How an atheist can believe in 'God'

[9-10ths_Penguin]

1.
the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, withoutrejection of revelation (distinguished from deism ).
2.
belief in the existence of a god or gods (opposed to atheism ).

Both senses of the word are valid. Read definition 2.

Posturing means avoiding saying an ET could be God. No one especially YOU have given a reason ET that I described (and that researchers said would be possible) could not be God. That is simple but understandable denial my friend.

; {>

I reply when I see something that makes me want to reply. Your interpretation that as avoidance of some question is incorrect. Frankly, your OP seemed like such a wall of text full of assumptions I didn't share that I figured that replying to it wouldn't be a good use of my time.

Regardless, sure: a powerful alien could be considered by people to be a god if they learned about it. So what? Where does that get us?

I have no good reason to think that humanity has ever encountered a powerful alien that could be mistaken for a god or that the extraordinary events in the Bible actually happened, so I see no need to explain the one with the other.

 

[LuisDantas]

Indeed. If you believe the Sun is God then it's quite easy to point out your God on a cloudless day. Likewise you could focus your worship on a race of highly advanced ETs. Neither are supernatural, both are natural phenomenon as much a product of the universe as we are. Of course. I guess it depends on what you think God's nature is.

Ever heard of cargo cults?

 

[Corvus]

Ever heard of cargo cults?

I sure have.

 

[Corvus]

With all due respect I have yet to hear from atheists or theists etc why this scenario of an advanced being attaining God status is not possible etc. I think its not only possible but probable. However even if this being is "I am who I am' ie God of the Hebrew bible the question I would like answered is was it too created or has is existed forever.

Oh I think the old Gods, or some of them, could quite literally be mythical memories of alien visitors. Who would of course demonstrate Godlike powers to iron and bronze age humans.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Indeed. If you believe the Sun is God then it's quite easy to point out your God on a cloudless day. Likewise you could focus your worship on a race of highly advanced ETs. Neither are supernatural, both are natural phenomenon as much a product of the universe as we are. Of course. I guess it depends on what you think God's nature is.

The spirit of this debate asks if a race is so advanced it can create or change physical law and do all the other things we associate with God it could be God. Just because it has advanced or was born of a universe or a time somewhere then as it evolved it became an disembodied 'spirit' that can communicate telepathically, live forever (it may even created space time), alter time, create universes it is or could be literally God.

You mentioned supernatural. Here is the definition for supernatural from the web;

SUPERNATURAL An manifestation or event attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature: "a supernatural being" synonyms: paranormal · psychic · magic · magical · occult · mystic · [more] 2.... NOUN manifestations or events considered to be of supernatural origin, such as ghosts.

So again according to common language and dictionary definitions an advanced being would be supernatural. It would be SN if only by its ability to alter, change, or create natural law. I am surprised there is so much resistance from atheists on this! I reckoned the theists and religious types would be the most opposed to such an idea. With all due respect I have yet to hear from atheists or theists etc why this scenario of an advanced being attaining God status is not possible etc. I think its not only possible but probable. However even if this being is "I am who I am' ie God of the Hebrew bible the question I would like answered is was it too created or has is existed forever.

notes; Would any member like source information for creating universes in the lab (Scientific American I think), or humans attaining telepathic thought and immortality etc....ps did anyone catch year million on Natural Geo TV?

; {>

 

[Corvus]

Repeating yourself wont help.

 

[Corvus]

The spirit of this debate asks if a race is so advanced it can create or change physical law and do all the other things we associate with God it could be God. Just because it has advanced or was born of a universe or a time somewhere then as it evolved it became an disembodied 'spirit' that can communicate telepathically, live forever (it may even created space time), alter time, create universes it is or could be literally God.

Worship it if you want, I am not going to. Nothing deserves my worship, nothing will get it.

 

[Corvus]

So again according to common language and dictionary definitions an advanced being would be supernatural.

