Mike Rosoft

As an atheist, I can sort the gods into two groups:
1) The gods I don't believe in because there is no evidence of their existence;
2) The gods I don't believe in because they don't make sense.

It is my understanding that the Christian God falls dangerously close to the second group.

According to the Old Testament, God committed and ordered genocide of entire nations because of they didn't believe in him (or so), and I agree with <a href="http://www.visi.com/~markg/atheists.html" target="_blank">Mikhail Bakunin</a> that "if [such a] God really existed, it would be necessary to abolish him."

The Christians (at the moment, I am speaking about conservative ones) will tell me that I am - for unknown reason - somehow responsible for Adam and Eve's transgression (is it a sin to seek knowledge?) and unless I accept God's mercy by believing in him, I'll go to hell. Sorry, but this is just plain bull's hit.

I am being told that God is all-powerful, and I never hear an explanation why he does nothing to stop the suffering which takes place all over the world. Yes, they say something about free will. But - even ignoring that part about natural disasters and diseases which have nothing to do with human actions - such a God looks like a policeman watching a criminal attack and rob (and possibly kill) his victim, calmly saying: "I am not going to help you. I won't be interfering with the criminal's free will."

If you have some evidence that your God doesn't belong to the second group, I'd like to see it. The next step would be showing me that it doesn't belong to the first one, either.


Mike Rosoft

southernhybrid

I don't believe in any gods. However, since I was brought up in a conservative Xian home, I am quite aware of the traits of the Xian god and I especially don't like the fellow. I view the Xian god as mean, vindictive, manipulative and childish. He uses his creation to satisfy his own vanity. He punishes his children like an abusive parent. He tends to focus on blood sacrifices, revenge and enjoys wreaking havoc with the weather and such, i.e. wiping out the entire population with a big flood, turning Lot's wife into a pillar of salt just because she had to take a final look back at S&G. And what about those weird threats in the book of Revelations! What's up with that? I tell you the whole thing is just plain creepy!

I think if we need mythological role models, we could find quite a few that would serve humanity much more positively than the Xian god. That guy is psychotic! To me, it is extremely obvious that the Xian god was created by man, in the image of man. I don't understand why so many people are gullible enough to believe in the Xian god.

Jamie_L

With relationship to "Christian" gods, I do not believe in:

Any god ever described to me by any source that claimed to be Christian.

Jamie

[ September 06, 2002: Message edited by: Jamie_L ]</p>

DMB

I am agnostic with respect to a creative intelligence for the universe, although I can't see that it's likely, since such an intelligence is used as an explanation for the complexity of the universe but must necessarily be more complex. There is also no known mechanism for pure intelligence to have a material effect, so I see the existence of this creator "god" as pretty unlikely.

Now when one moves on to the xian god or the gods/godesses of other religions that I am aware of, I see no reason whatsoever to pick one of them out from the crowd and identify it with the possible creator god. All these mythologies seem much of a muchness, with anthropomorphic deities. It just seems obvious to me that far from Man being created in the image of a god, the reverse is true.

The xian god in its more sophisticated manifestations is thought of as an omnipresent spirit (i.e. totally non-material being) which is nonetheless able to have unlimited effects on the material world. No evidence for this.

The central doctrine of xianity appears to me to be the story of the incarnation of the deity in the person of Jesus, the death and resurrection of the said Jesus and the atonement effected by Jesus's sacrificial death for the sins of humanity. {Now GT, if you don't agree with me that these are the important bits of xianity, I'd like to know what you think are.}

I find that I cannot take any of this doctrine seriously and that one has to commit all sorts of intellectual gymnastics to do so. Nowhere is it clear why the deity had to do this at all and, if so, only once. Nor is it at all clear how the death of this avatar can possibly scrub out all human sins. The idea of sacrifice, including human sacrifice, is present in many religions, but it is a primitive one that sits ill with modern knowledge and philosophy. I find animal or human sacrifice pretty disgusting, and its centrality in xianity doesn't make me think that there is any essential truth therein.

Keith Russell

Blue said:
"I believe there is a "God" type energy but that "energy" cannot be comprehended by a human mind."

