Are you an atheist? ...

by Nicolas 56 Replies latest jw friends

  • Terry
    Terry
    czarofmischief says:I certainly do NOT believe in Jesus. I don't think he existed, I don't think he did half the things they said he did, and I think he died for his own sins, and I think that he didn't come back from the dead, and I am positive that he AIN'T coming back anytime soon. I mean, would you?

    I always had the same problem, even as a JW, I just didn't have much actual feeling or use for the character of Jesus.

    I've read as much as I can and I have to agree with Czar. I don't think there really was a person anything at all like the "Jesus" we've had rammed down our collective throats for two thousand years.

    This Jesus is Clark Kent one day and Superman the next. Not my taste in super-heroes. Especially when he never shows up to save anybody from anything!

    By the way, I call myself AGNOSTIC.

    I have no actual "knowledge" that there is or isn't a god; but, the evidence would indicate that IF there is a God; he suffers from Munchausen by Proxy syndrome.

  • drwtsn32
    drwtsn32

    I am both an agnostic and an atheist, according to the common definitions of the words.

    Agnostic because I don't believe it is possible to prove or disprove the existence of god. Atheist because I do not believe in god. I take the stance of not believing in something if there is no evidence for it. Some people are agnostic but choose to take the stance that god *probably* exists. That's definitely not me.

  • azaria
    azaria

    I didn’t have much difficulty believing in God but at one time I did have a difficult time believing in Jesus. So much so that I stopped going to church because I felt like a hypocrite. I now believe in Him. I do believe in the bible; that Jesus is mentioned in the OT many times but we do have to read it. I don’t think we should believe something just because some one else has said so. One must look into it themselves. I do believe that Jesus was there before time began as the Word. So yes, I do believe in a Triune God.

  • Bubbamar
    Bubbamar

    I do believe in God....and I do not understand God. God is just what I call the higher order to the universe or the positive energy. I don't know. I just know there is something other than the physical world - something more powerful than me and you. I definitely do not believe in the OT god or the biblical creation story.

  • Golf
    Golf

    In short, no. No human influenced me to believe in a Creator. My grandmother was not a Christian, she believed in a Creator.

    Guest 77

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    If someone was able to prove god existed, fine, but I'm not holding my breath. No one's done it yet. And that is not through want of trying. If god existed and how we acted mattered we would know. No reasonable being deserving of worship would let people be uninformed and suffer as a result. If god would allow people by action or inaction to be ignorant of what they should do and of the certainty of its existence, then god is an asshole and can suck my balls. This is not an insult against any gods other than the ones that fit the attached description. I realise that some people feel god allowing us to be sure it existed would negate free will, and use this as the big excuse of why god isn't provable, but quite frankly the argument they use is absurd. I also realise some people perceive god or think they are god, but as they often disagree I think we know what value we can assign to these perceptions or delusions. It might be something we would call god exists, but we are unimportant to it despite our inflated little monkey egos. Give a primate an opposable thumb and it's all airs and graces... But obviously in such an instance it really doesn't matter if god exists or not. So thus far god either is an asshole, or is irrelevent, or doesn't exist. As god existing also requires all sorts of illogicity and pre-supposition, as I say, prove it but I expect to be disappointed each time someone tries. god > morals > laws > goverment is an old disproven theists chestnut, I think I've read it in 'Mere Christianity", where essentially C.S. Lewis says that there is a god because we have morals. If your dog pisses on the carpet it normally knows it is in trouble; that's not morals, that's learned behaviour and instinct completely fitting within a non-divine explanation of reality. To conclude that humans are different is to make a presuppostition that humans morals are 'magic' from 'god', and not merely instinct (don't piss off a more dominant dog in the afore mentioned example) and learned behaviour (because he'll hit you with a newspaper and push your nose in the pee-pee). Making assumptions because one is unaware of animal or human behaviour is not proof of god. """"First of all even though I do come across as very annoyed, I?m not, but am very saddened and offended by a number of remarks. I'm not offended when someone questions or wonders if God exists, it's when people make derogatory comments about Him that offends me and I'm sure most Christians.""" I'm sorry, I find it offensive that I have to act as though your imaginary friend existed to avoid offending you. Do you watch what you say about non-believers in god in case you offend them? If so, you've failed. Your arrogance in assuming peoples comments about something they don't believe exisits applies to your personal deity is offensive... or do you know definatively that YOUR interpretation of the Bible is right? Atheists lampoon the idea of god, but to say they are insulting god is to lose track of the simple fact they don't believe in god. They are insulting the idea of god, as it is arguably a silly one. Oh, do you make sure that believers in other gods are not offended by what you say? Tell you what, the day you make sure what you say doesn't offend me as an atheist or believers in any possible form of god, then you can start finger pointing about how other people talk. I also love how the believers are the presupposers and the agnostics and even some atheists are those who admit if better information came along they would revise their opinion, but what else would an atheist expect, eh?

