Question to Atheists

[quatona]

Ok good. Regarding the wandering eye stuff, that was really just a joke. I don't see the same kind of wandering you do and I suspect that it's not so much that I am wandering, but that something is causing you to have trouble processing the information (possibly because I really AM giving you solid answers and you may not be used to that).

Whatever assumptions about me that float your boat are fine with me.

 

[candle glow]

Whatever assumptions about me that float your boat are fine with me.

It's not an assumption so much as a fairly reasonable suggestion as to why it seems to take you so much extra effort to understand what I consider to be a fairly simple explanation.

I suggested that God deliberately set things up so that we could not prove his existence in a way which would put people into a position where they had no choice but to agree.

I suggested he did this because he is looking for people who want to see him, and not a world full of people who have no choice but to see him. This concept of seeking out truth from among many possibilities demonstrates sincerity and genuine desire as opposed to the complacency which comes from a situation where people have no choice but to believe.

I can´t seem to follow that line of reasoning.
How exactly does lack of evidence for the existence of an entity enhance the sincerity of seeking a relationship with it?
Would the sincerity of my relationship with my girlfriend somewhat be increased if I didn´t know she existed?

This was your first response, where you said that you cannot understand. Okay, fair enough. I was fine to elaborate using examples. In response to your non-existent girl friend question I suggested that it was not whether she existed or not, but how much effort you would put into trying to find her if she suddenly went missing; a situation where you have some idea of where she might be but no conclusive proof.

If your girl friend returned a year later what would you be able to tell her about your efforts to search for her? Would you explain that, because you had no conclusive proof of her whereabouts that you decided not to bother searching?

Or wold you explain that you tried a,b,c,d to search for her and that for the entire year you never stopped trying different options to find her.

Which option do you think she would be more impressed with? To me, I think that is a fairly simple concept to understand. (btw, this example does relate to the issue of existence because if she went missing with no explanation you would NOT know if she was still alive or not until you found her again to confirm it).

But okay, you still didn't get the concept of the proof of sincerity demonstrated through searching as opposed to complacency via irrefutable proof.

I also used another analogy, that of an adult supervising children. While the adult is there, the children will be very good because they know they are being watched. But when the adult leaves the room, some children may bully others, while some may sneak sweets from the cupboard, while others may decide to act the same as they would if the adult were still there.

It's like that with God. He's left the room. That doesn't mean he's stopped watching, but it does give the children the impression that he is not watching. Of course, the point is to see how they would behave if they really believed no one was watching. If one of the children were able to irrefutably prove to the other kids that an adult was indeed watching, obviously the children would change their behavior on that basis, not because they internalized any lesson or out of sincerity, but because they would feel pressured by the adults (albeit) hidden observation.

I think this concept really should not take so extra effort to understand, as though it's a problem with the concept itself rather than your willingness to think about it that is the problem.

You said:

Do I get you right: God plays hide and seek so that we can concentrate on the reasons behind the teachings, instead of concentrating the fact that it´s what God commands us to? That would be an entirely different argument than the one you made previously and which I meant to address.

The concept of searching implies some kind of effort to find what you are looking for. I suggested that choosing to apply the teachings of Jesus is a reasonable way of knowing if there is any truth in the teachings as well as showing God that we are genuinely interested in him (as opposed to applying the teachings only because we can't disprove his existence).

But it appears you still miss that point on the basis that there is no point in trying the teachings unless we have no choice to based on irrefutable evidence of God's existence to enforce those teachings.

There are heaps of people who follow rules, not because they want to, but because they feel compelled to either because they will be fired from their jobs, or because they are afraid of how they will appear to others around them, or because of emotional blackmail in family/friendly/romantic relationships etc.

How much better to find people who are willing to follow the rules because they actually believe in the reasoning behind the rules.

Once again, this concept seems really basic and easy to understand to me, and yet it takes "extra effort" for you to understand it. Would you prefer a partner who agrees with you because she understands your reasoning or because she feels pressured by what you will think of her if she disagrees, regardless of your reasoning? Isn't the answer obvious? Any yet, you say it takes "extra effort" to understand it. Why?

