How do atheists rationalize their nonbelief yet claim to know things about the bible

[ImAllLikeOkWaitWat]

If all atheists and agnostics on here are seeking God then this thread probably is going no where. But I'm sure there are many atheists out there who come on here to debate God and some even quote scripture but they don't believe it which I find ironic. How does one rationalize on one hand they don't believe in God then on the other hand they are posting on a christian forum some even read the bible some were former christians or pastors and theologians and I guess it shows words without faith mean nothing. Gods word without faith is meaningless to the reader.

What is faith? It is trust. In this case trust in God and trust in his written word. So I go back to my original question how do you rationalize that there is no God yet you interpret scripture or you own a bible and read it and still claim theres no god? It seems rather inconsistent on one hand to say theres no God then read his book. I encourage atheists and agnostics to read the bible but to do so with an open heart. If an atheist says theres 0 chance of a God this person can't be saved but for those who are more agnostic they have a chance. What reasons atheists have for non believing in god is numerous as the stars but it all boils down to not wanting to believe. I rarely meet an atheist who says Yes I want to believe in God but I can't because theres no evidence. Yet this same person believes he will wake up the next morning or believes in things that require faith and disregard that same logic when it comes to God is something I will never understand. I wish I could get inside the mind of an atheist and poke around here and there to figure out why he isn't open to God or is open to God but God isn't getting through. God bless

 

[rstrats]

ImAllLikeOkWaitWhat,

re: "How do atheists rationalize their nonbelief yet claim to know things about the bible"



Why does someone have to believe things in order to be aware of what is said about those things?

 

[rstrats]

ImAllLikeOkWaitWhat,

re: "How does one rationalize on one hand they don't believe in God then on the other hand they are posting on a christian forum..."



One reason might be that there is psychological factor hiding in one's subconscious for a "gotcha" moment.

 

[Armoured]

I'm a Christian, but I know a bit about the religious texts of Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. I Assume it's the same as that.

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

• “To sustain the belief that there is no God, atheism has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount to saying, “I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge.”
  – Ravi Zacharias

• “Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning.” C.S. Lewis

I think you'd have to decidedly excise the trolling factor first. Which is impossible to accomplish on any Internet forum because we're only reading what people choose to write about themselves. And we're expected to take that on face value.

What you're seeing in this particular community with regard to non-believer types isn't new.
For instance, there are atheists that made a career and gained so much notoriety spending their life talking about God. A man such as the atheist Christopher Hitchens. And to this day his peer, Richard Dawkins.

 

[Freodin]

Let's see if we can bring some structure into this one. No offence meant... I tend to use this stream-of-consciousness style myself quite often... but it is difficult to respond to in a way that does justice to the original thoughts.

If all atheists and agnostics on here are seeking God then this thread probably is going no where.

No worries, most atheists and agnostics do not "seek God", as they do not believe that there is such a thing. They are looking for answers though, for insights, for understanding... of the world and of Christians. Do try evaluate atheists "with an open heart", and we should get along quite fine.

But I'm sure there are many atheists out there who come on here to debate God and some even quote scripture but they don't believe it which I find ironic.

As above, atheists do not come here to "debate God". They might "debate" with Christians about God though. And a lot of other things that has nothing to do with the dreaded-by-some-Christians term "debate".

How does one rationalize on one hand they don't believe in God then on the other hand they are posting on a christian forum...

The best way to engage a lot of different views about a topic is a place where there are a lot of different people willing to talk about their views.
I don't know how it is where you live, but herearound people tend to be rather unresponsive when you start a theological conversation at the supermarket. Churches also do not tend to be inviting when you raise doubt during service... and even if you get a church group to talk to you, you will only get a very limited view.

...some even read the bible some were former christians or pastors and theologians and I guess it shows words without faith mean nothing. Gods word without faith is meaningless to the reader.

This is incorrect. All "words" mean something... but, as I am sure you will agree, not all words mean the same thing to all people. "God's word" is not meaningless without "faith"... it just can mean something else.
And, as I also hope you are aware of, Christians often disagree about the meaning of "God's word", even if they all assume the "truth" of these words.

So, as I hope you can see, "meaning" and "truth" and "belief in" are completely different concepts.

What is faith? It is trust. In this case trust in God and trust in his written word.

Unconditional trust is not something that is seen as positive by many people. Even by most Christians.
If one has this kind of "faith" or "trust" in the quran, the Book of Mormon or Darwin's "Origin of Species", I am sure you would call it misplaced, even if the first two of these examples claim to be "his written word".