Not at all, if an alien species evolved like any other, it is scientifically reducible. There is nothing supernatural about it. It just possesses advanced technology, presumably, if it can get here, or manipulate spacetime.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

I would just consider them highly technologically advanced civilization.

How would you know if it came back not in a space craft but from the sky that has opened as prophesied in the new testament. One of many verses describing Jesus return ; ie ;

1 Thessalonians 4:15-17:

For this we declare to you by a word from the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord (Jesus), will not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel (like thunder), and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.

HS! Zombies will rise from the dead! What is fascinating is that science itself is saying that these things are not impossible as they did a few years ago. We are really going on an semi off topic tangent that has little to do with the main theme of the OT. And there is no reason to repeat it, right?

Thanks for all the responses so far. They have been kind and well thought out in 99% of the cases. The thanks is especially meant because this is a very emotional subject for most of us, and so the restraint shown is appreciated!

; {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Worship it if you want, I am not going to. Nothing deserves my worship, nothing will get it.

Lol, I already do worship Jesus and God, and have come to the conclusion I don't care if God originated from something weird or not. But I have to say you sound like my prideful and mostly angry self a couple decades back. Pride may be an a evolutionary vestige from our so called common ancestors. That said I am not asking anyone to do anything except to think about stuff.
: {>

 

[ADigitalArtist]

create or change physical law

What does this mean exactly? If we create a force through technology to resist gravity, we haven't just created or changed physical law. We've just used one physical law to outweigh the force of another. That's not magic, mysticism, occult, etc. It might've been beyond humans and their scientific understanding at a certain point of time, but that doesn't change that the effect was still natural, not supernatural.
A highly advanced alien using technology to affect physical forces is still natural.

disembodied 'spirit' that can communicate telepathically, live forever

There is a great comic by Warren Ellis called Transmetropolitan which has characters like this. They are called Foglets. They can be invisible, cloudlike or take a shape, can create things out of thin air, can move through objects, etc. Sounds like a ghost.
But they weren't ghosts. They were human/machine interfaces. A human uploaded their brain into a cloud of microscopic nanites which had individual and collective movement. They gathered together and formed shapes or moved apart and became invisible to the naked eye. They collected tiny particles from the air and reassembled them to make things. They were small enough to pass through gaps. They also were self repairing and self charging so they lived forever.

They were made of natural materials powered by natural forces which used natural forces to do things humans can't do without sufficiently advanced technology. Wouod you call them gods or spirits or ghosts? Because I wouldnt.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

OOPS EDITED AT 12;38 FRIDAY FOR BRAIN FLATULENCE...SORRY!

Not at all, if an alien species evolved like any other, it is scientifically reducible. There is nothing supernatural about it. It just possesses advanced technology, presumably, if it can get here, or manipulate spacetime.

By the definition the advanced 'being' is supernatural. Read the definition. You are inserting emotion where intellect and reasoning should go. That is normally what any atheist or theist would do. Basically you are saying I don't care if this 'being' is immortal, telepathic, intellect beyond comprehension, and this being can change the laws of nature at will, and even create universes, it is not supernatural. However by definition it is.

Of course maybe there limits to science. Maybe no matter how advanced we become we will not be able to create life and a universe for it to play in. (even though scientists say there is no reason we given the proper tools could not create a universe in the lab.) Maybe no matter how intelligent our super computer linked brains are we may not be able to change or manipulate physical law. That would be the only way the beings or being or race would not be able to attain God status.

; {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

What does this mean exactly? If we create a force through technology to resist gravity, we haven't just created or changed physical law. We've just used one physical law to outweigh the force of another. That's not magic, mysticism, occult, etc. It might've been beyond humans and their scientific understanding at a certain point of time, but that doesn't change that the effect was still natural, not supernatural.
A highly advanced alien using technology to affect physical forces is still natural.

Changing physical law would be something like being able to stop time. Or to make an object exceed the speed of light. Not to appear to exceed c by folding space etc. To make a object the size of a car (or a pea) exceed light speed would require more energy than is in the entire universe. BTW, if it means anything to you I coined a term (someone has already thought of it I am sure) called supernormal. A supernormal event would be something that appears to be a supernatural event but in reality be a natural event like the parting of the red sea by natural forces.

