Bad Chihuahua! (An Inability To Separate God From Religion)

[PureX]

On another thread someone asked atheists why and how they became atheists. And nearly every response sited some unresolvable issue with religion, and/or with how some religion was defining God. The idea being that as the atheist rejected the God as it was defined by that religion, they rejected the idea of God all together.

And for some reason the irrationality of this thought process never seems to have crossed anyone's mind. As to a person, some religion or other was being allowed to define God, without doubt or exception, so that in rejecting that religion's 'God', the entire concept of and gamut of alternative possibilities was being dismissed, en total.

"A chihuahua bit me once as a kid so I reject and despise all dogs to this day."

It seems to me that there is a strong prejudice being served, here. As evidenced by a blanket dismissal prior to any honest exploration or investigation into the many possible ways we humans might choose to define or conceptualize "God".

 

[Nakosis]

On another thread someone asked atheists why and how they became atheists. And nearly every response sited some unresolvable issue with religion, and/or with how some religion was defining God. The idea being that as the atheist rejected the God as it was defined by that religion, they rejected the idea of God all together.

And for some reason the irrationality of this thought process never seems to have crossed anyone's mind. As to a person, some religion or other was being allowed to define God, without doubt or exception, so that in rejecting that religion's 'God', the entire concept of and gamut of alternative possibilities was being dismissed, en total.

"A chihuahua bit me once as a kid so I reject and despise all dogs to this day."

It seems to me that there is a strong prejudice being served, here. As evidenced by a blanket dismissal prior to any honest exploration or investigation into the many possible ways we humans might choose to define or conceptualize "God".

That's not me so I'll let the them there crazy God/religion hating atheists respond.

 

[Revoltingest]

On another thread someone asked atheists why and how they became atheists. And nearly every response sited some unresolvable issue with religion, and/or with how some religion was defining God.

Duh!
Were it resolvable, it would've been resolved.

The idea being that as the atheist rejected the God as it was defined by that religion, they rejected the idea of God all together.

I don't recall any of us giving that reason.
Perhaps someone did. I sure didn't.
I smell straw.

It seems to me that there is a strong prejudice being served, here. As evidenced by a blanket dismissal prior to any honest exploration or investigation into the many possible ways we humans might choose to define or conceptualize "God".

I am prejudiced against ridiculous claims that lack
any objective evidence whatsoever. Without such
evidence, there's nothing to investigate....unless
you're referring to your feelings. As we can see,
those things haven't led you anywhere positive.

 

[JDMS]

I agree that some atheists do seem to include resentment as part of their disbelief. Personally, I just don't see evidence for the existence of a God or god(s) or what have you, do it's more like I can't believe then I don't want to believe.

May be a bit personal for this thread, but I find myself desperately praying and wishing I could believe as I try to save some of my very old ranchu goldfish that I had since I was an adolescent. They aren't doing well after an unexpected crash in the pond's filter while I was out of town...

 

[Twilight Hue]

On another thread someone asked atheists why and how they became atheists. And nearly every response sited some unresolvable issue with religion, and/or with how some religion was defining God. The idea being that as the atheist rejected the God as it was defined by that religion, they rejected the idea of God all together.

And for some reason the irrationality of this thought process never seems to have crossed anyone's mind. As to a person, some religion or other was being allowed to define God, without doubt or exception, so that in rejecting that religion's 'God', the entire concept of and gamut of alternative possibilities was being dismissed, en total.

"A chihuahua bit me once as a kid so I reject and despise all dogs to this day."

It seems to me that there is a strong prejudice being served, here. As evidenced by a blanket dismissal prior to any honest exploration or investigation into the many possible ways we humans might choose to define or conceptualize "God".

It's as simple as the saying by Christopher Hitchens.

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".

 

[Alien826]

We have to be careful not to spread the definition of "god" so far that it loses all meaning. We have the Judeo-Christian concept of a being that is all powerful and has an intimate interest in all my doings. Then, there is describing the whole universe as 'god", which doesn't do anything much beyond existing. And everything in between.

I would say that most (Western) atheists know perfectly well that they are disbelieving a subset of the definitions of "god" but we tend to get used to listening to the former concepts, and ignore the rest. Personally, if someone wants to believe that the universe is god, that's fine by me. I might even agree with them, depending on what they mean by it.

