• 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!

Atheists: What would you consider credible communication from God?

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
A thunderous boom & a brilliant flash would precede the sky parting as God drove
his flaming golden chariot pulled by a team of 4 winged pink unicorns from Heaven
down to Earth. They descend upon the Capitol dome & White House, grinding
government and its wicked edifice to dust beneath their holy carriage. Alighting
from his holy conveyance carried by eagles beneath his feet, he stands before us
in all his glory....tentacles gracefully writhing, and expansive white beard fluttering
in the wind...he begins to speak in every known language simultaneously.

At this point, I plan to listen.
Or, something like "I am the Eternal Brahman" or I am the Lord Your God" or something like that in bold letters on the Cosmic Microwave Background. Even "42" would work...
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
So, since God does not do that, there are only three logical possibilities to choose from:
  1. God uses Messengers, knowing that not everyone will believe in them.
  2. God does not communicate at all.
  3. God does not exist.

4. God is continually communicating to everyone but the vast majority are so wrapped up in their lives that they don't hear. Or another variant: there is nothing other than God and what appears to be a lack of communication is people not knowing how to listen.

I derive this partly from saying something to my wife that she claims she never heard which means I never said it. And would you believe her claim that she speaks but I don't listen?
 
This is a carryover from a dialogue that has been ongoing between me and an Atheist on another forum for about five years... Yes, five years and we are still going around in the same circles. I posted something about this about six months ago but I am back with a slightly different slant.

Synopsis: The issue at hand is that this Atheist thinks that God should communicate directly to everyone in the world (all 7.4 billion people) because that is “what he considers” the only credible method of communication. In his opinion, if God does not communicate directly to everyone, that is evidence that God does not exist. One of his premises is that a God would want everyone to believe in Him, and direct communication to everyone would be “the only way” to accomplish that.

My position is that God wants everyone to believe in Him but God does not need everyone to believe in Him because an omnipotent/omniscient/fully self-sufficient God does not need anything from anyone. If an omnipotent God needed everyone to believe in Him, He could have communicated directly to everyone. So, since God does not do that, there are only three logical possibilities to choose from:
  1. God uses Messengers, knowing that not everyone will believe in them.
  2. God does not communicate at all.
  3. God does not exist.
There is no option #4, that if God exists, God would communicate directly with everyone, because God has not communicated directly with everyone.

In other words, since there is no evidence that God has ever communicated directly to everyone we can assume that is not what God wants to do, if God exists.

Credibility is not the issue here, this issue is the best way to communicate to accomplish what God is trying to accomplish.

Who would know the best way to communicate to humans in order to accomplish what God wants to accomplish, humans or God?

Recently a atheist told me the same thing, that if God existed, he would communicate to everyone and that communication could not be misunderstood.

I told him even if God did communicate to all, someone would likely say its a mass halucination. And others would still resist that God. So, it still would not solve the problem.

Also i said, the reason God does not comnunicate to everyone (directly) is due to some peoples pride. God loves humility. So, he chooses who he directly talks too.

Also, sometimes its not pride, sometimes its the desensitization to the spirit world (where God dwells). This dont mean God cannot overide that gap, but he has designed this gap so we can respect and apreciate the power of this reality.

Also, theres another. God has instituted the chain of authority. God communicates to angels. Angels communicate to the rulers of earth. The rulers of earth communicate to there societies.

Also, God gives freedom, with freedom comes the choice to either want or not want God to communicate. Theres also the choice to think with ones own mind, hence misunderstand the communication. If God made everyone understand it correctly, hed be indirectly making us all robots with no freedom to think and ponder. That also on top of it, depreciates the process of thought and mental work of intellectualism.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
This is a carryover from a dialogue that has been ongoing between me and an Atheist on another forum for about five years... Yes, five years and we are still going around in the same circles. I posted something about this about six months ago but I am back with a slightly different slant.

Synopsis: The issue at hand is that this Atheist thinks that God should communicate directly to everyone in the world (all 7.4 billion people) because that is “what he considers” the only credible method of communication. In his opinion, if God does not communicate directly to everyone, that is evidence that God does not exist. One of his premises is that a God would want everyone to believe in Him, and direct communication to everyone would be “the only way” to accomplish that.

