did I not make a "reasonable effort" (I searched for years! What more do you have to do?) now I'm also lazy?

Yes you are lazy. Lazy lazy lazy you bad bad man.

Offers cherry coke.

Jeez dude, if you've actively looked for a God and never found anything, that's all I ask! And that's what I said.

!!

That's all I ask.

You seem to be ignoring the obvious fact that you can't find God in an art book... or in anything physical. Otherwise it wouldn't be a matter of faith to show that he exists.
I DID look for years. And found nothing to suggest the evidence of any kind of deity.

You seem to be ignoring the obvious fact that belief in God is not a matter of faith but a matter of evidence.

Why are you so sensitive about this issue?

If what you say is true, then this post shouldn't pain you at all. You have already made the effort, that is all I ask.

I'd kindly suggest you backtrack and renounce your suggestion that anyone who hasn't had an experience with a deity is lazy, uninformed, and that experiences with a deity are something a fool can do. I'm none of those and I tried to have a religious experiences for years and came up dry.

It is something any fool can do. But it's not something everyone can do easily.

I suggest YOU backtrack and read my post where it points out that I'm simply asking you to look.

But not everyone can see this thing easily. And that's ok. I'm just asking people to look.

Anyone can look, right? Maybe not everyone will see.

I'm still working on a step-by-step process to help atheists see God:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=50670

It is FAAAARRRR from perfect.

CV

 

[Chevalier Violet]

I cannot bridge the gap because I doubt I will ever have a religious experience. When I was a Christian I begged God to let me know if He existed, but I got nothing. I do not know what more you want.

All I ask is that people try. Thanks for trying.

So is the link between perception and delusion.

Yes, you just made it.

I think i'm right being an athiest, on one hand, no I havn't tried looking for god but on the other hand there are better and more productive things to do in life then look for something which for an awfull lot of people isn't there.
If god wants to be found then he will find me.

Maybe you are right. I couldn't tell you

If you don't want to look, that's fine with me. I still think everyone is going to heaven, so I will be happy if you are doing things with your life that make you happy.

As for "if God wants to find me he will" this attitude is all the Christian's fault. Christians speak as if God is always knocking on our doorstep. Well, to be honest that is just false, or else there would be no atheism or other religions. Visions of God do take some effort, but if you don't want to make that effort, I have nothing but respect for you.

So, your reasoning is....because I've never had a direct experience of God, I can't know he doesn't exist.

Ok, well have you ever had a direct experience with an invisible pink unicorn? Or maybe even a purple invisible alpaca from the sky? Or even the Flying Spaghetti Monster? No? Well, then you can't say those things don't exist either.

I understand what you're saying. This is the fault of my wording. Damn it, this is an old post of mine.

Why do I think the Loch Ness Monster doesn't exist? Well, I don't know, and I've never seen this thing. I simply use my logic and reasoning.

This is fine. I like logic and reasoning. The difference with God over Pink Unicorns is that we humans all have the capacity to see this thing at any time.

So we could

a.) Sit here and blah blah blah
b.) Look for ourselves.

If you don't want to look, I'm ok with that.

If a person believes that God doesn't exist, then what logic is there for that person to try to experience God? For the atheist, there's nothing there to experience.

Because a lot of people have this experience. And if all humans are the same, atheists can experience this thing too.

And, not having a "religious experience" isn't the only reason, or even the major reason that people are atheists.

Well, I don't know about you but when I was an atheist I was one based simply on evidence, or rather a lack of evidence for the existence of God. Why would I believe if I had never perceived the thing.

Change the evidence, change the belief.

 

[Chevalier Violet]

Originally Posted by Chevalier Violet
So these atheists should HAVE a "vision of God" before they speak.

If they have never had a "religious experience," what reason do they have to believe in the supernatural, let alone God.

None. Then again, if they've never had a vision of God, what reason do they have to believe that God is a delusion?


Quote:
Most atheists, of course, are simply anti-Christian. They declare that Christians have manipulated and killed people for centuries. This is true, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't exist.

Strawman. And this declaration about Christians is a documented fact.

LOL! Were you trying to prove my point? Some strawman, all you're missing is the corncob hat.

Quote:
An atheist declares: "well I don't believe in aliens, yet I've never seen them:"

It is true that if you ask the skies to see an alien, you will not see one. (edit: But visions of God are different from experience in the everyday world. Anybody, with a REASONABLE EFFORT can see the vision theists attribute to god, even if you don't believe. No matter how much effort you expend, you will probably not see aliens. Also, searching for this religious experience will do NO HARM, unlike trying to personally understand insanity (or searching for aliens).)

