Legitimate reasons not to believe in God

[Trailblazer]

You should know better than to play the game of Kiss Hank's Donkey.

I don't know anything about any donkeys, but what I said was meant to be a reassurance that he will find out soon enough that an afterlife exists and that will be reason enough to believe that God exists. The proof will be in the pudding.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know anything about any donkeys, but what I said was meant to be a reassurance that he will find out soon enough that an afterlife exists and that will be reason enough to believe that God exists. The proof will be in the pudding.

Watch and learn then:

Spoiler

 

[Aupmanyav]

That is the very opposite of a threat. It was meant to be a reassurance.

I do not need any reassurance. I know what is going to happen.

 

[joelr]

It depends upon what you count as proof. Besides formalism presumes the reliability of logic; however no logical system can (if Godel's Theorem is correct) prove itself to be consistent. So even if God is true, you cannot prove it due to the all encompassing nature of God and of ordered systems. To prove God was true you'd need to prove that truth was true, but you can't even do that. So there is no obtainable big picture for us. Every time you reach a bigger picture there remains one larger. Change one word of a story and the whole plot may change, or read it to a different person, or write it in a different century, or change the color of the ink. The entire thing can change. The meaning of the universe has a similar but much more complex problem.

.

That isn't what Godel's Theorem is saying. It's about provability of formal systems not truth. He demonstrates a simple arithmetic that passes the test. If you are Christian and not Muslim you believe one version of God is true and are convinces another is not. Did you have to wrestle with truth to decide that?

 

[joelr]

Belief in God is not contrary to the evidence since there is no evidence that suggests that God does not exist.
This is very much unlike Trump losing the election, since there was plenty of evidence that demonstrated that Trump lost the election.

There is evidence of no God and there are ways to prove God.
The OT, NT and Quran are entirely FULL of divine beings making appearances, miracles happening, God flying around on magic smoke and fire, God showing up and speaking directly with people and hundreds of direct appearances in the OT. Temples were built for Yahweh to dwell when on Earth.
God, Jesus and angels are constantly giving visions, dictating text, flying into the air, growing to 40ft tall and glowing, performing exorcisms on demons and more.
People believe these legends are true so any of them can be duplicated.

In fact not seeing any of this is evidence that these Gods and divine beings do not exist. Finding the same stories and miracles in older religions is evidence that the stories are not from Gods but are legendary tales passed down and Gods were needed for a structured society to follow rules.
No historical writings from Biblical times EVER record anything like this. Only in myth do we see this. This is evidence these are just stories based on fantasy.

Impersonal laws of nature do exist. More evidence that this is true for all reality.
Neuroscience does suggest that consciousness after death is absolutely unlikely.
Multiple God beliefs that all contradict each other and are clearly products of beliefs of that time and place also suggest they are just stories.

Life and reality can be demonstrated to follow probabilities. Which is what the laws of physics predicts. No theistic deity can be altering these laws because everything plays out probabilistic.
There is plenty of evidence that a theistic God does not exist and none that shows one does exist.

 

[joelr]

“Shows”? Rather, mainstream science interprets evidence in a way that supports that conclusion.
Not all scientists accept such an understanding.

All scientists accept the evidence. There is no other way to accept it. There are several relative and absolute dating methods that confirm this.

The genus Homo evolved from Australopithecus.[19][20] Though fossils from the transition are scarce, the earliest members of Homo share several key traits with Australopithecus.[21][22] The earliest record of Homo is the 2.8 million-year-old specimen LD 350-1 from Ethiopia, and the earliest named species are Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis which evolved by 2.3 million years ago.[22] H. erectus (the African variant is sometimes called H. ergaster) evolved 2 million years ago and was the first archaic human species to leave Africa and disperse across Eurasia.[23] H. erectus also was the first to evolve a characteristically human body plan. Homo sapiens emerged in Africa around 300,000 years ago from a species commonly designated as either H. heidelbergensis or H. rhodesiensis, the descendants of H. erectus that remained in Africa.[24] H. sapiens migrated out of the continent, gradually replacing or interbreeding with local populations of archaic humans.[25][26][27] Humans began exhibiting behavioral modernity about 160,000-70,000 years ago,[28] and possibly earlier.[29]

The "out of Africa" migration took place in at least two waves, the first around 130,000 to 100,000 years ago, the second (Southern Dispersal) around 70,000 to 50,000 years ago.[30][31] H. sapiens proceeded to colonize all the continents and larger islands, arriving in Eurasia 60,000 years ago,[32][33] Australia around 65,000 years ago,[34] the Americas around 15,000 years ago, and remote islands such as Hawaii, Easter Island, Madagascar, and New Zealand between the years 300 and 1280 CE.[35][36]

There were no humans before Adam & Eve. Genesis 3:20…Eve was “to become the Mother of everyone living.”