Such a kind of "trust" has to be earned, and for atheists, Christianity has done nothing to earn this trust... or done something to lose it.

So I go back to my original question how do you rationalize that there is no God yet you interpret scripture or you own a bible and read it and still claim theres no god? It seems rather inconsistent on one hand to say theres no God then read his book.

Atheists do not deny the existence of Christianity or the Bible. Atheists do not believe that Christianity or the Bible are correct. But that doesn't keep atheists from reading the Bible and even interpreting "scripture" as a work of sociological and historical importance.

Humans write books. Humans write books about fictional events and characters also. Some humans even write books about fictional events and characters while claiming that these are real.

There is the quran. Dictated by an Angel of God.
Can you read it and claim that Allah is not God, the only God, and Muhammed is his prophet? Obviously you can. Atheists do the same with the bible.
Or can you "rationalize" not reading it, by discarding it and its message without knowing it? Then how can you demand from others that they read your book "with an open heart"?

I encourage atheists and agnostics to read the bible but to do so with an open heart. If an atheist says theres 0 chance of a God this person can't be saved but for those who are more agnostic they have a chance.

"With an open heart" is a curious phrase. What do you think does that mean? What do you think would happen if an atheist read the bible "with an open heart"?

What reasons atheists have for non believing in god is numerous as the stars but it all boils down to not wanting to believe. I rarely meet an atheist who says Yes I want to believe in God but I can't because theres no evidence.

Why should an atheist want to believe in God, in contrast to, say, believe in Zeus or in "Mother Nature" or in "the Universe" or in "reality"... or in "when I wake up next moring, I will be rich and can shoot lasers from my eyes"?

There is a term for wanting something to be true and trusting in it regardless of anything. It is called "wishful thinking".
Again, most people do not think this is a positive thing, and even most Christians agree with that.
Why would it be a good thing here?

Yet this same person believes he will wake up the next morning or believes in things that require faith and disregard that same logic when it comes to God is something I will never understand.

Really? You do not understand the difference between reasonable expectations based on empirical data, open to falsification... and wishful thinking?

I'll try to explain.
If I try to extrapolate from known data (I woke up today, I woke up yesterday, I woke up every day of my life. People at the vast majority of 'next mornings' wake up --> I will most likely wake up next moring. If I don't, I was shown wrong.) this is the "atheist" type of "faith"... reasonable expectations.

(Disclaimer: the following example is meant to show something that "requires faith" and is not meant as comparison to "God")
If you assert that the Invisible Pink Unicorn tells you the comming lottery numbers via a binary code-pattern in the dust particles on your desk... and you "trust" in that even in the face of negative evidence... this is wishful thinking.

I am sure that you will disagree that "faith in God" falls in the latter category... but based on the lack of evidence for atheists, they will definitly not count it as the first category.

I wish I could get inside the mind of an atheist and poke around here and there to figure out why he isn't open to God or is open to God but God isn't getting through. God bless

You would have at least to admit the option that the reason why is... that God doesn't exist.

 

[Freodin]

“To sustain the belief that there is no God, atheism has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount to saying, “I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge.”

– Ravi Zacharias

Which is, demonstrably, false. If the esteemed Rabi has to base his estimation of atheists on such a false statement, what does that say about his own position?

“Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning.” C.S. Lewis

Again, a false conclusion.
C.S. Lewis failing at basic logic is nothing new... but I am surprised how many Christians can ignore this because Lewis tells them what they want to hear.

I think you'd have to decidedly excise the trolling factor first. Which is impossible to accomplish on any Internet forum because we're only reading what people choose to write about themselves. And we're expected to take that on face value.

What you're seeing in this particular community with regard to non-believer types isn't new.
For instance, there are atheists that made a career and gained so much notoriety spending their life talking about God. A man such as the atheist Christopher Hitchens. And to this day his peer, Richard Dawkins.

Considering the notoriety... and wealth... that so many Christians make from their "spending their life talking about God"... I don't see a lot of difference.

And you should also consider that the likelihood that most posters here - you and me included - gain such a notoriety and wealth from posting here is rather slim.

So: if you expect to be taken on face value, take others on face value. Otherwise I can equally discard your and every other Christian posters writings here as "trolling".

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

Which is, demonstrably, false. If the esteemed Rabi has to base his estimation of atheists on such a false statement, what does that say about his own position?

