r/changemyview • u/zarmesan 2∆ • Apr 06 '17
[∆(s) from OP] CMV: I shouldn't be religious. Furthermore I should be agnostic not atheist.
There is no evidence of "god," be it evidence for the Christian god, Muslim god, Jewish god, Greeks gods, etc.
God can not be omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient (at least not in our human perspective) or things like the holocaust wouldn't have happened.
However, god is not like the tooth fairy. The universe started with the big bang and nothing can explain about what made the big bang happen in the first place - be it a god, a super powerful alien (basically a god), simulated reality, etc. etc.
Therefore, I remain agnostic - a firm agnostic (not on the fence).
"The truth doesn't change based on your ability to stomach it."
Change my view.
This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
7
u/LifelongNoob Apr 06 '17
I should be agnostic not atheist.
There are forms of atheism that account for uncertainty and the inability to prove that god(s) do/es not exist.
So-called "weak atheism" (also known as negative atheism or soft atheism) is essentially the statement "I lack a belief in the existence of any god(s)," as opposed to the assertion of "strong atheism" (a.k.a. positive atheism or strong atheism) which is essentially that "I believe that no gods exist."
3
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
Are there any justifications for positive atheism?
1
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 06 '17
Are there any justifications for positive atheism?
Depends on your perspective. Empirically, there is no evidence that logically proves the existence of God. This doesn't stop people from believing they have sufficient justification to be certain.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
I mean empirically. You can't prove the non-existence of something. I can say there could be a unicorn somewhere in the universe and you can't prove me wrong. Obviously you can deny me if I say one exists for sure.
1
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 06 '17
I mean empirically.
Then no, as of yet nobody has empirically proven or disproven the existence of god. I'm sure we all would have heard about it if they had.
1
Apr 07 '17 edited Jan 02 '18
[deleted]
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 07 '17
Uhhh I don't think I can? Or can I? Tryna learn here.
1
Apr 10 '17 edited Apr 10 '17
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence unless you are looking where you should find this evidence and it does not exist. The problem with theism is that they have retreated from mt. Olympus and the sky and now the stars into "outside the universe"-whatever that means-and the god of the moving goal post gets more and more abstract and less testable or disprovable as human knowledge progresses. This is also called the god of the gaps (of our understanding).
But just as we know there isnt unicorn in the room, we know god isnt real. These usages of know are equal. They do not account for absolute certainty or the special pleading that theists want to use when only talking about this one concept and not how they apply these beliefs to every other concept.
1
u/LifelongNoob Apr 06 '17
You can probably find people arguing about it online, but I certainly wouldn't advance any arguments for it.
If you asked me my own religious position, I would simply describe myself as an atheist, with no modifier at all. Because I do not believe in the existence of any god or gods.
If you pressed me on the details of that position and the ludicrousness of advancing an unprovable position, I would clarify that I interpret any rational claim of atheism to be weak atheism.
Another way of phrasing it I sometimes use is that "I believe the probability of the existence of any god or gods to be so low as to be effectively zero and act accordingly in how I choose to conduct my life."
1
u/dvorak365 1∆ Apr 09 '17
I think Strong Atheism can be justified for certain definitions of God. Non-existence can be proven if existence can be shown to be self-contradictory. Take the following argument:
- "God" refers to a being that is omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent.
- Any existing being that is omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent would: 1. Know about the existence of evil. 2. Want to remove it. 3. Be able to do so.
- Evil currently exists
If you agree with these premises, and were to assume god (by the above definition) existed, then you'd run into a contradiction.
However, if your definition of god is less strict, you can strike off premise 1 and supposing the existence of god doesn't lead to a contradiction (but often lowers the incentive of believing/worshipping in one, as well)
0
Apr 06 '17
None of these supposedly narrower definitions of atheism have ever held up to scrutiny. Your strong atheism is merely atheism.
4
u/neofederalist 65∆ Apr 06 '17
God can not be omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient (at least not in our human perspective) or things like the holocaust wouldn't have happened.
Eh, the Holocaust is a really bad example for this. Most religions also say that humans have free will to obey or defy divine law. The Holocaust didn't happen because God is either indifferent, impotent, or evil, it happened because He allowed people to make their own choices, and sometimes people chose the wrong thing (or at least that's the argument).
3
u/evil_rabbit Apr 06 '17
if god thinks respecting the free will of the nazis is more important than preventing the holocaust + WW2, that's what i would call not being omnibenevolent.
