God and evidence

[Leigha]

I view religious texts as man-made. If we're going to dismiss things solely because they're man-made, we'd have to give up a lot of knowledge and wisdom.

“Man-made” meaning that it wasn’t “inspired” by God; many feel that the Bible is purely fiction, all of the stories were contrived. For many non-believers, it’s a book that may have nuggets of truth/sound life advice, but they don’t view it as a communication with or from God.

And yes, there are many philosophers and so on who have provided us with wisdom but believers see the Bible as more than a philosophy book.

Non-fundamentalists may view the Bible as allegory for the most part, but they still see it as being inspired by God. I’d say that the NT often tends to be taken literally over the OT, but there are many interpretations. Anyway, my point had more to do with why atheists don’t find value in the Bible or any religious texts - if I didn’t believe in God, I’d likely have no use for it, either.

@ Z - are you responding to Syne’s post? FWIW - Many believers don’t really take issue with atheists, there seems to be some misconceptions and misunderstandings on both “sides.”

[Zinjanthropos]

@ Z - are you responding to Syne’s post? FWIW - Many believers don’t really take issue with atheists, there seems to be some misconceptions and misunderstandings on both “sides.”

By issue do you mean having a few questions? Syne doesn’t bother me at all, one voice as am I, of billions of voices. I take issue having my life, my wife’s and unborn child’s threatened by either real or fake believers. RIP my cat, they got him and stuffed his body between front and screen door with a note attached...upsetting to say the least. I think I get PO’d with believers when they try to push it on me....Syne’s never done that as far as I know.

[Leigha]

@ Z - are you responding to Syne’s post? FWIW - Many believers don’t really take issue with atheists, there seems to be some misconceptions and misunderstandings on both “sides.”

By issue do you mean having a few questions? Syne doesn’t bother me at all, one voice as am I, of billions of voices. I take issue having my life, my wife’s and unborn child’s threatened by either real or fake believers. RIP my cat, they got him and stuffed his body between front and screen door with a note attached...upsetting to say the least. I think I get PO’d with believers when they try to push it on me....Syne’s never done that as far as I know.

Oh, I thought since you mentioned evil in your post, it seemed to follow Syne’s. Yea, pushing faith on others is never a good thing. It’d be nice if believers and non-believers didn’t have misconceptions about the other, but such is life, I guess. Think there’s a lot of common ground if we could listen to one another. Honestly, even in Christian circles for example, the division is thick.

I’m sorry to hear about your cat. What on earth?

[Syne]

I get a kick out of people who think atheists are evil when non believers have at least one less reason to commit it, ie...in the name of a god. If I want to hear about the evil atheists then I might as well go to church. I won’t be picking up a gun soon to defend it. How many times do I need to say it, believe in a god all you want....how  that bothers someone is beyond me. It doesn’t perturb me if someone believes, honestly it doesn’t.

Have I seen the evil of theism up close? Does being threatened with death by an extremist Christian religious cult count? Do Lost friendships because I don’t believe or didn’t convert also mean anything? It’s shocking to say the least but that’s not the reason I’m atheistic, in fact I really don’t know exactly why, just am. I don’t analyze it. I figure I’m incapable of belief until god is proven I guess. I’ve been one for practically my whole life and it makes perfect sense to me, as a theist would think of their chosen god. God belief is so low on my list of life’s priorities that I don’t even consider it important.

That would be an instance of negativity bias, where people are more apt to lend more significance to bad things than good, even when there maybe more good or the two are equal. Believers also have one more reason to do good, which objectively results in more charity, happier lives, etc.. Again tarring all other religions with the evils of a single one is a hasty generalization.

Who said atheists were evil? I said equating Islam to the other Abrahamic religions is moral relativism that excuses evil, but no one said all atheists do so. Is losing friends over a lack of compatibility or shared interests evil? That seems like an extreme characterization, in line with negativity bias. Death threats are wrong, and illegal, coming from anyone, but they are not uniquely from the religious. Nor are cults representative of religion in general.

