The honest truth of it?

[Tiberius]

I fully admit that I do not understand or know everything about God.

This is how God works.

One question arises out of the above two quotes. If you fully admit that you do not understand or know everything about God, how can you make the assertion that "this is how God works"? You've just said you don't understand or know everything about God.

So how do you know the second statement is true, when you've admitted in the first statement that you don't fully understand or know everything about God?

[Edwardo Piet]

Maybe because he does claim to understand some things about God.

Watson? Do you? Or do you retract your statement?

EvF

[Tiberius]

Yes, understanding some things about God is fine, but my question was how he knows that "This is how God works" in the first place.

[Paul the Human]

Mmm. This sure is some tasty Kool-Aid! You should try some. The more you drink, the more you like it.

No, thanks.

---

Just a joke. From my perspective, that is what you might as well be saying.

---

[Dotard]

Watson,

You think I havent' had this same discussion a million times with those who believe and those who do not?

I've read all of your crap and I find no logical explaination of the 'why' you believe what you believe. And I maintain you are still full of shit with your 'believe it to understand it' line.

Experianced Hell did you? Tell us more about that one, were you married? Or were you refering to the Hell as described in the bible?

Yes you are a deist. More specifically a christian deist. You believe in a deity? You are a deist.

Trying to demonstrate I do not understand God tor the concept of God? Well then, enlighten me O' master of the God understanding. I'm hedging my bets it's more of a case of disagreement and you are doing nothing more than trotting out the old as the hills bullshit "you just don't understand".

Show me where I am not "understanding" and not just disagreeing with you on the nature of the character called God in the bible. Show me where I got the 'concept' incorrect without falling back on an unsubstantiated 'you just don't understand'.

[Tiberius]

You say that you are a true atheist, but I simpy do not believe there is such a thing.

Please don't go back to redefining words again; I thought you'd gone through that phase...

An atheist is someone who does not believe in Gods. A true atheist is someone who...well...does not believe in Gods (and isn't lying about it).

For that to be true, one would have to exist outside of the boundaries of God, and that is simply not possible.

No. One does not need to have any preconceptions about God to not believe it exists, just as one does not have to have any preconceptions about Granjubupo to not believe it exists. If you are unaware or ignorant on a subject, you don't have any belief in the existence of that subject at all, and so you have a disbelief.

Even if you extend things from "passive" disbelief to the kind of active disbelief that most atheists here have (i.e. we are aware of the God concept and still disbelieve it), your argument doesn't work any better. The only requirement of disbelieving in something is not having a belief in it.

God is a part of all things, even atheists. So from my POV, you are the self-deluded one. You are denying a very core part of yourself because you cannot understand that part.

Even if that were true, it does not mean atheists aren't atheists. Atheists are people who do not believe in God; not people who claim that God does not exist with 100% certainty.

When did denying a core part of something mean you couldn't call yourself a "denier"? Your argument, as the last one on semantics, always results in us getting rid of every single word in the dictionary. There is no such thing as an atheist since atheism is the denial of the self...well, from my perspective, there is no such thing as a Christian, since Christianity is the untrue belief in Jesus. It's your argument, just reversed.

As you see, it's a very arrogant view to take; you make the assumption that you are correct, and then don't consider anyone else's viewpoints on the matter. I don't go around saying Christians can't possibly exist, because by the very definition of Christianity (i.e. people who believe that Jesus is the Son of God...yada yada yada), there are Christians out there!

But I simply understand too much about how God works to truly believe you are an atheist, nor is anyone.

Again, the arrogance knows no bounds.

To be honest, I quite enjoyed your brief love affair with rationality. It's a shame you had to revert so quickly to the ignorant, arrogant, bigoted person who came here originally.

There, I said it. I'm not apologising for it. You deny that I have my beliefs, and I'll rightly call you out on your bigoted nature; to hell with the consequences.

[Eilonnwy]

Lots of posts made, too lazy to go through and read through all of them, but regarding the OP...It seems you've created a little bubble where you can explain away atheism by assuming, "They will never understand" and you blame the atheists for their lack of belief because they can't "feel" God the way you and other Christians "feel" God, or interpret specific events as having God behind it. You're making a big assumption here. Many of us are first generation atheists, we have experienced what it is to be a believer, and felt the things you have felt. At the end of the day, we came to the realization that it was not God and that's part of what makes us atheist.

In a nutshell, the post reminds me of the Ray Comfort claptrap. "If you want to know God exists, just drop do your knees and ask him to reveal himself and he will." And then, if you do this and God hasn't revealed himself? Well it was you, of course! You didn't believe hard enough. Wut?

It's nonsense. Utter nonsense.

[Minimalist]

That nonsense makes them feel "special", E. That's all that religion has to offer. The silly notion that 'god likes you best.'


And the dolts will gladly settle for that.

[Welsh cake]

@ Welsh Cake: As I said before, belief is a prerequisite to understanding.

Beliefs in themselves are not objectively true; reality doesn't mould itself around our beliefs, our beliefs have to be moulded around what is demonstrably proven to be real, hence why I no longer believe in angels, souls, demons or sky-daddy.

I believe in God and make claims about His nature because I believe in Him, and have had time to grow in my understanding of Him.

I thought you said earlier you didn't understand "him" at all.

Your denial of Him does not allow you to understand Him.

I understand the monstrous tyrannical nature of the Biblical God quite well thank you, unlike you, I just don't think logically impossible fictional characters are real.

As for a "god-like" being that created the universe, an idea which has the same justification as a race of aliens who destroyed themselves and created the reality we currently inhabit, the hypothesis is ultimately, logically unknowable. Not knowing about something is not the same position as simply rejecting or refuting it outright.

[The_Flying_Skeptic]

when I think of 'signs of god' or when Christians say they are experiencing god, I think of
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFs1Qf5m8Qg

I compare their experiencing their deity to seeing recognizable shapes in clouds or pareidolia. I wonder if the same parts of the brain 'light up' during MRI.

---

There is an universal tendency among mankind to conceive all beings like themselves, and to transfer to every object, those qualities, with which they are familiarly acquainted, and of which they are intimately conscious. We find human faces in the moon, armies in the clouds; and by a natural propensity, if not corrected by experience and reflection, ascribe malice or good- will to every thing, that hurts or pleases us. --David Hume* http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html

---