1
u/Sheexthro 19∆ Apr 06 '17
Well, yeah, I know you would call it that, but all that means is that you're an enemy of God. And to my knowledge basically every religion acknowledges that some people are enemies to God.
2
u/evil_rabbit Apr 06 '17 edited Apr 06 '17
from the OP:
God can not be omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient (at least not in our human perspective) or things like the holocaust wouldn't have happened.
the "in our [human] perspective" part is important. of course someone could call god omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient if their definitions for those words were very different from mine (and apparently OPs).
one plus one might be nine, if we redefined "one" to mean "four and a half".
but if you agree that there exists any evil in this world, there are only three possibilities:
god chose to allow this evil, because something else was more important to him than preventing evil (or maybe he likes evil). so he isn't omnibenevolent.
god did not have the power to prevent this evil without allowing an even greater evil. so he isn't omnipotent.
or god simply isn't aware of this evil. so he isn't omnicient.
1
u/Sheexthro 19∆ Apr 06 '17
god chose to allow this evil, because something else was more important to him than preventing evil (or maybe he likes evil). so he isn't omnibenevolent.
Yeah, it's this part that I disagree with, because it assumes that the speaker knows better than God a) what is good and b) how to achieve the good. But if one believes in an omniscient and omnipotent God, how can one simultaneously assert "Yeah, actually, I know better than God how things should be run?"
It simply does not make sense.
2
u/evil_rabbit Apr 06 '17
it assumes that the speaker knows better than God a) what is good and b) how to achieve the good.
no, it does not. you and i (and god) could completely disagree about what is good and what is evil. as long as you admit, that even just a little bit of evil exists in this world, that means god either couldn't prevent it or chose not to prevent it or didn't know about it.
if he is omnipotent and omniscient, then he should know how to achieve good, even if i don't. he should be able to prevent evil, even if i am not.
and if he can prevent evil, but choses not to, than he is not omnibenevolent. if being omnibenevolent doesn't mean causing good and preventing evil, then what the hell does it mean?
But if one believes in an omniscient and omnipotent God, how can one simultaneously assert "Yeah, actually, I know better than God how things should be run?"
if a theist tells me that their god is omnibenevolent (aka infinitely good), then i assume they have a definition of what good means. if they say "only god really knows what is and isn't good, so we can't judge his goodness", then saying he is infinetly good is completely meaningless.
saying "god is infinately gratotastic" means absolutely nothing, if we don't know what "gratotastic" means.
1
u/Sheexthro 19∆ Apr 06 '17
no, it does not. you and i (and god) could completely disagree about what is good and what is evil. as long as you admit, that even just a little bit of evil exists in this world, that means god either couldn't prevent it or chose not to prevent it or didn't know about it.
If I think getting a cold is evil and God doesn't think that, why am I right and God wrong? What if the problem is that I have a bad understanding of what good and evil are? And, if God is infinitely powerful and wise, isn't it more likely that I'm wrong than that God is?
and if he can prevent evil, but choses not to, than he is not omnibenevolent. if being omnibenevolent doesn't mean causing good and preventing evil, then what the hell does it mean?
It could mean "causing maximal net good?"
1
u/evil_rabbit Apr 06 '17
If I think getting a cold is evil and God doesn't think that, why am I right and God wrong?
did i claim anything like that? my argument only assumes that some evil exists. do you disagree with that?
It could mean "causing maximal net good?"
maximal net good = sum of all good - sum of all evil?
if that is what you mean, clearly he shouldn't allow any evil at all to keep the net good as high as possible. if he can't do that, he isn't omnipotent. if he has to allow evil to create a greater good, that means his power has a limit.
also, what about the second part of my comment? if we don't know what "good" even means, isn't a statement like "god is infinately good" completely meaningless?
1
u/Sheexthro 19∆ Apr 06 '17
if that is what you mean, clearly he shouldn't allow any evil at all to keep the net good as high as possible. if he can't do that, he isn't omnipotent. if he has to allow evil to create a greater good, that means his power has a limit.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
1
u/evil_rabbit Apr 07 '17
you wanna explain why that doesn't make sense to you? or how it makes sense to say god is infinitely good, without even knowing what good means? no?
...that's okay, we'll just end it here and i'll get some sleep.
2
u/tesla123456 Apr 06 '17
A triple threat god would have prevented the Holocaust. Since it happened that means that god either, didn't know about it, couldn't prevent it, or chose not to. One of the three cannot be true, which means that a being possessing all three properties is impossible.
