The Folly of Atheism

[Trailblazer]

If the author of the universe cared what we thought about Him I'm sure He could make his presence clear to us.

Excellent logic my friend...

It just so happens God does not care what we humans think of Him...

It does not affect God if we choose not to worship Him. Baha’u’llah made it perfectly clear that God has no needs since God is self-sufficient, thus God cannot have a “need” to be worshiped.

“This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.”Gleanings, p. 136

“Your Lord, the God of mercy, can well dispense with all creatures. Nothing whatever can either increase or diminish the things He doth possess.”Gleanings, p. 148

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures.” Gleanings, p. 166​

God does not demand worship, God enjoins us to worship Him, and that is only for our own benefit, not for God’s benefit.

“Consider the mercy of God and His gifts. He enjoineth upon you that which shall profit you, though He Himself can well dispense with all creatures.” Gleanings, p. 140

“The one true God, exalted be His glory, hath wished nothing for Himself. The allegiance of mankind profiteth Him not, neither doth its perversity harm Him. The Bird of the Realm of Utterance voiceth continually this call: “All things have I willed for thee, and thee, too, for thine own sake.” Gleanings, p. 260​

God 101 stuff.

 

[Trailblazer]

Or, y'know, you could just be wrong and the atheists have a point?

That is true, logically speaking, since there is no proof that God exists.

But atheists could also be wrong and if they are wrong there are consequences.

What are the consequences to believers if they are wrong?

 

[Trailblazer]

Indeed. The god you believe in is nothing short of a Monster. You would be correct

Ya know Bob, I am none too happy with Him myself so you won’t get an argument from me.

However-- the existence of obvious Progress, generally among Humans? Is absolute proof that your god isn't real.

I do not understand the correlation.

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: I guess you did not understand what that passage meant. It meant that if the entire Essence of God showed up on Earth the Light of God would be so bright as to reduce us to utter nothingness.

Bob said: LOOK! We found yet ANOTHER thing that your god CANNOT DO!

So-- Gross Incompetence it IS. Your god is so weak, so full of itself, it cannot dial anything back.

Lame.

That was not about what God CANNOT DO, it was about what God CAN DO.

God DID dial it back when he sent Baha’u’llah.

 

[Trailblazer]

Is your god's Ego so Fragile, that it would torture forever over the slightest doubt?

That's pretty evil, actually...

My God doesn’t do that. Now that we are living in the Dispensation of Baha’u’llah, atheists are not deprived of God’s mercy as long as their deeds and morals are good.

"This cycle is the cycle of favor and not of justice. Therefore, those whose deeds are clean and pure, even though they are not believers, will not be deprived of the divine mercy; but perfection is in faith and deeds. Undoubtedly, a person, who is not a believer, but whose deeds and morals are good, is far better than one who claims his belief in words but, who, in actions, is a follower of satan. The Blessed Beauty says, 'My humiliation is not in my imprisonment, which, by my life, is an exaltation to me; nay rather, it is in the deeds of my friends, who attribute themselves to us and commit that which causes my heart and pen to weep!'"

(Attributed to 'Abdu'l-Bahá, Star of the West, vol. 9, issue 3, p. 29)

 

[Trailblazer]

Faith is the abandonment of reason. Nothing rational about it-- you can BELIEVE ANYTHING that you are brainwashed into believing.

THAT is why it's not valid

That would be true, IF one was brainwashed.

Citation Needed: None of your "evidence" is actual evidence.

All my evidence is actual evidence even though it is not proof.

There is no proof that God exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

Paschal's Wager: WHICH god, from among MILLIONS?

There are millions of conceptions of god but there is only one true God.

Here is a brief description of the one true God so you will know how to recognize the imposters.

“Regard thou the one true God as One Who is apart from, and immeasurably exalted above, all created things. The whole universe reflecteth His glory, while He is Himself independent of, and transcendeth His creatures. This is the true meaning of Divine unity. He Who is the Eternal Truth is the one Power Who exerciseth undisputed sovereignty over the world of being, Whose image is reflected in the mirror of the entire creation. All existence is dependent upon Him, and from Him is derived the source of the sustenance of all things. This is what is meant by Divine unity; this is its fundamental principle.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167

 

[Trailblazer]

Trailblazer said: I am voting for 6.

6. God has reasons He made known to us for not presenting a conspicuous presence.

Bob said: 6 isn't a choice-- 6 is something you just pulled out of thin air.

Like 100% of your claims of "evidence".

No Bob, God gave us a reason, and I will explain it to you if you need help understanding it...

“If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people.” His purpose, however, is to enable the pure in spirit and the detached in heart to ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean, that thereby they who seek the Beauty of the All-Glorious may be distinguished and separated from the wayward and perverse. Thus hath it been ordained by the all-glorious and resplendent Pen… ” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 71

 

[Trailblazer]

No, I think I understood well enough. We can't directly see God, we can only get second-hand information from "messengers" who claim to give accurate information about him. That is what many religious sects claim, all with competing messengers and competing gods of their own. It's not convincing when your messengers do it any more than any others.

The real Messengers do not compete with each other, they simply bring new information in every age. Some of that information is different but it is not contradictory.

