Atheists: If God existed would God……

[Trailblazer]

Leaving aside what that says about the claim it is omnipotent, that would mean anyone you claim is a messenger of that deity could also be deceived, even if a deity specifically didn't want them to be.

Not unless God wanted them to be deceived, because the will of the Messengers is identical with the will of God.
That is not the case with ordinary humans. Since they have their own mind and free will they are subject to self-deception.

 

[Polymath257]

fact
something that is known to have happened or to exist, especially something for which proof exists, or about which there is information:
fact

It would not be a belief if it was a fact. Everything cannot be proven as a fact but I believe it based upon the evidence that indicates that it is true.

If there is no information about it, then there is no reason to believe it. it becomes a matter of personal opinion and nothing more.

I disagree about your characterization that something believed cannot be a fact. In fact, I try to limit my beliefs to things that are facts.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And my previous point stands.

Hardly.

As a great wordsmith once wrote ...

Imitation is flattery, but that's ok.

 

[Polymath257]

Ok, we can agree there are properties of the universe that you are unaware of. That means there remains the possibility that you will become aware of these properties.

Absolutely. And many things are in the works to expand our abilities to detect new things.

 

[Sheldon]

What you did is tell me what I meant by what I said, but you did not know what I meant, only I know what I meant.

the inference was unequivocal, and I took a deal of time to explain why.

You just cannot let go of what I said and move on.

Do I really have to explain to you again, that this is a public debate forum?

You always have to be right about everything, but you are not right about me or other people. You just believe you are.

So you're moving on to an ad hominem fallacy, priceless.

If rational people do A, then the inference is obvious that anyone who does not do A is irrational. Placing all atheists in that latter subgroup is a textbook No True Scotsman fallacy. If you would rather move on than address the fact you have made yet another irrational assertion, that is of course your choice, but no one else obliged to ignore it, or its significance.

 

[Trailblazer]

Is that a fact?

It is a belief that God has never communicated directly to ordinary human beings.
It is a belief that God has communicated to Messengers.
These are not facts because they cannot be proven.

 

[Polymath257]

All because it does not do what you WANT it to do.
God does not take orders from humans. Maybe that is what you cannot face, you and the atheists.

It isn't about 'taking orders'. It is about the meaning of the words 'all powerful', 'all knowing' and 'all good'. The meaning of those words says that an all knowing, all good, all powerful God would want to and be able to communicate with every human. Since that has not happened, either God is no all good, is not all knowing, is not all powerful, of does not exist at all.

 

[Polymath257]

It is a belief that God has never communicated directly to ordinary human beings.
It is a belief that God has communicated to Messengers.
These are not facts because they cannot be proven.

So why should anyone believe them?

 

[Polymath257]

No critical thinker would expect God to communicate directly to everyone in the world, only a small child would expect that. Any critical thinker would think it through and realize how it would be impossible to convey everything that God conveys to Messengers to all of the 7.8 billion people in the world. Even if God could convey all of that, very few humans could ever understand it, let alone do anything with it.

And a critical thinker would realize that this inability of humans would be a design flaw by the creator.

So what is God supposed to do, whisper in everyone's ear and say "Hi I am God and I exist." What would that accomplish? NOTHING.

Well, then God isn't doing it right. But, since God isn't limited to human abilities, he would be able to do the communication so that everyone understands.

And if God whispered in your ear and claimed to be God, how would you know it was really God, and not just an auditory hallucination or an alien from another planet?

So you are saying that God *cannot* whisper in my ear in such a way that it is clearly NOT any of those?

Clearly, atheists who believe that God should communicate directly to everyone have not thought it through. Like a small child all they can think of is that they want what they want. None of this is based upon reason, it is all based upon emotion.

I don't think there is a God at all. It isn't about what I or anyone else *wants*. It is what it means to be good, knowing, powerful, etc.[/QUOTE]

 

[Sheldon]

Ok, we can agree there are properties of the universe that you are unaware of. That means there remains the possibility that you will become aware of these properties.

Yes, but that wasn't what you asked to be fair. So for clarity here it is again:

do you also accept that in the realms of possibility, there may exist certain properties of the universe of a nature suggested in religious teachings of which you are not yet aware of

Your question asked if properties suggested in religious teachings were possible in parts of the universe we were unaware of, and again I ask, if we are unware of them, how can we say they are possible? That there are undoubtedly things we are currently unaware of if not in dispute, but that is not what you asked.

 

[ppp]

Imitation is flattery, but that's ok.