There is a great comic by Warren Ellis called Transmetropolitan which has characters like this. They are called Foglets. They can be invisible, cloudlike or take a shape, can create things out of thin air, can move through objects, etc. Sounds like a ghost.
But they weren't ghosts. They were human/machine interfaces. A human uploaded their brain into a cloud of microscopic nanites which had individual and collective movement. They gathered together and formed shapes or moved apart and became invisible to the naked eye. They collected tiny particles from the air and reassembled them to make things. They were small enough to pass through gaps. They also were self repairing and self charging so they lived forever. They were made of natural materials powered by natural forces which used natural forces to do things humans can't do without sufficiently advanced technology. Wouod you call them gods or spirits or ghosts? Because I wouldnt.

No they are not gods because they don't have the attributes God is said to have. In the OT I defined 'God' as being as powerful etc as the old testament Hebrew God. The Foglets would not even be supernatural either! Why? Because we can describe how they do what they do, and violate no physical laws.

Definition of physical law (from da' web) ;
noun
any scientific generalization based on factual observations, such as the law of gravitation~~~~

I understand the emotional pain this could cause some of you all', lol the church that sponsored my ordainment, a 200 year old (nearly) southern baptist church would not only give me emotional pain, the church deacons etc would give me a lot of physical PAIN if I were ever to say the above in public!

; {>

 

[Ponder This]

I am talking about a being that even those ETs you mentioned would worship the ONE I am describing which has all the powers the Hebrew God had. It would not need a spacecraft because it created this universe and prob every detail in it down to all physical laws.



Yes see above. However theists would not even know it was ET, and it would not matter because it would be that God. It could follow prophecy and could even helped man write the bible.



Your precisely correct! However they would be expecting a space ship and little green men, not the living God Jesus coming as promised from the east and on a white horse, eyes as red as flame coming to do battle with the antichrist...



I agree, however if God/Jesus/5the being did return as promised I am sure there would be a lot fewer atheists after he 'landed'. lol, eh?

; {>

If you want to describe this entity in a way that is indistinguishable from common conceptions of who or what God is, then fine.
If you want to describe this entity in ways not commonly understood, then not so fine.

Either way the atheists are unlikely to accept it even if it shows up and for all intensive purposes is indistinguishable from what is commonly understood as God (and proves that it is God). Even some theists will not accept it if it actually shows up. And until it does, there is no real way to test how people will truly react (regardless of how they actually claim they would act as posted on this forum).

You see, even if everyone agreed that God exists, there would still be people who would not worship Him. It's a common argument among atheists that if, for example, the Abrahamic God exists, then He must be an evil, sadistic tyrant on the basis of His actions as reported in the Bible. So the true atheists of today would not accept Him as their ruler even if He showed up in all of His Glory unless they were forced to do so beyond their will.

Of course, it's possible that the common interpretation of the Abrahamic God is not correct, but you will have to discuss those details with their objectors and you may find great difficulty in defining exactly who or what God is and what He/She/It wants. This is because even an atheist projects a conception of what he thinks God is when he takes the action of objecting to God's existence. As long as the atheist doesn't actually object to the existence of a particular deity, he isn't actually projecting a conception of the thing to which he objects. It's very subtle. So subtle, in fact, that atheists themselves can be unaware they are doing it and equivocate. For example, when they use the Flying Spaghetti Monster Argument, they equivocate: because they object to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, they must therefore object to all conceptions of gods even though those conceptions are not equivalent.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Both senses of the word are valid. Read definition 2.

Even number two validates what I said.

I reply when I see something that makes me want to reply. Your interpretation that as avoidance of some question is incorrect.