 

[Soandso]

Meh. Doesn't reflect my path to atheism

While there were initial aspects of Christianity that would lead me to question the idea of god, I still explored other ideas of God for a decade after leaving christianity before realizing that I just wasn't convinced that God existed as an actual being - at least, not any ideas of God that I had explored as of yet. Could that change? Sure. We'll see, though

 

[PureX]

I agree that some atheists do seem to include resentment as part of their disbelief. Personally, I just don't see evidence for the existence of a God or god(s) or what have you, do it's more like I can't believe then I don't want to believe.

But how do any of us know what "evidence" to look for?

I had a "God experience" as a small child. It was amazing and inexplicable. Very positive and uplifting. And yet to this day I don't know what to make of it. And in fact if it were to recur, right now, I still wouldn't know what to make of it. Because I have no possible way to "verify it". And that's with DIRECT PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.

It's like trying to validate infinity. It's simply beyond our (human) cognitive comprehension. So I don't know what to make of people saying that they "have no evidence". What evidence could any of us ever possibly have? Also, my experience was not "religious", and was not inspired by my own religiosity since I was only 6 years old at the time. And in fact when I was sent to a religious grade school shortly thereafter their religious indoctrination never really found a place in me partly because I "knew better".

May be a bit personal for this thread, but I find myself desperately praying and wishing I could believe as I try to save some of my very old ranchu goldfish that I had since I was an adolescent.

See, I find this very strange and interesting. You want to "believe" what, exactly? What does it mean to "believe in" God? I have no idea what or even if God is. So what is there for me to "believe in" except someone else's proclamations about what they think God is. And why would I believe them?

Yet I can still choose to hope that a God of my preferred understanding exists. And I can still choose to live as if that hope will turn out to be true. After all, I have no evidence that this God I prefer to hope exists DOESN'T exist. And neither does anyone else. And not only that, but I have gained ample evidence that my choosing to hope in this God's existence, and by living as if it exists, makes my experience of living life far better than before I made this choice. So that the choice then produces its own evidence.

They aren't doing well after an unexpected crash in the pond's filter while I was out of town...

Misfortunes befall is all, big fish or small. I hope they can rally. And hope is a good thing.

 

[Revoltingest]

We have to be careful not to spread the definition of "god" so far that it loses all meaning. We have the Judeo-Christian concept of a being that is all powerful and has an intimate interest in all my doings. Then, there is describing the whole universe as 'god", which doesn't do anything much beyond existing. And everything in between.

I would say that most (Western) atheists know perfectly well that they are disbelieving a subset of the definitions of "god" but we tend to get used to listening to the former concepts, and ignore the rest. Personally, if someone wants to believe that the universe is god, that's fine by me. I might even agree with them, depending on what they mean by it.

I've heard the odd claim that it's unreasonable
to disbelieve in gods we haven't yet heard of.
What's the alternative....believing in them?

 

[PureX]

We have to be careful not to spread the definition of "god" so far that it loses all meaning. We have the Judeo-Christian concept of a being that is all powerful and has an intimate interest in all my doings. Then, there is describing the whole universe as 'god", which doesn't do anything much beyond existing. And everything in between.

I would say that most (Western) atheists know perfectly well that they are disbelieving a subset of the definitions of "god" but we tend to get used to listening to the former concepts, and ignore the rest. Personally, if someone wants to believe that the universe is god, that's fine by me. I might even agree with them, depending on what they mean by it.

When I was a small child I had a personal experience of God. It was both amazing and inexplicable, and I cannot explain it to this day. But I can say that it was not religious at all. I sensed no "all powerful, all knowing, all judgmental" being. Only an intense love and joy coming from "it", for MY existence. That's it. No warnings, no messages, no expectations and no demands. Just huge joy and love, for me. Went on for over an hour, I think. When I finally went home everyone could tell something was different about me, I giess. And they kept asking me what happened. I didn't know, so I couldn't answer them. But I felt fine. And I soon forgot that anything had happened. Only to remember years later, when I was older.

I have no idea what to make of it. And no explanation for it. And certainly no way to "validate" it. I don't even "believe in" or "disbelieve in" it. It simply is what it is. And I leave it at that.

But why should I need to? It was an amazing gift in that it made me impervious to religious OR anti-religious indoctrination. And even better, it made me not need to understand it or to 'prove it' to myself or anyone else. That's simply not possible.

So I really don't understand this need for definitions and evidential validation. When even if you had it, it wouldn't do you any good. We can't explain the inexplicable. We can't validate infinity. We can't prove the existence of that which transcends existence. We can't "own God" with our minds. It just doesn't work that way. And I will say that to the religion-monger just as I will say that to the atheism mongers. It's not about what we know. It's a gift. And we can accept it and trust in it, or not.