  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    Hello Azaria,

    Thanks for responding. I appreciate your sincerity. I apologize if I was a bit abrupt in my last post. Let me try to explain myself better, in regard to your question:

    As for my analogy, I admit it was extremely simplistic but I don?t understand why it?s a misleading one. It?s like comparing our Heavenly Father to our earthly father.

    Witnesses frequently use both of these analogies. Another common, related one is the analogy of universe-as-pocket-watch. It goes, "If you were walking along a deserted place and found pocket watch on the ground, would you doubt the existence of a creator?" Of course, no one would doubt that someone created the watch.

    The reason this type of analogy is misleading, however, is that it implies that we know certain things about the universe that we actually do not. For example, take the watch analogy. Why can you reasonably conclude that someone created the watch? There are several solid reasons for doing so:

    • You have direct knoweldge that humans build machines in general.
    • You have direct knowledge that humans build and use watches.
    • You have seen many watches before and can verify that this is, in fact, one.
    • The watch bears markings (numbers, insignias, etc) that are significant to humans alone.

    It is entirely reasonable to conclude that a human created the watch. To conclude otherwise, you would have to find an explanation that accounted for the above bullet points. You might try to argue that an invisible leprachaun built the watch, but it would not be very convincing to most people.

    Now, in the case of the universe, we don't have information even remotely like the information we have regarding the watch. Specifically:

    • We have never seen another universe to which we can compare ours.
    • We have never seen any beings that might be capable of creating universes.

    Therefore, the universe is not like a watch at all. When you look at a watch, you know exactly what you're looking at because you've seen a million of them, and you know how they are made. There is a 100% precedent saying that watches are made by humans.

    The universe is more like a strange contraption that is utterly unlike anything you have ever seen anywhere, ever. You find it baffling. It seems to work consistently and reliably according to some set of internal rules, but it appears to be a sealed box that has been doing its thing for billions of years. There is not much we can infer logically by looking at such a thing.

    That's the point I tried to get across in my allegory, The Twelve Brothers, which I linked in a previous post. I hope you'll read it and let me know what you think.

    It's been interesting chatting. I hope you find this conversation illuminating.

    SNG

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    Previous post reports errors when I try to re-format it to something readable, so sorry for the double;

    If someone was able to prove god existed, fine, but I'm not holding my breath. No one's done it yet. And that is not through want of trying.

    If god existed and how we acted mattered we would know. No reasonable being deserving of worship would let people be uninformed and suffer as a result. If god would allow people by action or inaction to be ignorant of what they should do and of the certainty of its existence, then god is an asshole and can suck my balls. This is not an insult against any gods other than the ones that fit the attached description.

    I realise that some people feel god allowing us to be sure it existed would negate free will, and use this as the big excuse of why god isn't provable, but quite frankly the argument they use is absurd as it assumes that IF god existed AND proved he existed beyond reason ALL people would do what they should.

