Fooling atheists

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I suppose what i’m Saying is.....
Just because the Universe works in a certain way,
This doesn’t say anything about whether there’s a Creator or not.
That seems logical to me.

Even if physicists came up with a theory of everything....
And explained the universe with an equation....
Again this doesn’t rule out God,
He might have his own equation of explanation.

The universe can’t fool the agnostic,
For he doesn’t know and admits it.
But both atheists and theists are open to foolication.
I rest my case!!

You are quite the funny comedian. Agnostic isn't some "1/2 way house" between atheism and theism.

You can be both agnostic and theist, just as you can be agnostic and atheist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No one can expect God to leave evidence of his existence if that’s not what he wants to do.
Sherlock Holmes has met his match.
Or was that inspector cluesaw?

So you are saying that God is a psychopath? Granted if one reads the Old Testament that is definitely the picture that it paints.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Atheists can fool some of the atheists, some of the time.

Indeed. Just as christians can fool most of the christians, most of the time.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Doesnt matter. The bible just says satan can nask as light. So just as athiesy could be fooled (pretending its true to make a point) so can god(s) believing theists.

Just I only read the bible. Thats what it says.

Of course-- that raises the conundrum: Can god stop satan? If so, why does god refuse? (meaning god is complacent in everything satan does)

If god cannot stop satan, who's to say which is the more powerful deity? Perhaps satan has been painted in a terrible light-- where is his book?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The possibility that I am not holding a brick was already considered as part of the process of gathering evidence.

Do you ask yourself that and ask for evidence when someone else says something opposing what you believe (Im holding a brick) or do you acknowledge it is true (I could be wrong) giving credits to the probibility and other people telling you it is not regardless your original belief?

The question is why consider the possibility not that there is none.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What's a "personal argument," some sort of aesthetic disagreement?

Don't pretty much all definitions of God describe a magical, intentional personage?

The first, an argument you are personally invested in solving or addressing.

The latter, no. Basic given.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Do you ask yourself that and ask for evidence when someone else says something opposing what you believe (Im holding a brick) or do you acknowledge it is true (I could be wrong) giving credits to the probibility and other people telling you it is not regardless your original belief?

The question is why consider the possibility not that there is none.

Evidence is asked for new ideas or for ideas that run counter to the ideas that one currently accepts. Therefore if someone claimed to "prove gravity wrong" I am going to demand some fairly hefty evidence. If he says "this rock will drop when I release it" I tend to accept that since that goes along with my current understanding of the world. If one makes a claim one should be ready to defend it. Otherwise why should anyone accept it? That is why atheists quite often that atheism is not an outright denial that gods exist. It is simply a lack of belief, as one does not believe in Sasquatch. Give me some strong evidence, not a video of a man in a monkey suit, and I will probably change my mind. The same applies to the existence of a god. No one is being "fooled" since there is no evidence that could fool us.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Evidence is asked for new ideas or for ideas that run counter to the ideas that one currently accepts. Therefore if someone claimed to "prove gravity wrong" I am going to demand some fairly hefty evidence. If he says "this rock will drop when I release it" I tend to accept that since that goes along with my current understanding of the world. If one makes a claim one should be ready to defend it. Otherwise why should anyone accept it? That is why atheists quite often that atheism is not an outright denial that gods exist. It is simply a lack of belief, as one does not believe in Sasquatch. Give me some strong evidence, not a video of a man in a monkey suit, and I will probably change my mind. The same applies to the existence of a god. No one is being "fooled" since there is no evidence that could fool us.

I guess its personal choice to ask. Im wondering if there is a personal investment in why some atheists ask beyond getting new ideas.

Its healthy to have a discussion or proper debate to support one side belief in god and the other not. It doesnt look balanced when some atheist demand evidence for which the god-theist already provided according to his criteria of evidence. Basically, trying to get info that doesnt exist.

Its eaiser for both side to give in and talk about the logic of each others answers. That is one side if the theist wish to expand their views and the other side the atheist expand their statement of disbelief/claim as well.