And your God could resolve all that unconvincing confusion by directly revealing himself to us and telling us his opinions himself. But your God created a situation where we would be "reduced to nothingness" if that happened. Which, again, is absurd. And is 100% his fault and his problem for creating such a situation.

Obviously you do not know enough about God in order to know why God cannot just “show up.”

What is absurd is atheists expecting God to show up and speaking to humans directly, just because a mere 7% of the human population do not consider God’s Messengers sufficient.

According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (200 million convinced atheists). Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia

That means that 93% of the world population believes in God.

If God had never used Messengers, hardly anyone would believe in God because the main reason people believe in God is because of one of those Messengers. We know that because very few people in the world believe in God for some other reason. 84 percent of the world population has a faith and most of those faiths all have some kind of Founder, what I refer to as a Messenger.

There will always be people who do not believe in God because man has free will so man can choose to believe in God or not. This is exactly the way God wants it, otherwise God would not have created man with free will.

 

[Trailblazer]

The ability for something to be demonstrable is not dependent on human reach, it's an objective quality. Whether or not we were where 'god' is, it would either be demonstrable or not. If not, then it really doesn't get to qualify as an existent, because it is indistinguishable from a fiction.

It cannot be demonstrated by humans because we cannot access God where He is at.

It could be demonstrated by God if God wanted to demonstrate it.
But obviously God does not want to demonstrate it because He hasn’t.

Again, indistinguishable from fiction.

Only God is NOT fiction, God is real.

 

[Trailblazer]

You are correct in that something unprovable and hence unknowable may in fact be true. Thus, God/Gods may exist, and yet their existences may still be unknown.

Or God might be known to some but not known to all.

 

[Trailblazer]

IMO, it is for several reasons:
1. Pent up anger and resentment toward God needs an outlet.. a scapegoat for relief.
2. Competing ideologies are at odds with each other, and bring sparks when they come together.
3. Reality show hysteria is morbidly fascinating. Calm reason is boring. Yelling and emotion sells.
4. Insecurities need justification and affirmation. What better way, than a flame war?

I was thinking more along the lines that atheists really do want to know if God exists, even if that is only on a subconscious level. So they are trying to work it through, even if they do not realize it... I mean think about it this way: If we were all created to know and worship God, which is what my religion teaches, then that is an inbuilt part of humans, so everyone will be trying to attain that, even if they appear to be rejecting it.

My other hat is psychologist and I am actually a lot more interested in psychology than religion.

 

[Subduction Zone]

God told everyone where He is hiding and why He is hiding, through Baha’u’llah.

Now it is everyone’s job to go and read about that.

It’s fascinating actually, much more interesting than a God that shows up.

One reason God does not show up is because God does not want those people who would only believe in Him if He showed up to believe in Him....

Yes. he is hiding at a deli on the upper east side. The Reuben's are to die for.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes. he is hiding at a deli on the upper east side. The Reuben's are to die for.

God is hiding, I will give you that, but where He is hiding nobody knows...
I surmise God is hiding somewhere in the spiritual world, not anywhere on Earth.
God is kind of like the Wizard of Oz, only we never find God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

God is hiding, I will give you that, but where He is hiding nobody knows...
I surmise God is hiding somewhere in the spiritual world, not anywhere on Earth.
God is kind of like the Wizard of Oz, only we never find God.

Perhaps, unlike the Wizard of Oz, there is no man behind the curtain.

 

[Trailblazer]

Perhaps, unlike the Wizard of Oz, there is no man behind the curtain.

Certainly, that is a distinct possibility.
But unlike in the movie, I do not know if we will ever find out, because God might STILL be hiding from us after we die.

 

[oldbadger]

The Folly of Atheism.

The title reads more easily than the resulting OP.

The first atheists were Christians.
They did not follow the Roman/Greek Gods and were thus titled 'atheist'.
So the very meaning of the word can vary beyond your ideas. It depends who is using it.

As a Deist who believes in a Deity who is unaware of or unconcerned about us (look up Deism?) I have often argued that I must be some kind of atheist. (a-theist?). But RF does have a niche for 'Non-Theists' and so I don't mind retreating to that title if necessary.

You mention fallacies. The very fact that so many of the gospels' accounts can fall flat under scrutiny does put you in to a rather stranmge position. You claim to have a Faith and yet criticise folks who can claim to have a Theory.

Theories beat the ballyhoo out of Faiths, especially if the faithful try chucking bricks around.

 

[ArtieE]

If you are still confused then you are beyond my ability to help. Perhaps if you got a formal education you'd understand that the words human and individual are not required to comprehend the definition of viable. IF you can grasp the meaning of the word viable THEN you should be able to grasp what is meant by a viable human individual.

Since you apparently can't, you'll need to educate yourself a bit first.

It's a fetus if it's still attached to the mother and it's still a fetus if it's attached to the mother but capable of surviving outside the uterus and it's a viable human individual when it is capable of surviving outside the uterus and is no longer attached to the mother? Did I get it right or not? I just want to know if the status "human individual" depends on being physically attached to the mother or not.

 

[ArtieE]

That means that 93% of the world population believes in God.

That just depends on which polls you read. This survey says 51%. Most people believe in God, international poll finds

 

[ArtieE]

As I understand it Deeje is a JW and Trailblazer is a Baha'i... what happens to you after you die? Will you still be Baha'i and JW and live happily together in Heaven?