    I also realise some people perceive god or think they are god, but as they often disagree with each other I think we know what value we can assign to these perceptions or delusions.

    It might be something we would call god exists, but we are unimportant to it despite our inflated little monkey egos. Give a primate an opposable thumb and it's all airs and graces... But obviously in such an instance it really doesn't matter if god exists or not.

    So thus far god either is an asshole, or is irrelevent, or doesn't exist. As god existing also requires all sorts of illogicity and pre-supposition, as I say, prove it but I expect to be disappointed each time someone tries.

    god > morals > laws > goverment is an old disproven theists chestnut, I think I've read it in 'Mere Christianity", where essentially C.S. Lewis says that there is a god because we have morals.

    If your dog pisses on the carpet it normally knows it is in trouble; that's not morals, that's learned behaviour and instinct completely fitting within a non-divine explanation of reality. To conclude that humans are different is to make a presuppostition that humans morals are 'magic' from 'god', and not merely instinct (don't piss off a more dominant 'dog' in the afore mentioned example) and learned behaviour (because he'll hit you with a newspaper and push your nose in the pee-pee). Making assumptions because one is unaware of animal or human behaviour is not proof of god.

    First of all even though I do come across as very annoyed, I?m not, but am very saddened and offended by a number of remarks. I'm not offended when someone questions or wonders if God exists, it's when people make derogatory comments about Him that offends me and I'm sure most Christians.

    I'm sorry, I find it offensive that I have to act as though your imaginary friend existed to avoid offending you. Do you watch what you say about non-believers in god in case you offend them?

    If so, you've failed. Your arrogance in assuming people's comments about something they don't believe exists applies to your personal deity is offensive... or do you know definatively that YOUR interpretation of the Bible is right? Atheists lampoon the idea of god, but to say they are insulting god is to lose track of the simple fact they don't believe in god. They are insulting the idea of god, as it is arguably a silly one.

    Oh, do you make sure that believers in other gods are not offended by what you say?

    Tell you what, the day you make sure what you say doesn't offend me as an atheist or believers in any possible form of god, then you can start finger pointing about how other people talk.

    I also love how the believers are the presupposers whilst the agnostics and even some atheists are those who admit if better information came along they would revise their opinion, but what else would an atheist expect, eh?

    If there is a god it'll be far grander than the pathetic and childish human conceptions of it, that's for sure.

  • azaria
    azaria

    Hi SNG: Your post didn't offend me at all. I haven't read your post that you mentioned yet. I've been so busy that I didn't have time to respond sooner.

    Obviously because I believe in God this post will reflect that.

    Hi Abaddon: I wasn't going to respond but I do want to make some points, not that you or anyone would change their mind, It's put together rather quickly. Don't really have time to work on it, but I'm sure you get my drift.

    If someone was able to prove god existed, fine, but I'm not holding my breath. No one's done it yet. And that is not through want of trying.

    You state that no one has proven God’s existence but many people would argue that point. Many people firmly believe that it has been proven, through nature, through changes in peoples lives, etc. The only thing we haven’t seen is the physical body of God, the Father and I don’t think we could handle it.

    If god existed and how we acted mattered we would know. No reasonable being deserving of worship would let people be uninformed and suffer as a result. If god would allow people by action or inaction to be ignorant of what they should do and of the certainty of its existence,. This is not an insult against any gods other than the ones that fit the attached description.

    As I’ve stated, I believe that God exists and it does matter how we act and we do know how we should act. We are informed, through the bible for one. I do believe that God has placed in us moral principles and the knowledge of Him deep inside us. For some it’s buried so deep they can’t even acknowledge it. Some comments, which I deleted, I would rather not address except to say that one needs to learn to respect other peoples opinions contrary to ones own. I don’t believe in Islam or Hinduism but would never hurl insults at these people or the people they looked up to. They have every right to believe what they want but that doesn’t mean that I have to accept it. Likewise they don’t have to accept mine.

