phlebas

<strong>Then we have a Catch-22. The evidence is available if I seek God. But I will only seek God if I have evidence.

This isn't quite right. If you had evidence...you would have no reason to seek.

Did you mean:

The evidence is available if I seek God. But I will only seek if there is a good reason to.</strong>

Not anymore. When I first starting having doubts, my fears of hell and all that gave me a "good reason" to look for God: fear. I don't have fear anymore, and I am unmoved by teary-eyed testimonials of post-revelation bliss.

God has failed to provide this evidence you speak of at every opportunity, no matter how much I asked him. So I stopped asking. How many times will a call go unreturned before you stop calling?

Now, I need proof that there's someone there to take my calls before I dial again.

<strong>I was essentially demanding that God show up on my doorstep...perform some magic trick...and then and only then I would grace God with my belief in Him. For me there was a certain amount of smirking pride in 'laying down the law' for God and telling him how it really was.</strong>

I'm not laying down any new rules for God. But he's reneged on several promises already. "Seek and you will find" is just one of them.

There are several places in the Bible where God sets down his own rules about how he will reveal himself to people who want to find him. Well, I wanted to find him and he never turned up, so he appears to either be a liar or non-existent.

You can say I wasn't seeking in the right way, but how am I to know what way is right? And doesn't the thought count, even if I don't to the rituals right? I'm not trying to cast some spell to summon something -- God is supposed to be everywhere already.

Since the stakes are pretty high -- eternal damnation and torment -- you would expect an all-loving God to be a little lenient.

<strong>As it turned out, life has a way of completely removing pride. :^) At least it did for me. It was *after* this when I came to the point of honestly and earnestly seeking God.</strong>

Well, I don't consider pride to be a problem. And I think self esteem is a damn fine thing to have. So this is not a hot selling point for me Often, I'm appalled and saddened by how people who believe in God also believe that they are worth no more than the dirt they're groveling in. It reminds me of Oliver Twist.

<strong>Not to make him jump through hoops, but because IF he was there...I wanted to know Him. Never once did I assume He existed and just 'go from there'. However, I did seek. It wasn't until I honestly sought God that evidence of his presence became abundant.</strong>

Congrats on your Favored Nation status I had a few doubts, and it wasn't until I started seeking God for real instead of just parrotting verses as I had been taught that I became an atheist. The Lord might have giveth to you, but he taketh away from me.

I don't begrudge it of him, assuming he doesn't really exist If he does exist and I end up roasting because I didn't seek "properly," despite my earnestness, then I'm afraid I won't see all the same good qualities in him that you do.

<strong>In retrospect, this makes complete sense. God could not care less whether or not you or I think he exists. In fact this probably seems quite funny to God.</strong>

It would make sense if you don't believe you're gonna be punished for not believing in him. But if this God person is laughing at the absurdity of it all, while simulatenously sending people to hell, then again I have to question whether God is such a nice person.

<strong>Hence his silence when I implored a sign from him. God could not care *more* to have a real relationship with us. Hence his embrace when I really sought him without have a chip on my shoulder.</strong>

This is where it always breaks down. So many theists assume atheists don't see God because we have a "chip on our shoulders." I don't feel any chip, I don't carry any angry, and I'm not hiding some deep resentment. I "really" looked in all the ways I could thing of and found nothing. I didn't try to make anyone jump through hoops -- I was following the steps laid out in the Bible.

Not a peep.

But still, I'm implored by his followers to keep seeking him out.

Back to the phone call metaphor -- you get the phone number of a very attractive person, and she asks you to call and she'll show you the time of your life. So you call and leave a message on her answering machine, and it doesn't get returned. You try again, and still no return.

Meanwhile, her friends keep telling you that she really wants to hear from you. When you tell them you've tried calling, they say that you've got to give the magic word -- that's the only way she'll know you really want to call her back. It seems strange to you, but your don't mind a bit of quirky. However, they won't tell you the magic word. They just claim you will know it when you REALLY want to talk to her.

