Atheists: Your Perception of God

[Audie]

No "incomprehensible", just illogical, and disingenuous.

Obviously it is to you, or you would not imagine such things as you do, then attempt to criticize.
You in fact are like me in one way- we both criticize your fantasies.

Do try to show a little more grace though and not go into such crude insults.

 

[Audie]

Yes. The truth is that most of the people who are "discussing" the subject don't really know what they're talking about. Which is why they don't understand the difference between the cultural/religious theistic artifice, and the actual philosophical content/problem that the artifice is being used to embody, and represent. And as a result, their "discussions" just continue to go round and round and round in pointless circles. Pointless, except for the inevitable ego-stroking involved.

Observing your concocted, and generally mean spirited complaints
about atheists, we trust you are not trying to include yourself
among those who are offering informed discussion.

 

[Arthur P. Dent]

I'll be your Huckleberry! ;-)

If you were raised into a religion and now identify with atheism, is it the god of that religion? Is it the God you think the speaker is speaking of?

When someone speaks to you of God, what springs to mind?

What God do you default to?

I was raised in a Protestant home and was taught that god was "omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnisapient, omnitemporal, transcendent" entity so that is what "springs to mind"... however, after studying the subject matter over the past 10 years plus, I now know to ask the theist in question what THEY mean by "god". It is now my learned opinion that if there are say, 4 billion theists on the planet, then there are effectively 4 billion definitions of "god" based on their culture and own personal biases...

Just my $0.02....

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

I'll be your Huckleberry! ;-)





I was raised in a Protestant home and was taught that god was "omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnisapient, omnitemporal, transcendent" entity so that is what "springs to mind"... however, after studying the subject matter over the past 10 years plus, I now know to ask the theist in question what THEY mean by "god". It is now my learned opinion that if there are say, 4 billion theists on the planet, then there are effectively 4 billion definitions of "god" based on their culture and own personal biases...

Just my $0.02....

Omnisapient means me think "All Monkey".

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

I've asked Atheists this question, and they tell me that they think that people who refer to God are imagining or referring to some sort of man figure like a kind of literal Zeus type guy, or otherwise Jesus more rarely, but most seem to think or imagine a kind of mythological magical man is being referred to by the term God.

I have asked Christians, and many of them seem to also think of God in this fashion.

I have seen depictions in the media that refer to "God" and they depict God in this fashion as well.

In films "Gods" or "God" all appear as human figures, often older men, sometimes as a child.

People also depict the "Devil" in this way, but when Atheists think of what the people are calling the Devil, they seem to imagine that people are maybe referring to a big hairy shapeshifting demon goat bull black demon thing.

I don't believe in any such things, so maybe I'm an Atheist too.

 

[paarsurrey]

When people of varying religions speak of God, they typically are speaking of their perception of God from their own religious experience unless otherwise specified.

When someone speaks to you of God, what springs to mind?

If you were raised into a religion and now identify with atheism, is it the god of that religion? Is it the God you think the speaker is speaking of?

What God do you default to?

"Atheists: Your Perception of God"

Do Atheism have a perception of G-d? I doubt. Right, please?

Regards

 

[MikeF]

If you have no default perception of God, how do you carry on a conversation about God?

You make an excellent point in that we use categories like theist, atheist, Methodist, Buddhist for convenience and efficiency. If one wants to get down to brass tacks, each party would need to clearly define their position, find some common ground, and then work on any differences from there.

 

[QuestioningMind]

When people of varying religions speak of God, they typically are speaking of their perception of God from their own religious experience unless otherwise specified.

When someone speaks to you of God, what springs to mind?

If you were raised into a religion and now identify with atheism, is it the god of that religion? Is it the God you think the speaker is speaking of?

What God do you default to?

As an atheist who has no belief in any god beings my perceptions of god are entirely dependent upon the definitions provided by theists making a claim that there is some sort of a god being.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

For me, the word god is so subjective it is pretty much worthless outside of "higher power than currently known highest power".

IMO, that definition is probably the most useless definition of all of them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So how do you carry on discussion about God when you have no idea what the discussion partner is speaking of?

In my experience (outside of RF, at least), when someone brings up God, it's almost never in the context of a discussion about God.

 

[MikeF]

When people of varying religions speak of God, they typically are speaking of their perception of God from their own religious experience unless otherwise specified.

When someone speaks to you of God, what springs to mind?

If you were raised into a religion and now identify with atheism, is it the god of that religion? Is it the God you think the speaker is speaking of?

What God do you default to?

I would be interested to know if there was a specific theistic position that you feel gets unfairly disregarded by being lumped in with all other theistic positions held in the minds of those self-identifying as atheist.

