Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hold god to a higher standard than I hold myself to, and if I were "all powerful and ever loving", I would not let happen the things that "he" let's happen.
You should consider yourself lucky you are not in a position to make the choices. in the late 90's and early 2K's our public school system was at a turning point. now thats its 2018, we see clearly "what they let happen". EF-5 ... castrofic epic fail.
when we look at the validity of the claims
1) "god is either not there or its evil"
vs
2) "they are describing how the universe works incorrectly",
you tell me what dogmatic statement is more functional in humans?
or are you just using Hyperbole? I don't see them being even close.
You should consider yourself lucky you are not in a position to make the choices. in the late 90's and early 2K's our public school system was at a turning point. now thats its 2018, we see clearly "what they let happen". EF-5 ... castrofic epic fail.
when we look at the validity of the claims
1) "god is either not there or its evil"
vs
2) "they are describing how the universe works incorrectly",
you tell me what dogmatic statement is more functional in humans?
or are you just using Hyperbole? I don't see them being even close.
When I learned the psychological reasons as to why humans created Gods many years ago (simple due to brain structure and lack of consciousness), and why religions still stick around today (scare tactics, evangelizing, people looking to follow something, people afraid of the afterlife). Also, when I learned the evils of religion.
I hold god to a higher standard than I hold myself to, and if I were "all powerful and ever loving", I would not let happen the things that "he" let's happen.
You atheists continue to rebel against attributes given to God by men in various religions without simply addressing the base question of existence. You seem to do this because they are easy to refute and you have no answer for the God that is actually responsible for your existence and ALL existence, period. You assert ignorance (We don't know) and claim it is NOT God despite its obvious Godlike stature until proven otherwise.
You atheists continue to rebel against attributes given to God by men in various religions without simply addressing the base question of existence. You seem to do this because they are easy to refute and you have no answer for the God that is actually responsible for your existence and ALL existence, period. You assert ignorance (We don't know) and claim it is NOT God despite its obvious Godlike stature until proven otherwise.
This time I do not understand what you are trying to say. What God is responsible for my existence? How am I to know this for certain? Why should I select your God or anyone else's God without satisfactory evidence?
That I exist is evidence that I exist, not evidence for a God. What do I have to answer for when I don't see any God like stature, whatever that even means? I don't understand what you are saying in your last sentence. I get the feeling it is up to us to prove something is not a God or else it is a God? Maybe? Or something totally different?
This time I do not understand what you are trying to say. What God is responsible for my existence? How am I to know this for certain? Why should I select your God or anyone else's God without satisfactory evidence?
There is no reason to select anyone's version of God, but what is responsible for the existence of everything is by any standard a God. What other evidence would be greater than that? The only reason to reject that is animus toward the myriad religious autocracies promoted by belief in God. It is a classic case of guilt by association to the point that the concept of God is anathema to atheists.
Quote:
That I exist is evidence that I exist, not evidence for a God. What do I have to answer for when I don't see any God-like stature, whatever that even means? I don't understand what you are saying in your last sentence. I get the feeling it is up to us to prove something is not a God or else it is a God? Maybe? Or something totally different?
You believe that WHATEVER it is that is responsible for the very existence, control by so-called "laws," and the maintenance of everything, is insufficient to be called God. I see that as a ridiculous arrogance motivated by unwarranted animus toward man-made concepts of God.
You atheists continue to rebel against attributes given to God by men in various religions without simply addressing the base question of existence. You seem to do this because they are easy to refute and you have no answer for the God that is actually responsible for your existence and ALL existence, period. You assert ignorance (We don't know) and claim it is NOT God despite its obvious Godlike stature until proven otherwise.
Apart from us who HAVE questioned the base question of existence. From cosmology to probability. Once again with your misrepresentation.
The rest of your post is just the usual question begging and 'obvious' well poisoning that ignores the fact that the more we discover, it is always something other than a god.
There is no reason to select anyone's version of God, but what is responsible for the existence of everything is by any standard a God. What other evidence would be greater than that? The only reason to reject that is animus toward the myriad religious autocracies promoted by belief in God. It is a classic case of guilt by association to the point that the concept of God is anathema to atheists. You believe that WHATEVER it is that is responsible for the very existence, control by so-called "laws," and the maintenance of everything, is insufficient to be called God. I see that as a ridiculous arrogance motivated by unwarranted animus toward man-made concepts of God.
No I see no reason to call the universe God. Putting an unnecessary label onto anything is silly. The term God implies a being of which I see no evidence. Applying the term God to nature without giving that God a single attribute makes no sense to me. If it is arrogance to not seeing any reason to call it God because that is what you do then I guess I am arrogant. We exist as humans because things happened and the conditions were right not, in my opinion, because it was directed to be.
If I was to get a kitten and name it God would I necessarily cease being an atheist because I now believe that God, the kitren, exists? Your use of the term God to describe the Universe has as much practical use as my naming a Kitten God as far as atheism or any discussion about God goes.
You might not accept it but a reason to reject your notion of God is its only practical use to to call out people who don't believe in any gods. You have not convinced me otherwise. If you think I am arrogant because I don't accept your definition of God there is nothing I can do but accept that you think I must be arrogant. Myself 8 think it is arrogant to expect others to use the term God to describe the Universe because you think it is the correct term.
To the OP's original question: I started off as a Methodist. By the time I was in my teens I was questioning and especially so when I heard about the tithe. I started to attend other services and I read about other religions. By my late teens I would have described myself as an agnostic. Maybe two or three years later I embraced the notion that I was indeed an atheist. So it took me time.
I do not believe in trying to transform others to come around to my point of view. It took me time and, I suspect, that it is best if others come to this realization on their own after exploring all the options.
You atheists continue to rebel against attributes given to God by men in various religions without simply addressing the base question of existence. You seem to do this because they are easy to refute and you have no answer for the God that is actually responsible for your existence and ALL existence, period. You assert ignorance (We don't know) and claim it is NOT God despite its obvious Godlike stature until proven otherwise.
You don't like our message? I don't care. I don't like yours, and I don't like the very concept that your beliefs are "obvious". And if you kept your religion to yourself, most of us would be much more silent about religion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