How many times would you call again? How long before you realized how neurotic that was, and life was better before you started playing this person's game? Wouldn't you eventually stop calling? Wouldn't you think "she's got my number, she can get in touch with me if she wants to have me around," and get on with life? And if her friends kept badgering you, wouldn't you eventualy just ask them to put a sock in it, and tell her to call you when she gets over herself?

I hope you can see my point

<strong>Probably, the one thing you and I can agree on is how stupid Pascals wager is.</strong>

Glad to hear it -- you may yet be saved

<strong>This is disturbingly close to the attitude I had. Can you hear the tone? 'God missed his chance'. Brilliant.</strong>

Thanks But I refer you back to the phone call metaphor. I tried jumping through his little hoops, but the promised end result wasn't there.

<strong>Listen...IF God exists...he misses nothing. It is *us* who misses the chances. Not him.</strong>

I'm not closing the door forever. I don't have his number blocked But I am done leaving messages on his machine. If God wants me to believe, he can make me believe.

<strong>It is *us* who are subservient to him...not the other way around.</strong>

Subservience is a different question. Let's establish his existence first, then we'll make an org chart.

[ November 02, 2002: Message edited by: phlebas ]</p>

Synaesthesia

Well SOMMS, God still seems to be on the same level as physcic powers, unicorns and pyramid power. Good thing he doesn’t care whether I believe in him, because if a theoretically omnipotent god can do no better than John Edwards, there is no way I’m going to take it seriously.

If God doesn’t exist, promises and threat alike mean nothing.

wdog

there is a big problem with revelation as you describe it SOMMS. It is that the 'evidence' is not objective. I have talked with many people like you, including my own wife. They all say something is there, but nobody can agree on what. This type of personal revelation happens to people of all religions, so depending on your own theology, so are probably not only in disagreement with us, but with most believers as well about the nature of what you are experiencing. Also common though among all people I have talked to is a deep emotional attachment to the concept. It is as if i am talking to their brain stem instead of the cerebellum.

Your description of yourself also tells me that you were never comfortable being a nonbeliever. Arrogance and pride having nothing to do with it, my deconversion was actually very difficult. Your experience points to rather immature take on atheism. I know that many xtains like to bash us as being prideful fools, the result is that it makes xtains feels a little bit more smug. been there done that.

[ November 03, 2002: Message edited by: wdog ]</p>

wdog

SOMMS,

If you are not a christian, then ignore this.

Your whole description of god is at odds with what happened to doubting thomas. why was this one man afforded the luxury of proof? If god doesn't care, then why did jesus show thomas his hands?

ELECTROGOD

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas said:

&gt;&gt;It wasn't until I honestly sought God that evidence of his presence became abundant.


Talking about evidence is not presenting evidence, let's have it...or is it a secret that Atheists can't possibly understand...which isn't evidence at all.
Back to my other post you ignored, if "god" has complete power over everything in the universe but has no power over me then he cannot have power over everything. You are left with a big problem about what you believe.

Keith Russell

Greetings:

The whole idea of 'doubting Thomas' has always intrigued me.

Christians ask us to 'have faith', yet the disciples (if you believe the Bible) didn't have to have faith.

They got water that changed into wine, they got the loaves and fishes, they saw Lazarus raised from the dead, watched Jesus walk on water, they saw the Crucifixion, and the saw Jesus after he 'died'. The Isrealites got staffs that turned into snakes, pillars of fire, and manna (such as it was) from heaven.

All I get from theists are admonitions to 'have faith', and rebukes when I claim that 'faith' isn't enough.

Yet, the Bible stories relate that the Disciplies, and the multitudes who 'witnessed' Jesus' (and the Prophets') various miracles, weren't asked to rely on faith.

'God', these days, apparently ain't what 'He' used to be...

Keith.

Jamie_L

SOMMS:

I understand that you are busy, and you are getting a ton of responses here. However, I'm still interested in you response to the idea that there are people who have sought God with what they believed was sincerity and the proper attitude who are now atheists. This would seem to invalidate your hypothesis. If you don't think it does, what is your explanation?