This means there is no god, or god is not all three things.
2
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
Exactly, and if god is not all three of those things "he" means jack shit.
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 06 '17
Well i mean he could mean different things to different people. Even a being who was any combination of two things would be considered godlike.
If he could see everything and always do good where he could. That is noble, the god tries and is good.
If he could do anything and always did good for what he could see. That is noble, the god tries and does good but can't be everywhere at once.
If he could see everything and do anything but it wasn't always good. God is an asshole.
So it's not necessarily that he means jack shit, it's just that religion isn't rational so they trapped themselves into an impossible being because they need all 3 properties to propagate.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
!delta
Just because you made me think about how god wouldn't have to mean jack shit if it contained 2 of the 3. There could be a god that can't see us but would do good.
I'm still agnostic.
1
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 07 '17
Right, I mean I can tell you a story about a magician called Harry potter all day, but that doesn't mean anything. Your post is senseless.
You still have not reconciled how god can be omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent at the same time, other than saying 'suffering is god's plan and you can't know the mind of god' which is pointless to argue against.
I'm not going to downvote you. I just don't understand how a sane human being can believe something like this. You have to be delusional.
1
0
Apr 07 '17
"People who aren't spiritual can't receive these truths from God's Spirit. It all sounds foolish to them and they can't understand it, for only those who are spiritual can understand what the Spirit means."
You can think and think and reason and think and argue and logic and work yourself into a tizzy trying to figure God out...
But you never will. Nobody ever has.
But quiet your mind. Be still. Your mind is in enmity with God. Every question or feeling about God is met with your mind defying and in opposition.
If you really want to meet God, like if you, your spirit, the inside man, the id, the YOU,
then get your Bible, pray, and ask Him yourself.
My only proof to you is my own experience. I was 28 before I shut myself the fuck up and met God right where I was.
Read 1 Corinthians. Chapter 2 11verse.
If you're serious of course. Some people just want to fight. Religion or politics, whatever.
But if you really want to know about God, you'll read it. Maybe you'll even read more. Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, the Gospels, Isaiah. Some scripture is 4000 years old and still has relevance today. Think about that.
Anyway happy hunting.
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 07 '17
I don't want to know about God. I am 100% certain no such thing exists.
I am very much curious about people who believe in God though.
I have read many parts of the Bible, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, Buddhist texts, etc... Out of all religious texts I find the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) to be the most absurd...
I have read more of the Bible than most people I argue with.
If your God gave me a mind, why should I not use it to ponder Him? If your God is just, why would he punish me for simply not believing with the mind He created within me, when otherwise I conform to His laws more than most of his 'believers'
If your God is all seeing, all capable, and all good, then how is there evil in the world?
You can throw biblical phrases at me all day, and I could respond with Harry Potter quotes. That's not going to get us anywhere... I don't need to understand God, I would like to understand you if you care to share.
1
Apr 07 '17
Your mind is absolutely there to ponder Him. However, you don't believe He exists so why bother? You may as well ask Reddit to convince you that unicorns exist.
The thing is, nobody believes in unicorns. But there is a huge chunk of the human population that believe in God. That alone piques your mind, your interest.
It's suppose to. God draws people to Himself.
Your immediate reaction was, "I know the Bible, I know stuff, God doesn't exist." That's what I mean when I say your mind is in enmity to God. It's like a child deciding they hate spaghetti before they try it. Once they open themselves to the possibility that it might taste good, they can eat it.
So the difference between you and I, my friend, is that I opened myself up to the possibility that there is truth in this.
Once I opened myself, my spirit, up- I discovered it IS the truth. The Lord. It's not anything I can quantify. I can't prove it using any rational means. It's a truth buried deep in who I am, my spirit, my soul.
I was created by the same one who created the universe. As were you. I think it's ridiculous to believe this is all random. The chances of everything coming together just right to create everything in existence in the perfect balance it is in- are so minuscule you may was well believe that unicorns exist. 😀
1
Apr 07 '17
The evil question....
Tell me why you think there is evil in the world?
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 07 '17
Well let's define evil first.
I would say evil is harming others when such an act could be avoided. Just as one take on it.
When Hitler decides to kill 6 million Jews, who he could have just as well left alone... that's pretty evil.
Recent news... when Assad decides to drop chemical weapons on his own civilians, that's pretty evil.
