Why doesn't God do what it would take to get atheists to believe he exists?

[bhsmte]

That is possible, and IMO recommended. But it doesn't describe the situation where someone does not believe Jesus was right (I think, as I have not been educated otherwise).

Of course it is possible. People can look at the information and it just does not meet their criteria of being believable. I don't see why this is something that flies over so many heads. You don't believe in other Gods or other religions, right? Is that because you don't care for the other Gods, the other religions, or you just don't have a compelling reason to believe in it?

One thing is pretty clear though. Analytical thinkers tend more likely to be non-believers and this makes sense, because they tend to think more critically and objectively, before believing anything as true. Also, the higher one achieves in formal education, the less likely one is to believe in a God.

 

[bhsmte]

oi antz,

re: "Anyone who does not believe in Jesus Christ is in the same situation. They have not received the right information..."

But if they do receive the right information - then what? Are you suggesting that a person has the ability to consciously choose to believe things?

No one has the ability to truly believe in something, when the information is not available for them to truly believe.

You can't command belief either, that just doesn't work. That would be like someone telling you, your favorite color can no longer be blue and it must be red. Or, telling a Yankee fan they must start becoming a Red Sox fan.

 

[oi_antz]

oi antz,

re: "Anyone who does not believe in Jesus Christ is in the same situation. They have not received the right information..."

But if they do receive the right information - then what? Are you suggesting that a person has the ability to consciously choose to believe things?

Yes I am saying that, why would I not? Whenever we choose, we do what we think is best going to satisfy our needs. If they are choosing to not believe that Jesus is right, I think they clearly do not have the right information. Why not is not what I am suggesting. They could have not encountered it, they could have chosen to dismiss it. Who knows?

Of course it is possible. People can look at the information and it just does not meet their criteria of being believable. I don't see why this is something that flies over so many heads. You don't believe in other Gods or other religions, right? Is that because you don't care for the other Gods, the other religions, or you just don't have a compelling reason to believe in it?

You could certainly concede that the information I have gives me confidence in what I have chosen to believe, but you are making an assumption of my regard for other religions that I am not sure is accurate, or for that matter, is based on anything more than an expectation.

One thing is pretty clear though. Analytical thinkers tend more likely to be non-believers and this makes sense, because they tend to think more critically and objectively, before believing anything as true. Also, the higher one achieves in formal education, the less likely one is to believe in a God.

It has been my experience too that those who don't believe in a god are afraid to think analytically, critically and objectively. Not saying that believing in a god will change that, or indeed that belief is associated in any way to the unwillingness to think. It's all about what information we choose to accept and decline, and that affects what we choose to think about and how we think of it.

 

[rstrats]

　
　
　
oi antz,

re: "Yes I am saying that, why would I not?"


Perhaps you can help me then. I have never been able to consciously CHOOSE any of the beliefs that I have and I would like to be able to do that. If you think that you can consciously CHOOSE to believe things, I wonder if you might explain how you do it. What do you do at the last moment to instantly change your one state of belief to another? What is it that you do that would allow you to say; "OK, at this moment I have a lack of belief that 'x' exists or is true, but I CHOOSE to believe that 'x' exists or is true and now instantly at this new moment I do believe that 'x' exists or is true"?

Maybe you could use something like leprechauns to demonstrate your technique. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, a leprechaun is "a fairy peculiar to Ireland, who appeared in the form of an old man of minute stature, wearing a cocked hat and a leather apron" and who stores his gold at the end of a rainbow and if ever captured has to grant three wishes. So, assuming that you don't already have a belief in them, how about right now, while you are reading this, CHOOSE to believe - be convinced without a doubt - that they exist. Now that you believe in leprechauns, my question is, how did you do it? How did you make the instantaneous transition from lack of belief to belief?

 

[Angelquill]

The evidence is there.
It is all around you.
It is in the changed lives of His people.
It is in the miracle of life.
It is in the magnificence of the sky at night, it is in the beauty of a single snowflake, it is in the love in the new mother's eyes as she cuddles her newborn to her breast...
It is everywhere you look.

Yeah, I know.
However, Jesus did say that it takes the faith of a little child....

 

[mandyangel]

I think God wants you to find him. His love is everywhere as is his grace and I think finding him is an important part to any Christian's life. You have to want to find him though. You have to have faith. There are many Christians who try to help people along who act as disciples trying to spread the word of God even to people who do not want to hear it. However, this dangerous work- I've done it and been attacked so much for it, you have to be very strong and it has to take multiple Christians supporting eachother through it.