My position is that God wants everyone to believe in Him but God does not need everyone to believe in Him because an omnipotent/omniscient/fully self-sufficient God does not need anything from anyone. If an omnipotent God needed everyone to believe in Him, He could have communicated directly to everyone. So, since God does not do that, there are only three logical possibilities to choose from:
  1. God uses Messengers, knowing that not everyone will believe in them.
  2. God does not communicate at all.
  3. God does not exist.
There is no option #4, that if God exists, God would communicate directly with everyone, because God has not communicated directly with everyone.

In other words, since there is no evidence that God has ever communicated directly to everyone we can assume that is not what God wants to do, if God exists.

Credibility is not the issue here, this issue is the best way to communicate to accomplish what God is trying to accomplish.

Who would know the best way to communicate to humans in order to accomplish what God wants to accomplish, humans or God?

Feeings, dreams, signs, inner communication and dialogue, reflection, emotions of connection and wellbeing, feeling of a higher calling, reading scripure as god speaking to them, and a boat load of other ways people communicate with god and vis versa.

Some say that god only communicates through scrpture, prophets, angels, and so forth. Communication is multifacted. When it is from god, who is to say one person hears god and another person does not based on how they feel god should communicates with them.
 
4. God is continually communicating to everyone but the vast majority are so wrapped up in their lives that they don't hear. Or another variant: there is nothing other than God and what appears to be a lack of communication is people not knowing how to listen.

I derive this partly from saying something to my wife that she claims she never heard which means I never said it. And would you believe her claim that she speaks but I don't listen?

I identify, my wife tells me something, i nod in agreement. Later she reminds me, i say you told me that? I dont remember. :p
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Give me one good reason why God should communicate directly to everyone.
In theory, because he created each and everyone of us. We are told that he loves each of us (well, most of us). How would a parent not want to talk to his children? Would an artist refuse to look up and admire their own creations? Would a judge refuse to hear a defendant before passing sentence?

Some say that god only communicates through scrpture, prophets, angels, and so forth. Communication is multifaceted. When it is from god, who is to say one person hears god and another person does not based on how they feel god should communicates with them.
I'm sure Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, David Koresh, Jim Jones and Charles Manson would enthusiastically agree!
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Synopsis: The issue at hand is that this Atheist thinks that God should communicate directly to everyone in the world (all 7.4 billion people) because that is “what he considers” the only credible method of communication. In his opinion, if God does not communicate directly to everyone, that is evidence that God does not exist. One of his premises is that a God would want everyone to believe in Him, and direct communication to everyone would be “the only way” to accomplish that.

I have to wonder how come he concluded that a God that he does not believe in would have such a need. Maybe he was picturing the mainstream variety of Abraham's God?

Me, I am very much apatheistic.

Anyway, from what I see of the world, I must assume that if there is a God it does not particularly want to be believed in, certainly not by everyone. One reason might be recognition that such a belief is not always healthy, even.

If however the premise is that God somewhat resembles Abraham's conception of it; exists; and is indeed interested in being believed in; than I can see your friend's point.

It does not make much sense to believe in such a God while attempting to explain why he does not reveal itself directly to everyone. If nothing else, that turned out to be rather wasteful.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
First, thank you for such a well written and interesting OP!
Thanks, I was not sure how well it would go over, but I like talking to atheists and I prefer talking about God in general rather than about religion in particular. I am trying to steer clear of the religious threads where everyone argues about religion. I am not big on religion, I just happen to be a Baha’i because it makes logical sense to me. I have no mushy gushy feelings about God or Baha’u’llah and I have some of the same issues with God that some atheists have. :rolleyes:
Madness! If you can be so interested in what someone has to say that you can argue with them for five years, you should consider marrying them. Except in your case, you're already married. But otherwise....
It goes through cycles and there are breaks in between. I am on a break now because I realized I finally lost it when I went running into the kitchen last night and started hitting my husband again after reading the latest installments from this poster. I wrote up my responses in Word documents as usually do for longer posts, but then I decided not to post them. It does not matter what I say, the responses are always the same and it escalates when he cannot answer simple questions such as the following.
  • Why would an omnipotent God do what He did not want to do?
  • If God could have used another [better] method to communicate, why didn’t He use it?
  • Why should God speak for Himself?
  • Why does an omnipotent God need to excuse Himself for not doing what YOU think He should do?
  • How do you know what God could do?
  • Who are you to say [to an omnipotent/omniscient God] what He should do? On what authority do you speak?
His response was that my questions were all stupid and pointless attempts to evade the real issues, and, as such deserve no answer. Obviously he could not answer the questions without sounding ridiculous. But what are the real issues? The issue is that this poster thinks he knows what god would do if god existed and god won’t DO what this poster thinks God should DO.

