Does God Believe in Atheists? »
Posted By pacodecabra 3 weeks, 4 days ago in ReligionMany of those who believe it is impossible to know if God exists may on the surface spurn Christianity, but they seem to be the ones most likely to argue with Christians at every possible opportunity. This need to debate appears as much as anything to be a dare for Christians to prove them wrong, and I think they want to be proven wrong. The problem is that too many Christians do not live lives that come close to matching what we preach, which serves to discredit our witness.
Read Full Story at txevangelist.wordpress.com »
182 Views Share Story 88 Comments Report
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 88 (view all)
-
91%
smithichie3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA~" The difference is that atheists profess a belief that there is no God, while agnostics believe it is impossible to know if God exists".
Reply
Atheism is not a belief there is no god(s), instead we just don't believe in the god you and others believe in, it is a non-belief.
Do you believe Zeus does not exist or do you simply not believe in Zeus?
As for the Agnostic part, I think it's impossible to know if any agnostics actually exist or not.
If that sounds silly, that's how I think of the idea that providing any evidence for a god's existence is impossible. Why should a god be impossible to prove, at least so much as we can 'prove' an elephant or electron?-
100%
pacodecabra3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the comments.
Reply
The definitions I took for "atheist" and "agnostic" were from Webster's Dictionary. So using that, by your own definition wouldn't that make you more of an agnostic? Just curious, because while the terminology doesn't always matter, sometimes it's the very misunderstanding of a term that can prevent dialogue. -
-
-
89%
clarketelecom3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Duh. Of course I wish there was a magical man in the sky who could make all my dreams come true. Oh, and then there's death - the catalyst of all belief. You bet I want to live forever. I also want to win Powerball...Additionally, I doubt that Christians actually practicing what they preached would have any effect on my philosophy. In truth, I would simply put these earnest, robed carpenters in the same category as say, Orthodox Jews - earnest zealots overindulging in mysticism. So while your observation holds no revelations (pun intended) for me, you are right. I want a benevolent God to exist. I like to poke and prod at religion in hopes of stirring up a theologian capable of non-rhetorical discourse. In doing so I always hope to come away with a substantial ***** in my philosophy. Maybe it's my knowledge of history that makes a joke of the human corruption that went into the "divine" works of the world's major religions. Or maybe it's my understanding of physics, but that ***** never forms.
Reply-
100%
pacodecabra3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the comments clarketelecom. I'm glad you are open enough to admit that you want a benevolent God to exist. Here are a couple possibilities for "theologians capable of non-rhetorical discourse: Richard Ellis at www,reunionchurch.org and Greg Laurie at www.harvest.org. Both are much more geared toward application than theory.
Reply
-
-
100%
Mystic_Moldovan3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Quote: "The real question is what God thinks about atheists and agnostics and there are many verses in the Bible that answer this question."
Reply
The article is a "Bible says" exposition.
But first, you should research where the Bible came from. You need to be able to answer these questions: "Why are there four Gospels and not five." Why are there 66 books in the Bible and not 65 or 67? How many writers actually were involved with the Book of Daniel or some of the others? How do the 66 present books compare with the very latest discoveries among the Dead Sea Scrolls? How do you feel about the Dead Sea Scrolls, generally? What about the people who saved the Dead Sea Scrolls. Do you agree with their points of view? Why isn't the Book of Judas included as book number 67? How about the Book of Thomas? Who gets to decided which books to include and which ones to leave out? Do you prefer the Roman Catholic Bible, with a few extra books, or the Protestant one? What about the Gnostics? What about the Book of Mormon-- is it Scripture or not? Why or why not? Do the extra books not included in the Bible add or subtract to your understanding of God? If God the Father is neither male or female, and there is no Mrs. God, and God was never born and cannot die, what is IT that people are being asked to believe in? What about pantheism? Does that count as a valid belief in God? What do you do when one of the four Gospels doesn't agree with the other three? Does "the Bible says" still apply in those situations? One Gospel says Jesus cleared the temple of the moneychangers at the beginning of His ministry. Another Gospel says it occurred at the end of His ministry. Which is right? Are they both right? Are neither right? And if we're not sure, do we want to put our full weight on such a uncertain structure? Or do we simply pick Door Number One, Two, or Three?
My own position is that Scripture has been turned into a political tool to control others. Once people buy into "the Bible says" concept, then it is a small step to say, "The Bible says those people over there (gays, Jews, socialists, negroes, savages, Democrats, liberals, etc.) are to be outcasts of society because they won't do what the Bible commands." Therfore, I really can't link my name to this "Bible says" stuff any more. -
-
60%
cowboygrandpa3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From the Word for Today Bible, Dictionary
Reply
"ATHEIST one who denies the existence of God. The only occurrence in the New Testament of the Greek word atheoiatheists or godless onesis in Ephesians 2:12, where those who are separated from Christ are described as having no hope and without God. The early Christians were often called atheists because they refused to worship the pagan gods of their neighbors."
