Are you an atheist? if so, What is your POV about God?

[Unveiled Artist]

Why do you suppose it is evil if God were to decide that you are not fit for His future kingdom. I understand your gnashing of teeth here, but it is to be expected. It has been predicted. But why do you think it is evil for God to bring only the people He wants in His Kingdom to His future eternal Kingdom? Those of us who love Him are loved by Him. Do you invite people into your life that hate you?

Oh, gosh. It's called unconditional love. That's why jesus let his betrayer sit at his table even though he knew what would happen. It's why jesus did for all sinners not just a few that would turn to him.

God doesn't have unconditional love?

 

[ArtieE]

God doesn't have unconditional love?

If he did, why would he drown a whole planet full of humans and animals?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If he did, why would he drown a whole planet full of humans and animals?

From a Christian perspective, what @Sonofason said conflicts with the nature of his god. The Bible says christ has unconditional love but then Son says why would god invite someone that hates him to his home.

Logically, from a biblical perspective, that doesn't make sense for the christian god to do. If free will (or ability to make decisions on our own behalf) existed, then the ball would be in our court. God would invite us in and we'd have to repent and change our emotions before going to him. It's all on us.

He's saying god would deny people entry into the kingdom. I find that off he would send someone to die for christians then turn around and punish the christians who decide they didn't want to take the offer of his sacrifice.

I know there are small contradictions in the bible but the nature of christ and god and their purpose is a pretty huge one in the sceme of things

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I saw this in another thread. Unfortunately, it's not letting me edit my post with it.

 

[Willamena]

As an atheist myself, I have to respond -- I don't think you are quite accurate. I do not think it possible to judge what you call "strong atheism" either true or false. This is because it is impossible to prove the non-existence of any possible sort of God -- and most especially if there are definitions of "god" that are unknown to you.

It's impossible, because "non-existence," the way you're using the term (i.e. as if it were something) is impossible. You can't prove an impossibility. It's impossible.

What strong atheists claim isn't the impossible (i.e. we're not stupid).

On the other hand, I do think it is possible to disprove the "omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent" sort of God presented by various Abrahamic religions, by simply pointing to the Zica virus. What "free will" is involved in a mosquito infecting a pregnant woman whose fetus winds with with microcephaly (tiny brain)? The answer is -- none. Therefore, an OOO God could and would, by definition, have prevented it. Therefore, that God does not exist.

Hence strong atheists.

 

[`mud]

It's all about worshipping the transparency of invisibility.
I don't agree about the strength of an atheist's lack of belief standards,
there aren't any, we just don't give a crap about your unfilled prayers,
or your 'gods', there is no strength for non-belief in any and all 'gods'.
~
I think that has been said about ten thousand times on these threads,
but by a lot smarter posters than me, I need to take a nap.
~
'mud

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's all about worshipping the transparency of invisibility.
I don't agree about the strength of an atheist's lack of belief standards,
there aren't any, we just don't give a crap about your unfilled prayers,
or your 'gods', there is no strength for non-belief in any and all 'gods'.
~
I think that has been said about ten thousand times on these threads,
but by a lot smarter posters than me, I need to take a nap.
~
'mud

Aaww you don't care about our unfilled prayers? What about the rest of us?

But when you say "no strength" you mean there's no such thing as strong-atheist and weak-atheist?

 

[Milton Platt]

Following a Post I wrote, I Heard the claim that Atheism is claiming there is No god,
I tried correcting the person and explaining him that Atheism is the lack of belief in a God.
Its not saying there is no God, rather saying you don't believe there is A god based on current evidence.

I Would love hearing Atheists POV on the matter..

There are several shades of atheism, if you will. Just like there are thousands of different kinds of Christianity, people differ in what they believe exactly. Atheism is the rejection of claims of the existence of a deity. There is hard atheism, which makes a positive claim that there is no god, but you do not have to accept that stance to be a atheist. Not believing something is the default position. Belief in proposition should only follow sufficient evidence to support the claim. The types and quantity of evidence necessary varies with the claim. The claim of a dis-embodied, non material being with unlimited knowledge and power, that lives for an infinite amount of time in a place outside of space and time, for instance, is an extreme claim, and therefore should require extreme evidence for the claim to be accepted.

As for me personally, I do not say that I can ever know with 100% certainty that there are no gods of any sort, only that there is insufficient evidence to support the claims of those who say do exist. But I can say that I feel certain enough that there are no deities, that I do not bother myself with them anymore.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

From a Christian perspective, what @Sonofason said conflicts with the nature of his god. The Bible says christ has unconditional love but then Son says why would god invite someone that hates him to his home.