 

[SalixIncendium]

In my experience (outside of RF, at least), when someone brings up God, it's almost never in the context of a discussion about God.

I’m sorry to hear that. I’ve had many.

I suppose it depends on whom one chooses to engage in such discussions.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I would be interested to know if there was a specific theistic position that you feel gets unfairly disregarded by being lumped in with all other theistic positions held in the minds of those self-identifying as atheist.

Not really. I asked more out of curiosity than anything else.

But since you ask, it appears that evidence is mounting that this would depend almost exclusively on the atheist whether or not some theistic views are lumped in with others.

 

[MonkeyFire]

I pray to quintessence, love & aether.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I’m sorry to hear that. I’ve had many.

No skin off my nose; I have other hobbies.

I suppose it depends on whom one chooses to engage in such discussions.

Except for RF, I generally don't choose to engage in discussions about God.

Theism is interesting as a social and historical phenomenon, but the idea of a God (any version) that might exist in reality isn't something I feel any need to take seriously.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Ok...we are all just one BIG accident right?

I don’t know about all that, but I’m thinking your post may have been.

Care to discuss the topic?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

They "exist" as artifice. They "exist" as reality in the minds of the "believers". They just doesn't comport with the reality you've developed in your own mind.

I'm just saying this to be clear.

I don't understand the last part.

If god is an artifice to these people, and atheists do not believe the artifice exists, therefore they don't believe god exists. But you're saying that atheists don't understand god/unknown but just go off the artifice.

Is the artifice god or not?

So what. We humans are all carrying around a "reality" in our heads that don't match up with anyone else's, or in many instances with the actual facts, even. The point is not "who's right and who's wrong". The point is to share these realities with each other, and investigate them, to see if they'll better work for ourselves than the one we currently hold.

If it's not whose right or wrong, what is the intent behind you opposing what atheists believe and don't believe?

You've mentioned their views don't make sense and they are rejecting the content. So, if they are not right or wrong in their views, you have respect for their perspective and hopefully willing to understand it? (Since no one is proving either right or wrong)

I didn't get this impression from you before because it was mostly on what atheists think and how their thinking is invalid etc. You've developing better understanding?

Of course they are. But from our limited, human perspective, the answers are of a greater nature and significance than anything we know. So to us, they are "Divine".

I disagree. The unknown just is. Life is a mystery. Humans make more of it what it is so they can find their place and origin in the "grand" scheme of things (they say). It's all from a human perspective-in humans' minds). Life isn't a mystery in itself-just to us.

How, logically, does one "reject that the content exists" (The Great Mystery of Being) without solving the mystery? Indifference is not rejection. It's just indifference.

It's hard to understand, I know. Most people do not reject that life is a mystery. They reject the artifice on it "and" they reject the religious interpretation of it.

If you asked an atheist "do you believe life is a mystery?" Most likely they will say yes.
If you asked "is the mystery grand and divine?" They'd most likely be confused or say no.

Not because they don't believe life is a mystery but the application that this mystery entails has no divinity attached to it-it just is. So, they can agree, disagree. Believe that's true or disbelieve. Reject the claim or not. Or be indifferent to it.

I'm indifferent to it (though you mentioned I rejected-which I found that odd)

I am here to clear this confusion up for them. (You're welcome!)

Haha. Just remember that your explanation is one of many. So, don't expect them to agree with you just because they understand you. There's too many definitions of what god is (mystery and not) to settle on one person's opinion just because they claim its true.

Of course I can, and I do. And I have explained how, and why.

It's your choice to tell them they are rejecting.

I'm saying that doesn't make sense, sense their view of god is not a mystery-therefore they are not rejecting it. You're saying they do. They reject the artifice and many are indifferent to the content.

But they windmills are still just windmills. And I am not a fool. So I am able to see this, and say so to those who keep insisting that they are dragons (theists OR atheists).

They are dragons?

Is it possible to say "I don't understand" without calling them fools, dragons, and so forth?

Ignorance of other people's perspectives doesn't make them fools, no?

 

[MikeF]

Not really. I asked more out of curiosity than anything else.

But since you ask, it appears that evidence is mounting that this would depend almost exclusively on the atheist whether or not some theistic views are lumped in with others.

Absolutely. If one is unaware of any specifics or nuances of a particular belief, then when the generic word "God" is used, the recipient is left only with all previous definitions and contextual uses to decipher what the speaker means by its use. If the recipient identifies as atheist, then all previous exposure to the use of the word has left them unconvinced of the existence of things labeled such.

 

[Melissa Fuentes]

I don’t know about all that, but I’m thinking your post may have been.

Care to discuss the topic?

If your all about telling me I'm an accident...sure

 

[Melissa Fuentes]

If your all about telling me I'm an accident...sure

As for GOD. You can try.....