***?

*****? ****? **** *** *****

Quote: If an atheist has never had a vision of God, his or her opinion is simply uninformed. Considering how common it is to have a religious experience, the opinion is probably lazy too. (edit: <--- reasonable effort)

Lemme get this straight.

Assume for a moment that there is no god. Are you saying that they must FORCE themselves to knock themselves into some kind of a trance just to have some kind of credibility?

Now assume that there is a god. If they haven't had a "religious experience," that is the byproduct of the god's not giving this experience, either by choice or lack of ability.

This is of course the Christian's fault. Christians speak as if God is just whacking us over the head. Well, God isn't. We must seek God in our hearts. Now delusion or a not a delusion, that's up to you. But that perception is there.

If God doesn't exist, I have already covered a number of good reasons for looking. Just read the thread. The Buddhists give good reasons for seeking God, and Buddhists believe God is a part of ourselves. Think about that.

Quote:
What would you say of an art critic who had never seen even a picture of the Mona Lisa but said "it's an ugly painting." You'd say, "You've only heard people call it ugly, and formed an opinion by hearsay. It is not hard to see a picture of this thing. With a very minimal effort, like finding a picture in any art book, you could have an *informed* opinion, rather than an uninformed one."

(It doesn't matter if the person likes or dislikes the Mona Lisa without having seen it. It only takes a few seconds to google the Mona Lisa and see for yourself (reasonable effort)!)

Objection. We know that the Mona Lisa exists. We don't know that God exists.

Objection denied. This is not what that analogy is about. Would you listen and have much respect for an art critic talk about the Mona Lisa who had never seen it?

I hope not.

Quote:
Another atheist declares, "well, this is just a sneaky way of saying, 'if you don't believe what I believe, you're wrong.'"

No, I'm saying go look for YOURSELF. Once you've seen this epiphanic vision, which any fool can summon, your opinion will be just as informed as mine.

So Isaac Asimov, Thomas Edison, or any other atheist that has never been knocked into a spiritual trance is automatically a moron?

No, moron the point is they are uninformed about the existence or non-existence of God. Smart people, lack of personal experience in that domain. Lack of personal experience doesn't equal lack of intelligence.

If it were I would be a moron when it comes to women... oh wait I already am

Quote:
A fourth speaks, "people who believe in God are just gullible."

I don't know. All I'm saying is that everyone can and should see for themselves.

Um, yeah it *could* be an illusion. :sarcastic

I agree. It could just be an illusion.

Or, it could not be.

Then again, you wouldn't know anything about that from personal experience, so I don't really give much weight to your speculations on the matter. I know you'e never seen God and that is valid. On the other hand, any claim that it's an "illusion" is simply uninformed.

Quote:
Atheists DON'T have to accept hearsay (whereas judges, psychiatrists, and UFO skeptics do). Atheists can see for themselves without unreasonable effort, and without harm.

The question left in my mind is, do they know how or where to look?

You just lost me here. Is it a bad thing to deny hearsay?

FYI, in a court of law, hearsay is not admissible as evidence.

You're getting it!!!

Hearsay is an awful form of evidence.

I like it when atheists say "I have no evidence God exists." I think that sort of attitude is great.

I like it when atheists say "I suspect visions of God are delusions, but I don't know."

That's fine.

What I don't like is when atheists say, "God is a delusion." I wonder, how the hell do you know? You just say, "I'm sane so they're crazy." That strikes me as arrogant and I don't like it.

But suspicions I'm fine with.

My attitude in all religious matters is look for yourself. Look for yourself. Look for yourself.

Are you going to accept when people say "god is a delusion" or are you going to look for yourself?

If God doesn't come to you, well that's fine. You're looking for yourself. I do believe that it's learnable having visions of God. Then you could help me figure out if this thing I perceive is real.

Quote:
The Christians are largely responsible for this problem. They speak as if God's presence were self-evident, obvious, ubiquitous. It may be, but many atheists honestly and truly cannot perceive this God.

The point of my post is this: if you are an atheist, are you willing to look? Red pill or blue pill...

I'm not saying God exists. I don't know. I want to know if you're willing to look for yourself.

I am not convinced that you understand the process of becoming an atheist. Many atheists deconverted from Christianity, and frankly, it's rather presumptuous to show such arrogance toward what is often an EXTREMELY arduous and painful process.