Ephesians 2:1-10
"By Grace Through Faith
2 And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, 3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them."
Most people believe a car will take them where they want to go.
They don't understand how it works, but they know it does.
That is faith.
Sometimes the car breaks down and needs to be repaired.
They take it to a mechanic, and believe he can fix it.
They trust in the mechanic.
God is the Creator of all things, yet some have no faith in Him.
He can fix all things but they have no trust in Him.
Just my view on it.
I once didn't have faith in Him either, nor trust.
Because my life was full of misery, I questioned how God could allow it.
Then realized He made me and could do whatever it pleased Him to do with me.
So I stopped fighting Him and accepted His will for me.
Life isn't perfect, but I don't have to worry.
God is in charge.-
-
100%
smithichie3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CBG~Most people believe a car will take them where they want to go.
Reply
They don't understand how it works, but they know it does.
That is faith.
No that's not faith. That a car will work is not based on faith, it is based on evidence, direct, testable evidence.
For example, let's say I offer you to choose 1 out of 5 cars, sitting at the top of a very large hill, and I tell you that there are only working brakes in 2 of the cars. Would you honestly take one of those cars on faith alone? If you did, I would bet you would test those brakes before you got moving, the act of testing would negate the leap of faith.
Further, if taking a broken a car to mechanic was an act of faith, we wouldn't require said mechanics to be licensed or bonded, or even trained in auto repair for that matter. I don't know about you, but I take my car where I know I can depend on honest work and honest diagnosis. I don't base this on faith, I base it on evidence of past repairs.
-
-
40%
Dionys3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It amazes me how readily atheists believe in Quarks -- little, tiny, completely invisible to the naked eye particles (or bits of particles). What's even more amazing is that they see it as fact despite it being completely impossible for them to independently verify their existence. Instead they point to priests in white coats and say "they told me they exist and I've seen pictures."
Reply
I'm being somewhat silly here, but it's not very much different from those who believe in God and Christ and point to their priests and paintings as examples of His existence.
What it really comes down to is that atheists feel that in order to prove the existence of something it must be done scientifically and they have faith that there will never be a machine that can 'measure' the existence of God.
Just as, I'm certain, people scoffed at the existence of anything smaller than an atom until the existence of electrons, protons and neutrons could be proven and measured. Just as people scoffed at the existence of quarks before something was invented to measure them.
Perhaps those who have faith in God don't need a scientific scale or God-o-scope to measure the existence of God because they find that their heart is enough.-
100%
Tangent0013 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Perhaps those who have faith in God don't need a scientific scale or God-o-scope to measure the existence of God because they find that their heart is enough."
Reply
That is most certainly the case. I have no problem with people of faith unless they wish to inflict their beliefs on others through legislation or personal prejudice. -
100%
smithichie3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
D~It amazes me how readily atheists believe in Quarks -- little, tiny, completely invisible to the naked eye particles (or bits of particles). What's even more amazing is that they see it as fact despite it being completely impossible for them to independently verify their existence. Instead they point to priests in white coats and say "they told me they exist and I've seen pictures."
Reply
Sm-Show me the god with as strong as evidence as quarks have. Heck show me one with half as much evidence.
I don't have to independently varify quarks to accept their existence, the folks you say "tell us quarks exist", do much more than just say they exist, they also provide the testable evidence. Now that testable evidence is beyond little old me I will admit, but I don't have to test that evidence myself, the folks that test that evidence provide their results and more importantly their predictions to the world. A test that failed the prediction filled in by quarks would be headline news, just as a test failing to meet the prediction of Einstein's relativity would likewise make headlines and shine the spotlight on the scientist conducting said test.
I have never seen Pluto with my own eyes just like I have never seen Austrailia with them either, but I accept their existence based on testable evidence the same as Quarks.
-
-
100%
Bkumm3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This debate, as always, is fascinating. I am an atheist. I do not believe in a god or gods. It is impossible at this time to prove (or disprove) the existence of a god or gods. Faith, for me, doesn't enter the picture.
Reply
There are some who would argue that an atheist's position on god or the lack thereof, is as much a matter of faith as the position of one who believes in a god or gods. This is simply not true and here's why.
For those of us that argue that there is no god, it must be remembered that we are not arguing against the possibility of a god or gods. There is no evidence that either supports or does not support that contention. It is just as relevant for one to say that there is a god or gods as it is to say that there is not. Both are logical and reasonable.
However, that is not the position that most theists (those who believe in a god or gods) take. They presuppose that belief in a god means that said god or gods have a presence in the world around us. That position is offensive to atheists (those who do not believe in a god or gods) because there is ample proof that such a position is false. If, however, there were a group of people that said that a god exists, full stop, those people would not be offensive to atheists in that they are not suggesting that said being or beings have any influence whatsoever in the world around us.
