is God atheist?
- Thread starter Q25
- Start date
Almost everybody has some version of “GOD” that they harbor in the recesses of their minds; almost everyone, from the most primitive person to the most civilized.
It is that God in our minds that we often attempt to question, that sometimes we love and sometimes we feel angry with, and even from time to time we judge and condemn for His wrong deeds and His injustice.
To tell the truth, we often visualize Him as a sweet, plump grandfather, or as an enraged, wrathful sultan who sits on a star or in space FAR ABOVE US.
On the other hand, some people with a broader mind argue that there cannot be such a “GOD” as imagined and espoused by believers and therefore they do not believe a god. They are known as atheists –the unbelievers–.
However, neither the atheists, who do not recognize the existence of God, nor those who have a mental image of GOD that is in accordance with what they heard or have been preconditioned to believe, are aware of “MOHAMMED's ALLAH” at all!
It is that God in our minds that we often attempt to question, that sometimes we love and sometimes we feel angry with, and even from time to time we judge and condemn for His wrong deeds and His injustice.
To tell the truth, we often visualize Him as a sweet, plump grandfather, or as an enraged, wrathful sultan who sits on a star or in space FAR ABOVE US.
On the other hand, some people with a broader mind argue that there cannot be such a “GOD” as imagined and espoused by believers and therefore they do not believe a god. They are known as atheists –the unbelievers–.
However, neither the atheists, who do not recognize the existence of God, nor those who have a mental image of GOD that is in accordance with what they heard or have been preconditioned to believe, are aware of “MOHAMMED's ALLAH” at all!
A sane person does not deny his existance, does he? Something we obseve is that whatever comes into being has a cause, right? But what if God never came into being, but always was. This would mean that nothing had to create Him, he has always existed.
Obviously the humor of my post went over your head. I was implying that God supposedly wasn't created, and thus has no creator to worship, making him an atheist. Ha ha. :-|
On a side note: If nothing had to create God, then causality need not apply. If such is the case, then nothing need have created the Universe, which eliminates the need for God.
On a side note: If nothing had to create God, then causality need not apply. If such is the case, then nothing need have created the Universe, which eliminates the need for God.
At the big bang, the known visible universe came into existence. It isn't necessarily true that there was nothing before the big bang. Also, your reasoning is flawed as shown above. If God does not need to be created to exist, neither does the Universe. Otherwise, there's infinite regression; ie., what created God, and what created that, etc.
But if God is possible, then he's not necessary.
But if God is possible, then he's not necessary.
I believe the original intent of the poster was to show that God could not have "belief" in the sense that we do. Christians worship an exterior creator-God. But that deity (if he is indeed ruler of all) would not "believe" in God per se; he would merely believe in himself -- ironically, this makes God an egoist of sorts.
A Christian says, "I believe in God."
God would have to say, "I believe in myself."
So, in fact, religious folk have not eliminated self-interest or egoism; they have only concentrated it in one universal being.
A Christian says, "I believe in God."
God would have to say, "I believe in myself."
So, in fact, religious folk have not eliminated self-interest or egoism; they have only concentrated it in one universal being.
I also think that god (if he exists) ,ust be atheist. When I believe in god, I am obviously a theist, but when I believe in myself I am an atheist, am I mistaken? Therefore, a god that believes in himself cannot be a theist because he doesn´t believe in some superior being, he is bound to be an atheist.
And BTW, I do not see where Alpha´s arguments are flawed.
Why would that be illogical Enigma? When you cannot have an infinite past, how can there be an infinite god? Also, time might not be a straight line, it might be a circle, going round and round for eternity, thus you would only have a certain amount of past events that are repeated over the time.
And BTW, I do not see where Alpha´s arguments are flawed.
Why would that be illogical Enigma? When you cannot have an infinite past, how can there be an infinite god? Also, time might not be a straight line, it might be a circle, going round and round for eternity, thus you would only have a certain amount of past events that are repeated over the time.
"GOD" is a word with no identity, none!, no one can say what god is, nor can they describe "it's" nature, god is not a (HE) this makes him human. If god were to be a (HIM, HE) we describe (IT) by human attributes, which makes it clear to be a human invention for lack of knowledge. The easy way out of complex questions, the unknown is taken care off, by asigning this meaningless word: "god".
We invented the anthropmorphisis of god, by asigning a lunatic as the son of god, Jesus was an illiterate mystical person with nothing better to do but claim that he was the son of god, or made out to be the son of god by scholars many years after his death, a pundit that became a religion.
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/charles_bradlaugh/who_was_jesus.html
This entity with out identity, whom you all call "god" did not create the universe:
"The existence of God is not enough to explain the existence of the Universe. If the Universe can logically exist, then no God is needed to create it. If it is valid to say "everything has a cause except God", it is more likely that everything has a cause except the Universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the natural Universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause."