He just cannot see how illogical it is that an Omnipotent God would take marching orders from any human, or that an Omniscient God would not know more than he knows about how to communicate. It is beyond incredible, but the clincher is that he thinks he is the king of logic and he even thinks God is subject to his logic. God cannot do anything that is logically impossible. I had to take a break from him for a while. I might go back or not, I never know. I live like a good Buddhist, in the moment. :)

My poor husband is sick of me talking to him about this poster. He does not have the kind of patience I have. :rolleyes: I really should marry you. ;)
I do not believe his premise that a god would necessarily want everyone to believe in him to be correct. For him to assert that implies he knows what a god would think, should there be a god. That strikes me as absurd.
It is absurd but he has no answer when I confront him on it. The only answer is that God, if God existed, would want 100% belief. He has no reason because there is no reason except that he thinks that is what God would want.... And you wonder why I am losing my mind? :eek:
Of course if God existed God would know the best way to communicate to humans because (a) God is Omniscient, and (b) God knows what he wants to communicate and what He is trying to accomplish with that communication. This is logic 101 stuff.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
For an atheist to believe it would have to be impressive.

How about pre-warning a TV Channel that "I am going to appear before you all". Then at the allocated time, God appears and does something 'miraculous' - perhaps cause the River Nile to flow backwards; Maybe take 2 fishes and 5 loaves and feed the multitude; part the North Sea so that the migrants could cross.
Sorry, but God does not want to be that obvious, obviously. :rolleyes:

There is no indication God will ever do anything that miraculous that could give away the fact that He exists. God likes hiding or He would not be hiding, since God could come on down if he chose to, since God is Omnipotent.
The final one (thank you Stephen Fry) explain if you are all loving, etc., etc,. how come you allow children to suffer and die from bone cancer.
There are answers to this question but that is not the purpose of this thread. And why only children? Adults also suffer, some much more than others. Personally, that is what I think God has to answer, the unequal distribution of suffering. I could have been an atheist if I had not found a religion that makes sense to me and answered “most” of the questions I have... Gosh darn it. It would have been easier to be an atheist. :(
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
If a god or goddess ever crated the humans as well as the rest of life why would that god/goddess not want to reveal themselves.
I think God did reveal Himself, but not all of Himself.
How do you even know what the best way to accomplish what god is trying to accomplish if the goddess does not communicate? Messengers?
I think that is the best way since an Omniscient God would have to know the best way... Since the only evidence of God that we have comes from Messengers we can assume that if God communicates at all He uses Messengers.
Those that are messengers should be able to demonstrate the communication with the god or goddess.
I do not know how they could prove that they received the communication if they were the only ones who received that communication.
If god/goddess does not communicate at all than there is no reason to believe in the god/goddess because no communication has ever been sent or will be sent and the only knowledge can come from the natural world which would then be the only way to know anything. If there is no god then the natural world is our teacher. So 2 and 3 end with the same conclusion - the natural world is our teacher.
That works for people who do not believe in Messengers. :)
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Who would know the best way to communicate to humans in order to accomplish what God wants to accomplish, humans or God?

The title of the thread is not consistent with the OP.

As far as the title goes, I'd say that predictability and repeatability. In other words, if god said: "i'll be broadcasting every tuesday at 5pm ET", and then god did that, that would have some cred.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
How do you know what a deity knows or does not know, thinks or does not think. That infers a personal knowledge about the deity which means you have a way of directly connecting with the deity.
I do not know what the deity knows or thinks. All I know is what the deity wants because the deity revealed that to a Messenger and I read that.
Would a deity really be at the top of the food chain? Does the deity pray on the ones lower in the food chain which in itself is a misconception since there is not really a top but rather a transition of energy from one life to another all interdependent - no top or bottom otherwise one might consider the decomposers as the top since the are at the end point before the organic materials enter back into the ground. This reasoning indicates the deity is knowable so if knowable the deity is approachable.
Food chain was a bad metaphor. What I really meant is God is far, far above humans in power and knowledge and wisdom.

The deity is not knowable or approachable. All we can know is what Messengers revealed about the deity, some of its attributes and what it wants for us. Its Essence is unknowable.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Simple existence is not a "game changer" in any way I can see. The only way it is if and only if there is some direct consequence established by the God...like, "Believe in me, and you get to come to Heaven with me; don't, and not so much!"

