Should atheists believe in the God of christianity if...

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

That’s a pretty lousy reason to believe in God.

Have to start somewhere.

 

[DogmaHunter]

In a sense you are correct, your choices are limited by your nature.

No, not even that. I don't have any "choices".
Beliefs are not something that are arbitrarily "chosen" like what color pants you will be wearing today.

Something either convinces you or it doesn't.
I can't "choose" to believe things that I'm not convinced about, just like you can't "choose" to really believe that you could jump from the Empire State building and just float there mid-air instead of plummeting to your death.

So the idea that someone can "choose" to believe in gods (or not), is entirely senseless.

Not true.

Maybe you should read up a bit.
And even if no other religion said such a thing - it's just another claim on top of the many many claims it already makes. It's not going to add to its credibility whatsoever.

It is what the word of God says about you. I don't have to know you in this regard. Everyone who rejects God is playing the fool.

It is you who is saying it. I don't care where you pulled it from.
Again: I suggest you don't say such nasty things about me, since you don't know anything about me.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Apart from God, you cannot know truth, because only God gives you knowledge. You are stealing from the Christian worldview when you claim to know truth apart from God.

More meaningless statements.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Have to start somewhere.

Why do you "have" to?

 

[JoeP222w]

Then either the word of God is wrong, or your interpretation of the word of God is wrong, or perhaps both; but you're wrong.

What is the absolute standard of truth by which you believe you have determined this?

I'm curious; do you also believe those who worship other Gods are pretending, but actually know your God is real and the one they worship is fake?

Yes.

Romans 1:18-25 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. (19) For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. (20) For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. (21) For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (22) Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (23) and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. (24) Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, (25) because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

Or do you only apply this leap in illogic to Atheists only.

It applies to all who reject the word of God found in the Bible.

What law of logic does it violate? Just saying something is illogical does not make it so.

 

[JoeP222w]

Doesn't Matthew 5:22 say you are in danger of Hell fire if you call someone a fool?

Context matters. I did not call you a fool out of anger or hatred. Nor are you my brother while you consider yourself an Atheist.

God says you are a fool for rejecting and suppressing the evidence that is in overabundance around you. I was quoting the Bible. Your rebellion is against God.

 

[JoeP222w]

I can't "choose" to believe things that I'm not convinced about

God is not obligated to convince you. You are not the Judge. God is not on trial in your blasphemous courtroom.

It is you who is saying it. I don't care where you pulled it from.

I understand that you reject it. But your rejection of it does not make it not true.

I suggest you don't say such nasty things about me, since you don't know anything about me.

Already responded to this.

 

[JoeP222w]

More meaningless statements.

1 Corinthians 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[DogmaHunter]

God is not obligated to convince you. You are not the Judge. God is not on trial in your blasphemous courtroom.

If anyone wishes me to believe X, then I'm going to have to get convinced of the truth/accuracy of X first. Regardless who that someone is.

I understand that you reject it. But your rejection of it does not make it not true.

And yet you continue....
You saying it, doesn't make it true either.

Again: you know nothing about me. You insisting on accusing me of such things, is completely on you.

Already responded to this.

Indeed. You continue hiding behind your religion and using it as an excuse to accuse people in quite despicable ways.

 

[Gene2memE]

Not a claim, it is the truth. Atheists know God exists. There is no such thing as an Atheist.

Thanks for telling me what I know (and believe, or lack belief in). As you're such an expert on what I know already, can you do my taxes as well?

More seriously, lines like this (For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness) are one of the reasons why Christianity has been so successful: it provides those who are incorrect/stuck in their current mode of thinking with an easy way of dismissing their opponents, while simultaneously feeling superior/better about them selves. Outgroup exclusion PLUS a double helping of positive reinforcement AND personal superiority, all in one serving.

Say what you want about Paul and his writings, but he knew people and how to play right to his audience.

 

[JoeP222w]

If anyone wishes me to believe X, then I'm going to have to get convinced of the truth/accuracy of X first.

Thus you attempt to make yourself god, that all things must all under your approval.

You saying it, doesn't make it true either.

It is not true because I say it. I am not the source of the truth. God is the one who says it and thus it is true.

you know nothing about me. You insisting on accusing me of such things, is completely on you.

Again, the word of God accuses you. I am not the source. I understand that you cannot see that or reject it.

You continue hiding behind your religion and using it as an excuse to accuse people in quite despicable ways.

Again, I am not the one accusing you.

 

[JoeP222w]

Thanks for telling me what I know

My authority is the word of God, not me.

More seriously, lines like this (For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness) are one of the reasons why Christianity has been so successful: it provides those who are incorrect/stuck in their current mode of thinking with an easy way of dismissing their opponents, while simultaneously feeling superior/better about them selves. Outgroup exclusion PLUS a double helping of positive reinforcement AND personal superiority, all in one serving.

