Does God Believe in Atheists?

Originally posted by jammer
It's funny that so many people responded to this poorly worded post.

1. "Does God Believe in Atheists?"

Think about that.
Doesn't being God mean that you KNOW as opposed to "believe" anything?

2. "I have considered the subject of believing that there is no God in the Bible itself."

Somebody tell me what the heck that means!
To me it comes off as round and comes home God is overjoyed.
In this sense, God believes in atheists.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It's funny that so many people responded to this poorly worded post.

1. "Does God Believe in Atheists?"

Think about that.
Doesn't being God mean that you KNOW as opposed to "believe" anything?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I think you are right.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++====
2. "I have considered the subject of believing that there is no God in the Bible itself."

Somebody tell me what the heck that means!
To me it comes off as .. I'm thinking about believing that there is no God in the bible itself.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If it was poorly worded to the point that you derived that meaning from my question, then it was poorly worded.

But if you think about some of the utterances in the Scripture by God, He did sometimes speak in somewhat human terms.

For example, He was so angry with Isreal at one point that He didn't want Moses to change His mind about disciplining them. He actually told Moses to leave Him alone!

In another Scripture God asks if there is another God besides Him and says that He does not know of another God.

Another place He invites man to come and reason with Him.

So I take responsiblilty for poor wording of the post as to put it - "Does God Believe in Athiests?" I hope no harm is done. And I think a good number of people who bother to read the discussion understand that I mean something like - does God treat atheists the way atheists like to treat God.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3. "I can see much indication that God believes that atheists exists. Can any Bible student give me a reason to believe that God believes in Athiests?"

I'm not a bible student, but my concept of God is such that He doesn't "believe" anything .. He knows everything.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Point taken.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
(that's what makes Him God)
From my reading of the bible I think that atheists are the prodigal sons written about in the bible. God is very aware of these and loves them very much. When one of these turns around and comes home God is overjoyed.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The parable of the prodigal son (or it might be called the parable of the longing father) is exceedingly rich. It can be applied to practically any situation of a person coming to themselves to realize that their situation without the divine Father is poor and that they should return to Him.

I agree with you that God is the longing Father eager and even running to welcome the child of His to return and be fed and clothed and rejoiced over.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In this sense, God believes in atheists.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On one hand Psalm 53 says that only the fool says in his heart that there is no God. But on the other hand we have the Proverb saying:

"Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."

Originally posted by doodinthemood
I had logged off? and if he is capable of freing the damned, but does not, then that's a rather nasty god you're worshipping.

++++++++++++++++++++++++
I had logged off? and if he is capable of freing the damned, but does not, then that's a rather nasty god you're worshipping.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I don't see any great fence around the damned in eternity.

I think it would be more painful for them to leave that place than to stay there.

It is after all the ultimate escape for people who want nothing to do with God. If everywhere else is part of His kingdom and His reign can you imagine the pain of stepping out of the darkness and into the light?

As I read the Bible I don't see any walled fence keeping people in damnation. I see that there is no where else to go. You get what you want - just yourself - for all eternity.

At any rate the Bible spends much more time explaining that Jesus Christ already "went to hell" for everyone on His cross, so that they need not go.

Originally posted by Choreant
Omnipotence means possibility, not an imperative of doing something. Omniscence means knowledge, not an nesscesity to intervene. Weak attack, I would rather strike against universal love.

Indeed, and most others would too. But my point is a rather more subtle one than that. If God is omniscient, he has no choice as to what he does, since he already knows it'll happen. If he's omnipotent, he can change anything, and cannot therefore be omniscient.

Omniscience and ominpotence make impossible bed fellows, or at least logically inconsistent ones.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Indeed, and most others would too. But my point is a rather more subtle one than that. If God is omniscient, he has no choice as to what he does, since he already knows it'll happen. If he's omnipotent, he can change anything, and cannot therefore be omniscient.

Omniscience and ominpotence make impossible bed fellows, or at least logically inconsistent ones.

That just wrong. Both things are not necessarily logically inconsistent. (e.g. under compatibilistic views of free will)

Originally posted by scottishinnz
Indeed, and most others would too. But my point is a rather more subtle one than that. If God is omniscient, he has no choice as to what he does, since he already knows it'll happen. If he's omnipotent, he can change anything, and cannot therefore be omniscient.

Omniscience and ominpotence make impossible bed fellows, or at least logically inconsistent ones.

so many times... ok, once again...

1.X is omniscent.
2.X is omnipotent.
3.Omniscence means to know everything.
4.Omnipotence means to be able to do anything.
5. X being omniscent and omnipotent is absolute being.
6. Being absolute means not to change
7. X as a not changing being is over the time(which is a stream of changes)
8.Being over the time, allows omniscence
9. Being over the time means that the decisions of the X, are no to be considered in the past,now and future. It is only Now.
10. Thus, it doesn't contradict free will of X.
11. Being omnipotent has nothing to do with time, it it set of possibilites(infinte) from which X can choose his course of action.

Omniscent and Omnipotent X makes his decisons over the time stream and over the possiblities,as we see them.

NO CONTRADICITION

Originally posted by scottishinnz
What has my chess rating or my political beliefs got to do with anything? Last time I looked that wasn't what the debate was about. Oh no, wait, I got ya. You're just another one of them ones who can't tackle my points head on, so feel you have to attack me personally. Feel free. Go ahead. You think I care?

You say: Last time I looked that wasn't what the debate was about.

Well, look again. This was your entire response to my post.

That's the dumbest thing I ever read. Did you take an entire tub of stupid pills before you came out tonight?