I'm not convinced you understand why they deconverted from Christianity.

What frightens me is that many people are Christian or Muslim or otherwise, and they've NEVER perceived God before. Isn't that amazing. For them, it's just "faith."

I just can't believe people like that.

So yeah, people who are Christian who have never seen God, I think they should deconvert. I would. And yeah it would be painful. Because it seems like it's all a lie blah blah blah. That's my parents, you don't have to tell me about atheism... that's my parents right there.

But neither of them had ever perceived God before, so what do you expect.

No offense, but the bigger question is why you have such a bone to pick with atheists. They have made their decision based on evidence, or really, the lack thereof.

I see myself as like a lawyer before a judge. I say, before you make your judgment, there is a piece of evidence you should see, and can see. With a reasonable effort, and without harm. You should see this evidence, or at least try, before you make your decision.

Back to the process of leaving the faith--chief, I've read some deconversion stories that could make a grown man cry.

Chief, Christianity gone bad is one of the most horrific things I can imagine. Again chief, you're talking about my parents, and I know a lot of pushy Christians. They disgust me. And the pressure they put on people, it's awful.

That seems to be your bone to pick with Christians.

With atheists, I am simply asking you to try to perceive God.

So. I sense you are on a path of exploration, and I'm not sure if this is the type of response you were anticipating. Approach atheism from that point-of-view, and I think that all of this will start to make sense.

LOL! Well, actually yes it was exactly the type of response I was anticipating, because you haven't said anything I haven't heard from an atheist a thousand times before. On the other hand, what I'm saying, I've never heard anybody say before.

And you'd better check yourself with that attitude. We are all doing our best, and I know that as well as anybody. I am suggesting a more informed path.

I find it rather amusing that atheists see it as an act of courage to live life without "some guy flying high in the sky." It is not so much an act of courage as once again calling the theists delusional and giving themselves a reason to feel smarter than other people. Well we all do it. I for one understand that atheists are lacking personal evidence for God. And that's ok.

I'm simply observing that anybody can find this evidence, and have this personal experience.

CV

 

[Rolling_Stone]

We do not know why there is something rather than nothing, neither do we know the deep why of an event. We can describe what happens, but not why it happens in the way that it does. Empirical &#8220;knowledge&#8221; is not knowledge at all, but the custom of our expectations and the discernment of patterns. Since we don&#8217;t why order comes about in the universe or why energy behaves the way it does, and since we can only describe the processes, we can just as easily say design comes from within the nature of world as from without. The universe could come about as the result of reality&#8217;s intrinsic nature, the same way a plant grows from a seed.

But for the presence of consciousness in the world and the results of scientific inquiry, we could say this wins out over religion&#8217;s cosmological teleological arguments. However, Bell&#8217;s theorem, the Aspect experiments and various forms of the double-slit experiment all point to a holistic worldview. If, as countless experiments suggest, the universe is holistic rather than composed of relatively isolated and interacting bits and pieces, the logical consequences are upsetting to both atheists and classical theists. A holistic universe coupled to the human ability to make a conscious decision to use the body to clip the body&#8217;s toenail, for example, compels us to understand the universe infused with units of free will so that all of them, together, make the universe what it is by acting upon it holistically and non-locally.

In order to preserve the notion that matter-energy rather than consciousness is the dominant feature of the universe, atheists choose to ignore the science and assert that consciousness is an emergent property of matter acting locally rather than something that is intrinsic to the nature of reality. They have no choice. For if they were to admit to consciousness as intrinsic to reality, it would justify belief in a non-contingent and spacetime-transcending consciousness&#8212; God&#8212; and be seen as a justification for religious values.

Classical theism doesn&#8217;t like the idea any more than atheism. They see it as undermining God&#8217;s authority in the universe and therefore its own. It encourages people to find their own salvation and their own place in the universe, to go with what works for them rather than relying on an authority, whether it&#8217;s a preacher of some kind or a scripture.

Agnosticism doesn't like it because it leaves no excuse.

 

[Chevalier Violet]

I've had an experience with Flying Invisible Unicorns. I'm quite offended others who haven't had such experiences dismiss the existance of such wonderful beasts.

Do you catch what I'm saying?

Who would dare dismiss the existence of Flying Invisible Unicorns? Those punks. If you're just making fun of my belief in FIU's, I will cry so you'd better not be joking.