I don't dismiss those who disagree, but I also do not allow them to put themselves, the creation, as the role of Judge, the Creator.

I am in no way superior or better than anyone. I am a vile wretch saved by the grace of God in Jesus Christ. Yes, the claim of Jesus Christ are exclusive, and Him being the sovereign Creator, He has the right to make it so. Grace cannot be demanded.

Say what you want about Paul and his writings, but he knew people and how to play right to his audience.

Because Paul understood the truth of God, the nature of man, and was indwelt by the Holy Spirit and Paul spoke and wrote the truth.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Thus you attempt to make yourself god, that all things must all under your approval.

You're making less and less sense.
If you want me to believe X, you're going to have to convince me that X is accurate.
Seems perfectly sensible.

Why, do you always believe whatever people tell you at face value?
I'm guessing you don't. So why it surprises you that I don't either, is a mystery to me.

It is not true because I say it. I am not the source of the truth. God is the one who says it and thus it is true.

Actually, it's the authors of the bible (humans) who say it and claim it comes from a god.
That's quite different.

Again, the word of God accuses you. I am not the source. I understand that you cannot see that or reject it.

And it just continues.... hiding behind your religion and using it as an excuse to justify despicable accusations.

Again, I am not the one accusing you.

yes you are.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

Why do you "have" to?

Why wouldn't you want to believe if it has positive benefits now and the only option of eternal happiness we have.

 

[Desk trauma]

Why wouldn't you want to believe if it has positive benefits now

By asking me to feign belief in your deity you are asking me to lie. I do not find lying to be acceptable conduct. Do you?

the only option of eternal happiness we have.

According to those who believe in your deity, those who believe in other deities or spiritual systems disagree. Why should I give your claims more weight then theirs?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Why wouldn't you want to believe if it has positive benefits now and the only option of eternal happiness we have.

Because false hope, is false.

My beliefs are based on what convinces me, on what I can rationally justify.
Not on what feels nice and/or comfortable.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

@DogmaHunter @Desk trauma You guys don't believe it's possible to believe in the God of christianity in a way thats rational and convincing? Surely you would have to admit there is at least some way you could be convinced of it. And if you do know the way then you get bonus points.

 

[Desk trauma]

You guys don't believe it's possible to believe in the God of christianity in a way thats rational and convincing?

It's possible to arrive at that conclusion but I have not hence why me saying that I have would be a liar if I said that I had and went about pretending to believe what I do not. Would you find that lie acceptable?

Surely you would have to admit there is at least some way you could be convinced of it.

A total rewrite of the facts of history and the nature of the universe.

 

[DogmaHunter]

@DogmaHunter @Desk trauma You guys don't believe it's possible to believe in the God of christianity in a way thats rational and convincing?

If I would consider believing the christian god to be rational, then I would be believing in the christian god.

Surely you would have to admit there is at least some way you could be convinced of it. And if you do know the way then you get bonus points.

See, the problem is...... that ship has already sailed.

It's like asking me if I could be convinced that the world is actually flat... well... no, not really.
As far as I am concerned, we seem to have progressed way past that stage at this point.
There's no way for me to be convinced of christianity (in the sense of accepting what the bible says), because far too much of it has already been shown to be completely false. Does that mean that the god it talks about does not exist?

Well, strictly speaking: no. It could be that the authors of the bible were just extremely mistaken about lots of things. But then we get to a point where we would have to say that the bible isn't representative of the god it talks about. There's so much wrong with it, that the rest of it, at best, becomes suspect.

So, IF this book is indeed based on some real deity, then I'ld have to say that this deity's actual reality will be so far removed from what the bible states, that it actually doesn't make much sense anymore to identify it as the "christian" god.

As for the god himself... I can't comment on what would convince me... because in order to answer that, I'ld require a falsifiable and/or independently verifiable/testable definition of this god. Only then could I say what evidence would convince me, because such a definition would tell me what evidence could be found and which evidence shouldn't be found. In short: I'ld require an actual "god model" that makes testable predictions that can be objectively and independently tested.

Think about it: what would convince you that an undetectable invisible dragon is following you around everywhere you go?

When something is literally defined as being indistinguishable from things that don't exist....

All I can do is shrug my shoulders and walk away.

 

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

@DogmaHunter But lets assume there is some truth to the story of the fall even if adam and eve didn't exist. If mans mistake was not to believe in God, and the only way to rectify that error is to have faith, then what if faith is the only way. What if you can't have your God model and have it be independently verifable because in such a circumstance you cant actually undo the sin that led us to this fallen world, which can only be undone through faith that "adam and eve" lacked.