I'm sure atheists have many reasons for what they do, but my reason for "doing good" is simply that doing good is beneficial for the well-being and survival of my society and everybody in it including myself. No god required.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Folly of Atheism
- Thread starter usfan
- Start date
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I know and believe because of the evidence.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
That is the best reason I can think of.
Sure. But not between accepting what's true. I simply can't make the choice to believe in fairies no matter how much I tried.
He could show us his backside again like he did to Moses. We could use all kinds of scientific instruments to figure out exactly what he is.
Because using fallible humans as go-betweens is guaranteed to get any message you have corrupted. Unless you claim that these messengers are all 100% correct in what they claim?
I'm not interested in "believing" it. What I'm interested in is:
1. This "Breeze of God" did it involve actual air molecules moving so that they could be measured? Was this noticed by somebody else?
2. This "Holy Ghost" was standing on his right hand. Well, what did it look like?! How big was it?! What did it do?! Did it impact on things in the room?!
3. What did this "Supreme Spirit" actually look like?! How big was it?! How far in front of his face was it?!
4. What did Gabriel actually look like?! How big was he?! Did he have wings?!
Why can't your messenger come up with some actual useful information instead of blabbering on about bosoms and "reflections of glory"!
No I can't. The truth value of something isn't determined by what I feel makes sense to me.
Meaningless statement as you have no way of knowing that for a fact.
Which Cause exactly?
You believe because of evidence. You know because of facts. I see no reason to believe stuff because of evidence. Belief just gets in the way of the search for truth and fact.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Just like I could not choose to believe in the beliefs of other religions such as the same body of Jesus floating down from the sky.
I do not believe that God ever showed His backside because God does not have a backside.
I cannot just choose to believe in that.
I believe that the Manifestations of God are infallible because they represent the will of God who is infallible.
“The essence of belief in Divine unity consisteth in regarding Him Who is the Manifestation of God and Him Who is the invisible, the inaccessible, the unknowable Essence as one and the same. By this is meant that whatever pertaineth to the former, all His acts and doings, whatever He ordaineth or forbiddeth, should be considered, in all their aspects, and under all circumstances, and without any reservation, as identical with the Will of God Himself. This is the loftiest station to which a true believer in the unity of God can ever hope to attain. Blessed is the man that reacheth this station, and is of them that are steadfast in their belief.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 167
Sorry, you won;t be getting any of that information. Only the Manifestations of God are privy to it.
We were talking about His "Holy Spirit experience" and that is why I posted the passages.
That is just a small part of His total Writings, and many contain useful information.
I did not say that what makes sense to you determines what is true, only that if it makes no sense to you you will probably not believe it.
It is a fact, unless anyone has ever shown that the spiritual world (afterlife) is true objectively.
The Cause of Baha'u'llah, which is another way we refer to the religion now called the Baha'i Faith.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I have facts that support my evidence. That is why it is evidence.
So you don't believe Moses, your own messenger?
Like Moses was privy to seeing the backside of God?
Then why don't you ever post any then? Seriously, post something that is useful and informative and detailed enough to actually learn something from!
I wouldn't believe it anyway. I'm not a "believer" by nature.
If you had facts you would have knowledge, not belief.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I would believe it if Moses actually wrote it.
Nobody has ever seen God. Jesus said so.
I do post them sometimes, if they are related to a subject I am talking about.
Neither am I.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I do have knowledge.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
So what? Just because there are reasons why we do things that does not mean we do not have free will. We would not do anything if we did not have reasons because reasons are what motivate us to act. We make choices based upon reasons. Reasons do not make choices, people do.
Everything we do is based upon the past because at the moment we make a decision in the present, everything that affects that decision is in the past.
God’s point of view does not affect what we choose to do in any way. God knows what we will do only because God is All-Knowing.
I do not know what you mean by objective. My claim is that God exists. That does not mean there is any objective proof of God.
Then don’t search. God gave you free will so you can make that decision to search or not.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
You're still not following. If we consider all the possible reasons why we make a choice. Not only those about the circumstances and what is happening but all of the internal ones too; our personality, likes and dislikes, hopes and fears, preferences, beliefs, and so on. If all of those do not result in only one possible choice, then any remaining ingredient must be random because it has nothing at all do do with us or the choice being made.
But unless there is true randomness in the world, then god will have decided what everybody will do the moment it created the world, because the world would be operating as a deterministic system (which is defined as one with no randomness).
objective
1.1 Not dependent on the mind for existence; actual.
If your god is supposed to be objective, then it is reasonable to seek objective (not dependant on the mind) evidence.
Except for the impossibility of "free will" with respect to a god, fine - but this brings us back to the contradiction. If god is then going to judge people (or disadvantage them in any way) for not believing - it would mean that your god is not just and fair.
There are two major problems: the first is the impossibility of "free will" in this context, but even if we ignore that, we run up against the injustice of a god that would judge people for not believing when there is no objective evidence.
How do you know that?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I guess I am not following you. I do not know what mean by random.
