I would suspect that from your first statement, Ierrellus, the same would hold true for you if you saw another human being as having the experience of being condemned to ‘eternal’ suffering in this life? You would respond.
I believe it may have been Hugh Prather who said something to the effect of – “Who could find this a place of heaven if only 1 other person found it a place of hell? That may sort of be paraphrasing but I always remembered that.
Are there still many theologians who preach fire and brimstone? I wonder where it comes from since in the bible Jesus did speak of love and forgiveness. Perhaps some people would rather hold onto the O.T. attitudes (albeit, even there, a god could be compassionate and forgiving). A lot of our beliefs/ways of viewing a god are determined by who we are at our core, who we have become and our own personal attitudes formed from family, especially our parents.
No religious perspective is proof of the existence or non-existence of god.
That’s a good way of defining one’s spirituality which may be, not always but may be a far cry from another’s organized religious attitude. The key words are empathy and compassion and action as a result of that. The Good Samaritan comes to mind. Or the atheist who is out there in human solidarity with his brother helping to build houses destroyed by a tornado as opposed to the believer who ONLY sits in church praying to a god who he/she needs to remain close to while all around him is following apart.
Arc,
Thanks, you got me right. The parable of the good Samaritan, a member of a group despised by the “in” crowd, shows the difference between nominal Christianity and walk the talk Christianity. Atheists may base their take on religion from the former, but are quite capable of doing the latter. In doing the latter they are following Jesus, not theology.
All excellent questions, for which the answer would seem most likely to be, “Because the Christian belief system is inherently flawed”, flawed here meaning inconsistent with conditions in our actual reality, with sound logical reasoning, or with expected predictable outcomes based on an assumption of the truth of Christian claims.
Example: if god is loving and just and all-knowing, then surely he/she/it would not allow a person to be born into a family/life that robs him of a chance to grow into a proper and eternally important Christian faith! Yet this happens all the time, as you point out about yourself. Thus we have a contradiction in what would be expected if Christian beliefs were indeed true, and the actual state of affairs in reality.
Let’s just say that there is some kind of a Being (?) with loving, just and all-knowing characteristics.
I don’t know - I’m just saying.
If we expand our minds and our imagination and intelligence, in what way might we begin to conceive and arrive at the possibility that this may indeed be a truth?
What is it that we may be perhaps missing when we dwell on the above as a contradiction?
Let’s just say that there is no contradiction there insofar as those 3 attributes of a Being and the particular life one is born into and lives - and barring some of the psychological needs which go into forming some of the silly frills of one’s religious beliefs -
I do not believe anything is missing; if god loved a person then god would not create that person and the conditions of that persons life such that s/he never had a reasonable chance, or even any chance at all (think remote tribes in the jungle) to come to understand the eternally important truths of Christianity. Our only options are as follows:
The above mentioned Christian beliefs are untrue
The Christian god does not love us
The Christian god has no control over who is created and the conditions of that created person’s life
Ah, but Three Times Great, there have to be many things that are missing from the god equation…if…
The thread is “Why are there atheists?” – so I would even prefer to drop the Christian term and just say god.
Many universal beliefs and perceptions are - untrue – within our own minds about the god concept.
But perhaps according to a much more expansive interpretation and meaning of love – a Being may love us - as in allowing us to find ourselves and come to our highest Selves through the gifts of free will and human evolution –
Perhaps we also have to “see” the part that others play in our lives insofar as love goes. Perhaps that is some kind of human failsafe buttom which evolved (or may not have-misdirection through a dark alleyway) that was put into our design to balance out what we do not intuit as a god’s loving. perhaps we need to take a closer look.
Perhaps chooses to have no control. …perhaps doesn’t have control. Perhaps “control” according to how we interpret it.
Well, that’s a given but perhaps we are evolving in the right direction. And perhaps once we have arrived, we will have a better understanding of how a god may love. And there will be no contradiction between that love and our lives. Perhaps. Who may know the mind of god? Is part of human evolution to know the mind of god more clearly or to merge into with the mind of god…if there is a god, that is.
okay, you mentioned being possibly sent to heaven or hell so you’re talking about Christianity?