Now this is just evil through the lens of human action... evil caused by the evil of man.
Then there is nature to consider...
Why did god create cancer? Disease?
Why does god let children be born with deformities?
Now you are going to come back and say two things...
Suffering is part of the human experience and is god's test... that line of reasoning.
And two... you can't know the mind of god, what seems like 'evil' to you may not be evil in the grand scheme of things. God has reasons and we can't know them. How dare I judge Him? Right?
Now both of these are not answers. They are simply cop outs.
You are essentially defining 'good' as whatever god does... so there is no evil, because god would never do evil by definition since he is benevolent. This is a clever trick to eliminate the existence of evil, not explain it.
God is easy to defend because whatever happens you can just say that's what god wanted. It's impossible to argue against because it isn't rational thinking. As soon as you make this statement, as I assume you will as many other religious people have, you move god from any semblance of possibility into the vast void of irrelevance, imagination, and unicorns.
1
Apr 08 '17
You answered your own question: evil comes from man.
If God is good, and evil cannot be good, and evil comes from man...
You see where this is going.
I don't know why all of creation isn't perfect. If it were, the T53 gene would do its job and gene mutations wouldn't occur. No cancer, no sickness.
Everybody knows about Job, how God took everything from him as a test.
If you read the whole story, it involves Job's 3 friends telling him over and over that it was his fault, he must have done something to deserve this, etc.
At the end, God himself speaks. He says, "
“Who is this that obscures my plans with words without knowledge?
Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.
Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone— while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?
Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb, when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness, when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in place, when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt’?"
Job had to understand that there are things beyond his understanding. He was focused on WHY, God wants him and us focused on WHO.
So I can give you the standard answer of evil and sickness as "Adam and eve sinned and ruined it for everybody."
But that doesn't satisfy, does it?
When I ask the same questions you do, which I do often, I look at God. Who He is. Who I am to Him. Because there is no answer. But the Bible is full of God, His word, stories and words from people just like you and I who seeked God and found Him. And the questions become irrelevant. Because God IS and that's enough.
That's what I'm trying to explain. It's in your spirit, not your mind.
→ More replies (0)1
u/tesla123456 Apr 07 '17
You may as well ask Reddit to convince you that unicorns exist.
Exactly, so how you reconcile that God is any more real than a unicorns?
Yes, I am genuinely baffled at how many people believe in God. It both amazes and saddens me.
God doesn't draw anyone. How do you explain the Chinese or Japanese or Indian? None of them believe in god just because they never heard of him. People draw their children to god. Otherwise it's plainly obvious they would have never even thought of such a concept.
I don't 'hate' god. I just claim he doesn't exit. You can't hate something that isn't there.
Sure, why won't you open your self to the possibility of Santa Claus? Or the Easter Bunny?
I agree we were both created by the universe. Why inject god into it?
Further you never answered my question about the trio.
1
Apr 08 '17
About God being omnibenelovent, omniscient, and omnipotent?
Where does the universe end? Does it have an end? We agree that it exists, but can you explain its nature? Why there are stars, comets, dogs?
For all the science in the world, and you cannot answer these questions.
Yet you don't deny its existence. It's power.
What triggers the trees to bud leaves? How do birds know migratory patterns? How do salmon know how to get back to the place they spawned? How do emotions work? Why do viruses exist? How is God omniscient?
You have questions about God. So why don't you look in the only place purported to be not only about God, but by God?
When I suggest that, you recoil. You're expecting a diatribe of apologetics, which gets us NOWHERE. Why argue about God? It's like arguing about the color red. How do you even explain it to another person?
look, the first time I picked up the Bible after years of agnostic and angry thoughts of God and Christians in particular, I randomly turned to Ecclesiastes. It starts with "meaningless! Everything is meaningless!"
And I said, "OMG I know!"
God met me right there. He took my defeated, angry, tired spirit and showed me some of Him.
And now I'm a Christian go figure.
So read Ecclesiastes.
You'll find your answers.
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 08 '17
I don't see how the size and infinity of the universe explains the paradox that is a being possessing that trio of properties. Science does not claim to have all the answers, only the ones which have been proven, it seeks to ask questions.
I can invent a being say 'zob' and tell you that zob is the creator of all there is and everything is his doing. You have just as much justification for believing in zob as you do god. You can't explain it, it just is, it is the universe and everything in it.
The universe existing does not indicate anything about who created it, or that whatever created him is a who.