This is all very simple, unlike perceptions of the outside world, we perceive God in our hearts. So we are all capable of looking in our hearts and seeing whether or not we feel communication with God there.

If you are an atheist, this is not a simple task. All I ask is that you look.

It wasn't even a consideration in my being an atheist for years.

The emphasis is on study of the Scriptures, adherence to the commandments, prayer, fellowship, and being of use in the world.

Oh man, the only thing worse than an atheist who has never seen God is a Christian who has never seen God. Those people are the worst, I just can't stand them. They make no sense.

Like how can you be a Christian or a Muslim without having seen God. It just makes no sense to me at all. I base all my beliefs on evidence, and evidence alone.

This thread is about suggesting to atheists that there is still more evidence they could find.

It would make more sense for a person to say that they never had a religious experience but they do believe in God.

Yeah I know people like that, they frighten me.

That or they are being rational.

I'm not saying this position is irrational. I'm saying it's uninformed. It's a rational conclusion, simply based on the lack of evidence.

I have nothing but respect for atheists who have perceived God.

Certainly religious experience exists. However, anyone who attempts to make a statement of fact, such that God exists or the many religious doctrines devolved from God, must expect that such assertions can be challenged logically.

Uhhh, yeah, of course they be challenged logically. I simply question the capacity of the uninformed to make that challenge.

I'm fine with agnosticism however.

Generalization. Invalid.

Generalization about generalizations. Invalid.

Yeah this is an old post. Dam* it, I need to rewrite this post I get mad when I make generalizations.

All the atheists I know are also anti-Christian. Not to say they are against Christian people, but obviously they tend to be against the idea of Christianity, organized religion etc. If you have never seen God, I think Christianity should seem stupid and pointless.

Again, Christians who have never seen God frighten me.

Strawman.

And yet like five other people made the EXACT SAME ARGUMENT about aliens (pastafarians, Flying Invisible Unicorns). God you sure are one big strawman. Do you have a corncob nose?

But thank you for rejecting their arguments for me, I appreciate it

I have personally witnessed the devastation people can go through searching for a "religious" or "spiritual" experience can do to a person in a very poor circumstance.

I know about a hundred people who credit God with a fantastic change in their life. I have never met anyone have a bad experience with God. So I don't know, our experiences are different on that one, big time.

You know that Alcoholics Anonymous, one of the ten steps is finding a higher power, right? I don't think we're going to disagree that AA is devestating anybody. I know people who have gone through that and it totally changes their life.

Their opinion has most likely been informed through experience and extensive research. I would hardly call that lazy. You might also want to look into the research on epilepsy of the frontal lobe and how it coincides with religious experience.

Yes, yes, I know atheism is based on personal experience. I get that. What I'm saying is that atheists could very easily have a different kind of personal experience, aka a vision of God.

And as for extensive research? I hope you're joking. You just said you can't have a vision of God in a book. Well you can't. And no book is going to show you were God is. God is in my heart, and your heart and everyone's heart. Maybe it's a delusion, I don't know. It really doesn't feel like one. And I think it's pretty arrogant the way the atheists I know simply declare that it's a delusion. It could be one, but how do they know?

Can someone Google God?

Yes I just did. Jk, no, this is why debates about God are useless and we must all look for ourselves. We may all find God in our hearts. But I can't show you anything.

This is how debates about God differ from a debate about the Loch Ness monster.

That said, I know you don't perceive this God right now. I understand that. I accept that. All I'm saying is: I can teach you how to perceive God.

I've looked for God. I've prayed to God. I've prayed in a way that would shame most religious folk. I've prayed long before I loaded that damn shotgun and put it in my mouth.

Ooook, your personal history sounds pretty f*d up, I'm sorry to hear about that. Anyway, thanks.. for... looking, that's uhhh all... I ... ask.

I'll see you around the forum.

[/quote]

I don't mean to be rude, but I'm very skeptical of anyone who claims to have experienced a higher power. So far no one's claim has been observable.

I don't think that's rude. I think that's great that you're skeptical of people's visions of God.

What I would love for you to do is have a vision of God and be skeptical about it.

You know what this is about for me? I feel like I'm one of the few people on the planet who has seen God but still doesn't believe God is real.

I just want some other people to actually have this vision yet remain skeptical. That way I can talk to them.

Talking to atheists is like discussing a painting with the blind.

And PS God is a personal evidence kind of thing. God is not socially observable, only personally so.