If you say so. I am wondering if its not emotional why are you attempting modify definitions etc. Nevertheless, I take your word for it, one size does not fit all, and I always speak in generalizations out of respect and to hopefully avoid angering those with thin skins. I know personally of many atheists who have said they would like to believe in God but can not for what ever reason, as I have said more than once in this thread. Your rebuttals, all of them where you attempted to say an being sufficiently advanced is not or could not be supernatural by definition were factually wrong. However I am not concerned what you believe, that sounded a little harsh, what I meant is if it turns your crank go for it.

Frankly, your OP seemed like such a wall of text full of assumptions I didn't share that I figured that replying to it wouldn't be a good use of my time.

Of course its all speculation and assumptions! DO I have to define those words too? There is nothing wrong with speculative thinking especially if there is support for the ideas. There is! Einstein called similar sojourns of speculation 'thought experiments'.

Regardless, sure: a powerful alien could be considered by people to be a god if they learned about it. So what? Where does that get us?

Hmmmm' what we have here is a problem to communicate! Ok the entire point of my wall of assumptions was to speculate if it were possible for an advanced being to be God. If yes I was interested how an atheist would square that with their world view. That's all.

I have no good reason to think that humanity has ever encountered a powerful alien that could be mistaken for a god or that the extraordinary events in the Bible actually happened, so I see no need to explain the one with the other.

As I said if you are liking that so am I. Even if it is extraordinarily alien to me.... I couldn't resist. I for one enjoyed the back and forth~

; {>

 

[ADigitalArtist]

able to stop time. Or to make an object exceed the speed of light. Not to appear to exceed c by folding space etc. To make a object the size of a car (or a pea) exceed light speed would require more energy than is in the entire universe. BTW, if it means anything to you I coined a term

Even assuming those things can be done, why would I assume that it isn't a case of our current knowledge of physical laws being incomplete, and is just as natural (or normal) as any other technological device that uses physical forces?

No they are not gods because they don't have the attributes God is said to have. In the OT I defined 'God' as being as powerful etc as the old testament Hebrew God. The Foglets would not even be supernatural either! Why? Because we can describe how they do what they do, and violate no physical laws.

You do understand that there are conceptions of god far beyond the Christian or even Abrahamic usage, right?
Anyway, I see no reason you're presenting that your alien situation is any different. The foglets use a form of energy generation that wouldn't work in physics, as we know it. But that doesn't make it non-physical.

I understand the emotional pain this could cause some of you

This seems to be an unreasonable and uncharitable assumption on your part. Like 'you're too afraid of death to accept this is the only life there is' would be.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Ok the entire point of my wall of assumptions was to speculate if it were possible for an advanced being to be God. If yes I was interested how an atheist would square that with their world view. That's all.

To specifically answer this question: I would say a highly advanced alien or aliens somehow inspired that particular narrative. That is, the OT. But I wouldn't then call the alien gods nor worship them (I wouldn't worship anything, not being fond of totalitarianism.), because that has as little to do with the definition of a god to me as 'the universe' does to you, even if pantheists disagree.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

If you want to describe this entity in a way that is indistinguishable from common conceptions of who or what God is, then fine.
If you want to describe this entity in ways not commonly understood, then not so fine.

Thank you for allowing me that small favor!

Either way the atheists are unlikely to accept it even if it shows up and for all intensive purposes is indistinguishable from what is commonly understood as God (and proves that it is God). Even some theists will not accept it if it actually shows up. And until it does, there is no real way to test how people will truly react (regardless of how they actually claim they would act as posted on this forum).

I would say that is a affirmative, meaning I agree.

You see, even if everyone agreed that God exists, there would still be people who would not worship Him. It's a common argument among atheists that if, for example, the Abrahamic God exists, then He must be an evil, sadistic tyrant on the basis of His actions as reported in the Bible. So the true atheists of today would not accept Him as their ruler even if He showed up in all of His Glory unless they were forced to do so beyond their will.