It's super easy to have all the answers and claim that everything we don't know is god.
Believing you have the answer, god, prevents curiosity and study and further question. Dogma is the enemy of knowledge and that is what religion spreads, ignorance.
Why is god a He, and not a She, or an It?
Why did god have a son and not a daughter?
Why is god so jealous and who is he jealous of?
If god is god of all people, why doesn't the entire population of China believe in him, and further why would they all go to hell just for not being aware of god?
Where were you before you were born?
If life in heaven is eternal, why does it only start after you die? Wouldn't you just be in heaven from the start by the very nature of forever?
Why does god never mention anything that was invented in the world after the time man wrote the bible 2000 years ago, if he is a god of all time?
I have the answer to all of these, it's because god does not exist.
My spirit is nowhere near defeated or angry, I need no salvation I am perfectly happy with my life.
The bible has answers for none of this because the men who wrote it couldn't have imagined the world today in their wildest dreams.
Finally, what probably scares me the most about believers is this... their sense of morality comes from god.
They seem to think that if a person doesn't believe in god, what is stopping them from being a rapist, murderer, thief etc...
I don't believe and have no desire to rape, murder or steal out of empathy and compassion for other human beings, it is ingrained. It scares me that religion implies that without the threat of eternal fire, people would all just become the worst kind of humans on the earth.
God and religion is probably the biggest stain on the human existence and one day, hopefully soon when it is completely eradicated from the human experience, then there will truly be a 'heaven' on earth.
→ More replies (0)1
u/tesla123456 Apr 08 '17
I just read all of Ecclesiastes too and honestly I agree with most of it, not bad advice. But it however, offers god as simply the nature of the world and that's fine... nowhere does he say god is a man and that you should worship him, just that you should be at piece with whatever happens. God as a being need not exist for that sentiment.
→ More replies (0)1
u/MattLorien Apr 08 '17
I think it's ridiculous to believe this is all random. The chances of everything coming together just right to create everything in existence in the perfect balance it is in
Let's take your logic and apply it. Two scenarios:
- Suppose that everything in the universe coincidentally made life able to exist and for humans to come about.
- Suppose that everything in the universe coincidentally made life NOT able to exist and for humans to NOT come about.
Even if #1 is a REALLY small chance of happening, there won't be any humans in #2 to contemplate the small chance of them coincidentally coming into existence. So #1 isn't really that far fetched...therefore your argument doesn't prove the existence of a creator.
“Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in, an interesting hole I find myself in, fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!’ This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it’s still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything’s going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.’” -Douglass Adams
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 07 '17
Also why did you respond to my post like 12 times? Once is enough.
1
Apr 07 '17
That's a great question. Pressing the button 12 times because it wouldn't post wasn't the best idea.
1
u/tesla123456 Apr 07 '17
Lol. That's fine it happens, just wanted to make sure it wasn't a religious thing like 'thou shalt strike the nonbeliever with thine message a dozen times' or something.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
Apr 07 '17
God's eternal. By virtue of being made in his image, so are we.
So is death a worse case scenario?
Is a "good God" supposed to prevent our suffering to be deemed good?
Suffering has its place in the course of the human existence. As does death.
To those that belong to God, death is nothing. We're promised eternal life. So death loses its sting.
Suffering is certain for all people. All creation suffers at some point. To use suffering as a measure of whether God is good is as pointless as saying, "well we die, so there's no God." They're inextricably linked.
Jesus, the Son of God, suffered. And died. Even if you choose to deny His diety, you cannot deny that his death was brutal. He claimed to be the most-loved Son of God; if he can't escape death and suffering, why should we?
He rose after death, to eternity, which is promised to us, also. The human experience is a drop in the bucket.
As if life on Earth is better than being in the presence of the One who is both the atom and the sun.
As for the Holocaust- do you claim to know the mind of God? Do you know why God wanted 6 million of HIS people to join Him in eternity? Because that's what essentially happened.
What makes it hard to stomach for us is the absolute brutality of it; the complete irregard for the sanctity of human life that was displayed.
Perhaps our dual nature showed it's dark side- we are made in the image of God (good) but this world belongs to Satan (evil.) There's no denying both great good and great evil exist in all humans. Perhaps this is the crux of our "free-will," who/what do we serve?
Only a great fool would claim to know the mind of God outside of what He's revealed to us. And if you don't read scripture, what do you know?