    I realise that some people feel god allowing us to be sure it existed would negate free will, and use this as the big excuse of why god isn't provable, but quite frankly the argument they use is absurd as it assumes that IF god existed AND proved he existed beyond reason ALL people would do what they should.

    1.Maybe we are being tested to see how truly loving we are. (How many of us complain about the suffering in this world, especially in third world countries, but as individuals do nothing about it) 2.Maybe He wants us to really seek Him, which takes work on our part.

    I also realise some people perceive god or think they are god, but as they often disagree with each other I think we know what value we can assign to these perceptions or delusions.

    I do believe in an absolute truth. Some things just aren’t negotiable or debatable. God Himself has decided, not me, but I'm sure that some would consider me arrogant for stating so. What someone may think or create in his own head isn’t necessarily reality. Each one of us has to make a decision about what we believe, whether we reject all gods altogether, whether we embrace Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, etc. Because I’m Christian I will try to comment about Christian beliefs. I feel that most mainstream Christians do believe the same thing when it comes to the really important doctrines. It’s when we get to the smaller, less significant things that we may disagree.

    It might be something we would call god exists, but we are unimportant to it despite our inflated little monkey egos. Give a primate an opposable thumb and it's all airs and graces... But obviously in such an instance it really doesn't matter if god exists or not.

    Not sure what you mean by this paragraph.

    So thus far god either is an , or is irrelevent, or doesn't exist. As god existing also requires all sorts of illogicity and pre-supposition, as I say, prove it but I expect to be disappointed each time someone tries.

    Illogicity - that’s a new one for me. Did you ever believe in God? Was there one thing in particular that happened to you personally to change your views or was it over time?

    god > morals > laws > goverment is an old disproven theists chestnut, I think I've read it in 'Mere Christianity", where essentially C.S. Lewis says that there is a god because we have morals.

    If your dog pisses on the carpet it normally knows it is in trouble; that's not morals, that's learned behaviour and instinct completely fitting within a non-divine explanation of reality. To conclude that humans are different is to make a presuppostition that humans morals are 'magic' from 'god', and not merely instinct (don't piss off a more dominant 'dog' in the afore mentioned example) and learned behaviour (because he'll hit you with a newspaper and push your nose in the pee-pee). Making assumptions because one is unaware of animal or human behaviour is not proof of god.

    Do you really compare your behaviour to an animal? Obviously animals don’t have morals. As you state it’s learned behaviour and instinct. I don’t think a dog would gather up a bunch of other dogs and help the less fortunate dogs that don’t have anything to eat. I doubt that they care if another dog goes hungry unless it’s a mother.Yes humans learn certain behaviour and as a woman I totally believe in instinct but I believe that each person is born with moral values. I think in time because of negative learned behaviour, trauma, etc it can be pushed deep inside but I believe that everyone has it. Heaven help us all if it’s strictly learned behaviour and instincts.

    First of all even though I do come across as very annoyed, I’’m not, but am very saddened and offended by a number of remarks. I'm not offended when someone questions or wonders if God exists, it's when people make derogatory comments about Him that offends me and I'm sure most Christians.

    I'm sorry, I find it offensive that I have to act as though your imaginary friend existed to avoid offending you. Do you watch what you say about non-believers in god in case you offend them?

    I’m a little confused. How could I have offended you personally when this is your first post to this topic. As I’ve stated before, I’m not offended by someone disagreeing with me. I am offended when someone uses derogatory words about someone that I believe in. Show me where I may have offended someone who has different views to mine.

    If so, you've failed. Your arrogance in assuming people's comments about something they don't believe exists applies to your personal deity is offensive... or do you know definatively that YOUR interpretation of the Bible is right? Atheists lampoon the idea of god, but to say they are insulting god is to lose track of the simple fact they don't believe in god. They are insulting the idea of god, as it is arguably a silly one.