Garden of Eden[edit]

The parallels between the stories of Enkidu/Shamhat and Adam/Eve have been long recognized by scholars.[64][65] In both, a man is created from the soil by a god, and lives in a natural setting amongst the animals. He is introduced to a woman who tempts him. In both stories the man accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and must leave his former realm, unable to return. The presence of a snake that steals a plant of immortality from the hero later in the epic is another point of similarity. However, a major difference between the two stories is that while Enkidu experiences regret regarding his seduction away from nature, this is only temporary: After being confronted by the god Shamash for being ungrateful, Enkidu recants and decides to give the woman who seduced him his final blessing before he dies. This is in contrast to Adam, whose fall from grace is largely portrayed purely as a punishment for disobeying God.

Judaism - Myths


Myths

Biblical myths are found mainly in the first 11 chapters of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. They are concerned with the creation of the world and the first man and woman, the origin of the current human condition, the primeval Deluge, the distribution of peoples, and the variation of languages.

The basic stories are derived from the popular lore of the ancient Middle East; parallels can be found in the extant literature of the peoples of the area. The Mesopotamians, for instance, also knew of an earthly paradise such as Eden, and the figure of the cherubim—properly griffins rather than angels—was known to the Canaanites. In the Bible, however, this mythical garden of the gods becomes the scene of man’s fall and the background of a story designed to account for the natural limitations of human life. Similarly, the Babylonians told of the formation of humankind from clay. But, whereas in the pagan tale the first man’s function is to serve as an earthly menial of the gods, in the scriptural version his role is to rule over all other creatures. The story of the Deluge, including the elements of the ark and the dispatch of the raven and dove, appears already in the Babylonian myths of Gilgamesh and Atrahasis. There, however, the hero is eventually made immortal, whereas in the Bible this detail is omitted because, to the Israelite mind, no child of woman could achieve that status. Lastly, while the story of the Tower of Babel was told originally to account for the stepped temples (ziggurats) of Babylonia, to the Hebrew writer its purpose is simply to inculcate the moral lesson that humans should not aspire beyond their assigned station.


Scattered through the Prophets and Holy Writings (the two latter portions of the Hebrew Bible) are allusions to other ancient myths—e.g., to that of a primordial combat between YHWH and a monster variously named Leviathan (Wriggly), Rahab (Braggart), or simply Sir Sea or Dragon. The Babylonians told likewise of a fight between their god Marduk and the monster Tiamat; the Hittites told of a battle between the weather god and the dragon Illuyankas; while a Canaanite poem from Ras Shamra (ancient Ugarit) in northern Syria relates the discomfiture of Sir Sea by the deity Baal and the rout of an opponent named Leviathan. Originally, this myth probably referred to the annual subjugation of the floods.

Where do you base these beliefs on? Evolution has never been seen to form any higher classification of organisms than species…and that was first observed in 2017! No genus taxon, no family taxon
We should expect all organisms to have the same genes within the same DNA structure, since all life forms have the same Creator…. It does not mean they are biologically related.

Yes nature created life. Not Inana, Yahweh or Zeus.

Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Primates
Suborder: Haplorhini
Infraorder: Simiiformes
Family: Hominidae
Subfamily: Homininae
Tribe: Hominini
Genus: Homo
Species:
H. sapien

 

[Aupmanyav]

Multiple God beliefs that all contradict each other and are clearly products of beliefs of that time and place also suggest they are just stories.

Multiple God / Goddess belief is just as good as One God belief. Indian multiple deities do not fight each other and exist in a harmonious fashion and not like the Greek deities, who are at conflict with each other. Of course, they are all stories, but more colorful than the One God scenario.

"vāsāṁsi jīrṇāni yathā vihāya, navāni gṛhṇāti naro ’parāṇi;
tathā śarīrāṇi vihāya jīrṇāny, anyāni saṁyāti navāni dehī." BG 2.22

Like a person who throws away old clothes and accepts other new clothes, in the same way when the body grows old, leaving the old form, one gets other new form/s.

See, no false promise of 'divine bodies'. Just what science will say.

 

[Brickjectivity]

That isn't what Godel's Theorem is saying. It's about provability of formal systems not truth. He demonstrates a simple arithmetic that passes the test. If you are Christian and not Muslim you believe one version of God is true and are convinces another is not. Did you have to wrestle with truth to decide that?

