Atheists: If God existed would God……

[Aupmanyav]

So why would I offer it again just to hear you say that again? I don't have anything I did not have last time.

So why should you repeat it again and again since 2017. We can also say see the 'his life, his actions, and his words' for Gandhi or Vivekananda (or others, Ramana Maharshi, for example). Does it prove the existence of God or their being manifestations of Allah?
Their lives were more illustrious, but they were not self-praising liars, who derived benefits for three generations.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then he does interact with humans.

No, I do not believe that God interacts with humans.

That's incorrect. No deity define as the one you mentioned earlier has ever associated with humans which is of course in complete contradiction with what you said above of such a deity having contact with a bunch of messengers (your deity is so contradictory you didn't even realized you contradicted yourself in the very same post).

I never claimed that God associated with any of the Messengers. God has no associates or partners.
I said that God spoke to the Messengers through the Holy Spirit but that was not a two-way communication.

Other types of deity associates with humans. Hell some deities are literally human beings.

You are free to believe whatever you want to about that. I do not believe there are any other deities except the one true deity.

You need to google what sovereign means. To me sovereign is to have power, control and authority; to rule over something. To rule, you must interact else you are just observing. Ruling implies directing, commanding, guiding and the likes. To be sovereign over humans, you must interact with them in some way.

You are thinking of a human ruler, but God is not a human. God does not rule, direct, command or guide like a human because God is not a human. To equate God with a human and think that God would behave like a human ruler is the fallacy of false equivalence.

False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1] A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".

This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors.
False equivalence - Wikipedia

what does t mean for god to be soverign

Theological definition

The Easton's Bible Dictionary defines God's sovereignty as His "absolute right to do all things according to his own good pleasure." ... This use is not a sign of weakness, but rather a token of almighty God's greatness and goodness.
Sovereignty of God in Christianity - Wikipedia

 

[Trailblazer]

Don't do that. Belief and logic don't mix. People who start to think logically become atheists or agnostics.

I cannot disagree with that since I came close to becoming an atheist owing to my logical thinking.

 

[Trailblazer]

That's because no atheist has ever demanded that god should stop the evil acts of humans. (Okay, some have, but they didn't understand the problem of evil, just as you don't.)
The problem of evil (or, as I just learned, it should be named "problem of suffering") is not the suffering humans cause but the suffering caused by "acts of god", floods, earthquakes, childhood leukemia, etc.

I agree with you on the floods and earthquakes but how is childhood leukemia an act of God?
No disease is an act of God since God does not cause human diseases; that are just part and parcel of life on earth.

 

[John53]

I agree with you on the floods and earthquakes but how is childhood leukemia an act of God?
No disease is an act of God since God does not cause human diseases; that are just part and parcel of life on earth.

Who or what created disease?

 

[Trailblazer]

That is a self defeating explanation. When you know that the message from god can be corrupted, how do you know the one you got isn't?

How do I know? Because I know how the Writings of Baha'u'llah have always been protected such that they could never be corrupted. The original tablets all reside at the Baha'i World Centre in a vault. Nobody can access them except for those in authority.

 

[Trailblazer]

So why should you repeat it again and again since 2017.

Because I have been a fool, but that does not mean I have to continue being a fool.

 

[epronovost]

No, I do not believe that God interacts with humans.

I never claimed that God associated with any of the Messengers. God has no associates or partners.
I said that God spoke to the Messengers through the Holy Spirit but that was not a two-way communication.

You are free to believe whatever you want to about that. I do not believe there are any other deities except the one true deity.

You are thinking of a human ruler, but God is not a human. God does not rule, direct, command or guide like a human because God is not a human. To equate God with a human and think that God would behave like a human ruler is the fallacy of false equivalence. That's d

False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which an equivalence is drawn between two subjects based on flawed or false reasoning. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.[1] A colloquial expression of false equivalency is "comparing apples and oranges".