 

[bhsmte]

Yes I am saying that, why would I not? Whenever we choose, we do what we think is best going to satisfy our needs. If they are choosing to not believe that Jesus is right, I think they clearly do not have the right information. Why not is not what I am suggesting. They could have not encountered it, they could have chosen to dismiss it. Who knows?


You could certainly concede that the information I have gives me confidence in what I have chosen to believe, but you are making an assumption of my regard for other religions that I am not sure is accurate, or for that matter, is based on anything more than an expectation.

Not once on this site, have I said a believer should not believe what they do, even if I find their justification for it, to be weak. What I will do, is take issue when a believer tells me; you don't believe because you hate God, you can't have morals without God, they choose to ignore reality to protect their belief, they claim to have objective evidence for God, but you choose to reject it, etc. etc. When that happens, it is open season on challenging those claims. If someone tells me they believe on faith and don't engage in any of the above, more power to them.


It has been my experience too that those who don't believe in a god are afraid to think analytically, critically and objectively. Not saying that believing in a god will change that, or indeed that belief is associated in any way to the unwillingness to think. It's all about what information we choose to accept and decline, and that affects what we choose to think about and how we think of it.

Interesting, that has not been my experience at all, but I would imagine, with anything, there are exceptions to the rule. What can not be denied, are the studies that show; analytical/objective thinkers are more prone to be non-believers and higher education also tends to make one more prone to non-belief. When you get up into the graduate and PHD level, the non-belief goes up quite a bit.

 

[bhsmte]

The evidence is there.
It is all around you.
It is in the changed lives of His people.
It is in the miracle of life.
It is in the magnificence of the sky at night, it is in the beauty of a single snowflake, it is in the love in the new mother's eyes as she cuddles her newborn to her breast...
It is everywhere you look.

Yeah, I know.
However, Jesus did say that it takes the faith of a little child....

Objective evidence that is verifiable, does not point directly to any God. Many have tried to claim this and they have all fallen short when challenged. The evidence around us, can be explained mostly through science, for those who have a frame of mind to learn it.

With that said, if all the things you mention are evidence of a God for you, then you certainly can claim that for yourself, but others don't see it the same way.

 

[bhsmte]

I think God wants you to find him. His love is everywhere as is his grace and I think finding him is an important part to any Christian's life. You have to want to find him though. You have to have faith. There are many Christians who try to help people along who act as disciples trying to spread the word of God even to people who do not want to hear it. However, this dangerous work- I've done it and been attacked so much for it, you have to be very strong and it has to take multiple Christians supporting eachother through it.

Wanting to find something badly enough, is mostly based on individual psychology, then it is anything else.

If a person wants to find a God badly enough, there mind will likely convince themselves they have and their mind will begin to relate everything they experience and see, to a God.

 

[oi_antz]

Interesting, that has not been my experience at all, but I would imagine, with anything, there are exceptions to the rule. What can not be denied, are the studies that show; analytical/objective thinkers are more prone to be non-believers and higher education also tends to make one more prone to non-belief. When you get up into the graduate and PHD level, the non-belief goes up quite a bit.

That doesn't mean that they will apply those skills to theological pursuits though, and that is what I am saying I observe happening a lot.

 

[oi_antz]

　
　
　
oi antz,

re: "Yes I am saying that, why would I not?"


Perhaps you can help me then. I have never been able to consciously CHOOSE any of the beliefs that I have and I would like to be able to do that.

I find this an interesting statement. What makes you believe whatever you do believe?

If you think that you can consciously CHOOSE to believe things, I wonder if you might explain how you do it. What do you do at the last moment to instantly change your one state of belief to another?

Usually I have to consider the potential result of choosing to let go of a previous belief in favour of the new one, and to consider what I stand to lose or gain each way.

What is it that you do that would allow you to say; "OK, at this moment I have a lack of belief that 'x' exists or is true, but I CHOOSE to believe that 'x' exists or is true and now instantly at this new moment I do believe that 'x' exists or is true"?

Maybe you could use something like leprechauns to demonstrate your technique. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, a leprechaun is "a fairy peculiar to Ireland, who appeared in the form of an old man of minute stature, wearing a cocked hat and a leather apron" and who stores his gold at the end of a rainbow and if ever captured has to grant three wishes. So, assuming that you don't already have a belief in them, how about right now, while you are reading this, CHOOSE to believe - be convinced without a doubt - that they exist. Now that you believe in leprechauns, my question is, how did you do it? How did you make the instantaneous transition from lack of belief to belief?

I didn't. I don't have enough information to be sure that they are real. Perhaps you are better to assess a real example of someone having changed a belief, because it does happen, and everyone does it sometimes. Then you can look to see what information caused them to change their belief and see what sort of issues they had while they were considering whether to let go of their existing belief. Not every change of belief is a difficult decision, but some are.