It is, perhaps, a matter of "faith" to say that there is no god. But, it is irrational to believe in a god that has a day to day influence in the world around us when there is ample proof that this is not the case.
That being said, I care not what someone else believes as long as their belief does not impede my freedom to disbelieve.-
100%
Dionys3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"They presuppose that belief in a god means that said god or gods have a presence in the world around us. That position is offensive to atheists (those who do not believe in a god or gods) because there is ample proof that such a position is false."
Reply
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you here -- but how is there ample proof that "god or gods have a presence in the world around us" is a false position? What evidence is there? -
100%
memestryker3 weeks, 3 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"It is, perhaps, a matter of "faith" to say that there is no god."
Reply
OK, using this logic, it would also be a matter of faith to say there are no unicorns, no Santa Claus, no Tooth Fairy, and no Flying Spaghetti Monster.
I say the evidence is stronger than "a matter of faith" that neither a magical male uber-being named "God" nor any of those entities listed above exist. Since there is no evidence for any of them other than folk tales and contrived fiction.
-
-
100%
clarketelecom3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's there disconnect that cannot be bridges between believers and non-believers. First I should define so semantics don't get in the way - a believer has faith that there is something greater then oneself taking an interest in the believer, guiding their actions. A non-believer doesn't accept this. The disconnect lies in the idea of faith. Faith is an absolutist stance - this is the way it is and that's that. Science, however allows for edits, challenges and improvements upon theory. This a non-absolutist stance that accepts the idea that we cannot have a perfect understanding of our world until every theory is challenged ad naeseum. At which point these theories are considered "fact". These fundamentally different schools of thought cannot be reconciled because their basis of what constitutes truth are opposite. Absolutist v. Non. So while quarks are the best possible explanation for the behavior of sub-atomic particles at this time, as decided by scientific committee, a new theory can dethrone it as understanding marches on. God cannot be dethroned because his existence is above reproach in a believer's eyes - untestable, unproved to people who require proof. On a total tangent though - the way we find extrasolar planets is by looking at the effect/"wobble" it has on its star. The only way to view such a thing directly is if the planet crosses its star right on our viewing plane. A somewhat rare event. This is an analog for the way we detect sub-atomic particles. Forces that shouldn't be there are explained using accepted techniques. Until something better comes along. A lot of believers see this constant shift of fact as an unstable, scary world. I think it gives the world the beauty and connectedness that non-believers crave just as much as believers.
Reply-
Neutral
Dionys3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"a believer has faith that there is something greater then oneself taking an interest in the believer, guiding their actions."
Reply
I don't think a believer necessarily thinks that the 'greater something' is guiding their actions or taking an interest in the believer. I think that would be an intensely narrow definition.
"Faith is an absolutist stance - this is the way it is and that's that. "
Not really. There's lots of wiggle room, edits, challenges and improvements.
"Science, however allows for edits, challenges and improvements upon theory. This a non-absolutist stance that accepts the idea that we cannot have a perfect understanding of our world until every theory is challenged ad naeseum."
Science is as much an absolutist stance because it assumes the only way to test reality is through science itself. Or that the only 'real' things in our world are things that can be proved by science. That is with utmost certainty an absolutist stance.
" On a total tangent though - the way we find extrasolar planets is by looking at the effect/"wobble" it has on its star. The only way to view such a thing directly is if the planet crosses its star right on our viewing plane. A somewhat rare event. This is an analog for the way we detect sub-atomic particles."
"Forces that shouldn't be there are explained using accepted techniques. Until something better comes along. "
It's funny to me.. This is EXACTLY how those of faith "see" God's influence in the world. One doesn't need to see the 'invisible' (to our current technology) planet to know that its influence is there and present.
"A lot of believers see this constant shift of fact as an unstable, scary world. "
And some see this constant shift and change as the foundation of their religious tradition and the interconnectedness of being that exists across all aspects of life and the universe. You shouldn't belittle either group.
-
-
86%
bubba23 weeks, 4 days ago
-
100%
tchef3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can't accept that. How does God love a little girl who has been kidnapped, raped and killed? How does one allow that to happen to someone he loves? God supposedly created everything, that means good as well as evil, yet only takes credit for the good. The evil is the Devils work, but who created the Devil? The same all knowing god that supposedly created all of us. And wasn't the Devil once his favorite angel? But I thought God had no favorites. I would say that Man created god, in his own image not the other way around.
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
tchef3 weeks, 4 days ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If there are gods, and being an atheist I don't believe there are I would think that the Greeks had it right. The gods are above looking down at us and we are their entertainment. They contently mess with us for their own pleasure.
Reply -
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.