I agree. However whether such an advanced being would be accepted or worshiped while interesting is beyond the scope of this thread. I was more concerned how atheists would be able to claim God did not exist. Also I wanted to know that since it was now (barely) scientifically possible for such a race or advanced being hereafter called an AB to exist how does that effect their world view etc? (granted an AB its more science fiction than science)

Of course, it's possible that the common interpretation of the Abrahamic God is not correct, but you will have to discuss those details with their objectors and you may find great difficulty in defining exactly who or what God is and what He/She/It wants.

Well my education and life experience for the last twenty years (damn I am old) have been dedicated to knowing that very thing. I would use the bible versions and the bible description of God because it fulfills the academic definition of God and the bible version is what a large percentage of people think of when they envision God. However that said it really does not matter too much what examples are used to represent God. Only that the dictionaries description was fulfilled would be ok.

This is because even an atheist projects a conception of what he thinks God is when he takes the action of objecting to God's existence. As long as the atheist doesn't actually object to the existence of a particular deity, he isn't actually projecting a conception of the thing to which he objects. It's very subtle. So subtle, in fact, that atheists themselves can be unaware they are doing it and equivocate. For example, when they use the Flying Spaghetti Monster Argument, they equivocate: because they object to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, they must therefore object to all conceptions of gods even though those conceptions are not equivalent.

Still the OTs concerns (the questions I wanted to address as I mentioned above) could be answered even using the FSM as God, if the FSM had the attributes commonly prescribed to God, ie an supernatural all powerful, immortal a universe creator. If I am going to debate atheists in serious debate I usually try to define the types of atheists before we begin. Most of the time everyone agrees to use two interpretations such as hard atheist soft atheist or positive atheist negative atheist. Don't laugh a new study defines seven types of atheists and one web age (unknown validity) listed 72 types! Most debaters on both sides generally agree Hard or soft atheist is usually sufficient for forum type debate.

thanks for the reply~

; {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

Even assuming those things can be done, why would I assume that it isn't a case of our current knowledge of physical laws being incomplete, and is just as natural (or normal) as any other technological device that uses physical forces?

Yes I agree. Even gravity appears to be repulsive instead of attractive the most distant parts of our universe. Many things have recently been discovered that seem to violate physical law in deep space. But that has no bearing on my point where I was attempting to define some things normally attributed to God.

You do understand that there are conceptions of god far beyond the Christian or even Abrahamic usage, right?[/qutote]

No! Really? man you are so smart! If you have been reading the replies you would know why I chose the Hebrew God as an example. Of course I could have listed the thousand or so gods and individually listed their powers but I don't think this site has that kind of band with!

Anyway, I see no reason you're presenting that your alien situation is any different. The foglets use a form of energy generation that wouldn't work in physics, as we know it. But that doesn't make it non-physical.

I have already covered that. What other feats can those critters do? Raise the dead? Create our universe?

This seems to be an unreasonable and uncharitable assumption on your part. Like 'you're too afraid of death to accept this is the only life there is' would be.

Better have another drink. If you can not understand the simple ideas presented in the OT maybe you should participate in a thread that has a subject you can understand. Presenting 'foglets' as an example or a comparison of supernatural beings or events is laughable.Your replies are mostly redundant and do not address the main issues. You have failed in all attempts to rebut and have chosen to derail this thread by redirection and other tactics instead. Many members at least understand the concept even if they do not agree or have other issues that its not possible for God to be an advanced being which is a major point of the OT. I am fine with that, and think its healthy to disagree if the disagreement is not malicious in nature. IMO most of your comments fall into the latter category.

; {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

To specifically answer this question: I would say a highly advanced alien or aliens somehow inspired that particular narrative. That is, the OT. But I wouldn't then call the alien gods nor worship them (I wouldn't worship anything, not being fond of totalitarianism.), because that has as little to do with the definition of a god to me as 'the universe' does to you, even if pantheists disagree.

Ok then, even though I do not understand what you mean by saying 'a highly advanced alien or aliens somehow inspired that particular narrative. That is, the OT' the last part of your reply is wonderful. We just disagree and as I said reciprocal respectful disagreement can lead to productive debate.

: {>