If a Christian God exists, then he cherry picks.
And well, if he does, I don’t think I’m ripe enough.
Sure, it doesn’t matter which label we use. The point is that the notion of god contains on the one hand a loving/just/all-knowing being and on the other hand a reality where people suffer and die meaninglessly. It is easy to target this contradiction in the Christian belief, because this belief (along with other major monotheistic beliefs) makes the claim that if you do not believe what they believe, god sends you to hell. If we add the Christians and Muslims together, what % of the world’s population would this be? Alot. So, “alot” of the world’s population buys into this belief structure, to some degree or another.
But, if you want to lose all the labels and just say ‘god’ without any specific belief structure, sure that is fine, however the problem remains albeit in a less overt form - the suffering and injustice of the world. This is a problem for anyone making a claim to belief in a higher being that has control over life, reality and the state of affairs in it. Looking around in the world, we see great love and great hate, great justice and great injustice, great good and great bad. And often with no discernable “reason” other than a wholly impersonal, non-human natural event (such as a tsunami). Why do these things happen, why do little children die? This is a question the theist of any type must address, unless the theist affirms that god either does not care about humans at all, or this god is impotent to do anything about these tragedies.
If you had the power to stop a child being murdered, wouldn’t you? If you choose not to, wouldn’t it be a fair criticism of you that you just didn’t care? So my point here is that the theist belief must address this inconsistency between stated qualities attributed to god and the state of affairs in the reality that this god is supposedly a part of.
Well, yes. That is my point. This is the most likely answer to the question, that there is no god. It explains the atheist position in a nutshell. If there is no god, we are left with no inconsistencies here, everything makes perfect sense, all good and bad are acts of nature interpreted from the perspective of a particular organism-life, natural is cruel and impersonal, life is full of randomness, some people live long happy lives and others are born starving and suffering, to die shortly afterward. There is no ‘higher logic’ involved. It is what it is.
Sure, but tell that to the starving Somalian child who lives in a gutter and gets prostituted by his parents for money.
These ideals we hold onto, that god is just giving us free will in order to let us “find ourselves” and grow and evolve is a prerogative of a life sufficiently insulated from pain and suffering, a life of affluence and relative comfort. I consider it condescending to take this view in light of how many people in the world experience extreme suffering, pain, hardship and death, how many people never have a chance to “find themselves” or grow and evolve.
I am not sure what you are getting at here, can you explain more please?
Define control as the ability to change a stated outcome. The point here is that god either cannot change things, or cares not to. If you want to make a case for a “higher logic” (see above, “finding ourselves”, etc) I think this argument fails because it applies only to a small, limited number of humans, who are lucky enough to be born into sufficiently affluent conditions with ample opportuities in life. Many people are not that lucky.
Yes I do think that we are.
That is a stretch, but of course it is a possibility. What might this new future perspective on love look like, do you think?
Nice speaking with you too
I think “know the mind of god” is a metaphor for “know one’s own soul and heart”. I think we need these grand concepts and abstract ideas in order to remain fundamentally open to ourselves, to the unknowns and possibilties within us. God is one means of remaning open. It is the sort of one size fits all approach to authenticity, to being genuine, since it affords at least a minimal degree of openness to self/life but requires no actual work or effort to achieve. The problem with the god belief is not that there is no god, but that the god belief is a crude and highly flawed way of accomplishing this psychological utility. The limitations and flaws in the god belief are readily apparent, particularly in the way one typically must literally believe the truth of the god belief in order to access the psychological utility granted by the belief, and thus one must literally lie to oneself, deceive oneself. This severely limits the effectiveness of the belief, and leads to all kinds of problems (war, hate, prejudice, confusion, anxiety, hopelessness, delusion). Philosophy, for example, is a better way to access this same utility, on a much greater level and without as many of these detrimental effects; but since philosophy requires a lot of work, most people can’t be bothered, and take the easy route.
I actually do not even like to use the word god. It expresses nothing.
I know this and I used to feel this way before I came to realize that there is no logic or harmony when the two stand side to side and are compared. At least not in terms of where we are in our human evolution (consciousness) at this time.