This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result.[2] False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence doesn't bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors.
False equivalence - Wikipedia

what does t mean for god to be soverign

Theological definition

The Easton's Bible Dictionary defines God's sovereignty as His "absolute right to do all things according to his own good pleasure." ... This use is not a sign of weakness, but rather a token of almighty God's greatness and goodness.
Sovereignty of God in Christianity - Wikipedia

You went very quickly from a definition of God to YOUR god very quickly. If you tell me God is loving, sovereign, patient and the like, I assume you mean it in its usual sense if not you need to mention it. I don't know what's the God of your thought experiment. That's doubly more confusing because your definition of sovereign is exactly the same as the all-powerful you also mentioned in your list leaving me to believe they were two different traits.

If you tell me that your God in your thought experiment is YOUR god and that he never interact with people, then your question on "would God communicate with people" the answer is no. You just said he doesn't and will never do that. What's the point of this thread if that's the case?

 

[Trailblazer]

Who or what created disease?

Infectious diseases can be caused by:

• Bacteria. These one-cell organisms are responsible for illnesses such as strep throat, urinary tract infections and tuberculosis.
• Viruses. Even smaller than bacteria, viruses cause a multitude of diseases ranging from the common cold to AIDS.
• Fungi. ...
• Parasites.

Apr 7, 2021

Infectious diseases - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic

 

[Heyo]

I agree with you on the floods and earthquakes but how is childhood leukemia an act of God?
No disease is an act of God since God does not cause human diseases; that are just part and parcel of life on earth.

It also isn't caused by human evil. Depending on your belief how much or what is caused by god it may be a problem or not. If you don't believe in an intervening god, no amount of suffering from whatever cause, poses a problem.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So why would I offer it again just to hear you say that again? I don't have anything I did not have last time.

You never had any evidence even to fool a fool.

 

[F1fan]

How do you know that God is not giving guidance to people who need it?

Because all around us we see people who need guidance. They either claim no God reached them, or they do. Either way, God failed.

I am not asking you to believe in any God.

You're claiming an implausible God exists. The alternative is a realistic one that is nothing like what believers think.

 

[F1fan]

It might sound declarative but that doesn't mean I am declaring it.

Then your language usage needs work.

 

[John53]

Infectious diseases can be caused by:

• Bacteria. These one-cell organisms are responsible for illnesses such as strep throat, urinary tract infections and tuberculosis.
• Viruses. Even smaller than bacteria, viruses cause a multitude of diseases ranging from the common cold to AIDS.
• Fungi. ...
• Parasites.

Apr 7, 2021

Infectious diseases - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic

Yes but that doesn't answer who or what created them. This is about where I start losing interest in religion.

 

[Trailblazer]

You went very quickly from a definition of God to YOUR god very quickly. If you tell me God is loving, sovereign, patient and the like, I assume you mean it in its usual sense if not you need to mention it. I don't know what's the God of your thought experiment. That's doubly more confusing because your definition of sovereign is exactly the same as the all-powerful you also mentioned in your list leaving me to believe they were two different traits.

God cannot be loving, sovereign, or patient in a human sense because God is not a human. The only way we an know what it means for God to have these traits is by referring to scriptures. I do not know what it means for God to be loving, all I know is what it says in my scriptures, that God created humans out of His love for us. As far as patience is concerned I can only guess that means that God is patient with humans so God wants patiently for us to come around.

What it means for God to be sovereign is explained in the Bible, as I posted to you before.

If you tell me that your God in your thought experiment is YOUR god and that he never interact with people, then your question on "would God communicate with people" the answer is no. You just said he doesn't and will never do that. What's the point of this thread if that's the case?

I already know what I believe God would do, not only based upon my religious scriptures, but based upon what we can see in the world.

The point of the thread is to find out what atheists think that God would do as per the OP questions, #1 and #2.

 

[Trailblazer]

It also isn't caused by human evil. Depending on your belief how much or what is caused by god it may be a problem or not. If you don't believe in an intervening god, no amount of suffering from whatever cause, poses a problem.