Has to work both ways or theist like to hear themselves talk and atheist ask questions about something they already dont believe exists. (hence why they are atheists)

Least they are willing to change their minds if they have evidence they accept. New ideas? You guys keep asking. What more do you need than what theist have already given you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I guess its personal choice to ask. Im wondering if there is a personal investment in why some atheists ask beyond getting new ideas.

Its healthy to have a discussion or proper debate to support one side belief in god and the other not. It doesnt look balanced when some atheist demand evidence for which the god-theist already provided according to his criteria of evidence. Basically, trying to get info that doesnt exist.

Its eaiser for both side to give in and talk about the logic of each others answers. That is one side if the theist wish to expand their views and the other side the atheist expand their statement of disbelief/claim as well.

Has to work both ways or theist like to hear themselves talk and atheist ask questions about something they already dont believe exists. (hence why they are atheists)

Least they are willing to change their minds if they have evidence they accept. New ideas? You guys keep asking. What more do you need than what theist have already given you?

The problem with most theists is an inconsistency of what is accepted as evidence. If they were consistent most would have to believe in more religions or no religioins. The standards that a Christian applies to Muslim beliefs if applied to their own would make them staunch atheists. The standards they apply to their own applied to Islam would make them Jihadists.

 

[Al Ibn Al Amra]

That is only if Aallah SWT can be fana' .

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is only if Aallah SWT can be fana' .

"fana' "

Does that mean "found"?

 

[McDoogins]

It is not the universethat has fooled anyone, it is Satan. God has left much evidence of His existence but has allowed Satan to cloud people's minds so that only a few really faithful can see the truth. Atheists do not see the truth so the say God does not exist. It is not their fault but they have fallen under the influence of Satan who they also cannot see so they will of course deny that this is the way it is.

My internet sarcasm sensors are in the workshop right now, but if you aren't being sarcastic, Satan wouldn't want you to be Atheist, he would probably want you to be a Satanist.

 

[blü 2]

Has the universe fooled atheists into thinking there is no God?
Or can’t atheists be fooled?

Non-believers can be fooled. Anyone can be fooled.

Still, the question isn't really whether God exists or not. The question is whether God exists outside of the imagination of individual people, that is, whether God has objective existence of not.

Unfortunately we don't have a definition of God that would allow us to tell whether any real thing were God or not. Indeed, as far as I know we don't even have a candidate real thing to apply such a definition to.

But meanwhile perhaps this is the test: if God has objective existence, then God can be shown to us, a satisfactory demonstration whether in person or by TV or by scientific instruments.

This would so quickly get rid of so much unbelief that really, it's extremely odd that no one has done it, isn't doing it every day.

 

[Jumi]

Gosh, that would make the universe considerably more intelligent than we are.

Well sometimes I look at things people do to damage themselves and the planet and I think a bunch of rocks could have handled that better... good thing that's not all of us.

 

[Jumi]

My internet sarcasm sensors are in the workshop right now, but if you aren't being sarcastic, Satan wouldn't want you to be Atheist, he would probably want you to be a Satanist.

If you look at the Satan in Job, he would just want to throw in some challenges to test your faith... though of course there are many types of Satan people think are like secondary gods opposing the main one.

 

[Valjean]

The first, an argument you are personally invested in solving or addressing.

but isn't one personally invested in every argument pursued? If I have no interest in a subject I don't post.

The latter, no. Basic given.

Please explain.

Its healthy to have a discussion or proper debate to support one side belief in god and the other not. It doesnt look balanced when some atheist demand evidence for which the god-theist already provided according to his criteria of evidence. Basically, trying to get info that doesnt exist.

So your objection is the 'criteria of evidence'?
I don't see different criteria. Algebra is pretty much cut and dry. A thing is either reasonable/logical, or it's not. You can't make up your own criteria.

Its eaiser for both side to give in and talk about the logic of each others answers. That is one side if the theist wish to expand their views and the other side the atheist expand their statement of disbelief/claim as well.