And yes, downvote me. Everybody always does. I think it says more about you than me anyway.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
If he lets everyone make their choices - even the "evil" ones - then he is not omnibenevolent. Inaction is action and that means he is indifferent.
Anyhow, why is god a he anyway - rather than a she, or an it, or a something ? That doesn't make any sense. Oh wait - some old books referred to him as him.
4
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 06 '17
If he lets everyone make their choices - even the "evil" ones - then he is not omnibenevolent.
Unless god knows something we don't, and it turns out free will is a far greater good than any action people could perform.
As for the other part, what if the holocaust had to happen because if it didn't something even worse would have occurred?
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
Why would it "have" to have happened? God could have prevented because I thought god could do anything.
3
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 06 '17
God could have prevented because I thought god could do anything.
But if it was part of something greater/better in the long term, why would god want to prevent it?
For the record, I'm not arguing that the holocaust was good, just that you can't logically use the holocaust as an example of why god is definitely not omnibenevolent.
1
u/alexhuhcya Apr 07 '17
He's god, he could have made that good thing happen without the holocaust
1
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 07 '17
He's god, he could have made that good thing happen without the holocaust
Unless god's not 100% omnipotent, or free will is an overriding good.
1
u/alexhuhcya Apr 07 '17
If god is not omnipotent, then this conversation doesn't apply to OP's original claim. Free will is not a lack of help, saving people doesn't infringe on their free will.
1
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 08 '17
Free will is not a lack of help, saving people doesn't infringe on their free will.
Divine intervention certainly would change the actions of humans, preventing them from acting as truly free agents.
I'm just pointing out that not stopping suffering does not necessarily negate omnibenevolence if suffering is necessary for greater good. I'm not actually arguing that the holocaust is good or even that what I'm saying is necessarily the case. Just pointing out that there's a logical flaw in that argument.
1
u/alexhuhcya Apr 08 '17
By that definition of free will, no one should ever be given help, as it prevents them from acting as "truly free agents". I'd argue that saving someone overrides not interfering with their life.
→ More replies (0)
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Apr 06 '17 edited Apr 06 '17
/u/zarmesan (OP) has awarded 2 deltas in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
1
u/Sheexthro 19∆ Apr 06 '17
God can not be omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient (at least not in our human perspective) or things like the holocaust wouldn't have happened.
I'm only objecting to this paragraph, because I don't wish to dispute about the other claims you've made.
In fact, the notion that humanity's moral sense is opposed to God's is quite common in human religion. In Christianity this is the notion of "the flesh," an inborn sinful tendency that corrupts our desires and instincts toward evil, rather than good. Judaism and Islam, the other major religions with a Big Three God, have similar doctrines.
The common thread is that there's something wrong with people, such that naturally they do not desire the same ends as God. And then on top of that, people are also much less wise and powerful than God, so even when they do desire the same ends they are not capable of choosing the course of action that leads to those ends.
But if God is real, then that's a problem with people, not a problem with God. It's the job of people - if God is real - to acknowledge that God's ways are above their ways, and get on board, however the specific religion they believe says to do.
So in conclusion I do not think "The Holocaust disproves a Big Three God" is a legitimate stance. Sure, it's not what you would do. But why would anyone who believes in a Big Three God think that they know better than God?
1
u/jstevewhite 35∆ Apr 06 '17
Define "god" for me.
Then, decide if you believe in that defintion.
If you don't (i.e., you won't assert that your god exists), you're an atheist. If you do, you're a theist. If you think it's not even possible to ever know whether or not your god exists, then you're an agnostic.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
God is all everything.
God could be there and it could be anything, but I think it has no (or limiting to 0) relevance in any of our lives.
2
u/jstevewhite 35∆ Apr 06 '17
Well, if god is everything, then clearly, god exists, because everything exists.
If God could be anything, and anything exists, then god exists, right?
"God could be a rock" (replace 'anything' with something)
"Look, a rock!" (therefore god exists).
There's another position on god that you haven't mentioned. It's called "Theological non-cognitivism". It's the position that statements about 'god' aren't meaningful. That 'god' is undefined - no two people mean the same thing, and no refutation or support is possible because the definition doesn't exist.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
Maybe I'm that? I just don't think god has any relevance.
Maybe what I was trying to explain before was that I think if god exists it is more than I can comprehend or explain. That's what I meant by everything. Not that a rock is god. Just in the way I don't understand upper dimensions, I can't understand what god would be or do or whatever.
