|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: An atheist who is not so keen on God | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Brian writes: Essentially, Christians think that by loving others you love God.I disagree, and believe that we can help others and not love God. How do you define the word, "God"?
Brian writes:
Surely you have issues with God. I know that the cruel O.T. accounts are some of them. I also think that God wants you to show love for Him, and to do so you would have to believe in your heart that you show love for Him through loving others.What do you really know about God? Did He ever seem real to you? Brian writes: So you are saying that you don't love God or that you are an atheist and that God does not exist? I would say then that the main argument of the topic would be, is it possible for an atheist to love others without loving God?My answer is yes! ![]() Gary writes: What a nice guy, Gary! I should hang around with you...I wish I were as altruistic...I usually pick who to help and who to avoid. Perhaps I will get called on the carpet someday for avoiding some people that I should have been helping! I just enjoy helping others out. Brian writes: And you are so cheerful and nice when you don't think! I respect you even when you DO think, but I think that your heart is bigger than your brain, professor! Don't any of those theology students ever get to you just a little bit? Told you I wasn't thinking! LOLJar writes: Because of the contradiction within the definitions of belief. An atheist believes that there is no outside source of wisdom. Thus, Matthew, Mark, Jesus, or Paul Harvey are all just human opinions. From YOUR perspective, however, the acts of kindness count the same from all people. If doing good things, even small little insignificant things count as expressing love, if doing for the least of them is the same as doing it directly for jesus, then would that not be true across the board?Why would the acts of kindness and just consideration of a professing believer be counted more worthy than the same acts when performed by an atheist? And we know the SOURCE that you have, Jar! ![]() Brian writes: Jar DOES kinda grow on you, don't he? I have never disliked his responses. Perhaps I did at one time not respect them so much, but that was my own vanity and ego getting in the way! I can confess that there are many Christians who keep me from considering the faith again. If all Christians were are patient and thoughtful as you, then perhaps my opinion might change.Jar writes: OK..OK...I want in on this one, too! We agree that helping others is a good way to live. We agree that the scientific method is a good test of reality.Rrhain writes: Yes. There is. Do I need to prove it? Is there nothing that is distinct and separate from god?And if I don't or can't prove it, does that mean that you have joined our circle for the moment?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Rrhain writes: Yes. There is. Do I need to prove it? Is there nothing that is distinct and separate from god?And if I don't or can't prove it, does that mean that you have joined our circle for the moment? Rrhain writes:
Huh?NIV writes:
Oops...there I go quoting scripture again! Looks like I can't prove it. John 1:4-55 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it. (sorry I'm being ornery.) This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-21-2005 07:21 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Jar writes: Well to answer this question from my perspective, I would say no. Because God values a Christian and an Atheist the same. So let me ask you, that same question. Do they have different values?Thanks for pointing out my prior logic and giving me a chance to rethink my position. ![]() Perhaps Rrhain is asking us if we can't talk about love and compassion without talking about Jesus. It appears that you are better at making a parable out of scriptural truth than I am.I certainly value Rrhain the same as I value young Chris(as an example) except that Chris Porcelain agrees with me and Rrhain usually does not. Human nature and emotional gratification seeks people who comfort and shuns people who irritate. Your parable is showing us that no such contrast has to be followed. Am I right? This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-21-2005 07:31 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Jar writes: Oh come on! You are not THAT old! I'm old and sometimes it's difficult for me to make my thoughts clear to others. ![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
I found a good article which addresses some of the arguments, assertions, and ideologies which we have talked of thus far...it is at Probe Ministries but the logic is fair and balanced, IMHO.
A Conversation with an Atheist What I like about this article is that the article includes the personality of the issue...the relationship between seekers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Jar writes: I think that I understand where you are coming from. Is it not kinda like the Widow with the two mites? Is that any clearer?NIV writes: For a believer to give of themselves can be justified by them as an extension of the imparted abundance of God. For an atheist, however, giving simply for the action of doing good is in effect giving it all they have! Luke 21:1-4 As he looked up, Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. "I tell you the truth," he said, "this poor widow has put in more than all the others. All these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on."right?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Rrhain, I've about had it with your persona of smug intellectualism where you come into a post and then proceed to attempt to logically twist the conversation towards proving yourself right.