 

[gord44]

That is possible, and IMO recommended. But it doesn't describe the situation where someone does not believe Jesus was right (I think, as I have not been educated otherwise).

Who said anything about Jesus not being right?!

 

[oi_antz]

Who said anything about Jesus not being right?!

Plenty do. (an atheist for example).

 

[rick357]

Of course it is possible. People can look at the information and it just does not meet their criteria of being believable. I don't see why this is something that flies over so many heads. You don't believe in other Gods or other religions, right? Is that because you don't care for the other Gods, the other religions, or you just don't have a compelling reason to believe in it?

One thing is pretty clear though. Analytical thinkers tend more likely to be non-believers and this makes sense, because they tend to think more critically and objectively, before believing anything as true. Also, the higher one achieves in formal education, the less likely one is to believe in a God.

Me stupid believe big God. You big smart but can not stop thoughts from coming to mind thought come you think so free will not happen so think what you realy believe cant escape so accept

 

[gord44]

I apologize for my comments here. I realized this particular sub form probably isn't the place for them. Peace.

 

[Angelquill]

Objective evidence that is verifiable, does not point directly to any God. Many have tried to claim this and they have all fallen short when challenged. The evidence around us, can be explained mostly through science, for those who have a frame of mind to learn it.

With that said, if all the things you mention are evidence of a God for you, then you certainly can claim that for yourself, but others don't see it the same way.

Science can look at the physical brain, for instance. It can tell us where our sense of sight originates, or where our speech center is. It can't tell us why one person can paint fabulous masterpieces, or why someone else can write beautiful music. It can tell us how to measure IQ, but not why one person is a genius while another one is maybe mentally handicapped.
Simply put, science is limited in what it can, and what it cannot accomplish.

Yes, I see evidence for God in those things. Science cannot explain why so many people have experienced major changes in the way they think about things after accepting Christ, or how it is that every single snow flake is different, or how it is that we perceive beauty. Science would describe that new mother's love as an electro-chemical response in her brain, but it can't seem to figure out why it is that not every mother experiences that electro-chemical response.
Science is a fantastic tool, and I am fascinated by it. However, science can never explain the miracle of life. Even if we ever get to the point where we can "create" life in the laboratory (I'm not holding my breath), all we will really have proven is that God did, indeed, start with "the dust of the ground". If you really want to impress me, start with a total vacuum, and create your own dust from scratch...

 

[Angelquill]

Psychiatry, as you probably know, is not considered "an exact science". Amazing that we have doctors who can perform complex brain surgery, but we can't seem to cure mental illness. Oh, we can medicate...sometimes. However, there is very little chance that once a patient is on medication, that he will ever be able to come off of it. If we can do delicate and complex surgery on the brain, why can't we get those pesky chemicals in proper balance, so that the mentally ill patient can be "normal" (whatever that means) without having to rely on medication that often has some rather dangerous side-effects?

Why is that?

 

[rstrats]

oi antz,

re: "What makes you believe whatever you do believe?"

It's only a guess, of course, but my beliefs may very likely be engendered by some process occurring in my subconscious due to an exposure to outside stimuli such as literature, lectures, media, conversation, experience, etc."


re: "I didn't. I don't have enough information to be sure that they are real.

If beliefs can be obtained by simply choosing to have them, then enough information is not necessary - prudent in certain cases, perhaps - but not necessary. But even if it were necessary, how would you know when you had it? And what would be the state of your mind with regard to the issue in question once you realized that you had enough information?

 

[TheyCallMeDavid]

Hi David!

My thoughts are not really eastern. If anything they are Western. Based in Western thought with a strong base in the Tanakh.

I don't deny the incarnation and resurrection.

...................

Hello. If you believe in the resurrection of Christ , then that means everything he said about himself and everything he taught was in fact true including him being The very Creator of the Cosmos. It also means that the Christian Faith is the correct one and all other competing ones are invalid . So, do you still believe in Christs resurrection ?

 

[bhsmte]

That doesn't mean that they will apply those skills to theological pursuits though, and that is what I am saying I observe happening a lot.

The skills we are talking about; analytical, objective and critical thinking, don't mesh well with theological pursuits. The reason; theological ideas, are a dime a dozen, with wide variations and don't have objective evidence to support any of them.

To many that think analytically and look for objective evidence, it becomes clear, that theology is a man made attempt, to look for hope, to understand why we are here, to look for support, etc.. If one's mind can't get to the point of believing the claims are credible and can be reconciled with reality, they can't force themselves to pretend they believe it.

This is why, theological beliefs require faith and no problem with that, if it makes someone a better person and able to cope with life better.