What is truth but words that are thought to describe consistent systems? As human beings we can only work with the appearance of truth and can not have it directly.

By-the-way: After I posted someone else commented and pointed out that what Godel shows is that any system complex enough to represent itself cannot prove itself to be complete. I incorrectly used the word 'Consistent', but it was close enough for my post.
Legitimate reasons not to believe in God

 

[CG Didymus]

Don't try to frighten me with that.

Funny how different religions have some ways of scaring people into obeying their Gods. Christians probably have one of the best with their belief in Satan and hell. But then they say not to worry, if the person believes, Jesus will save them. Ah, words we can count on... or maybe not. Baha'i say that is not exactly true. They come up with their own ways to frighten people into submission to their God.

 

[CG Didymus]

Watch and learn then:

Spoiler

That is so right on, except with the case of my prophet. What he said... Is the truth. Because he said so, and he doesn't lie.

 

[CG Didymus]

There is evidence of no God and there are ways to prove God.
The OT, NT and Quran are entirely FULL of divine beings making appearances, miracles happening, God flying around on magic smoke and fire, God showing up and speaking directly with people and hundreds of direct appearances in the OT. Temples were built for Yahweh to dwell when on Earth.
God, Jesus and angels are constantly giving visions, dictating text, flying into the air, growing to 40ft tall and glowing, performing exorcisms on demons and more.
People believe these legends are true so any of them can be duplicated.

In fact not seeing any of this is evidence that these Gods and divine beings do not exist. Finding the same stories and miracles in older religions is evidence that the stories are not from Gods but are legendary tales passed down and Gods were needed for a structured society to follow rules.
No historical writings from Biblical times EVER record anything like this. Only in myth do we see this. This is evidence these are just stories based on fantasy.

Impersonal laws of nature do exist. More evidence that this is true for all reality.
Neuroscience does suggest that consciousness after death is absolutely unlikely.
Multiple God beliefs that all contradict each other and are clearly products of beliefs of that time and place also suggest they are just stories.

Life and reality can be demonstrated to follow probabilities. Which is what the laws of physics predicts. No theistic deity can be altering these laws because everything plays out probabilistic.
There is plenty of evidence that a theistic God does not exist and none that shows one does exist.

Ironically, I think most Baha'is would agree with you... that these stories are fictional. However, Baha'is then come up with a symbolic interpretation, which they say was the true purpose of the fictional story. Unfortunately, they say, people took those stories literally.

For me, I think they were religious myth and taught to the people as if they were true. But that still makes the stories not true, and passing them off as true, a lie. But I also don't accept the Baha'i interpretation that the stories were meant to be taken symbolically. So, for me, the Baha'i interpretation is also not true. And just like "Kissing Hank's ***", there is too many things that have to be assumed to be true and too many things "proven" true through circular reasoning. But does that bother believers? No, because they "know" it's true.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Funny how different religions have some ways of scaring people into obeying their Gods. Christians probably have one of the best with their belief in Satan and hell. But then they say not to worry, if the person believes, Jesus will save them. Ah, words we can count on... or maybe not.

The popular theme of Christianity is "God loves you," but if you disobey him and sin against him, then he will send you to hell to be tortured, and you'll suffer for all eternity. However, if you repent of your sins and accept Jesus as your savior, then God will forgive you, and you're safe. But there's a catch. There is a loophole in this seemingly hopeful biblical promise: you could still be stripped of your salvation and be cast into hell if you don't follow God's will. Jesus' parable of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31–46) and his clear warning: "Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 7:21) demonstrate that even though you repented and were forgiven of your sins, you could still go to hell if you don't toe the line exactly the way God wants you to, and herein lies another conflicting message in the Bible, because Romans 10:9-13 says that if someone declares with their mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believes in their heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, they will be saved. The verse claims that whoever calls on Jesus' name will be saved, but his warnings clearly say otherwise.

And Ephesians 2:8–9 states, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast." However, in Matthew 7:21, Jesus stated, "Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven," and his sheep and goats parable in Matthew 25:31–46 states the "sheep" were rewarded with eternal life for their good works of feeding the hungry, giving water to people who are thirsty, inviting in a stranger, clothing the needy, and visiting the sick or people in prison. However, the "goats" in this parable were lambasted by Jesus for not feeding the hungry, giving water to people who were thirsty, inviting in strangers, clothing the needy, and not visiting the sick or people in prison. Jesus cursed them and sent them to eternal damnation. The "goats" lacked the good works to be rewarded with eternal life, in spite of the fact that they were Christians who accepted Jesus as their lord and savior.