"If God can make plans, think logically or exist, then logic is an arch-power that encompasses God and gives reason for god's existence which appears to refute the idea that God could be the creator of logic. The God as first-cause argument is partially undermined. If there is no logical reason why God exists then it is more likely that there no logical reason why the Universe exists, and that instead of assuming that the organisational force is a 'god', it's simpler and more rational to assume that it is the universe itself. It appears that whether God exists for logical reasons or not a fundamental contradiction occurs. The only answer is that creator-gods cannot possibly exist. Atheism is more logical. This is also true if God is placed "beyond logic". And if it is said that Human logic is incapable of realizing such metaphysical truths, then this also undermines any argument that can be made by one human to another, for the existence of god." http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/universe.html#Time
Here are some more articles refuting the god concept: http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/?t=refute.txt
On another note, no-one can claim one way or the other that god does-or does not exist, for in order to make such a claim one would have to know exactly what god is, and have full knowledge of it's existence or lack thereoff. Thus neither side of this debate can be won, unless someone can come up with a conscise explanation of what god is, or prove it's existence or lack thereoff.
So we refute mysticism at its core, by refuting ancient religious text that try to explain what god is, or what our purpose should be while here on earth. To be servent to an entity ruled by other humans that claim to have divine power, or divine knowledge of ancient literature.
Do you have the time?.
Why!? you may ask yourself did we human come up with the notion of god?.
Well I've got an theory about that one too, or better yet Julian Jaynes has a theory of the evolution of human consciousness: I'ts a nice read if you got the time: http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cach....org/pdf/jaynes_mind.pdf+bicameral+mind&hl=en
Godless.
We invented the anthropmorphisis of god, by asigning a lunatic as the son of god, Jesus was an illiterate mystical person with nothing better to do but claim that he was the son of god, or made out to be the son of god by scholars many years after his death, a pundit that became a religion.
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/charles_bradlaugh/who_was_jesus.html
This entity with out identity, whom you all call "god" did not create the universe:
"The existence of God is not enough to explain the existence of the Universe. If the Universe can logically exist, then no God is needed to create it. If it is valid to say "everything has a cause except God", it is more likely that everything has a cause except the Universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the natural Universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause."
"If God can make plans, think logically or exist, then logic is an arch-power that encompasses God and gives reason for god's existence which appears to refute the idea that God could be the creator of logic. The God as first-cause argument is partially undermined. If there is no logical reason why God exists then it is more likely that there no logical reason why the Universe exists, and that instead of assuming that the organisational force is a 'god', it's simpler and more rational to assume that it is the universe itself. It appears that whether God exists for logical reasons or not a fundamental contradiction occurs. The only answer is that creator-gods cannot possibly exist. Atheism is more logical. This is also true if God is placed "beyond logic". And if it is said that Human logic is incapable of realizing such metaphysical truths, then this also undermines any argument that can be made by one human to another, for the existence of god." http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/universe.html#Time
Here are some more articles refuting the god concept: http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/?t=refute.txt
On another note, no-one can claim one way or the other that god does-or does not exist, for in order to make such a claim one would have to know exactly what god is, and have full knowledge of it's existence or lack thereoff. Thus neither side of this debate can be won, unless someone can come up with a conscise explanation of what god is, or prove it's existence or lack thereoff.
So we refute mysticism at its core, by refuting ancient religious text that try to explain what god is, or what our purpose should be while here on earth. To be servent to an entity ruled by other humans that claim to have divine power, or divine knowledge of ancient literature.
Do you have the time?.
Why!? you may ask yourself did we human come up with the notion of god?.
Well I've got an theory about that one too, or better yet Julian Jaynes has a theory of the evolution of human consciousness: I'ts a nice read if you got the time: http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cach....org/pdf/jaynes_mind.pdf+bicameral+mind&hl=en
Godless.
Damn if I do, damn if I dont, but this also a good article about Julian Jaynes theory of consciousness: http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf043/sf043p18.htm
Godless.
Godless.
On the contrary, God means the creator of the Universe. All other attributes given to God are debatable and/or falsifiable. While the concept of God is incoherent/inconsistent, it is not meaningless.
There appear to be flaws in the reasoning on that site. Either that or the lack of clarity makes it too difficult to follow the arguments logically.
From http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/?t=refute.txt :
This is false. The author makes no distinction between strong and weak atheism. It is weak athism that doesn't claim God is disproved, while strong atheists do. Nonetheless, there are good arguments on that page.
I believe this has been done. God is defined as the creator of the Universe, and there are proofs of God's nonexistence.