I don’t think that this is the attitude or the belief of ALL believers just the ones perhaps who were raised to believe that every negative action deserves a punishment. I don’t believe in hell, except for the ‘living’ one which we all go into at times.
But that’s just it. As human beings, we find it unbearable to leave unanswered questions to tragedies which we experience. We must ask the questions. Many people understand that there are no ‘real’ answers – the questions are just a cry in the dark night. Some of us realize that there will be no light shined on them – and some of us are just so desperate to have some of the pain/anguish/confusion dispelled from within us, that we reach for answers where there are none.
Sure, we can explain the science behind a tsunami but we can never explain the deeper ‘why’ of all of that human loss…because natural occurrences can never be explained on the same level of the spirit or the soul (if we have one).
This is why, for me, it’s best to leave god out of the equation…not because I do not want to face the answer but because the answer can never be resolved within our minds. It’s always a conflict between the mind and the heart/spirit. And the more one thinks about it, I’ve been there, the more one agonizes over it and walks into a living hell. At times I do intuit a loving intelligence and there it ends – in harmony for me. Yes, I do question and search the god thing in my mind sometimes but not out of desperation but just as exploration to see where it takes me. It isn’t important where it takes me because I know that I can only get so far with it…but that is just me.
I suppose that most logical intelligent theists would think that god is indeed impotent to do anything about it – that although being “present” and “active” within the universe – this does not presuppose omnipotence. But it does presuppose a kind of ‘personal’ god. Maybe it just comes down to what they hold as more dear and important to them – a personal albeit perhaps not loving god (according to our ‘present’ knowledge and experience) or a powerful one. Which would You choose in a human being?
Yes, I would - but we are judging here in ‘human’ terms, Three Times Great. But can we ever really know that if there even is a god or ‘Something which permeates the universe’ which would be my better way of expressing the word ‘god’ - that it is so impersonal? I personally do not imagine a personal or loving one but at times, as I said, I do not intuit this. I intuit a loving and intelligent energy but that may just be my spirit/self when it is in complete harmony with everything that surrounds me.
quote]Well, yes. That is my point. This is the most likely answer to the question, that there is no god. It explains the atheist position in a nutshell.
[/quote]
Yes, but that also does not answer the question because we just cannot ‘know’ – we can only believe or disbelieve or hold that we just can’t know. The atheist’s position in a sense I think is just as closed off as the theist’s/deist’s. I go along with the ignostic myself. Lol.
And if there is no god – how does one explain the fact that there is also much love, much human sacrifice on the part of loving people for the greater good of humanity? How to explain the fact that we have indeed evolved – not perfectly – into a universe where one can still see love at work – though of course, at the same time, one can still see hatred and apathy at work? There are BOTH that thrive. Have we simply evolved in this way through randomness or might there be some kind of indirect direction going on here. I’m not using the word god or a god’s ultimate design here.
******I wasn’t, in actuality, saying that there IS a being who loves us – I can’t know that – all I AM ABLE TO KNOW is that somehow there appears to be some kind of a balance – though it doesn’t make me feel any better. I think that this may probably be the reason why we need to come up with answers – we need to force the answers – because otherwise we cannot feel good about ourselves and the world. The only reality that I CAN see is that there is STILL love in the world and this love hopes to and tries to counteract the lack of love and the apathy about these things. This human universal love reaches out as it can to save and to help. That I can see – that I do not have to question.
No, it isn’t an ideal, it is just another perspective, another way of looking and questioning what ‘may be’. It is not written in stone or in belief, at least not for me. It’s just groping in the darkness to shed some light on the subject. I don’t look to have light shed on it necessarily – just to see if there IS some light there that might bring more consciousness and awareness to some kind of truth…bring us closer to a hidden truth.
But I will grant you, you’re correct – as many do do this – try to shield themselves from pain and suffering. This is why, for me, we cannot answer that WHY question. To do that, is to try to bring meaning where there can be none. The only meaning I think that ultimately comes to us eventually is shaped by who we become because of the experience.