THEN, if the atheists chooses not, I will be curious as to why.

 

[Revoltingest]

I agree that some atheists do seem to include resentment as part of their disbelief.

I've met such atheists, who were typically
once believers, but endured abuse by
their fellows in the name of their god.

 

[Alien826]

I've heard the odd claim that it's unreasonable
to disbelieve in gods we haven't yet heard of.
What's the alternative....believing in them?

If we haven't heard of them then we are physically unable to form any opinion of them. If you mean that someone comes up with some previously unknown (to me) description of some god like being, then I tend to either positively disbelieve (if there is something about it is internally inconsistent or flies in the face of reason) or look into it further (if it makes some kind of sense to me) or file it away under "odd things I have heard". Incidentally that applies to everything I hear, not just religion.

I'm not sure if that answers your question.

 

[LadyJane]

Is the chihuahua business meant to compare one dog bite leading to the dismissal of all canines with the idea of disgruntled apostates dismissal of ze gods?

That suggests an irrational and hasty reaction to something unpleasant rather than a non-violent process in the mental machinery that delivers a deity free model of reality.

The rejection is of the existence of something that hinges on our belief. And can be similarly exhilarating and as liberating as the feelings described above.

It's just a matter of perception.

 

[Revoltingest]

If we haven't heard of them then we are physically unable to form any opinion of them.

We can based upon a trait that makes
it a god, ie, a supernatural being.

If you mean that someone comes up with some previously unknown (to me) description of some god like being, then I tend to either positively disbelieve (if there is something about it is internally inconsistent or flies in the face of reason) or look into it further (if it makes some kind of sense to me) or file it away under "odd things I have heard". Incidentally that applies to everything I hear, not just religion.

I'm not sure if that answers your question.

Yes.

 

[Alien826]

We can based upon a trait that makes
it a god, ie, a supernatural being.

You misunderstand. If we haven't heard of them we have no reason to think about them at all because we have nothing to think about. Once someone makes some claim about a god then we have heard about it. Then your statement is correct.

 

[Heyo]

On another thread someone asked atheists why and how they became atheists. And nearly every response sited some unresolvable issue with religion, and/or with how some religion was defining God. The idea being that as the atheist rejected the God as it was defined by that religion, they rejected the idea of God all together.

And for some reason the irrationality of this thought process never seems to have crossed anyone's mind. As to a person, some religion or other was being allowed to define God, without doubt or exception, so that in rejecting that religion's 'God', the entire concept of and gamut of alternative possibilities was being dismissed, en total.

"A chihuahua bit me once as a kid so I reject and despise all dogs to this day."

It seems to me that there is a strong prejudice being served, here. As evidenced by a blanket dismissal prior to any honest exploration or investigation into the many possible ways we humans might choose to define or conceptualize "God".

That's why I identify as an Agnostic. I let others contemplate about the existence of gods. There is enough evidence for me to know that nobody even knows what a god is. No need to ponder the existence of something nobody knows anything about.

 

[RestlessSoul]

I've heard the odd claim that it's unreasonable
to disbelieve in gods we haven't yet heard of.
What's the alternative....believing in them?

The alternative is neither to believe nor disbelieve. A binary mindset won’t see this, of course.

 

[RestlessSoul]

That's why I identify as an Agnostic. I let others contemplate about the existence of gods. There is enough evidence for me to know that nobody even knows what a god is. No need to ponder the existence of something nobody knows anything about.

Not interested in dark matter or energy then?

 

[Heyo]

Not interested in dark matter or energy then?

We know something about Dark Matter and Dark Energy, they are phenomena. We just don't know what exactly causes the phenomena.
"God" is not a moniker for a physical phenomenon. (Well, maybe someone has used "god" to describe a phenomenon - but most people don't agree.)

 

[RestlessSoul]

We know something about Dark Matter and Dark Energy, they are phenomena. We just don't know what exactly causes the phenomena.
"God" is not a moniker for a physical phenomenon. (Well, maybe someone has used "god" to describe a phenomenon - but most people don't agree.)

We don’t, really. We observe phenomena which require other, unobserved phenomena to explain them. In other words, we see what we suppose to be the gravitational effects of dark matter and energy, and hypothesise their existence based on this indirect observation. To fill in the gaps, as it were.

Religious people see the effects of God everywhere around them, in much the same way.