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.
Why would a person hide intrest in God? Well for one, they are ashamed of their intrest. Their intrest is " Closet intrest", and they are ashamed to come out of the closet. They then have to put on a " Persona of unbelief", all the while they are intrested, and some of them actually want God to be real.
Yes, thats right, many unbelievers " Want God to be real." Does this mean they believe the world would be better off with a God? We know they rant about the world being worse because of religion; but is God the same thing as religion?
By definition, my interest in matters relating to what people believe about god(s) and how it relates to human behavior and existence are uncloaked, at least in this forum. In meat-space (real life), however, if anything is cloaked, it's my DISbelief in god(s). I can't be open about it because most people disagree and are too fragile / easily offended by the mere fact of my unbelief, even if I'm not the least aggressive or assertive about it. When I lived in the midwest, in a "respectable" conservative white-flight bedroom community, there were many taboo subjects beyond religion, including any substantive discussion of politics or ethics unless I totally agree with the prevailing community standards. Where I live now, it's much better, but you still never know what ox you're unintentionally goring by simply expressing your beliefs and I am still careful not to "uncloak" until I know someone fairly well. If that makes me "ashamed to come out of the closet" them I'm guilty as charged, but what it really means is that I pick my battles. I'm too old and life is too short to spend all my time in butt-kicking contests with people who aren't really making an effort to understand me anyway.
At any rate, if anyone seems to have some sort of Freudian glitch on display, it's you, Mickiel. You desperately need to believe that I believe. I don't know why that is. It's a little like someone I know who had a drinking problem in the past -- a fairly minor one as such things go -- and now every time she's a little tired or depressed or sleep-deprived her daughter thinks she's not only drinking again, but roaring drunk, and the more the mother denies it the more adamant the daughter is about it. Beatings will continue, in other words, until morale improves.
As to your final point ... do I "want god to be real"? Well who wouldn't want some aspects of some versions of god. I wouldn't mind an existence where god is my sky-buddy, who has my back, who loves and cares about me and provides for me and all that. Who wouldn't approve of such a deal? My problem is that life doesn't work that way, so either there is no such deal or the fact that such a thing is on offer is of no practical value. The world I actually inhabit is one in which the generally posited kindly / benevolent god is either absent or completely uninvolved (or possibly, is really capricious and/or non-benevolent). Any of those things produces the same net result. My main problem is really with the existence of suffering, or more formally, the problem of suffering (a term I prefer to the more commonly stated problem of evil or POE).
The basic problem for any atheist is an inability to believe and for me that inability is mostly centered on the problem of suffering and its incompatibility with a tri-omni god. More fundamentally, the sort of god most of us in this space would be talking for or against is a logical impossibility.
Finally: is god the same as religion? I never thought they were the same thing. Religion is a human construct for interacting with god(s). They are related but different. In the latter phases of my own theism, I would have said that I believe in god and am spiritual but not religious. I have come to see this as a circumlocution and an evasion. If you believe in a personal god and that this god has some requirement of you, then you must construct (or subscribe to) a system of observances and traditions to fulfill that requirement. You can no more have one without the other than you can have cars (or at least cars that can actually get you places) without roads.
Conversely, if you don't believe in a personal god who is present and interactive, then religion becomes at best an empty observance and at worst, a tool for the unscrupulous to manipulate and control and oppress the credulous. Many good works are performed in the name of religion, but even if you look only at that, they often are a case of doing the right things for the wrong reasons (obligation, guilt, fear, shame, etc).
By definition, my interest in matters relating to what people believe about god(s) and how it relates to human behavior and existence are uncloaked, at least in this forum. In meat-space (real life), however, if anything is cloaked, it's my DISbelief in god(s). I can't be open about it because most people disagree and are too fragile / easily offended by the mere fact of my unbelief, even if I'm not the least aggressive or assertive about it. When I lived in the midwest, in a "respectable" conservative white-flight bedroom community, there were many taboo subjects beyond religion, including any substantive discussion of politics or ethics unless I totally agree with the prevailing community standards. Where I live now, it's much better, but you still never know what ox you're unintentionally goring by simply expressing your beliefs and I am still careful not to "uncloak" until I know someone fairly well. If that makes me "ashamed to come out of the closet" them I'm guilty as charged, but what it really means is that I pick my battles. I'm too old and life is too short to spend all my time in butt-kicking contests with people who aren't really making an effort to understand me anyway.