I suggested that it is not that you cannot understand it, but because it really does make so much sense in the context of why atheists (or Christians) cannot put God into their test tubes. It is not because he does not exist but because he will not allow us to spoil the conditions he has set up for discerning who is really sincere and who is not.

There is no blanket answer to hide behind. We humans demand that God prove himself to us, while at the same time he demands that we prove ourselves (our sincerity) to him.

In conclusion, I see no reason to believe that you are not able to understand these concepts based on how you've carried yourself in your posts so far and especially since so much explanation has been given on what it means), or that they are difficult to understand in general.

So, I suggest that you really do understand that there is some merit in what I'm saying, but because it puts the ball back into your court regarding evidence you are pretending that I am being somehow confusing and you just can't understand.

But, if you still say that I've jumped to the wrong conclusion on that, I'm find to accept that you simply are not able to understand the concepts I've explained here.

 

[Tnmusicman]

If I may I would like to answer also.

I think part of the problem with some Christians is that they are incredibly possessive of the context of God. This not only stems from their admiration and fidelity to the belief, but also occasionally a selfishness that says contrary view points and opinions have no value or relevance. They simply don't want to hear what other people think, they use the argument of "theme" that non-believers don't really belong in the discussion to mask a very different purpose, to foster an environment suitable for themselves and to squash different opinions. It not only serves to corral and foster good discussion at times, it serves as a means to silence others.
It may not be so much a need to silence others but in my experiance many great conversations have been ruined by a militant non-believer. If you're an atheist then fine but why ruin a good exchange amongst 3 or 4 people by having a disrespectful attitude towards God,church,faith,ect...??

Christianity is something that has effected us all, regardless of our choices and beliefs. Christianity is something that spans so many issues, it serves to touch on so many door steps and lifestyles, it cannot be contained to those who agree with it. Christianity is something that effects the very roots of some nation's foundations. Wars have been fought, lives have been lost over these issues. Religion is something that has delicately infiltrated all of our lives for better or worse.

Those who refuse to embrace it still have much opportunity to be concerned with it, to have thoughts on it, to find it interesting. I also think that the more experience you have with those who do not agree with you, the more you discover people that are absolutely brilliant people regardless of their belief and to not value discussion with those people is unfortunate and foolish.

Just as it may interest you that a group of atheists chat about how they find no reason in your choices, that they cannot imagine why you do the things you do, atheists can find it just as reasonable to find it interesting that we Christians do not understand them and that is absolutely a common case, Christians often do not understand them.

Philosophy is fascinating, regardless of your own decisions. Not every atheist is concerned with the destruction of Christianity or God. Not every Christian is concerned with the inquisition of atheism.

For those who are aware of what Atheism is and is not, and choose to accept the label atheism, that requires a choice, that requires a conscious recognition of your position toward religious beliefs, often one surrounded by emotional cliffs and valleys, it is often littered with experiences, problems, discoveries, choices, lines drawn in the sand, decisions made, and religion is very much at the center of it all.
Just because they have no or disregarded their fidelity to religion is by no means a reason for us to expect it to not concern them, often it is quite the contrary and sometimes those people who've been through much but came to different conclusions than our own can give us an extremely valuable new light on a subject.

Absolutely!! My faith has done nothing but INCREASE after being exposed to some of the atheist/agnostics I've come in contact with.Consequently, I have become better educated on some of the inconsistancies with my own choice of faith and I better understand the atheist point of view, so it can be a good thing to converse with people of various faiths/religions/non-believers.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I just want to say right from the start that I love that you guys are here.

My question is, why?

For me personally, I usually only join forums if they are about something that interests me or I am involved in.

For example, another forum I comment on from time to time is based around a hobby of mine. I like the topics and I also use it to improve my hobby. I do have to say that the people that claim they are atheists in this forum, for the most part are pretty respectful not just to Christians, but humans in general, so thank you for that.

But anyways, back to my original question, why are you guys here?

Even though I'm an atheist, I find as a constitutional conservative, even though I don't share religious ideals with Christians, there are many other ideals that I do share with them.

Not to mention, there's a wide variety of other topics available to discuss...I've been in threads about cars, answered questions for people in the tech forum, discussed pistol shooting in the recreation threads, been in a debate over who was the best bass player, etc...

Plus, it's not always a bad thing to hear other points of view