 

[Trailblazer]

Watch and learn then:

Spoiler

I would have given that a Funny, but it was also Informative since it made the point quite well.
God and the promise of an afterlife from an atheist perspective.

That was almost as funny as that other video you posted about Viagra. It's a keeper.

 

[Trailblazer]

I do not need any reassurance. I know what is going to happen.

You can no more know that than I can know what I believe I know.
Nobody knows what happens after we die except those who have died.

 

[Trailblazer]

Life and reality can be demonstrated to follow probabilities. Which is what the laws of physics predicts. No theistic deity can be altering these laws because everything plays out probabilistic.
There is plenty of evidence that a theistic God does not exist and none that shows one does exist.

God is not altering the laws of physics.
There is plenty of evidence that a theistic God does exists and none that shows one does not exist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I would have given that a Funny, but it was also Informative since it made the point quite well.
God and the promise of an afterlife from an atheist perspective.

That was almost as funny as that other video you posted about Viagra. It's a keeper.

I couldn't help myself since you made a Kissing Hank's Donkey (you can't say ***) argument.

 

[Subduction Zone]

God is not altering the laws of physics.
There is plenty of evidence that a theistic God does exists and none that shows one does not exist.

I do not know of any reliable evidence that a theistic God exists. By the way, as far as your second claim goes you might want to Google Search "The problem of evil".

 

[Trailblazer]

I couldn't help myself since you made a Kissing Hank's Donkey (you can't say ***) argument.

And I am glad you didn't help yourself, I needed a laugh.

 

[Trailblazer]

I do not know of any reliable evidence that a theistic God exists. By the way, as far as your second claim goes you might want to Google Search "The problem of evil".

What is considered reliable evidence varies among individuals. I believe there is reliable evidence, the Messengers of God.

The problem of evil does not negate God's existence, it only negates a loving God, IMO, but God does not have to be loving in order to exist.

What is meant by the problem of evil?

The problem of evil refers to the challenge of reconciling belief in an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God, with the existence of evil and suffering in the world.

Problem of evil - Wikipedia

Evil can be explained by man having the free will to commit evil acts. The immensity of suffering in the world is a problem, but there is no reason to think that if an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God existed there would be no suffering, since some suffering serves a purpose.

 

[CG Didymus]

The popular theme of Christianity is "God loves you," but if you disobey him and sin against him, then he will send you to hell to be tortured, and you'll suffer for all eternity. However, if you repent of your sins and accept Jesus as your savior, then God will forgive you, and you're safe. But there's a catch. There is a loophole in this seemingly hopeful biblical promise: you could still be stripped of your salvation and be cast into hell if you don't follow God's will. Jesus' parable of the sheep and the goats (Matthew 25:31–46) and his clear warning: "Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 7:21) demonstrate that even though you repented and were forgiven of your sins, you could still go to hell if you don't toe the line exactly the way God wants you to, and herein lies another conflicting message in the Bible, because Romans 10:9-13 says that if someone declares with their mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believes in their heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, they will be saved. The verse claims that whoever calls on Jesus' name will be saved, but his warnings clearly say otherwise.

And Ephesians 2:8–9 states, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast." However, in Matthew 7:21, Jesus stated, "Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven," and his sheep and goats parable in Matthew 25:31–46 states the "sheep" were rewarded with eternal life for their good works of feeding the hungry, giving water to people who are thirsty, inviting in a stranger, clothing the needy, and visiting the sick or people in prison. However, the "goats" in this parable were lambasted by Jesus for not feeding the hungry, giving water to people who were thirsty, inviting in strangers, clothing the needy, and not visiting the sick or people in prison. Jesus cursed them and sent them to eternal damnation. The "goats" lacked the good works to be rewarded with eternal life, in spite of the fact that they were Christians who accepted Jesus as their lord and savior.

My parents were raised Catholics but didn't push it on us. I remember lots of Catholics living in fear of not going to Mass and committing a mortal sin.

Romans 10:9-13 says that if someone declares with their mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believes in their heart that God raised Jesus from the dead, they will be saved.

That's an interesting verse, because the Baha'is don't believe that Jesus was raised physically from the dead. Which is one reason why I question them. They say they believe in the Bible and NT, but I don't think they really do. They believe what they want to about the Bible and the NT. But at least they dumped the devil, demons and a literal place called hell.