Jamie

Amos

Keith, maybe believers just ain't what they used to be.

Thomas was doubt and the twin of Peter who was faith. Since faith cannot be conceived to exist without doubt all doubt must be removed before faith can be annihilated. This means that when Thomas was convinced Peter was defrocked to leave Jesus free from faith and doubt prior to ascention because neither faith nor doubt can enter heaven or there would be doubters in heaven and temples in the New Jerusalem.

Notice that after Peter was defrocked they went fishing while he was still naked and they could not catch a thing because he was still naked. They were fishing in the wrong side of the brain which just indicates that resurrection is a non-rational event (beyond theology) and therefore the new faith must come from the right side of the brain and so when Jesus told them to throw their nets on the other side Peter once again put on his cloak of faith and dove headfirst into the celestial sea of the right brain.

It is on this insight that the Church built its universal truths and it is for this same reason that no gates of hell will ever prevail against it.

wdog

Doubt may be the converse of faith, but that is no proof that doubt and faith have to coexist in a person. Doubt is simply needed to define faith, your sentence is logically invalid.

Since it took the convincing of thomas for peter to enter heaven, then why can no one else can get the evidence? The implication is that nobody else can make it with just faith, which is what all believers have.

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

All, Jamie_L


I am really sorry I don't have time to respond to each question/post/idea that has been posted. You all have good points and very valid questions. That may sound strange coming from a theist, but hey, I'm willing to acknowledge stuff for what it is. :^)

I've been meaning to hit K's, Goliaths and everyone else's posts but I don't know if time will allow. Jamie_L brings up a point...one that has application to my current discussion with phlebas. So I'll respond in kind.


No. This doesn't mean I like Jamie_L more than the rest of you blokes or that I am ignoring you or am 'hiding' from truth. It just means the point is very relevant to a number of aspects of this thread.


This is a really good question, and I don't think any reasonably intellegent skeptic (or thiest for that matter) can discourse over this subject for very long without thinking about it.

'What about those who have really tried to seek God but still don't believe?'


First, I've got to say that I am quite dumbfounded by the answers I've been getting. What has become most obvious by asking this series of simple questions is that:

Most (not all) athiests would not seek/choose God even if they knew he existed.

This is amazing to me. And I think this should be enlightening even to those who have an atheistic viewpoint:


If you wouldn't choose God even if you knew he existed...then evidence has little to do with your rejection of God or the God concept.



In short,
IF God exists AND he wants those who want him THEN ones heart (attitude in laymans terms) determines whether or not they see and recieve evidence for God.


This attitude is exactly what you (Jamie_L) are asking about. What if they seem to have had the right attitude but still do not believe?


Well, what is the 'right' attitude? Whatever the attitude is it should never assume God exists. This would be circular...well lets forget the politically-correct, philosophically aware wording...this would just be downright stupid. I think we can agree on this.


This being said what were the attitudes of the people mentioned above who you said sought God?
What are their answers to these questions?

A-Were they were truly seeking God? Yes...it sounds like it.
B-If God did exist, would they acknowledge his sovereign power and authority over everything...themselves included?
C-If God did exist, would they be thankful for everything that God has done for them...namely existence?
D-If God did exist, would they acknowledge that he is worthy of worship?
E-If God did exist, would they worship him?
F-If God did exist, would they willfully submit to the authority of God?


If the answers to any of these questions is 'no' or if these questions seem uncomfortable or distasteful...then one is not ready for a relationship with God. How could they ever hope to have a relationship with God if they can't do the above?


I can't speak for the people you mention, but I can speak for myself. When I was an atheist I did have A and maybe B...I most certainly did not have C, D ,E and F. Why would I worship God? Simply because he made me? Forget that. God is just an egomaniac. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

This is no joke. You can do this yourself. It is a very real, very tangible measurement of how open you are to God or the God concept. If you can't say yes to all of the above then it is not very rational to complain about having no evidence for God.

For if God exists...this is most certainly the case: He wants those who really do want him.

Thoughts and comments welcomed,


Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

[ November 04, 2002: Message edited by: Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas ]</p>