It might appear to be condescending and maybe it is but perhaps it’s also brought on as a result of the human experience – we sometimes lack such awareness and true understanding insofar as our emotions go and dealing with the conflict of mind vs. heart and for many, yes, it IS beyond condescension – it’s also a form of apathy and coldness.
Re-read the ******** above. Who knows. Is human evolution part of a god’s ultimate plan or is it just how consciousness has evolved – in a loving way without a god? But what is more important – what might be or the reality of what we actually do see? I mean what actually is there universally for all to see. Maybe that does not answer the question but that’s because there is no real answer. Am I wrong?
I use the words “may” and “perhaps” because there really is no evidence either way. And I do see more to the contrary. Like you, I cannot believe in a god who has control, let alone that there may even be one. It just isn’t logical, it appears. Perhaps it’s better for us as humans to stop depending on a god - and be ‘god’ to one another – that is in the important sense that the theist feels that we are created in the ‘positive’ image and likeness which they feel a god is… A divine lovingness. After all, we can only truly relate to one another (universally speaking) not to a god.
And it’s really narcissistic and selfish and unloving when you think of it, to think that a god would deign to bring some into a heavenly life and some into a hellish life. Of course, if there IS such a thing as reincarnation that may explain it better but it doesn’t solve the greater problem of living in the NOW. And reincarnation for me, if it exists, does not speak of creating our hells because of our pasts but in simply being given lessons to learn from our pasts. I know, it’s very convoluted.
Well, that would ONLY be in the case of ultimately discovering that there was one. Lol
A utopian world as opposed to a dystopian one. Lol Wouldn’t you say that it’s been quite a stretch for us, human evolution? We aren’t finished yet, if you don’t see the possibilities, they’ll never arrive. They may not arrive, but if you don’t see them, surely they will not.
Dandelions are so nice and beautiful. lol
You too.
I think what it actually means is that we cannot know the mind of god. It is mystery…we can only approach it in a simpler way by bit by bit unveiling it and seeing little glimmers of different kind of truths. That is, if there is a mind of god. But I also think that it can be done by ‘knowing one’s own soul and heart’ as you say here. If the Divine truly is within us, that’s the only way to know it. And for us to be able to approach others and if I may ‘blaspheme’ here, lol -become like divinity itself, we can only do this by knowing our own souls and hearts. Somehow I intuit this.
Are you speaking of the belief in god or the beliefs that actually surround one’s belief in god? As you say, it isn’t necessarily about believing in a god – but to me it is about our own psychology and human journey/experience that creates the bias and those flaws and muddy one’s perceptions. I see nothing negative about someone believing in god just as long as those beliefs have been examined and they lead one on an all-inclusive spiritual journey into realizing that ALL of us are part of the human equation, humanity, and have a right to be valued and cared for. Otherwise, why bother!! There are no hierarchies when it comes to humanity, in actuality. In short, acting as the loving god which they feel exists though oftentimes appears to be absent and may be completely non-existent…would solve the god problem.
Cats, for example, cannot “see the evidence”.
There are atheists, because they cannot “see the evidence”.
But unlike cats, atheists presume that the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence. “Presumption, presumption.”
Oh Rational Metaphysics has a life seed that you wouldn’t believe… literally.
Of course, to believe it, you have to “see” it. And we know where that leaves atheists and the other blind faiths.
which evolved (or may not have-misdirection through a dark alleyway) that was put into our design to balance out what we do not intuit as a god’s loving. perhaps we need to take a closer look.
Who knows. Is human evolution part of a god’s ultimate plan or is it just how consciousness has evolved – in a loving way without a god? But what is more important – what might be or the reality of what we actually do see? I mean what actually is there universally for all to see. Maybe that does not answer the question but that’s because there is no real answer. Am I wrong?
It is mystery…we can only approach it in a simpler way by bit by bit unveiling it and seeing little glimmers of different kind of truths. That is, if there is a mind of god. But I also think that it can be done by ‘knowing one’s own soul and heart’ 
](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/uploads/default/original/2X/7/7c349bf1053f368a5729d053e1e91215f22ce66c.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