I m not sure how all this is related to free will. I believe people choose what they will do and what happens is determined by human will and actions that follow, not determined by God.
That said, I think there is also such a thing as predestination so some things are predestined by God but we cannot know what those are. Some of our destiny is irrevocable and some is impending, and the impending destiny can be changed by prayer and entreaty.
There is objective evidence, by your definition of objective (actual) but how one interprets that evidence is subjective.
I do not know that God will judge you, especially if you made a sincere effort and did not find what was evidence to you.
There is objective evidence but how is that unjust for God to judge you if you did not like the evidence He provided?
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Because Jesus said so and I trust Jesus.
John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
1 John 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.
That is also how we know Jesus was not God, because people saw Jesus.
Except of course that Jesus is God as John 1:18 clearly states. "No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known." John 1:18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father's side, has made Him known.
Is Jesus really God? There are many cults and false religions today that deny it.
Is Jesus God?
Last edited:
If you are standing at a crossroads and have a choice between taking two roads that choice is influenced by all your previous experiences and hence isn't determined by free will. You can't freely choose which road to take your choice has been influenced by what has happened to you previously. You can flip a coin. That's what random means.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
"the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father"
God is in closest relationship with Himself?
That makes absolutely no logical sense and they changed the translation to try to make Jesus into God.
The correct translations are as follows:
John 1:18
CEB No one has ever seen God. God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made God known.
KJV No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
NASB No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
NCV No one has ever seen God. But God the only Son is very close to the Father, and he has shown us what God is like.
NKJV No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
NLV The much-loved Son is beside the Father. No man has ever seen God. But Christ has made God known to us.
RSV No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.
WE No one has ever seen God. But his only Son is very near to his Father's heart. He has told us plainly about God.
John 1:18 - Bible Gateway
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Did Jesus Tell the Sanhedrin He Was God?
January 30, 2014 by Kermit Zarley0 Comments
Christians generally have believed that the Jewish Sanhedrin (Council) accused Jesus of Nazareth of claiming to be God, and that is why it condemned him as a blasphemer worthy of death. But according to the New Testament (NT) gospels, Jesus did not tell the Sanhedrin he was God.
During the latter part of Jesus’ public ministry, the scribes and Pharisees constantly questioned him about his teachings. They wanted to “catch Him in some statement, so as to deliver Him up to the rule and the authority of the governor” (Luke 20.20 NASB).........
Sometimes when Jesus had preached to crowds, they questioned who he was, mostly if he was Israel’s promised Messiah (John 6.14-15; 7.40-41; 8.25; 10.24). Consequently, Caiaphas the High Priest now demanded an unequivocal answer from Jesus about his identity. According to Matthew, Caiaphas exclaimed, “I adjure You by the living God, that You tell us whether You are the Christ, the Son of God” (Matthew 26.63).
Jesus answered Caiaphas somewhat obscurely, yet affirmatively, “You have said it yourself” (Matthew 26.64). Then he added, “nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see the son of man sitting at the right hand of power, and coming on the clouds of heaven” (v. 64). This addition is a clear self-designation as the “Son of Man” in Daniel 7.13-14 and “Lord” in Psalm 110.1, the latter of whom Jews interpreted as the Messiah.
For the first time, Jesus unequivocally claimed publicly of being the Messiah-the Son of God-the Son of Man. It is the most thoroughgoing self-identification he ever made. He fully revealed who he was, yet he did not say that he was God. Rather, he distinguished himself from God and asserted that in the future God would vindicate him to the utmost.
The High Priest then invoked a long-held tradition, tearing his robe as a symbolic gesture signifying mourning, and charged Jesus with blasphemy. The Sanhedrin agreed.
The reason so many Christians have thought that Jesus here claimed to be God is that he admitted to being the Son of God. But that is a misunderstanding of the Bible’s use of this expression. The Old Testament (OT) applies it not only to the promised Messiah, but also angels, pious men, kings of Israel, and even the nation of Israel. Jews rightly understood that the Messiah being the Son of God, as in Psalm 2.7, 12, indicated no more than an unprecedented, intimate relationship between him and God. And the High Priest probably connected these two expressions, since Jews understood them synonymously.
Church fathers subsequently taught that Jesus was God because he was the Son of God. But they tended to be anti-Semitic, thus ignoring whatever Jews thought. And many church fathers were influenced by Greek religio-philosophy. Greek mythology espoused many gods and sons of gods, some of which were believed to have been generated by copulating with humans. Church fathers erroneously applied this Greek metaphysics. They reasoned that God having an only Son was similar to a man having a son. Since a man’s son became a man like himself, they reasoned that God’s Son must also be God.
It is most significant that neither the witnesses nor Sanhedrin members accused Jesus of ever claiming to be God. Jews had so accused Jesus twice in his career; yet both times he denied their accusation (John 5.16-47; 10.30-38). Apparently, they accepted his denial.
(To see a titled list of over fifty, two-three page posts (easily accessible) about the Bible not saying Jesus is God, click here.)
Did Jesus Tell the Sanhedrin He Was God?