God help us. It's demonstrably false? We really need a rolling laughing smiley character in that list of emotes. Dear Lord, I'm laughing too hard here.

 

[Freodin]

God help us. It's demonstrably false? We really need a rolling laughing smiley character in that list of emotes. Dear Lord, I'm laughing too hard here.

Yes. Logically, it is not necessary to have infinity knowledge to know that a certain something does not exist. The limited and specific knowledge is enough.

But if logic amuses you... glad I could provide some entertainment.

Though this non-response and simple dismissal of my post does nothing to encourage me to "take you at face value".

 

[Carbon]

How does one rationalize on one hand they don't believe in God then on the other hand they are posting on a christian forum

Hello ImAllLikeOkWaitWhat, what a great question. One reason an atheist might join a Christian forum is to subject their own beliefs to criticism, always hoping to improve their thinking. Karl Popper in the 60s had an important insight now accepted by many modern atheists and "freethinkers", which is that the best way to search for truth isn't to look for evidence that you are right, but to look for evidence that you are wrong.

Popper called his insight falsification. It's not intuitive at first but once you get the idea it has a way of sending your worldview on a roller coaster ride.

 

[Cearbhall]

If all atheists and agnostics on here are seeking God then this thread probably is going no where.

I think there are very few on here who fit that bill. I'm not sure why someone who doesn't believe in any gods would be trying to find a being whom they don't believe exists.

But I'm sure there are many atheists out there who come on here to debate God and some even quote scripture but they don't believe it which I find ironic. How does one rationalize on one hand they don't believe in God then on the other hand they are posting on a christian forum some even read the bible some were former christians or pastors and theologians and I guess it shows words without faith mean nothing.

I enjoy the discussions, and I think it's important to expose myself to a greater variety of Christian denominations and religious leanings than the one in which I was raised. Joining a website that was created for people exactly like me wouldn't be as intellectually stimulating.

 

[ViaCrucis]

• “To sustain the belief that there is no God, atheism has to demonstrate infinite knowledge, which is tantamount to saying, “I have infinite knowledge that there is no being in existence with infinite knowledge.”
  – Ravi Zacharias

I think the demonstrable weakness in Zacharias' statement here is that atheism isn't "the belief that there is no God", atheism is the lack of a belief in God/gods. It's not a belief in a negative statement, it's non-belief in a positive statement. It does not require infinite knowledge to not believe in something.

I do not believe in Zeus. I don't need infinite knowledge to not believe in Zeus, I simply lack a belief in Zeus.

Where as Christians we do not believe in the various gods of other religions; atheists simply do not believe in any divinity whatsoever.

Neither requires infinite knowledge, both are simply a lack of belief in certain things.

As such Zacharias' statement is quite weak.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[JackRT]

I'm a Christian, but I know a bit about the religious texts of Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism. I Assume it's the same as that.

Agree! It boils down to the difference between knowledge and belief.

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

I think the demonstrable weakness in Zacharias' statement here is that atheism isn't "the belief that there is no God", atheism is the lack of a belief in God/gods. It's not a belief in a negative statement, it's non-belief in a positive statement. It does not require infinite knowledge to not believe in something.

I do not believe in Zeus. I don't need infinite knowledge to not believe in Zeus, I simply lack a belief in Zeus.

Where as Christians we do not believe in the various gods of other religions; atheists simply do not believe in any divinity whatsoever.

Neither requires infinite knowledge, both are simply a lack of belief in certain things.

As such Zacharias' statement is quite weak.

-CryptoLutheran

To the contrary. Atheists claim there is no God. Not Zeus, Attis, Athena, Pan, no god whatsoever. The very word, atheist, in the Greek of its origin states that; no god.
To affirm there is no God is to imply infinite knowledge that no such thing as God exists. And to claim that it cannot exist implies an infinite knowing that no thing that could be called God can be found anywhere at all.

If an atheist wanted to demonstrate a lack of strong universal affirmation of no god they'd say they were an agnostic. Which would then be the affirmation of, I do not believe in the gods of religions currently but I am willing to entertain the idea that a creator could exist.

 

[rstrats]

JackRT,

re: "Agree! It boils down to the difference between knowledge and belief."

The difference being that knowingly having knowledge about an issue automatically causes a belief about the issue, whereas you can have a belief about an issue for which you do not knowingly have knowledge about the issue.

 

[rstrats]

VanillaSunflower,
re: "To the contrary. Atheists claim there is no God."