Has to work both ways or theist like to hear themselves talk and atheist ask questions about something they already dont believe exists. (hence why they are atheists)

Least they are willing to change their minds if they have evidence they accept. New ideas? You guys keep asking. What more do you need than what theist have already given you?

The problem is, theists have, so far, given no actual evidence.

 

[Woberts]

Lemme just swap a few things around, and................. bingo!

"Has the universe fooled theists into thinking there is a God?
Or can’t theists be fooled?"

That's a tad better.

 

[WalterTrull]

I am fascinated by the demand for physical evidence of non-physical phenomena.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

but isn't one personally invested in every argument pursued? If I have no interest in a subject I don't post.

Some. Im not invested in god-existence post because I know theist have their own criteria for gods existence; so, he does. I have yet to find a theist, even a Pagan who just didnt want to talk about her gods, who want to go deeper into the existence of god. Theres a underling message: its personal. Its evident. Its a waste of time talking.

Mayhe in person.

Please explain.

Not all gods are magical. Pantheist god is life itself. Its hard to pin point magic in finding a tree's existence or find faith to believs mountains do. I explained god in another post. No one challenged me on it. Think of the abrahamic god as energy (which I believe all unseen gods are). When you pray, there is a surge and uplift of emotions like in meditation. The connection between body and mind meditates on a given object or person of devotion. You basically trust your mind go outside yourself to find what the mind defines as god. Using the workings of the mind as an outside source to understand "him" internally. Working of the nerves.

Energy als suppports and sustains all life. Hindu, so far I was told, and Buddhist use energy in some way to connect with mind in the former god. In some buddhist sects, energy can come in colors. A lot of india cosmology. Just abrahamic religious its not a color thing. Its more so the mind making an outside source inside. Its psychological.

The problem I see in some abrahamoc god-theist and their atheist is defending gods based on their cultural definition. What type of god is an atheist actually looking for? Can it be discribed to where if a theist finally answers your question, youd believe his answer?

So your objection is the 'criteria of evidence'?

I don't see different criteria. Algebra is pretty much cut and dry. A thing is either reasonable/logical, or it

Christians have thei criteria. Pagans theres. I have mine. Some atheist has theirs. You wouldnt use the same formula for each algebraic equation. You wouldnt ideally use a fork to eat tomato soup.

God is not cut and dry. Until atheists understand that fact, theyd ask forever and get no "mathematical" answer. Its based on totally different critera. Its a totally different topic with a totally different line of thought. Unforuntately, not all god(s) people can talk about it. Christians depend on the bible, no understanding. Hindus depend on experience. Not a hindu? No understanding.

Its not math. Gods are logical you just have to take out the culture and claims and investigate what each god person has in common psychologically, physiological experience, definition of culture, history, theology, and common sense.

Its more time consuming then it is hard. No theist will challenge you on it because it belittles their experiences. Least so far. You may be surprised.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The problem with most theists is an inconsistency of what is accepted as evidence. If they were consistent most would have to believe in more religions or no religioins. The standards that a Christian applies to Muslim beliefs if applied to their own would make them staunch atheists. The standards they apply to their own applied to Islam would make them Jihadists

If you focused it on christianity, what other source of evidence would some atheist look for outside their scripture? I mean, I "experinced" god in the Catholic Church. What -I- personally know of him. How I talk about the trinity is understood but foreign language to catholics. My figuring out the mystery of the eucharist seems to belittle them. But the evidence is there. Youre using the wrong criteria to confirm it.

What type of god does a atheist want to see?

Do they have an idea of what they want to see so when a theist finally tells them, theyd finally believe it?

Their consistancy is the bible. Think Muslims the same. Jews most definitely. Its a cultural thing. All theree have a "if you'r not apart of us you want understand it." Spiritual ego. I had one jew basically insulted me because his view on christians as if all americans are christians. Online, they have more issues of mentioning their name than a christian does.

So, guess it depends on what atheists mean by the god they want to see. If its not logical, and they believe god doesnt, unless agnostic, what exactly are they looking for and why the christian god?