I don’t discount the possibility, no matter how slim, of a god existing. At least something akin to one. For example if the universe is a simulation then the entity who controls the on/off switch might be considered. Fact that there is no empirical evidence doesn’t surprise me. Is this a case where lack of evidence is purely circumstantial to an atheist? If you feel inclined to take a shot a me for non belief then be my guest. Do you want me to recant my stance or fake being a believer? Why?

Lack of empirical evidence doesn't surprise me either. If there were undeniable evidence, people would have no free will in their belief. I don't see anyone here trying to change your beliefs. Perhaps feeling such pressure doesn't derive externally.

I view religious texts as man-made. If we're going to dismiss things solely because they're man-made, we'd have to give up a lot of knowledge and wisdom.

“Man-made” meaning that it wasn’t “inspired” by God; many feel that the Bible is purely fiction, all of the stories were contrived. For many non-believers, it’s a book that may have nuggets of truth/sound life advice, but they don’t view it as a communication with or from God.

And yes, there are many philosophers and so on who have provided us with wisdom but believers see the Bible as more than a philosophy book.

Non-fundamentalists may view the Bible as allegory for the most part, but they still see it as being inspired by God. I’d say that the NT often tends to be taken literally over the OT, but there are many interpretations. Anyway, my point had more to do with why atheists don’t find value in the Bible or any religious texts - if I didn’t believe in God, I’d likely have no use for it, either.

Man-made and inspired by god. They wrote what they knew, at the time, just as the writers of Greek mythology wrote what they understood in their time and culture. It is inspired by god to the extent that it serves a higher purpose. Lots of people dismiss the whole Bible because it includes things about the laws back then, like punishing slaves, that are just part of the time and culture but are not inspired by god. God gave us reason so we could sort those things out for ourselves. While no human author is infallible, I think it's more a matter of non-believers being incapable of discerning historical standards and cultural mores from divine revelation. They seem more prone to presentism, applying today's standards as if they always existed.

I'm not a Hindu or Buddhist, but I can appreciate some value in their religious teachings. Most atheists follow the religion of scientism, to the exclusion of appreciating all other religions or the good they do.

[Magical Realist]

If there were undeniable evidence, people would have no free will in their belief.

Why would freewill require a lack of reliable knowledge? People kept in the dark about things have less freewill not more. Knowing the truth otoh allows us to freely make informed choices and to make the right choices. If I were God, I'd manifest myself unmistakeably to everyone openly so that they aren't enslaved in the illusion of me not existing, particularly when believing in my existence is so critical to their salvation.

[Leigha]

If I were God, I'd manifest myself to everyone openly so that they aren't enslaved in the illusion of me not existing, particularly when believing in my existence is so critical to one's salvation.

Well, Jesus (for example) struggled to get many people to follow him, while he was alive, in the flesh, performing miracles, raising people from the dead, running counter to the culture, saving lives, etc. Even in the flesh, people didn't believe that he was who he said he was. To those back then who did believe (and do, today), that was the ''manifestation.''

Just using Christianity as an example, but I'd bet that many followers of other religions, have experienced manifestations of their own, proving to them that God exists.

[Magical Realist]

If I were God, I'd manifest myself to everyone openly so that they aren't enslaved in the illusion of me not existing, particularly when believing in my existence is so critical to one's salvation.

Well, Jesus (for example) struggled to get many people to follow him, while he was alive, in the flesh, performing miracles, raising people from the dead, running counter to the culture, saving lives, etc. Even in the flesh, people didn't believe that he was who he said he was. To those back then who did believe (and do, today), that was the ''manifestation.''

Just using Christianity as an example, but I'd bet that many followers of other religions, have experienced manifestations of their own, proving to them that God exists.

It would take a lot more faith imo to believe some Jewish carpenter was God in the flesh than believing in God directly as an invisible being. But it would certainly bolster my faith if I saw this man raise someone from the dead! That ability would definitely be god material.

[Zinjanthropos]

Perhaps lack of empirical evidence should be a clear indication to believers that god wants it that way. Waste of time to add a few more beliefs IMHO. I don’t think god would find it foolish to fabricate a religion from it. Imagination is a good thing but to not imagine a god exists also fits, it’s what the (lack of) evidence is indicating.