Who says I don't have that right? You? I have the right to believe whatever I want for whatever reason I want and so do you.

I do. I have the right to believe you don't have the right to say that.

Again, sorry, this is an old post, the wording sucks and that's my fault as a writer.

Nonetheless, you have not had a vision of God. Sorry, you can't help me.

Also, I have "religious experiences" all the time. I just don't call them that since you don't need religion to have them. All you need are emotions.

Now just have a vision of God and we can talk.

Can you back up that most Atheists are anti-Christian? Do you have the results of a survey or something?

Yes, US News and World report did a survey in 1997 which showed that 99% people breathe oxygen. The only 1% was Dick Cheney.

Wow, I just can't believe you would need a "survey" to prove something so obvious. Read books by atheists. They are against organized religion, Christianity in particular... because Christianity makes no sense if you don't perceive God.

I think atheists should be suspicious of Christians.

That isn't the reason I don't believe in God. It's the reason I don't like religious faith. God's existence is a separate issue entirely.

Well it's a reason for the people I know.

I believe in aliens. They may be single celled organisms, but as big as the universe is I can expect that the probability of alien life existing is very high.

What's your position on Flying Invisible Unicorns?

Does spending 2 years of study, prayer and faithfulness with dozens of nights spent crying myself to sleep because I didn't feel God count as "reasonable effort?"

No.

Just kidding, yes. And you never perceived God? Dude, you must have no ability to delude yourself Start with a flea circus and move on up.

I don't quite get this... So in order to first believe something does not exist you need to experience it?

No, in order to be INFORMED about this vision everyone calls God, I think you would need to see it. It's like any movie or anything else.

My problem with atheists who have never had a vision of God is that they are uninformed on this theism issue. Smart people, just haven't had one experience.

How are we to know what is or is not a religious experience? God could be playful, mean, nice, a child. Each of these personalities that God could have would give the person a different religious experience. Hey, there could even be more than one God!

Absolutely there could be more than one God. That's why I want open minded people, like you, to start having these visions so we can discuss them.

Anyway, great question about "how do I know when I have a religious experience." I can't really define it in words, but I don't think you could possibly miss one. That said, I think you'll know if you have a vision of God, yes?

CV

 

[Chevalier Violet]

No kidding. I think that is what they do.

The Christians who have never seen God are the worst.

Many have seen God before, however. Consider that.

Garbled nonsense.

Too advanced for you. I guess.

There's an extraordinarily idiotic documentary out there called "What the Bleep Do We Know" you might like.

Coward.

So just rendered yourself moot.

Huh? I'm not a theist. I'm an agnostic. I think my post is a bit over your head. Sorry, humility and personal exploration isn't for everyone. Try again next year.

I personally consider myself the most reasonably open minded person on this forum.

I am kicking your @ss in the openmindedness department. Wahoo, now I'm the most open-minded on the forum.

That's irrational and I'll admit that. When you've been through the experience of harrowing mental disorders and drug addiction you will reach out for every avenue in absolute earnestness and honesty.

I feel you, sorry to hear that.

Besides, your whole thread is meaningless once you realize that atheism is not a bar to religious belief. Atheism is defined merely by one who is without belief in God. God, a divine and personified creator, is not necessary for a religious definition.

My impression of the word is that atheism = active belief that God does not exist. Agnosticism tends to be the belief that we simply do not know.

The former is a religious belief, the latter a philosophical one and as you say, a lack of belief.

CV

 

[Panda]

I don't think you understand atheism. It is the lack of a belief in any God, or Divine Spirit etc. Most atheists have become atheists because after looking for God they found nothing. I know I did wonder if a God existed, I looked and found nothing. I then found evidence that seemed to activly disprove the existance of any sort of God. It is not religious as it is not faith, it is based on evidence, knowlege and personal logic.
Your are taking an extremly arogant view while lacking even a basic understanding on atheism. Perhaps once you understand you might be able to make a non-contradicting and logical argument against atheism.

 

[Chevalier Violet]

I don't think you understand atheism. It is the lack of a belief in any God, or Divine Spirit etc. Most atheists have become atheists because after looking for God they found nothing. I know I did wonder if a God existed, I looked and found nothing. I then found evidence that seemed to activly disprove the existance of any sort of God. It is not religious as it is not faith, it is based on evidence, knowlege and personal logic.
Your are taking an extremly arogant view while lacking even a basic understanding on atheism. Perhaps once you understand you might be able to make a non-contradicting and logical argument against atheism.