    As I’ve stated before, show me how I truly offended someone just by stating my views and beliefs. Do you definitely know that you are right? If one doesn’t have any convictions about something, stand for something one is extremely shallow in my estimation. What I truly don’t understand is why you get so annoyed because someone believes in God. Would you have the same reaction if someone said that they believed in say, Santa; that he was the creator You may roll your eyes and think, this person needs help, but would you get angry with him?

    Oh, do you make sure that believers in other gods are not offended by what you say?

    I don’t think that people who strongly believe in one god would be threatened by someone believing in a different god. I may not agree with someone but I wouldn’t be offended. Unless they shoved it down my throat and make me feel that I had no choice.

    Tell you what, the day you make sure what you say doesn't offend me as an atheist or believers in any possible form of god, then you can start finger pointing about how other people talk.

    There you go again accusing me of offending you when this is your first post. You would be more correct if you say that I may have offended atheists in general, but not you personally.

    I also love how the believers are the presupposers whilst the agnostics and even some atheists are those who admit if better information came along they would revise their opinion, but what else would an atheist expect, eh?

    You don’t love it. You know, someone who truly wants the truth, whether they are believers, agnostics or atheists wouldn’t feel threatened and might consider changing their minds if they got valid information. I feel that some people may be too stubborn to admit that they may be wrong.

    If there is a god it'll be far grander than the pathetic and childish human conceptions of it, that's for sure.

    On some level I have to agree with you there. I don’t think people could ever comprehend how incredibly awesome God is. We only see small glimpses of His existence, as much as we can handle. I do think that if we could, we wouldn’t be able to handle it. It would be too much. But hey, I believe in Him and I won’t apologize for that. I hope there are no hard feelings, but please don't use foul language. Agree to disagree but show some respect please..

  • seattleniceguy
    seattleniceguy

    Hello Azaria,

    Thanks for responding to this thread again. I hope you'll get a chance to respond to my post. In the meantime, I thought I'd just respond to a few points from your response to Abaddon.

    I do believe in an absolute truth. Some things just aren?t negotiable or debatable.

    I think that most agnostic/atheist people believe this, too. That is, wishing something does not make it true. Actually, it was exactly this belief that caused me to revise my belief system. Trust me, I think it would be great if there were a God. I would be very interested in meeting him, because I have some serious questions. But just because I want there to be a God does not mean there actually is. When I looked at the available facts, I decided that I was being dishonest to act convinced that he existed - wishing him into existence, if you will.

    Obviously animals don?t have morals. As you state it?s learned behaviour and instinct. I don?t think a dog would gather up a bunch of other dogs and help the less fortunate dogs that don?t have anything to eat.

    Actually, you may be surprised to know that many animals exhibit what we could call "compassion." For example, in one experiment, a monkey was trained that if he pushed a button, he would receive a reward. Once he learned of this, he readily pushed the button. Next, though, it was revealed to the monkey that when he pushed the button, a monkey in another room would be punished. The first monkey stopped pushing the button. In other words, at cost to himself, the monkey showed empathy for a fellow.

    Abaddon wrote:
    I also love how the believers are the presupposers whilst the agnostics and even some atheists are those who admit if better information came along they would revise their opinion, but what else would an atheist expect, eh?

    Azaria wrote:
    You don?t love it. You know, someone who truly wants the truth, whether they are believers, agnostics or atheists wouldn?t feel threatened and might consider changing their minds if they got valid information. I feel that some people may be too stubborn to admit that they may be wrong.

    If I may, I think the point Abaddon was making was that, by definition, agnostics are open the possibilty that God exists. If better information were avaiable, I would readily revise my opinion to the one that most fully accounted for the data. On the other hand, believers are usually not willing to consider the possibility that they are incorrect. Are you willing to accept the possibility that there is no God after all?

    SNG

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit