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

[bhsmte]

You are confusing a belief in God with knowledge of God. If you have “knowledge” of God’s existence you do not believe He exists but know He exists. Belief is the same as Faith and trust and trust/faith is what we need. If God provided “knowledge” to everyone that would eliminate the need for faith in His existence being a detriment to man.

Why would having "knowledge" that God existed be detrimental to man?

 

[oi_antz]

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?

I think you are making it complicated when it is much more simple in my mind. Our beliefs are what we have chosen to think are the right beliefs to have, whatever the reasons were. Any time information comes along that challenges those beliefs, we have to decide whether we will let that information be a challenge that makes us consider and potentially change an existing belief, or dismiss the new information and not allow the existing belief to change. You can see here that acceptance of information is the key factor in forming beliefs, and as you have said above that your beliefs are engendered by the information you have. But there is competing information, even if it is so unlikely as leprechauns. Why not think about what makes you dismiss information that challenges your beliefs?

To answer your question then, the information must be sufficient when it causes a change in belief. But, as I have explained, I don't think that sufficient information will necessarily cause it to happen. This is often because we get attached to our beliefs, but also can be because the new belief scares us. This leads us to see that what we deem to be sufficient information depends entirely on whether we are prepared to form the new belief or not. This is why I originally used the word "education" instead of information.

To predict what my state of mind would be when I had enough information to believe in leprechauns, is not reliable. It is better to examine a real situation, like I said, when a belief has been challenged and has replaced an existing belief. You must have experienced that at some time.

 

[gord44]

the good Lord didn't give me a choice. He chased me down and tackled me. I said back away Jesus. I don't got no time for you. But he just won't let go. When I sneak away he tackles me again and says you aint going nowhere son.

 

[oi_antz]

The skills we are talking about; analytical, objective and critical thinking, don't mesh well with theological pursuits.

I don't agree with this. I think that these skills are necessary for theological pursuits. To exercise religion without being analytical, objective and critical is to make your opinion into the opinion of someone else without understanding it properly. That is not theology.

The reason; theological ideas, are a dime a dozen, with wide variations and don't have objective evidence to support any of them.

Sure.

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..

That is not an objective observation though, and an example of why I have said they are not applying their skills to the task.

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.

I agree with this.

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.

You can see I don't think that is the reason why faith is required in Christianity (I am intentionally not applying this concept to other theology). Also having theological beliefs does not make us a better person. I think you should try to understand faith better.

 

[oi_antz]

the good Lord didn't give me a choice. He chased me down and tackled me. I said back away Jesus. I don't got no time for you. But he just won't let go. When I sneak away he tackles me again and says you aint going nowhere son.

Why you and not bhsmte?

 

[gord44]

no clue good sir. I learned not to question the almighty too much.

 

[bhsmte]

I don't agree with this. I think that these skills are necessary for theological pursuits. To exercise religion without being analytical, objective and critical is to make your opinion into the opinion of someone else without understanding it properly. That is not theology.

Again, there is a reason people who lean more towards; analytical, critical and objective thinking are less likely to be believers. If one is psychologically primed to believe in a God, they may apply critical thinking in choosing their specific theology though.


Sure.

That is not an objective observation though, and an example of why I have said they are not applying their skills to the task.

It is my opinion, if one applies a heavy dose of; analytical, objective a and critical thinking to theology, they are either going to be very confused, or they are more likely to discard theology as something they can reconcile.

I agree with this.

You can see I don't think that is the reason why faith is required in Christianity (I am intentionally not applying this concept to other theology). Also having theological beliefs does not make us a better person. I think you should try to understand faith better.

My point was this, if having faith beliefs in a certain theology, make someone a better person, they have chosen the right path for themselves. It is certainly not the case, that all that latch onto faith beliefs, use their faith in a positive manner.

 

[bhsmte]

Why you and not bhsmte?

Individual psychological reasons are why, IMO.

 

[oi_antz]

Again, there is a reason people who lean more towards; analytical, critical and objective thinking are less likely to be believers. If one is psychologically primed to believe in a God, they may apply critical thinking in choosing their specific theology though.

That makes good sense and appears to be true. What do you think is the reason that the people you describe are less likely to be believers?

It is my opinion, if one applies a heavy dose of; analytical, objective a and critical thinking to theology, they are either going to be very confused, or they are more likely to discard theology as something they can reconcile.

Thank you for sharing this. It is not the place to discuss it, but I will just remind you that it is not consistent with my experience.

My point was this, if having faith beliefs in a certain theology, make someone a better person, they have chosen the right path for themselves. It is certainly not the case, that all that latch onto faith beliefs, use their faith in a positive manner.

Yes, well my point was that some people become monsters when they choose to pursue a theological belief. Mind you, people can be monsters in the same way for choosing not to as well. So I just have to suppose that the theological belief is not necessarily going to make someone a better person.

Individual psychological reasons are why, IMO.

Sure. Is this individual psychological difference possibly not due to experience? I ask this because I still see it as an issue of education.

 

[bhsmte]

That makes good sense and appears to be true. What do you think is the reason that the people you describe are less likely to be believers?

Analytical thinkers tend to roll over every rock and need to reconcile things with reality. If they can't reconcile it, they can't convince themselves to jump on board with it, because they would only be fooling themselves. This is how I felt, when I learned more about the NT and reexamined what I learned with the reality of the world we live in. Analytical thinkers also are much less likely to believe in; ghosts/spirits, alien abductions, conspiracy theories and the like, because they don't find enough believable evidence. Analytical thinkers tend to question first, intuitive thinkers are more prone to, believe first.


Thank you for sharing this. It is not the place to discuss it, but I will just remind you that it is not consistent with my experience.

That's fine, but it has been consistent with mine and IMO, is the reason people are leaving Christianity in general and also church affiliations have been on the decline for decades.

Yes, well my point was that some people become monsters when they choose to pursue a theological belief. Mind you, people can be monsters in the same way for choosing not to as well. So I just have to suppose that the theological belief is not necessarily going to make someone a better person.

Correct, psychological disorders come in all shapes and sizes, believers and non-believers. If faith is the right match for you, it becomes apparent, but some use it as a weapon or shield.

Sure. Is this individual psychological difference possibly not due to experience? I ask this because I still see it as an issue of education.

Psychology is both; genetically driven and environmentally driven, it is a blend.

 

[oi_antz]

Analytical thinkers tend to roll over every rock and need to reconcile things with reality. If they can't reconcile it, they can't convince themselves to jump on board with it, because they would only be fooling themselves. This is how I felt, when I learned more about the NT and reexamined what I learned with the reality of the world we live in. Analytical thinkers also are much less likely to believe in; ghosts/spirits, alien abductions, conspiracy theories and the like, because they don't find enough believable evidence. Analytical thinkers tend to question first, intuitive thinkers are more prone to, believe first.

Thanks. How much do you think that the culture of the community of types that you are describing impacts their ability to reconcile things with reality? IOW, do you think that a fear of being ridiculed or outcast for choosing to accept a position that is outside of the community's belief set might be a deterrent for someone to accept an idea?

That's fine, but it has been consistent with mine and IMO, is the reason people are leaving Christianity in general and also church affiliations have been on the decline for decades.

I don't think that is the reason. I think it is culture and education. People naturally want to resist the idea that they are not as good as they think they are, so naturally anything that tells them otherwise is going to be distasteful. Then when they are confident that it is ok to reject that judgement, they become comfortable with it and begin to despise it. Then the culture propagates. What do you think of that?

Correct, psychological disorders come in all shapes and sizes, believers and non-believers. If faith is the right match for you, it becomes apparent, but some use it as a weapon or shield.

Psychology is both; genetically driven and environmentally driven, it is a blend.

Thanks. Do you believe then that some people are genetically more able to accept beliefs in God than others? This means that two people given the exact same life experience (which is untestable, remember), will make different decisions about their faith?

 

[bhsmte]

Thanks. How much do you think that the culture of the community of types that you are describing impacts their ability to reconcile things with reality? IOW, do you think that a fear of being ridiculed or outcast for choosing to accept a position that is outside of the community's belief set might be a deterrent for someone to accept an idea?

IMO, analytical critical thinkers are much less prone to social pressures when they examine a situation. At the end of the day, you have to live with yourself and what you have settled on, not what others have settled on for themselves.

I don't think that is the reason. I think it is culture and education. People naturally want to resist the idea that they are not as good as they think they are, so naturally anything that tells them otherwise is going to be distasteful. Then when they are confident that it is ok to reject that judgement, they become comfortable with it and begin to despise it. Then the culture propagates. What do you think of that?

I agree, it is culture and education. It is the education and acquired new knowledge, that has caused them to question theology and some can't reconcile it any further. I think the whole; atheists despise theism is heavily overblown. Sure, there are some over the top atheists, just as you have over the top Christians, but for the most part, atheists just can't buy the story. For myself, I was a Christian for 40 years and recognize why some people need and choose to believe. For many, it is the right choice for them.

Thanks. Do you believe then that some people are genetically more able to accept beliefs in God than others? This means that two people given the exact same life experience (which is untestable, remember), will make different decisions about their faith?

Yes. Some people are wired to lean towards analytical thinking and others more intuitive. Studies have confirmed the same and the impact on likelihood of one being a believer or not. This does not explain all the reasons one would believe or not, but it is an important one.

 

[oi_antz]

IMO, analytical critical thinkers are much less prone to social pressures when they examine a situation. At the end of the day, you have to live with yourself and what you have settled on, not what others have settled on for themselves.

Are you certain that this is true and not just a cliche? I have been ridiculed and cast outside by people who gloat about the attributes you listed, and not because I am less inclined to be like that, but only because of my position on a belief in God and as soon as I said it. So while I can see that these are ideals that these community will aspire to, I do not expect it to be implemented in reality, at least in the majority of communities.

I agree, it is culture and education. It is the education and acquired new knowledge, that has caused them to question theology and some can't reconcile it any further. I think the whole; atheists despise theism is heavily overblown. Sure, there are some over the top atheists, just as you have over the top Christians, but for the most part, atheists just can't buy the story. For myself, I was a Christian for 40 years and recognize why some people need and choose to believe. For many, it is the right choice for them.

Yes. Some people are wired to lean towards analytical thinking and others more intuitive. Studies have confirmed the same and the impact on likelihood of one being a believer or not. This does not explain all the reasons one would believe or not, but it is an important one.

Great. Thanks for all your clarification

 

[bhsmte]

Are you certain that this is true and not just a cliche? I have been ridiculed and cast outside by people who gloat about the attributes you listed, and not because I am less inclined to be like that, but only because of my position on a belief in God and as soon as I said it. So while I can see that these are ideals that these community will aspire to, I do not expect it to be implemented in reality, at least in the majority of communities.

Great. Thanks for all your clarification

Not sure the makeup of the community you live in, but I know you are not in the United States. In the US, atheists are looked down upon from a social aspect in a big way.

If people have outcast and or ridiculed you because you believe in a God, they have their own issues they need to deal with. I can understand them having a discussion with you about it and giving their point of view, but ridicule is not necessary.

 

[oi_antz]

Not sure the makeup of the community you live in, but I know you are not in the United States. In the US, atheists are looked down upon from a social aspect in a big way.

If people have outcast and or ridiculed you because you believe in a God, they have their own issues they need to deal with. I can understand them having a discussion with you about it and giving their point of view, but ridicule is not necessary.

I am thinking of my experience on a particular website. In my daily life I don't get to discuss religion much, and when I do it is usually with people I know who are much more reasonable. I still know communities do exist that are like this though, and whether they are religious communities or not doesn't seem to make any difference. Most people automatically think they are superior to someone they don't understand. Thanks for your input.

 

[ForJesusChrist]

God has done well enough trying to get atheists to believe. It is simply the atheists lacking the want/motivation/knowledge to believe.

God Bless

 

[gord44]

Not here to debate. But I will say one thing before I leave this post. Key word for this post is ALL.We are all blessed/have with free will. Some of use it for good and some of us humans use it for evil. Some of us take it and make good decisions with it and some of us make bad ones too. We all have free will to do as we please. We just have to remember CONSEQUENCES.If one does not want to believe in God..his/her choice. HAVE AVERY BLESSED DAY my friend !

~ Kelly

No need to debate. I was just saying I did nothing to earn Gods grace. No right choices, no right decisions. I take no credit, for all is done by God. There's nothing in me that would choose Jesus. As I said, if God didn't choose some, heaven would have none. Have a blessed day as well!

 

[rstrats]

oi antz,

re: "I think you are making it complicated..."

Actually, just the opposite. If beliefs can be obtained by simply choosing to have them, then just do it. What could be more simple?


re: "To answer your question then, the information must be sufficient when it causes a change in belief."
　
I would say that that is indeed the case. The only way you know when you have enough information is when you suddenly realize that you have a new belief. But the new belief wasn't obtained by consciously choosing to have it.

 

[oi_antz]

oi antz,

re: "I think you are making it complicated..."

Actually, just the opposite. If beliefs can be obtained by simply choosing to have them, then just do it. What could be more simple?


re: "To answer your question then, the information must be sufficient when it causes a change in belief."
　
I would say that that is indeed the case. The only way you know when you have enough information is when you suddenly realize that you have a new belief. But the new belief wasn't obtained by consciously choosing to have it.

That is not how I form my beliefs.

 

[bling]

Why would having "knowledge" that God existed be detrimental to man?

I will give you a short version:
If you gain knowledge, it only encourages you to be even more self-reliant, knowledge is power so it tends to “puff the person up”, which is the opposite of being humble. Humility is what we need since we are being asked by God to accept His charity. While trusting in a benevolent Creator is something the lowliest mature adult on earth can do, so faith (trust) is a humbling experience and humility is what we need to humbly accept charity.