A god that doesn't care isn't relevant, as far as I can see.
I agree. :)
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
This is a carryover from a dialogue that has been ongoing between me and an Atheist on another forum for about five years... Yes, five years and we are still going around in the same circles. I posted something about this about six months ago but I am back with a slightly different slant.

Synopsis: The issue at hand is that this Atheist thinks that God should communicate directly to everyone in the world (all 7.4 billion people) because that is “what he considers” the only credible method of communication. In his opinion, if God does not communicate directly to everyone, that is evidence that God does not exist. One of his premises is that a God would want everyone to believe in Him, and direct communication to everyone would be “the only way” to accomplish that.

My position is that God wants everyone to believe in Him but God does not need everyone to believe in Him because an omnipotent/omniscient/fully self-sufficient God does not need anything from anyone. If an omnipotent God needed everyone to believe in Him, He could have communicated directly to everyone. So, since God does not do that, there are only three logical possibilities to choose from:
  1. God uses Messengers, knowing that not everyone will believe in them.
  2. God does not communicate at all.
  3. God does not exist.
There is no option #4, that if God exists, God would communicate directly with everyone, because God has not communicated directly with everyone.

In other words, since there is no evidence that God has ever communicated directly to everyone we can assume that is not what God wants to do, if God exists.

Credibility is not the issue here, this issue is the best way to communicate to accomplish what God is trying to accomplish.

Who would know the best way to communicate to humans in order to accomplish what God wants to accomplish, humans or God?
I would have gone with option 4.

But since you limited the choices, you would have to go through a process of elimination.

1 is eliminated right away because there is simply no consensus among any 'messenger of God' out there. The confusion among all of 'God's Messengers' is mind-boggling of which that type of confusion gives birth to the thousands of denominations we see today, with obviously , lack of agreement with themselves as to what their own holy book means and says. There's clearly no communication at all from God to anybody which directly plays into number 2.

What's left is number 3, for which I would say evidence speaks for itself solely on the basis that there is in fact no evidence to begin with. God does not exist.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Because they're part of a larger system He/She/It/Them wants to see what happens?

Or maybe we're a creative arts project?

Or maybe we taste good, and He/She/It/Them wants there to be lots of us, cause He/She/It/Them is having other deities over for a party after work, and we make good finger food, so to speak?
Any of these are possible in the absence of any other explanation. ;)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
4. God is continually communicating to everyone but the vast majority are so wrapped up in their lives that they don't hear. Or another variant: there is nothing other than God and what appears to be a lack of communication is people not knowing how to listen.
I will buy that. ;)
I derive this partly from saying something to my wife that she claims she never heard which means I never said it. And would you believe her claim that she speaks but I don't listen?
That happens to me to, with my husband. Then again he is getting older so he is kind of hard of hearing, so it is not all on him. I just need to speak a little louder and I think God could do the same, so I understand how atheists feel. God might just need to step up the volume. ;)
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Recently a atheist told me the same thing, that if God existed, he would communicate to everyone and that communication could not be misunderstood.

I told him even if God did communicate to all, someone would likely say its a mass halucination. And others would still resist that God. So, it still would not solve the problem.

Also i said, the reason God does not comnunicate to everyone (directly) is due to some peoples pride. God loves humility. So, he chooses who he directly talks too.

Also, sometimes its not pride, sometimes its the desensitization to the spirit world (where God dwells). This dont mean God cannot overide that gap, but he has designed this gap so we can respect and apreciate the power of this reality.

Also, theres another. God has instituted the chain of authority. God communicates to angels. Angels communicate to the rulers of earth. The rulers of earth communicate to there societies.

Also, God gives freedom, with freedom comes the choice to either want or not want God to communicate. Theres also the choice to think with ones own mind, hence misunderstand the communication. If God made everyone understand it correctly, hed be indirectly making us all robots with no freedom to think and ponder. That also on top of it, depreciates the process of thought and mental work of intellectualism.
Those are about the best explanations I have heard as to why God does not communicate directly to everyone. I would like to share this with my atheist friend but I doubt it would make any difference. :(
I already know what he would say about the hallucination and resisting God... He would say that God is Omnipotent so God could make sure we all know it is really Him and God could make us believe in Him... :rolleyes:

This atheist does not believe that we have free will which is why he does not think humans bear any responsibility for believing in God or causing suffering... It is all on God, God should make us believe and God should end all suffering, just because God is Omnipotent. :rolleyes:
 
Top