At any rate, if anyone seems to have some sort of Freudian glitch on display, it's you, Mickiel. You desperately need to believe that I believe. I don't know why that is. It's a little like someone I know who had a drinking problem in the past -- a fairly minor one as such things go -- and now every time she's a little tired or depressed or sleep-deprived her daughter thinks she's not only drinking again, but roaring drunk, and the more the mother denies it the more adamant the daughter is about it. Beatings will continue, in other words, until morale improves.
As to your final point ... do I "want god to be real"? Well who wouldn't want some aspects of some versions of god. I wouldn't mind an existence where god is my sky-buddy, who has my back, who loves and cares about me and provides for me and all that. Who wouldn't approve of such a deal? My problem is that life doesn't work that way, so either there is no such deal or the fact that such a thing is on offer is of no practical value. The world I actually inhabit is one in which the generally posited kindly / benevolent god is either absent or completely uninvolved (or possibly, is really capricious and/or non-benevolent). Any of those things produces the same net result. My main problem is really with the existence of suffering, or more formally, the problem of suffering (a term I prefer to the more commonly stated problem of evil or POE).
The basic problem for any atheist is an inability to believe and for me that inability is mostly centered on the problem of suffering and its incompatibility with a tri-omni god. More fundamentally, the sort of god most of us in this space would be talking for or against is a logical impossibility.
Finally: is god the same as religion? I never thought they were the same thing. Religion is a human construct for interacting with god(s). They are related but different. In the latter phases of my own theism, I would have said that I believe in god and am spiritual but not religious. I have come to see this as a circumlocution and an evasion. If you believe in a personal god and that this god has some requirement of you, then you must construct (or subscribe to) a system of observances and traditions to fulfill that requirement. You can no more have one without the other than you can have cars (or at least cars that can actually get you places) without roads.
Conversely, if you don't believe in a personal god who is present and interactive, then religion becomes at best an empty observance and at worst, a tool for the unscrupulous to manipulate and control and oppress the credulous. Many good works are performed in the name of religion, but even if you look only at that, they often are a case of doing the right things for the wrong reasons (obligation, guilt, fear, shame, etc).
Interesting well writen views; and all too common and just as traditional as the oppisite side of your belief, or unbelief. Atheism is just as quilty of traditional views as Theism is; both groups are quickly becomming outdated in their criticisms of each other. Theist try to hide their " Doubts of God", Atheist try to hide " Their hopes of God;" and both must then live out their lives in a mental pattern of public display of their " Stated views", which is often different than their conscious views. Afraid to admit being afraid; intimidated by their own shadows of doubt; caught up in a battle game of traditions; neither really understanding God.
Religion does not represent God and has not been endorsed by God, but human believers of all sorts have usurped that position of " Representing God, and thus perverted it beyond measure." Arming Atheists with all kinds of targets to legitamitly hit. Thus Atheist see the large holes in religion, and think then that equates to God having those faults in him; a serious error in comparrison! Religion is not God and in no manner represents him. Nor is Atheism the proper definition of God nor can they ever hope to define him properly.
Atheism and Theism exist because God exist, it was God who planted the seeds or the origins of both groups, and he then left them to themselves. Just as good and evil exist because of God, all contrast in human living, God is ultimately responsible for { and we are most fortunate of that }, God is the spindle that turns all of reality, its just of intrest that God would even allow rejection of himself from his own creations, and in humanitys case, his own children rejecting him. Yet God, in his great wisdom, uses that rejection, planned on it, to actually bring his creations and children to his desired outcome in reality. He uses suffering in the same manner. An incredible being, God is actually using evil, sin, unbelief, suffering, pain; all these and more in an incredible mixed bowl of eternal ingredients that will produce his new born again remade children who will live with him in eternity, after we have suffered and been prepared.
