Observations On Atheism Part II - God And The Bible

[allan175]

Yes. If you want to argue semantics, you're right. But in that you are implying that believed gods are real, which I feel undermines the whole point of a "God." I could say that there is a ghost following me around, and that would not make it right, that would not make it so. Maybe in my mind there is a ghost, and he's a nice guy, but for everyone else, is he real? I don't think so.

Your ghost doesn't apply in the same way. A god isn't defined in the same way. A god is anything that is venerated or mighty. A political hero, an idol. It doesn't have to be real to anyone else or exist in any other sense. The gods of mythology and pagan superstition are as real as the gods of the Bible. Zeus doesn't depend upon any observations other than that he was a god. It doesn't matter if he is real or not he is still a real god. Atheists tend to miss that point because they get caught up in the position of defending a belief in the non-existence of God and Allah only because those two pose a political threat. Zeus doesn't.

I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. I'm as happy defending the non-existence of Zeus as the bible god or Allah! It does tend to be one of the "current main" gods that are discussed but only because those are the ones bandied about the most. I may use the word "god" when answering questions but in my mind that covers *all* gods current and old (and future!).

Why doesn't non-belief make sense? I know what I don't believe: I do not believe in a supernatural force, being, fate, entity which guides my life or has ever interfered with the universe. Plain and simple. Now if you can explain to me why I don't know what I am talking about, on a basic level, I'd be glad to hear it.

Well that is the point, isn't it? Belief isn't an issue. If you define atheism as simply not believing in any gods - that is to say, worshipping gods then it means nothing. There is no political or even rational position you can take there other than to make a statement of non-belief. Is that atheism? But to say that there is no gods is just ignorant of what the word god means and it doesn't specify God Jehovah or Allah which is the real problem anyway.

By the way - Jehovah God doesn't claim to guide your life. Which brings us to the point atheists always make regarding supernatural. Supernatural is only something that science can't test or prove. To deny the supernatural is only another means of saying you condemn what you can't understand. I am fascinated to discover that most atheist believe in extra terrestrial life.

It is really a question of control by specific Gods you reject and since those gods don't actually exist it is a political struggle with those who allegedly represent him.

You say that you do not believe in god but you can't even state that in a definitive way. You do not believe in which god? All gods? Believe in them? What does that mean, you don't think they exist? In the Bible there are many gods mentioned. I can show you pictures of gods. The apostle Paul said that even ones own belly could be a god. You don't believe in god? That means nothing. You don't even know what one is.

Definitely, because *no one* understands the supernatural! People make up beliefs based on their interpretation of events ("I won because I wore my lucky underpants!" etc).
I have said before, the word "atheist" doesn't really cover things properly but it is the word we are stuck with. If I started calling myself "non-supernaturalist" no one would know what I mean (and it doesn't roll off the tongue as easily).

As for life on other planets, I say there is *probably* life on other planets, but not in the same way as "there is probably no god(s)". In fact, being an atheist would make you more likely to expect life on other planets merely because life is not a special case "made in god's image" etc. We are probably here due to natural processes which are, more than likely, happening in other places. Not necessarily in the same way though.

Mr Daystar, you are very wordy. You probably have a superiority complex.

That has definitely been my impression too.

He obviously has a good understanding of langauge and where words come from (etymology?) but his answers tend to be wordy but without any real substance (other than "I understand things better than you").

As for what "ahesists hate", I'm afraid I don't hate anything or anyone.

I'm not shouting "There is no god!" from the rooftops, but I will certainly say "I'm pretty sure there isn't a god".

You seem to be saying "religion is wrong, but my interpretation of the bible is right". Which is exactly what every follower of a religion is saying, as has been said in a better way, I'm only one more god agnostic than you.

Religion never stays true, even to itself. The Hebrews waited two thousand years for a messiah and when he arrived they killed him. Why? Because their religion distorted his meaning into their own.

The apostle Paul foretold that Christianity would change into myth and fables and it did.

There are only two ways to interpret the Bible. Right and wrong. Is my way right? Increasingly so - which means that I have gotten it wrong in the past and will get it wrong in the future. Interpretation is accountable to the Bible itself. Testable.

No one who has ever lived will get it all right. That isn't even the point.

I'm not sure what you are getting at there. You say there are only two ways, right & wrong, but then say you are getting more right and you were less right before. Surely that means there is not just two ways...
How is your interpretation testable?