Logically, from a biblical perspective, that doesn't make sense for the christian god to do. If free will (or ability to make decisions on our own behalf) existed, then the ball would be in our court. God would invite us in and we'd have to repent and change our emotions before going to him. It's all on us.

He's saying god would deny people entry into the kingdom. I find that off he would send someone to die for christians then turn around and punish the christians who decide they didn't want to take the offer of his sacrifice.

I know there are small contradictions in the bible but the nature of christ and god and their purpose is a pretty huge one in the sceme of things

That "Christian perspective" is very perplexing to many of us. And that applies equally well to the Muslim perspective, I think, and probably several others.

As far as I am aware -- from what they say -- the only thing that is absolutely necessary for "salvation" (that, is being invited to live eternally with God) is faith in and acceptance of Jesus Christ as saviour. You can do very bad things, but if you don't have that -- tough toenails. You can do very good things, but if you don't have that, tough toenails. Thus, on one point we must be very clear: God doesn't actually care if you do good or bad, only that you believe the right thing.

But, if there's anything we know about the human animal, it is that human children are quite literally programmed to believe their parents, and next their immediate community. They must, or they would not grow up to have children of their own. "Don't put your finger in the socket" or "don't eat the red mushroom" or "don't jump off the roof" are all pretty good ways to help ensure your child grows up to be a parent, too. And that -- whether Christians and Muslims like it or not -- is how evolution works.

So, Christians believe -- and I have had this confirmed by many of them, many times (or been given deeply equivocal answers by Christians seeing the logical trap they're being led into) -- that the child born to a Hindu family, taught from earliest moments by parents, family and community to believe in the gods and tenets of the Hindu religion -- and believing it because he's programmed to -- is, too unfortunately but inevitably -- condemned to eternal punishment. It's not his fault, but sorry, them's the rules.

And those rules are -- apparently -- made by the same God that made the rule "believe your parents." And far too many Christians are blind to the truly essential paradox, nay fatal contradiction, of this. Go ahead, try them. Ask Sonofwhatever to provide a way out of this. You'll see.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

There are several shades of atheism, if you will. Just like there are thousands of different kinds of Christianity, people differ in what they believe exactly. Atheism is the rejection of claims of the existence of a deity. There is hard atheism, which makes a positive claim that there is no god, but you do not have to accept that stance to be a atheist. Not believing something is the default position. Belief in proposition should only follow sufficient evidence to support the claim. The types and quantity of evidence necessary varies with the claim. The claim of a dis-embodied, non material being with unlimited knowledge and power, that lives for an infinite amount of time in a place outside of space and time, for instance, is an extreme claim, and therefore should require extreme evidence for the claim to be accepted.

As for me personally, I do not say that I can ever know with 100% certainty that there are no gods of any sort, only that there is insufficient evidence to support the claims of those who say do exist. But I can say that I feel certain enough that there are no deities, that I do not bother myself with them anymore.

Thank you, nice post. We get so hung up on defining everything to the tiniest nuance that we lose track of what we're really talking about.

Do you believe in god/God? Okay, good.
Do you believe that your belief entails something -- that it requires something of you, or will do something for you? Okay, good. Do it, or get it, whatever
Do you not believe in god/God? Okay, good.
Do you think your disbelief harms you in some way? Then you're lying -- you do believe!
Do you not know whether you believe or don't believe? Then you're agnostic.
If you're agnostic, do you think you're missing out on something? Then you're lying -- you're not agnostic, you believe, but haven't figured out what you're supposed to do or get.
If you're agnostic, but don't think it matters -- then you're really not agnostic, you don't believe, because belief is always a positive (i.e. entails some requirement or some outcome) thing.

 

[Sapiens]

Suggesting that there is only a 0.1% chance that there is a god is anything but honest. You have no data at your disposal to arrive at such a conclusion. It is pure speculation on your part, and there is nothing honest about speculation. Speculation is just speculation, or in this case 98% wishful thinking.

Suggesting that there is anything more than a chance that does not differ significantly from zero that there is a god is anything but honest. You have no data at your disposal to arrive at such a conclusion. It is pure speculation on your part, and there is nothing honest about such speculation. Speculation is just speculation, or in your case completely wishful thinking.

How about the prophesy of Daniel chapter 9, verse 25 stating 300 years before Christ the exact day that Christ would make his triumphant entry into the city of Jerusalem as King and Messiah? Oh wait, never mind that. I forgot that I was talking to someone who doesn't really care to know the truth.