Don’t care about good and evil in this thread since it’s supposed to be about divine evidence.

[Syne]

If there were undeniable evidence, people would have no free will in their belief.

Why would freewill require a lack of reliable knowledge? People kept in the dark about things have less  freewill not more. Knowing the truth otoh allows us to freely make informed choices and to make the right choices. If I were God, I'd manifest myself unmistakeably to everyone openly so that they aren't enslaved in the illusion of me not existing, particularly when believing in my existence is so critical to their salvation.

If I show you a chair, that you can touch, sit on, etc., you can only deny it's a chair if you're delusional. IOW, you have no rational choice but to accept its existence. That doesn't somehow give you more free will. We have rationally intentional choices over things that are unsure. For example, if we knew the future, we would be insane to make any choices other than those that lead to the best possible outcomes. The same goes for god. If we knew, as an empirical fact, that god exists, we'd be insane to do anything but believe and try to follow it.

If your conception of free will includes the overtly irrational, then you're saying that mental illness, insanity, etc. are a choice. I'm pretty sure that's not what you're trying to say, which makes that contrary to your claim that knowing, for a fact, that god exists would allow more free will.

Assuming there is a god, it's only a non-believer's own motivations that enslave them. Whether it's some past pain they can't let go of, their own egos, etc.. Like the idea of reincarnation, your salvation is solely dependent upon your own choices. Tipping the scales removes your own agency from the equation. Which means more, having someone give you something you didn't earn or earning something on your own merit?

Perhaps lack of empirical evidence should be a clear indication to believers that god wants it that way. Waste of time to add a few more beliefs IMHO. I don’t think god would find it foolish to fabricate a religion from it. Imagination is a good thing but to not imagine a god exists also fits, it’s what the (lack of) evidence is indicating.

Lack of empirical evidence is exactly how god wants it. It could not be otherwise. But knowing that we are not just animals, driven solely by instinct, does put a higher moral onus on us. Or are you fine with the stronger guy being allowed to kill you simply because, in nature, might makes right?

Don’t care about good and evil in this thread since it’s supposed to be about divine evidence.

Do you care about good or evil as objective actions in the real world? That's the actual question. No one is asking you to believe anything about divine evidence.

[Leigha]

It would take a lot more faith imo to believe some Jewish carpenter was God in the flesh than believing in God directly as an invisible being.

Many people back then felt the same way. Jesus wasn't ''their idea'' of the Messiah that they'd been waiting on.

But it would certainly bolster my faith if I saw this man raise someone from the dead! That ability would definitely be god material.

It's interesting though that many were still skeptical, despite meeting Jesus in person, and witnessing his various acts. But, it still comes down to faith. For the early followers of Jesus, it took faith to risk their lives to follow ''a Jewish carpenter'' who was said to be God, even despite the miracles they were witnessing. They had to stake their entire lives on him, betting the farm.

---

Man-made and inspired by god. They wrote what they knew, at the time, just as the writers of Greek mythology wrote what they understood in their time and culture. It is inspired by god to the extent that it serves a higher purpose. Lots of people dismiss the whole Bible because it includes things about the laws back then, like punishing slaves, that are just part of the time and culture but are not inspired by god. God gave us reason so we could sort those things out for ourselves. While no human author is infallible, I think it's more a matter of non-believers being incapable of discerning historical standards and cultural mores from divine revelation. They seem more prone to presentism, applying today's standards as if they always existed.

All good points. Not sure though that non-believers are ''incapable,'' there simply may be no desire on their part to learn spiritual truths, or follow spiritual paths. They don't want a ''spiritual life,'' so any discussion of faith, beliefs, religion may ring hollow to them.

I'm not a Hindu or Buddhist, but I can appreciate some value in their religious teachings. Most atheists follow the religion of scientism, to the exclusion of appreciating all other religions or the good they do.

That's true. I'm thinking of the concept that describes when an individual or culture accepts a variety of belief systems as having wisdom and universal truths. Religious pluralism?

---

Totally off topic, but I have to ask this - are the words that I've italicized ^^ display slightly larger (and different font) than the rest of the words? That's been bugging me, and I've been meaning to ask! ^_^