Some atheists do and some don't. A-theist simply means 'without theism".



re: "If an atheist wanted to demonstrate a lack of strong universal affirmation of no god they'd say they were an agnostic."



But they are still an atheist. A-gnostic simply means 'without knowledge'. You can be a theist and still be agnostic about the position - e.g., "I believe - am convinced - that there is a god, but I have no actual knowledge about its existence".

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

VanillaSunflower,
re: "To the contrary. Atheists claim there is no God."


Some atheists do and some don't. A-theist simply means 'without theism".



re: "If an atheist wanted to demonstrate a lack of strong universal affirmation of no god they'd say they were an agnostic."



But they are still an atheist. A-gnostic simply means 'without knowledge'. You can be a theist and still be agnostic about the position - e.g., "I believe - am convinced - that there is a god, but I have no actual knowledge about its existence".

atheist (n.)
1570s, from French athéiste (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god, denying the gods; abandoned of the gods; godless, ungodly," from a- "without" + theos"a god" (see theo-).The existence of a world without God seems to me less absurd than the presence of a God, existing in all his perfection, creating an imperfect man in order to make him run the risk of Hell. [Armand Salacrou, "Certitudes et incertitudes," 1943]


agnostic (n.)
1870, "one who professes that the existence of a First Cause and the essential nature of things are not and cannot be known" [Klein]; coined by T.H. Huxley (1825-1895), supposedly in September 1869, from Greek agnostos "unknown, unknowable," from a- "not" + gnostos "(to be) known" (see gnostic). Sometimes said to be a reference to Paul's mention of the altar to "the Unknown God," but according to Huxley it was coined with reference to the early Church movement known as Gnosticism (see Gnostic).I ... invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of 'agnostic,' ... antithetic to the 'Gnostic' of Church history who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. [T.H. Huxley, "Science and Christian Tradition," 1889]The adjective is first recorded 1870.
agnosticism (n.)
1870, from agnostic + -ism.The agnostic does not simply say, "I do not know." He goes another step, and he says, with great emphasis, that you do not know. [Robert G. Ingersoll, "Reply to Dr. Lyman Abbott," 1890]

 

[Cearbhall]

I think the demonstrable weakness in Zacharias' statement here is that atheism isn't "the belief that there is no God", atheism is the lack of a belief in God/gods. It's not a belief in a negative statement, it's non-belief in a positive statement. It does not require infinite knowledge to not believe in something.

I do not believe in Zeus. I don't need infinite knowledge to not believe in Zeus, I simply lack a belief in Zeus.

Where as Christians we do not believe in the various gods of other religions; atheists simply do not believe in any divinity whatsoever.

Indeed. It's always mind-boggling to me when a theist insists that the only type of atheism is the type that is more correctly termed "hard atheism," and/or that atheists are taking an aggressive stance against something. Can they not see that they take the same position on things every day? It's a casual standpoint. "Oh, this email is just spam. What it says isn't true." "My kid didn't actually see a monster in her closet." "I'm not worried about running into Bigfoot when I go hiking." Those views don't define a person.

 

[ViaCrucis]

To the contrary. Atheists claim there is no God. Not Zeus, Attis, Athena, Pan, no god whatsoever. The very word, atheist, in the Greek of its origin states that; no god.
To affirm there is no God is to imply infinite knowledge that no such thing as God exists. And to claim that it cannot exist implies an infinite knowing that no thing that could be called God can be found anywhere at all.

If an atheist wanted to demonstrate a lack of strong universal affirmation of no god they'd say they were an agnostic. Which would then be the affirmation of, I do not believe in the gods of religions currently but I am willing to entertain the idea that a creator could exist.

Agnosticism is simply saying "I don't know if there is a god".
Atheists don't believe in a god.

Most atheists don't make a claim that "God doesn't exist"--or rather--"I know there is no god", simply that they don't believe one exists, or that there is no evidence so they have no reason to believe on exists.

That doesn't require infinite knowledge, it doesn't even require a particular finite knowledge, it simply requires that one not believe.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

Agnosticism is simply saying "I don't know if there is a god".
Atheists don't believe in a god.

Most atheists don't make a claim that "God doesn't exist"--or rather--"I know there is no god", simply that they don't believe one exists, or that there is no evidence so they have no reason to believe on exists.

That doesn't require infinite knowledge, it doesn't even require a particular finite knowledge, it simply requires that one not believe.

-CryptoLutheran

The post I made showing the origin of atheist and agnostic speak well for themselves.