And all mankind are included in this great birthright inheritance; and all will be ultimately interested in it.
Religion does not represent God and has not been endorsed by God, but human believers of all sorts have usurped that position of " Representing God, and thus perverted it beyond measure."
Since religion does not represent god, then either someone or something else does, and/or god communicates directly (and selectively) with his creations. By one or the other of these mechanisms you have made various assertions about god -- his grand design and humanity's destiny and guaranteed inheritance. This, despite having just said god is not knowable and also has not revealed himself through religion, which is to say, not on any great scale.
I am curious how you come by this knowledge and how you substantiate it?
Since religion does not represent god, then either someone or something else does, and/or god communicates directly (and selectively) with his creations. By one or the other of these mechanisms you have made various assertions about god -- his grand design and humanity's destiny and guaranteed inheritance. This, despite having just said god is not knowable and also has not revealed himself through religion, which is to say, not on any great scale.
I am curious how you come by this knowledge and how you substantiate it?
The only human to have represented God in the last 2,000 years has been Jesus, there have not been any since him in my view and are not any humans representing him now; no humans, no groups and no churchs represent God now in my view! Nobody represents or knows God, including myself, in my understanding of things. In my view, which I have come upon by personal study of all that is avialible, God has hidden himself from humanity to a large degree, and simply is allowing the vast confusion concerning him to flurish and swell. All of us have been deceived, we all have been exposed to blindness by God and cannot comprehend him in his totality, with clarity.
I think a time will come when God will once again select a few humans and open them, and then eventually open everyone; but I do not see that occuring now. I think that is yet to occur. And I hold no intrest in substantiating these views. People are free to believe what they wish.
The only human to have represented God in the last 2,000 years has been Jesus, there have not been any since him in my view and are not any humans representing him now; no humans, no groups and no churchs represent God now in my view! Nobody represents or knows God, including myself, in my understanding of things. In my view, which I have come upon by personal study of all that is avialible, God has hidden himself from humanity to a large degree, and simply is allowing the vast confusion concerning him to flurish and swell. All of us have been deceived, we all have been exposed to blindness by God and cannot comprehend him in his totality, with clarity.
I think a time will come when God will once again select a few humans and open them, and then eventually open everyone; but I do not see that occuring now. I think that is yet to occur. And I hold no intrest in substantiating these views. People are free to believe what they wish.
In my view...God has hidden himself from humanity to a large degree, and simply is allowing the vast confusion concerning him to flurish and swell. All of us have been deceived, we all have been exposed to blindness by God and cannot comprehend him in his totality, with clarity.
I think we have a lot of pots calling the kettles black. Decry science. Many gays were very happy when science was decried in '73.
science was decried? How? did the gays refuse to believe the theory of evolution? Or did they simple not liked being labeled as having a mental disorder? I actually would like to know what the scientists were saying about the gay-people back in the 70s. Probably labeling it a mental disorder was done because their lives were so miserable and they couldn't help but to be gay and get hurt in society for it. I doubt science was being decried as much as how it was being twisted and used for social-engineering reasons... yet we do that today with the schizophrenics and such, and I'm sure were lots of gays trying to stop their "sickness" because of how it was viewed back then, even by those with such qualities themselves.
any opportunity to make money is usually taken up.
Intrest in God is quite a movable scale with humans, and can be conditional at times. For example, when serious troubles come, intrest in God zooms in many personal lives. When deadly tradegy pounces the intrest in God explodes. Why is that? Well because deep within the human conscious people seem to think God could help, they just don't understand if he wants to help that perticular event.
But the human tendency to call on God for help is ingrained, I would say; its there because it was programmed to be there.
People don't call on science during these incredible moments of real self expression and revealed deep inner trust.