Mind you, I still respect you as a logically thinking individual, but you simply do not see the forest or the trees in this picture! Lets go back to the beginning of the post to prove my point, shall we? Brian starts it out. He states Brian writes: Essentially, Christians think that by loving others you love God. I disagree, and believe that we can help others and not love God. Jar’s opinion is that when an atheist helps out a fellow human being he is showing love for God at the same time. This is basically the sheep and goats scenario, where Jesus says that when you help someone you are helping Jesus. As an atheist, I find it difficult to agree with Jar, I do understand completely what he is saying, I just don’t agree with it. He(Jesus) specifically says love God AND love others as you love yourself. I agree that Jar’s description, if true, would fulfil these two criteria. I believe that you have to be conscious about loving God in order to truly show love for God, and an atheist cannot do this. So starts the thread. Brian admits that a true atheist cannot be conscious of God. Jar wants to take the conversation...WITH BRIAN...a bit further. Jar writes: In other words, IF God exists, even as a philosophical idea, acts of kindness would count equally by Him regardless of who does them. Dominion Seraph points out that if God does not exist, no measureable count of emotional response is possible. Why would the acts of kindness and just consideration of a professing believer be counted more worthy (By God) than the same acts when performed by an atheist?But if God isn't a part of your group, there's no love there. This is what you don't understand about the thread, however. Jar and Brian came to a common agreement, namely Let us assume for a second that you live your life as I say a Christian should and as you say an Atheist should. Can we accept that as a given for the next few steps in this discussion? In other words, a communion of agreement was formed between Brian and Jar. This is what I mean't by joining our circle. You yourself were the proof that God need not be a part of the discussion, but you were not within the communion of the flow of the topic. Comprende? It may be insulting to suggest that your opinion is not to be taken seriously, but at this particular conversation and at this particular point being made, you were simply not in sync. Nobody wanted you to assault the logic of our agreed communion by in effect disproving the validity of what was being said. It matters not if you were relativly right because you were not in common agreement. to wit: Brian writes: Sure.jar writes:
Again, Brian agrees..reconfirming the communion of the conversation: Assume for a moment that I am right and when someone dies they actually come face to face with GOD. Would the GOD I describe damn someone who acted appropriately and simply denied GOD's existence?Brian writes: Brian is allowing Jar to frame the discussion. Jar then says: The God you describe wouldn't, no.Jar writes: Remember, I am not asking you to believe in GOD, only trying to address whether or not it is possible for an Atheist to love GOD without professing or acknowledging a love of GOD. At this point, Rrhain, nobody who addresses Jar or Brian can break the communion of agreement. The thread is framed, in essence, by these two. Brian affirms Jars right to frame the issue of the possibility of God...Brian writes: Brian is not saying that he believes in God but he IS saying that he believes in Jar for the purpose of the discussion and the verbal exchange. Are you with me so far? The communion of agreement ends when you attempt to reframe the issue by saying Well, I hope your right, you deserve to be. Thanks for giving up a lot of your Sunday, I appreciate it.Rrhain writes: Thus, you are asking for proof and in effect saying that proof NEEDS to be established. The problem is that this presupposes the divinity of Jesus and thus is a circular argument. It equates "love" with "Jesus" and "god" and thus anything that anybody anywhere does is for Jesus and god if it is done with love.But that's assuming what you're trying to establish. You need to prove that things done out of love are necessarily done for Jesus even if the person doing it doesn't know it. You need to show that a person can't do anything without Jesus or god entering into the equation. I say no it does not. The agreement had already been established between Jar and Brian. The proof may be what you seek, but you had no right to reframe the topic or break into the issue with demands on your behalf. The agreement...the communion between Jar and Brian was agreeing on a concept of God. You then said: Rrhain writes: well, you are demanding that your reframed idea of the topic be considered. Is there nothing that is distinct and separate from god?Rrhain writes: No, it cannot be applied to you. Brian had agreed to entertain presuppositions by Jar. it is a presupposition and thus cannot be applied to atheists. Any insistence that your vision of the world is necessarily the right one necessarily denies the existence of the atheist. No, it denies that your opinion be part of the communion. You cannot prove anything except that you are in disagreement with the terms of the conversation.
Rrhain writes: And you can claim no part of the circle...the circular reasoning of the conversation. All that you are proving to the discussion is the fact that you--representing atheism--need not love God. What you now need to do is show us how you can love us rather than attempt to manipulate the conversation.
If you and I both want me to do the same thing but I have absolutely no connection to you and come to the conclusion to do it completely on my own, how am I possibly carrying out your desires? You didn't enter into it. You are completely outside the system. You may agree with what I've done, but you can claim absolutely no part of it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Rrhain--at best, we have two differing worldviews. You claim that you believe in A God but not MY God.
You state, however, that Rrhain writes: Says who? You? Why should we believe you? Atheists seem to find love without god without any trouble. We? How do you know that you do not believe in my God? My logic in dismissing your god is that you are being disagreeable merely to prove your point. My point is that agreement IS possiblewith love as a common denominator. You claim to believe in a god, right? Tell us the characteristics that your god embodies. Who says that we need to have empirical and naturalistic methods of proof for justification of our belief? Based on your logic, you could walk into a room full of Christian Believers and declaere in effect that there was no valid proof for their belief. Until and unless you can prove that our belief is a product of our vain imagination, you can do nothing more than opt out of this public debate. You have no unique God that is apart from the absolute God. Your belief is nothing more than your own ego and logic that is defying any authority not created by or confirmed by yourself. You cannot expect me to verify my Faith according to your terms. Additionally, you cannot frame it according to the laws of scientiofic proof because faith and belief do not fall within that discipline. We can possibly never agree on THIS one! This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-26-2005 01:07 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18710 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
snikwad writes: That matter always existed in one form or another? what do rational atheists believe in without evidence... This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-26-2005 06:45 AM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025