Now you say: You're just another one of them ones who can't tackle my points head on, so feel you have to attack me personally.

I guess I failed to notice your point in calling me dumb and stupid and thought you had changed the subject to intelligence. I took one glance at your rating and your political beliefs and realized intelligence is not one of your strong points. Since you had insulted me first, I responded in kind.

Originally posted by TheSkipper
I have just never really heard of the idea that people somehow "know" about God without having been told about him. I'm trying to get you to flesh out the idea a little more.

My wife IS a lawyer...she may be rubbing off on me! 😉

edit: Oh, and if we are not surrounded by Christianity at every turn then, at least every other.

LOL...you sound like the lawyer....😉
The only thing I said about birth is the desire most people have, excluding wierdo's, the desire to live forever...🙂

Originally posted by Choreant
so many times... ok, once again...

1.X is omniscent.
2.X is omnipotent.
3.Omniscence means to know everything.
4.Omnipotence means to be able to do anything.
5. X being omniscent and omnipotent is absolute being.
6. Being absolute means not to change
7. X as a not changing being is over the time(which is a stream of changes)
8.Being over the time, ...[text shortened]... s decisons over the time stream and over the possiblities,as we see them.

NO CONTRADICITION

Answer simply yes or no, can God do something that he didn't know he was going to do?

Originally posted by jaywill
If it was poorly worded to the point that you derived that meaning from my question, then it was poorly worded.

But if you think about some of the utterances in the Scripture by God, He did sometimes speak in somewhat human terms.

So I take responsiblilty for poor wording of the post as to put it - [b]"Does God Believe in Athiests?" I hope ...[text shortened]... you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."[/b][/b]

I read the Bible more like an epic poem than a history book.
"Utterances in the Scriptures by God" are, in truth, only words written down by men.
I think when God utters something we'll all know who is speaking.

You ask .. "does God treat atheists the way atheists like to treat God."

Different atheists like to treat God in different ways. Some simply ignore the idea altogether. They've already decided that God does not exist, so they treat Him the way the average 40 yr old would the Easter Bunny. Some atheists make a logic argument .. most don't bother.
God loves atheists.
This is just my opinion, I don't claim to know. It's just the way I feel about God. I believe He loves every one of us, from the purest soul to the serial killer on death row.

Good one here .. "Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."

Like I say .. an epic poem.
It describes all of us at different times in our lives.
I think it's called hubris.

Originally posted by Choreant
so many times... ok, once again...

1.X is omniscent.
2.X is omnipotent.
3.Omniscence means to know everything.
4.Omnipotence means to be able to do anything.
5. X being omniscent and omnipotent is absolute being.
6. Being absolute means not to change
7. X as a not changing being is over the time(which is a stream of changes)
8.Being over the time, ...[text shortened]... s decisons over the time stream and over the possiblities,as we see them.

NO CONTRADICITION

Okay. I'll explain it in small words.

Omniscient. He knows everything that will ever happen to everything, himself included. Nothing can deviate from that, else he would not be omniscient.


Omnipotent. He can change anything, at any time.


If he changes anything from what he already knows will happen, then he's not omniscient. If he cannot, he is not omnipotent.

Originally posted by Varqa
You say: [b]Last time I looked that wasn't what the debate was about.

Well, look again. This was your entire response to my post.

That's the dumbest thing I ever read. Did you take an entire tub of stupid pills before you came out tonight?

Now you say: You're just another one of them ones who can't tackle my points head on, so feel you h ...[text shortened]... ence is not one of your strong points. Since you had insulted me first, I responded in kind.

You made a stupid statement. I told you it was stupid. There is nothing wrong with that. You are the one who decided to change the subject to my chess rating. Feel free to attack me.

The funny thing is, you have judged me based upon a political view that I do not hold, and a chess rating. You think I'm stupid because I have a bad chess rating? Fine. Personally, I think I just got timed-out a lot.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
You made a stupid statement. I told you it was stupid. There is nothing wrong with that. You are the one who decided to change the subject to my chess rating. Feel free to attack me.

The funny thing is, you have judged me based upon a political view that I do not hold, and a chess rating. You think I'm stupid because I have a bad chess rating? Fine. Personally, I think I just got timed-out a lot.

I did not make a stupid statement. Read it again. Look at the smiley at the end. It was a ^%&*^ joke.

I am not in the habit of judging people. I do not think you are stupid, but you are certainly rude. That is the problem with you atheists. For some reason you think not believing in God gives you a license to be rude and obnoxious.

Jammer,

I found this comment from you interesting:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think when God utters something we'll all know who is speaking.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If such a speaking from God to man did possibly, I say even possibly, occur, who do you think is the best candidate in history to have uttered such words?

Of all speakers whose words we have record of, whose would you say come the closest to possibly being the speaking of God to mankind?

Originally posted by Varqa
That is the problem with you atheists. For some reason you think not believing in God gives you a license to be rude and obnoxious.

And you are generalizing too much by saying "you atheists". Atheists are a very diverse group of people because the only thing that makes them a 'group' is that they don't believe in God. They often have little else in common so for you to make any general statement about 'you atheists' would almost certainly be wrong.

Also when a Christian is rude he is a hypocrite, when an Atheist is rude he may not be.

Originally posted by Varqa
I did not make a stupid statement. Read it again. Look at the smiley at the end. It was a ^%&*^ joke.

I am not in the habit of judging people. I do not think you are stupid, but you are certainly rude. That is the problem with you atheists. For some reason you think not believing in God gives you a license to be rude and obnoxious.

I don't think I was rude nor obnoxious to you, why are being rude to me?