Suffering poses a problem for me, whether it is human-caused or suffering caused by the natural world, but I do not believe that it is God's responsibility to prevent either one of those kinds of suffering. After all, God created a world in which He knew that humans would suffer from many causes, so why would God then come and prevent the very suffering that is inherent in the material world that He designed? That just does not make any sense.

 

[epronovost]

God cannot be loving, sovereign, or patient in a human sense because God is not a human. The only way we an know what it means for God to have these traits is by referring to scriptures. I do not know what it means for God to be loving, all I know is what it says in my scriptures, that God created humans out of His love for us. As far as patience is concerned I can only guess that means that God is patient with humans so God wants patiently for us to come around.

What it means for God to be sovereign is explained in the Bible, as I posted to you before.

I already know what I believe God would do, not only based upon my religious scriptures, but based upon what we can see in the world.

The point of the thread is to find out what atheists think that God would do as per the OP questions, #1 and #2.

To which I asked which God and instead of telling "mine; a God that doesn't interact with anybody and who has no human characteristics and whose traits can only be parsed from reading my holy scriptures" you confused me by trying to make it sound like if it wasn't your deity specifically. I can't tell what your deity would do if it were real since you can't even state beyond a shadow of a doubt what his characteristics and traits would be.

It would be akin from asking of you if my wizard would communicate with people and the only trait I would give you for sure is "my wizard is super powerful". That's not enough to make any speculation.

 

[CG Didymus]

Logical fallacy, appeal to popularity. As an example, about 72% of republicans believe that trump won the election. By your way of thinking they are correct.

Numbers are irrelevant to whether an idea is true.

And how many of those "God" believers believe the same things? And how many of them believe that Baha'u'llah is a true messenger from God? And how many messages from God do Baha'is believe are accurate? Yet that is all people had to go by to know about God until Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah? And how many, other than Muslims and a few Baha'is read the Quran? How many of any religion, other than a few Baha'is, read the writings of the Bab? And who other than Baha'i read the writings of Baha'u'llah. And out of those, how many have read all of the writings of Baha'u'llah?

Yet that is supposedly the most important communications we have. They are supposedly from the one and only God. And, the other problem, is these messengers are always controversial, so they get rejected by most people.

 

[Trailblazer]

Because all around us we see people who need guidance. They either claim no God reached them, or they do. Either way, God failed.

I never claimed that God guides everyone. God only guides whomsoever He chooses to guide and withholds guidance from others.

“No God is there but Him. All creation and its empire are His. He bestoweth His gifts on whom He will, and from whom He will He withholdeth them. He is the Great Giver, the Most Generous, the Benevolent.” Gleanings, p. 278

You're claiming an implausible God exists. The alternative is a realistic one that is nothing like what believers think.

You are preaching to the choir.

I believe in God but I never said I believe in an all-loving God who cares if we suffer or not. In fact I have said the exact opposite. It is obvious that God does not really care how much humans suffer since He created a world that is a storehouse of suffering.

“O thou seeker of the Kingdom! Thy letter was received. Thou hast written of the severe calamity that hath befallen thee—the death of thy respected husband. That honourable man hath been so subjected to the stress and strain of this world that his greatest wish was for deliverance from it. Such is this mortal abode: a storehouse of afflictions and suffering. It is ignorance that binds man to it, for no comfort can be secured by any soul in this world, from monarch down to the most humble commoner. If once this life should offer a man a sweet cup, a hundred bitter ones will follow; such is the condition of this world. The wise man, therefore, doth not attach himself to this mortal life and doth not depend upon it; at some moments, even, he eagerly wisheth for death that he may thereby be freed from these sorrows and afflictions. Thus it is seen that some, under extreme pressure of anguish, have committed suicide.”
Selections From the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, p. 200

No, it is not ignorance that binds man to this world, it is God who binds man to it by creating it and expecting us to live in it.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes but that doesn't answer who or what created them. This is about where I start losing interest in religion.

Diseases are just part of living in the physical world. Nobody created them. If certain conditions were present in the body that allowed them to develop then they developed. A person might have a genetic predisposition or they might have bad living habits that lead to diseases.