Blu, then how can you--with your human mind--comprehend this 'energy' even to the extent that you can 'believe' in it?

Keith.

NialScorva

Could you describe Squiggy the invisible elf that you cannot touch sitting on your shoulder?

Blu

Keith,

My relative and personal truth has taught me to believe in such an energy. Although, I believe I can humble myself enough to realize that I don't know and cannot fully comprehend the nature of God, it doesn't stop me from believing in something.

By the way, I prefer to refer to "God" as "The Universe."

It all comes down to experience when it comes to beliefs spiritual or otherwise. If your experience tells you that there is no God, so be it. If your experience teaches you that there is a God, so be it. The whole idea is to try to harmonize and cooperate with the many cultures, societies, and religions of the world and to get along above all else. Once someone says, "I know Truth, and anyone who doesn't believe like I do are wrong" they begin to create great conflict. Individuals then form groups and then the rallying cry is: "We are right, you are wrong." or "I am saved, and you are going to hell unless you join us."

The bottom line is people can either accept our differences or they can rage against them. And we all know what happens when an individual or a group decides to rage against a culture, a society, a belief system, or an individual.

I liked how you didn't out right say that I was: "Wrong" or "Stupid" for believing the way I do. That is a giant plus for you. I like to discuss my beliefs and philosophize but I really try to refrain for assuming that everyone should believe the way I do when it comes to spirituality.

More and more I am identifying with Humanism with just a hint of Unitarian Universalism. Although, I have my personal beliefs and way of looking at things. I do not feel the drive to join an group or church.

Thoughts? what do you believe?

Sincerely,
Blu

Keith Russell

Blu:

Thanks for a detailed, and sincere, response.

First, you say that you believe that God is the universe. Well, that's fine, but it certainly means that you view God as being far different than most people who claim to believe in God.

God is usually described as the 'Creator' of the universe, and a being who wants or demands certain actions of human beings: prayer and obedience to certain dictates/commands.

Now, I believe in the universe. I also believe that the energy of which the universe is comprised cannot be created or destroyed.

Thus, the universe--though finite--is eternal: uncreated.

If the universe did not create itself, then the universe does not meet the primary characteristic most often ascribed to God.

Besides, calling the 'universe' the universe is fine: I don't believe we need two words for it: God and universe.

Seems redundant to me...

Keith.

fiendus rex

i'm very much in agreement that it's unnecessary to believe in gods that a) there is no evidence for and b) that contradict themselves.

a god who 'creates evil and brings prosperity' and who has 'no darkness in him' can't exist. the christian dual-nature of god is contradictory. the gnostics were probably more clearheaded when they supposed the old testament god was a jealous demiurge and that salvation by the true god was only attainable through knowledge.

and to believe in such a contrived being is deception. the validity of the judeo-christian god is based on mosaic authorship of the pentateuch, divine inspiration of the bible, and hence inerrancy and predicating absolute truth. if one looks at the history of the bible, one can see this really isn't the case. the bible is a nice collection of myths, laws, poetry, and other stories, but its message of salvation is a) nothing incredible for the time (it just overpowered all other beliefs) and b) wrong.

the bible presupposes the existence of a soul, immortality (from a certain point), the existence of any god... and hence the whole book begs the question.

for this reason i'm a strong atheist towards the xian god, but a weak atheist to the much broader definition of 'god' simply because of the lack of evidence. it doesn't have evidence of its improbability like the xian god does, it lacks any evidence at all which contributes to its improbability.

Marduk

Seems like there are two types of gods, the one who created the universe but somehow is not part of it, and, to me anyway, the more reasonable god who is the universe and everything in it.
East/West, never the twain shall meet.
Once you go beyond the primitive anthropomorphic old white man with a beard asking Adam to "pull my finger" type god you enter into a pointless semantic duel. Like the old 'if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it does it make a sound?' type thing, Depends on how you define sound ...yadda yadda yadda. which is why I usually avoid this forum.

The theist won't accept that god is a metaphor, the materialist won't accept that the universe is an illusion maintained by god.
"Jehova's Blasphemy"

carry on grasshopper