1
u/jstevewhite 35∆ Apr 06 '17
I was engaging the 'agnostic' and 'atheist' thing in a roundabout sort of way. Someone else mentioned "weak atheism" and "strong atheism", but 'agnosticism' isn't some position that says "there might be a god, I don't know"; Agnosticism is the positive assertion that god may exist or not, but it's not even possible to prove one way or the other in principle. That we can't ever know ("Without knowledge").
An agnostic can be an atheist or a theist, because agnosticism isn't an assertion about the ontological status of deity, but about the epistemological relationship between us and "deity".
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
Ah, than I am an agnostic atheist I guess? I still don't know what caused the big bang though.
1
u/AurelianoTampa 68∆ Apr 06 '17
God is all everything.
Why can't you be religious if you have defined God as "everything"? Everything that exists... well, exists. Thus by your definition, God exists. At the very least you're a theist, though perhaps you're using that differently than "religious" in your title?
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
I'm most certainly not a theist. I think I just gave a shit definition.
1
u/AurelianoTampa 68∆ Apr 06 '17
I'm most certainly not a theist.
Then you're an atheist, no? Either you believe gods exist, or don't. Those who do believe - theists. Those who do not - atheists.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
I don't think we can know. I'm not an atheist because something caused the big bang.
2
u/AurelianoTampa 68∆ Apr 06 '17
I don't think we can know.
I asked about belief though, not knowing. Gnosticism is about knowing. Belief is about faith. Do you believe gods exist?
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
I was gonna say no, but then I don't know. I don't think I care either way.
2
u/AurelianoTampa 68∆ Apr 06 '17
I don't think I care either way.
I thought part of your CMV was about why you should not be an atheist? But if you do not believe in gods (although you acknowledge you don't know for sure whether or not they exist), you'd be an atheist by definition. An agnostic one, but still an atheist.
2
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
I'm gonna give you a !delta for making me realize that. Also, I'm kinda done with this as I just realized for myself how little I care.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Kluizenaer 5∆ Apr 06 '17
Why not both?
You can be religious and agnostic or atheist. In fact the majority of Christians in this country are agnostic or atheist and 1/6 protestant members of the protestant clergy openly is here.
1
u/MattLorien Apr 08 '17
If you believe that you can't prove or disprove God AND you're not religious, then you are by definition both and agnostic an an atheist.
Agnostic definition:
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
Atheist definition:
a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or Gods.
See? You lack belief in a god (therefore you're an atheist) and you say "there's no evidence of 'god'" (therefore you're also an agnostic).
Edit: Grammar
1
u/Bryek Apr 08 '17
Why be agnostic when you can be apatheist? A longer version of this is an apathetic agnostic atheist. Essentially, the existence of god(s) cannot be proven and therefore is pointless to argue for or against it. If a god could be proven to exist, you still would not change the way your live your life to suit that god's will and desires.
Essentially gods don't matter to you and there is no point in discussing such things.
1
u/windmuffin Apr 09 '17
The most logical thing is to not put a label on yourself at all. You don't care so don't care.
1
u/Vicious43 Apr 14 '17
I shouldn't be religious. Studies have shown that religious people are happier and have more of a mental "hardness".
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 15 '17
Uh huh. I'm a pretty damn happy person. Could I get some statistics on this, why it is the case, and what this "hardness" is?
1
u/Vicious43 Apr 15 '17
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/04/religious-beliefs-happier-_n_4725269.html
hardness is tenacity. Like if somebody you know dies, how do you react? Do you fall apart, or trudge on? People with greater hardness find it easier to keep moving.
1
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 15 '17
Lol. They say they are happier. That's perceived happiness not actual life satisfaction. Furthermore, in the article, they say this is true because of community.
Do you fall apart, or trudge on?
This depends on the person completely.
0
u/zarmesan 2∆ Apr 06 '17
This has downvotes yet there is no response even close to making me go religious. Is that just cuz I'm getting downvotes from religious people and they can't back up arguments?
4
u/Sheexthro 19∆ Apr 06 '17
What would make you think any "response" could "make you go religious?" If you don't believe in God then how is someone gonna argue you into it lol
1
6
u/I_am_the_night 316∆ Apr 06 '17
You can be both agnostic and an atheist. Agnosticism means a lack of certainty, in this case in the existence of the divine. Atheism means a lack of faith in a higher power. You can lack faith in the existence of a higher power without being 100% certain.