You must be the first person to tell me that I don't understand atheism. That is pretty funny. What is there to understand?

You just summarized atheism: it is a belief that a higher power does not exist.

*You* don't understand theism.

That is my entire point.

And let's talk about this word "look." You say most atheists have looked for God and found nothing.

By looked do you mean they have existed for a while and seen nothing. They looked under their bed, inside a tree and seen nothing. I suspect you mean that most have quite simply gone about eating, breathing, and going to the bathroom... without running into God on the street. I think that's what you mean by looking.

Now a percentage of atheists have done what I call looking... as in prayed, searched their hearts and still found nothing. My post is not about these people. They have tried.

If you are the latter, then feel free to be an atheist. I have no quarrel with you.

That said, what if I told you I knew a technique to seeing God. Would you try?

Your objection has a lot of contradictions and is illogical, probably stemming from your extremely arrogant viewpoint.

*offers delicious chocolate chip cookie*

This was an old post of mine from another site, I'm not sure in retrospect that I would keep all of it.

Let me know if you want to do some actual looking, or perhaps you'd prefer to just speculate, blow around a lot of hot air, and run around the jungle gym.

If you want to "look", feel free. If you want to seek, there's a small chance I can help.

CV

 

[Yerda]

You must be the first person to tell me that I don't understand atheism.

I'll second it.

What is there to understand?

Firstly the difference between what Panda said,

It is the lack of a belief in God.

And the nature of your response,

It is a belief that a higher power does not exist.

These aren't equivalent sentences.

That said, what if I told you I knew a technique to seeing God. Would you try?

Yes. Before however, I'd like to know what it is you mean by 'God'.

 

[Chevalier Violet]

I'll second it.

Then like that other poster, you don't understand atheism either, apparently.

Firstly the difference between what Panda said,

It is the lack of a belief in God.

And the nature of your response,

It is a belief that a higher power does not exist.

For atheism, Dictionary.com has the following entry:

1.the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2.disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

These aren't equivalent sentences.

You're right. They aren't equivalent sentences. So if you scroll up, you'll see that I had the correct definition, according to dictionary.com, and the other guy had the wrong one.

I'm serious, I didn't think it was possible to misunderstand atheism... but the two guys who accuse me of not knowing what it is, define it differently than the dictionary, whereas I define it the same.

I love irony!

I don't mean to appear condescending. If you choose to define atheism as "lack of belief in God" for your own purposes, that's fine with me. Next time you accuse me of not knowing what something is, I simply suggest you look it up in the dictionary first. I am fairly certain I have not misread the dictionary in this case.

His definition is commonly referred to as agnosticism. This post is about atheists, not agnostics. I am an agnostic ... and although the other poster accuses me of contradicting myself, I hope I didn't say too many words against what I myself believe...

It's ok to define words differently than the dictionary... I just feel the poster picked a rather inopportune time to accuse me of misunderstanding atheism, and then calling my point of view "extremely arrogant."

Yes. Before however, I'd like to know what it is you mean by 'God'.

I don't believe that any definition or set of words could have any meaning for you before you see this 'God' yourself.

It's not as though I just woke up one day and was like "you need to see Fiji in order to know it exists." We know Fiji exists. Seeing 'God' (I am loving the quotations, please keep using them, as I do myself) is a totally different ballgame, and just completely different than anything you will ever perceive.

So if I seem a bit insistent that atheists see what they call a "delusion" for themselves, that's why. For me, perceiving God was a ball of light that extended my consciousness to the limits of the universe in an orgasmic ball of flame.

And again, just to be absolutely clear, I'm not saying that "god" is real. I'm saying this perception is real. (let me know when I can stop repeating that, I just want to make sure that point is crystal clear).

All right, I will formulate a step by step process different from the one I have already posted about how to see God (in a different thread).

CV

 

[gnostic]

From what I understand about this, that no-one, not even believers (except perhaps a few prophets) can personally see God, with their own eyes.

Any Christian or Muslim, or whatever background, can see God must be delusional, because God is not likely to make visual appearance. Even majority of prophets don't actually see God, unless they are exceptionally special to God. Often prophets can hear God's messages or commandments, visions that are sent to the prophets. The visions may be sent by God, but that doesn't even mean God will appear in these visions.

It does not say anywhere that Noah actually saw God, but he did hear God's commandment.

Then the question become how do you have a personal experience without seeing God?