Yah man. But you might want to rethink, the physical universe only comprises 5% of the observable universe.

 

[Sheldon]

Not unless God wanted them to be deceived, because the will of the Messengers is identical with the will of God.
That is not the case with ordinary humans. Since they have their own mind and free will they are subject to self-deception.

A special pleading fallacy, really?

 

[Trailblazer]

Maybe, maybe not. We evidently cannot know either way. So why assume it to be that way?

I do not assume an afterlife exists, I believe it exists.

maybe the reason the communication hasn't happened is that there is no real consequence if we don't believe. Maybe concerns about the afterlife are simply unfounded fears.

Maybe communication has happened but not everyone has received the communication.
Maybe the consequences of non-belief are not as serious as people think they are and as such it is not vitally important to receive communication from God.
Maybe concerns about the afterlife are over-exaggerated.

I am not trying to talk you out of believing in God, I am just saying that maybe it is not as big of a deal as people make it out to be.

 

[Trailblazer]

A special pleading fallacy, really?

No, just a belief.

 

[Sheldon]

It is a belief that God has never communicated directly to ordinary human beings.
It is a belief that God has communicated to Messengers.
These are not facts because they cannot be proven.

If it is not a fact because it is not proven, then it cannot be known either, else it would be a fact. Since a fact is something that is known OR proven to be true. Yet you have made many claims to knowledge.

 

[Polymath257]

I never said that or implied it.

I said that a rational person would look at the evidence God provided, THAT is all I said.
That means that if God provided any evidence a rational person would look at that evidence.
I did not say that God provided any evidence. I believe He did but that has nothing to do with what you see as evidence.

I would say that a rational person would look at the evidence available. YOU are assuming there is *any* evidence provided by God. That is not in evidence.

There is no evidence of messengers, other than some people *claiming* to be messengers. But there is no good reason to believe them.

To believe the 'messengers' are 'from God', you have to *first* believe there is a God. Only after that can the belief that those people were messengers from God be supported.

 

[Polymath257]

No, God does not behave that way. If God behaved that way nobody would believe that He exists.

Funny, the evidence points to any existing deity acting as if it is non-existent.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
A special pleading fallacy, really?

No, just a belief.

A belief can involve a logical fallacy, obviously.

 

[Sheldon]

Funny, the evidence points to any existing deity acting as if it is non-existent.

A little belated, but Penblwydd hapus i ti...

 

[CG Didymus]

I think what that poster meant to infer was based on core claims for certain religions. Namely that if an omniscient and omnipotent and omni-benevolent deity exists, then it is irrational to imagine that deity would not make every effort to communicate with every human in an unequivocal way, if the consequence were an eternity of torture for those consequently disbelieved the claims of various adherents of different religions.

That is in fact a perfectly reasonable inference. It occurred to Epicurus centuries before Jesus is purported to have said a single word.

Yet, the Bible stories make it clear that God had several ways to get his point across. "You ate the fruit Okay you are hereby cursed." "You people are all evil, and I'm sorry I even created you. I'm going to drown all of you except Noah and his family." "Jonah, go tell the people of Nineveh I'm going to destroy them and their city." Plus, angels appearing. Stopping the Sun for a day. Jesus walking on water, casting out demons and rising from the dead. That God got involved all the time. He wrote on a wall and on a stone tablet. And he spoke a couple of times. And he sent the Holy Spirit to those that believed in Jesus.

But some Baha'is don't think much of those stories. And, ironically, they agree with Atheists that they are fiction. So, the Baha'i concept of God doesn't communicate except through special manifestation every 500-1000 years. Or maybe not, Baha'is still believe in a lesser type of prophet. God could send some of those. And again, some Baha'is were paid a visit by Abdul Baha' himself.

To think that an all-powerful God can't find a way to communicate to everyone? I'm sure he could, but that's not what Baha'is want. They need the people of the world to turn to their guy and his writings as the "only" way to know about God.

 

[Polymath257]

I do not assume an afterlife exists, I believe it exists.

So it is a personal opinion. An assumption you make for your own personal reasons.

Maybe communication has happened but not everyone has received the communication.
Maybe the consequences of non-belief are not as serious as people think they are and as such it is not vitally important to receive communication from God.
Maybe concerns about the afterlife are over-exaggerated.

As I said: maybe the message isn't that important. If it isn't relevant to our well-being, then even a good deity would be able to not communicate.

I am not trying to talk you out of believing in God, I am just saying that maybe it is not as big of a deal as people make it out to be.

?