atheistic god

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Is existence a quality?

Existence is NOT a predicate (quality). However, everything that actually exists does have at minimum one other predicate than mere existence, that can be potentially observed. So far, nothing of the kind has been demonstrated for any version of god that I've heard of.

There have been quite a number of anecdotal reasons to suppose there is a god (actually, there has been an absolutely immense amount of this anecdotal stuff -- usually referred to as Scripture), but not a single, verifiable piece of it is actually on offer.

Show me -- in the real world, here and now -- just one thing, a single thing, that can ONLY be explained by the existence of God, and trust me, you will have my attention. I don't think you can do it.

 

[David T]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

Atheists have the same God as religion it's called ivory tower or cranium!!!! Hell I treat it all as cranialsyntosism a mental disorder called "normal"!!! You suffer from severe normalcy....john Muir has the cure in a single quote. Good luck if you choose to be free from yourself to be yourself. Not easy actually. Believers, non believers and agnostics do not exist where I walk in the forest. Just poachers, tourists, and patients if they don't see.

 

[blü 2]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

1. Be around, available for consultation, have own TV show.
2. Meaningfully answer all correspondence, petitions, enquiries and so on, like supposed to do already.
3. Don't pretend to be right all the time.
4. No threats or bullying or secret interfering.
5. Drop all the nonsense about omnipotence and omniscience and omnipresence and perfection blah blah.
6. Respect everyone's privacy.
7. Respect everyone's freedom of opinion.
8. Be accountable. That includes paying damages after storms, tsunamis, earthquakes, eruptions and floods, and during droughts and famines. And for overlooked prayers, and wrong advice.
9. Pay taxes like a good citizen.
10. Get rid of all members of the religious profession who aren't up to scratch; or anyway.

 

[BilliardsBall]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

Simple--all atheists constantly produce conditions to make God in their image rather than vice versa:

*There would be no suffering
*God would appear on demand
*God would grant miraculous reprieves from moral failings without Christ's atonement

Etc.

 

[syo]

What do you mean by god (to an atheist)?

something superior.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

something superior.

What does that mean?
Superior to what?

 

[syo]

What does that mean?
Superior to what?

superior than nature. something like the christian god. who can 'control' the forces of nature.

 

[QuestioningMind]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

Qualities that can actually be measured and verified.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

superior than nature. something like the christian god. who can 'control' the forces of nature.

A ghost?

 

[syo]

A ghost?

superior than a ghost. unless someone sees god as a ghost.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

superior than nature. something like the christian god. who can 'control' the forces of nature.

To me, all that "nature" means is "that which exists," which means that anything "superior to nature" - and therefore not part of nature - does not exist.

... unless you'd be okay with something like "superior to the rest of nature."

 

[Laughing Coyote]

Scientists have pretty much rejected God out of hand. He's the last thing they want to find.

Science can't take a position on something that doesn't provide evidence in "real things," which includes the existence or non-existence of God. As of yet for this same reason it can make no statement about what pre-existed the universe.

Furthermore, I don't think a science is in a position to reject God because that would assume that knowledge is complete and that there are no longer premises or assumptions. Science, like religion, is as yet riddled with premises which is a way of saying that it presumes a god. To mention several, I'll say there is an assumption in science that we can understand the part separate from the whole (called reductionism); that there is something called "nature" posed separate from humans (this finds its origin from Judeo-Christian prophetic religion's separation of God from the world); that science can know the universe as an exterior object of human thought (I think this problem was posed to Einstein by the philosopher Henri Bergson when he said that although you say time is relative you still privilege the scientist's time); that the institutions of science have privileged position as opposed to other institutions of human cultures; that there is an indifferent and amoral universe; that humans as scientific beings have a privileged position within creation (which derives from Christian view of creation), and so on. Things framed as "laws" of science, furthermore, though they are based on consistent observations their origins and existence is not yet understood and possibly never will be.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

superior than a ghost. unless someone sees god as a ghost.

I don't understand superior outside of relating it to, say, a king to his servant or boss to employee. If god is not a ghost (thinking of casper), what is god?

 

[Willamena]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

The only quality it needs is to make sense.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

Well, to start, how about a god that has the properties of any other objectively real entity. In other words, how about a god that can actually be detected by the five senses? Otherwise, no reason to posit the existence of something that just isn't there.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

That's already begun

Andre Linde for example, principle in modern inflationary theory considers it feasible that we could one day create our own universe, and that this is how ours may have come about, as an intelligent creation from another universe.. many atheist cosmologists agree

And I've heard many other atheists contemplate this as an 'acceptable' solution to the problem of accounting for our universe, as long as they don't have to use the word 'God', which I understand, that would be a bit embarrassing at this point!

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Well, to start, how about a god that has the properties of any other objectively real entity. In other words, how about a god that can actually be detected by the five senses? Otherwise, no reason to posit the existence of something that just isn't there.

But the multiverse is granted a waiver on this right?

 

[Rational Agnostic]

But the multiverse is granted a waiver on this right?

No, I treat notions of the multiverse the same as I would "God" claims. I don't believe in a multiverse. Agnostic in the sense that I don't rule out the possibility of its existence, but until clear-cut evidence of it is produced, it should be dismissed in a similar way IMO.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

No, I treat notions of the multiverse the same as I would "God" claims. I don't believe in a multiverse. Agnostic in the sense that I don't rule out the possibility of its existence, but until clear-cut evidence of it is produced, it should be dismissed in a similar way IMO.

It's interesting 'multiverse theory' was until recently listed on Wikipedia as an example of a 'scientific theory' in the strict sense- but has been removed, losing popularity perhaps...

so in the analogy of HELP being spelled with rocks on the deserted island beach, do you similarly dismiss the castaway until clear cut evidence is produced?

i.e. the universe, Earth, IS clear cut evidence for God to most of us, although evidence is a subjective thing of course, otherwise this forum would be a little dull!

 

[Srivijaya]

i wonder, what kind of qualities should a god have, so that atheists would start believing in that god?

As an atheist I can possibly offer a few rambling thoughts.

The key realisation would be that god does not ‘exist’. From this point onward the atheist can begin to work out the truth of the matter.

Let's examine it from a Christian POV, as I'm familiar with it. Creation in Genesis is a matter of division, spirit upon the water, light and darkness etc. This depicts a movement from a non-dual state into duality. Time, the elements etc. arise and we end up with Adam and Eve in the garden. Adam is still not sundered from the divine but he abides within it in a state of unknowing, which can't last.

The knowledge of good and evil (the fall) is nama-rupa, the mind of discrimination and self-grasping awareness which takes consciousness into grosser duality, hence the 'expulsion from the garden', which is actually an instruction manual for the return journey.

The junction between night and day (when the flaming sword of the guardian Cherubim is extinguished) is the best time to enter samhadi - look at the colour of Shiva's skin. Clues everywhere.

In this duality of 'existents' there can be no god, as the supreme cannot be limited by any distinctions. Like reflections in a mirror which do not taint the mirror, existents are illusory and transitory but are possible only because they are held in the mirror (existence/god/awareness).

So, if you meet god on the road you might not want to kill him but certainly resist the urge to believe in him.

I don't imagine that would appease any theist though.