Since religion does not represent god, then either someone or something else does, and/or god communicates directly (and selectively) with his creations. By one or the other of these mechanisms you have made various assertions about god -- his grand design and humanity's destiny and guaranteed inheritance. This, despite having just said god is not knowable and also has not revealed himself through religion, which is to say, not on any great scale.
I am curious how you come by this knowledge and how you substantiate it?
Its called "faith" for a reason. Because thats what it takes. FAITH in the presence of a higher being. There is no absolute proof of God's existence, and everyone knows this - including you, presumably. Why you then ask for "substantiation" when there is no evidence for faith or beliefs that would satisfy a nonbeliever/skeptic, is bizzare.
Lets imagine there was "hard" proof of a God. Doesnt have to be the christian god, just a god. The god comes to earth and does his/her thing every so often, and everyone knows and expects it. Now, what would the earth be like? Would it be the same? Hardly. How would people behave? Well, they probably would spend a great deal of time praying and hoping and waiting for divine intervention, wouldnt they? There would be non stop prayer vigils, and innumerable temples and other houses of worship for that purpose. Basically, this life would become nothing more than one giant prayer fest in the hopes of moving on to the eternal "good place" in the next life. Sounds terrible dull and non productive. People would probably rely on prayer more so than any other thing for their own well being. Life would probably, therefore, be a lot LESS advanced, as everyone would depend on God for the smallest "favors" and such. Ugggh, sounds terrible.
There is no PROVEN presence of god. The vast majority of true believers understand that God is not sitting around waiting to hear our prayers sp he/she can magically intervene. No! Humans must take care of themselves. Waiting for God's hand to rescue you from the side of a mountain, to the exclusion of other rescue activites, is recognized as incredibly foolish by even the most ardent believers.
We are stronger as a species through our lack of hard evidence or proof of God, and yet simultaneously we are strengthened by the belief that God loves us, unconditionally, and has given us the raw tools we need to live a satisfying and fulfilling life. Thats what its all about.
Its called "faith" for a reason. Because thats what it takes. FAITH in the presence of a higher being. There is no absolute proof of God's existence, and everyone knows this - including you, presumably. Why you then ask for "substantiation" when there is no evidence for faith or beliefs that would satisfy a nonbeliever/skeptic, is bizzare.
Lets imagine there was "hard" proof of a God. Doesnt have to be the christian god, just a god. The god comes to earth and does his/her thing every so often, and everyone knows and expects it. Now, what would the earth be like? Would it be the same? Hardly. How would people behave? Well, they probably would spend a great deal of time praying and hoping and waiting for divine intervention, wouldnt they? There would be non stop prayer vigils, and innumerable temples and other houses of worship for that purpose. Basically, this life would become nothing more than one giant prayer fest in the hopes of moving on to the eternal "good place" in the next life. Sounds terrible dull and non productive. People would probably rely on prayer more so than any other thing for their own well being. Life would probably, therefore, be a lot LESS advanced, as everyone would depend on God for the smallest "favors" and such. Ugggh, sounds terrible.
There is no PROVEN presence of god. The vast majority of true believers understand that God is not sitting around waiting to hear our prayers sp he/she can magically intervene. No! Humans must take care of themselves. Waiting for God's hand to rescue you from the side of a mountain, to the exclusion of other rescue activites, is recognized as incredibly foolish by even the most ardent believers.
We are stronger as a species through our lack of hard evidence or proof of God, and yet simultaneously we are strengthened by the belief that God loves us, unconditionally, and has given us the raw tools we need to live a satisfying and fulfilling life. Thats what its all about.
This is misunderstood baloney, there are thousands of proofs of God, millions of proofs that anyone can see and figure out. It requires no imagination, God did come to earth when he had Eden created, and he walked in Eden on earth. The humans back then simply drifted away from God over the years, and thats exactly what occured, and it was not imagination. The bible advises us to " Prove all things", its just that many believers in God have been duped into thinking that God is not amoung those things that can be proven; they are incredibly wrong and live in error; and they spread that error.
There are millions of proven pressence of God, its just that the number of humans who see that proof, is not in the millions.
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.