My evidence of God is in me. It is not for you. I cannot give it to you. The evidence I have apparently isn't meant for you. If it was, you'd have your own evidence.

How does one make a triumphant entry into anywhere and have it go unnoticed and unrecorded by contemporary sources? Sounds fishy.

 

[Segev Moran]

Just keeping it honest my friend.

BS...there is nothing obvious about there being life elsewhere. You're letting your imagination, or wishful thinking cloud your judgment. There is no evidence either way, and therefore, you're believe that aliens exist is no more probably than my belief that they do not exist.

Cloudy judgment = poor reasoning skills.

Of course there is!
We know that we are all made of the same substances that are mostly common in the universe! (one for one!!!)
We know that there are thousands of planets that are a viable candidates to support life
We know that there are more stars that we can imagine
We know that life emerged on at least one planet, It will be improbable (to say the least) that life didn't emerge on any other of the Billions of billions of billions other stars!

 

[`mud]

hey Carlita,
I'll read again ?
"I don't agree about the strength of an atheist's lack of belief standards"
Maybe I myself, said it wrong, Ill study it.
Thanks for the edit.
~
'mud

 

[Sonofason]

I'm not a mind-reader, and your post gives no hint at how you get from "the Big Bang happened" or any of the other things you mentioned to "therefore God exists."

You clearly misunderstand. It is not that the Big Bang happened and therefore God exists. God exists, and therefore the Big Bang happened. It's simple. God spoke. And as a result, the Big Bang happened.

 

[Sonofason]

So much for John 3:16, eh?

Yeah, especially considering John 3:17-18

It is my guess, being an expert in writing composition, that even Jesus spoke in context.Taking verses of scripture out of context is not helpful to our discussion, and it certainly is not helpful to a person's salvation.

 

[ArtieE]

You clearly misunderstand. It is not that the Big Bang happened and therefore God exists. God exists, and therefore the Big Bang happened. It's simple. God spoke. And as a result, the Big Bang happened.

Are you confusing gods? That was Ptah.

"Ptah is the Creator god par excellence: He is considered the demiurge who existed before all other things, and by his willfulness, thought the world. It was first conceived by Thought, and realized by the Word: Ptah conceives the world by the thought of his heart and gives life through the magic of his Word. That which Ptah commanded was created, with which the constituents of nature, fauna, and flora, are contained."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ptah

 

[Sonofason]

So God would have to spend eternity with you?

Ahhh, I'm a nice guy once you get to know me.

 

[Sonofason]

How, odd, because you don't know me any better -- and possibly not as well, since I haven't been posting here nearly as long as you and others.

So I really do find this a sadly deficient response, and one that has the effect of making your offensive statement stand -- and I quote: "Yes, I pray to God about people lie [sic] you all the time, that your destruction comes quickly."

I repeat, I don't think it reflects very well on the Saviour you claim to follow.

Do you believe the following verses reflect the Savior?
"And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God." (Revelation 15:1)

"Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming." (Colossians 3:5-6)

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." (Romans 1:20)

Do you not see a direct correlation between my petitions to God, and what God intends to do?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You clearly misunderstand. It is not that the Big Bang happened and therefore God exists. God exists, and therefore the Big Bang happened. It's simple. God spoke. And as a result, the Big Bang happened.

You said that the Big Bang - among other things - is evidence for God. This means that we can start with the fact that the Big Bang happened (along with whatever other evidence you need to make your case) and, making logical steps from this, establish that God exists.

Can you do this? If so, then go ahead and do it.

If not, then how is the Big Bang evidence for God?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Do you believe the following verses reflect the Savior?
"And I saw another sign in heaven, great and marvellous, seven angels having the seven last plagues; for in them is filled up the wrath of God." (Revelation 15:1)

"Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. Because of these, the wrath of God is coming." (Colossians 3:5-6)

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." (Romans 1:20)

Do you not see a direct correlation between my petitions to God, and what God intends to do?

Are using your brain when asking me this? We've already established that I am an atheist, and that I know for certain that the Bible was composed by humans. So why the heck would I believe any of that stuff -- especially the peculiar and idiotic Revelation (which many in the early church didn't even want in the canon)?

You just can't bring yourself to admit that you, calling yourself Christian, have said something that is most unChristian. You said that you pray often for my quick destruction. Just like Christ: "as you did it to the least of them, you did it to me! Matt 25:31-40

Man up and admit your sin!