The unhappy 'atheist.'

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Why have i unwittingly allowed myself to be labelled as an atheist?

I use the term on this forum in the apparently mistaken belief that people here know what it means.
Outside this forum I do not use the label. If someone asks me what religion I belong to I say 'I don't believe in God'. If they ask me if I am Christian I say 'no'. I have never been asked if I am Muslim.
As far as I recall, I have only discussed the subject with one adult (a Muslim friend) and two teenagers in the last 10 years, so its really not something that comes up much anyway.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I use the term on this forum in the apparently mistaken belief that people here know what it means.
Outside this forum I do not use the label. If someone asks me what religion I belong to I say 'I don't believe in God'. If they ask me if I am Christian I say 'no'. I have never been asked if I am Muslim.
As far as I recall, I have only discussed the subj ...[text shortened]... ) and two teenagers in the last 10 years, so its really not something that comes up much anyway.

I likewise almost never discuss religion in my private life. (My wife was brought up in a Shinto environment, but even that we have only discussed on a superficial level). I do occasionally find myself drawn into discussions about faith at work, as a surprisingly high percentage of my clients are preoccupied with God. (When it comes to mental health, religion is either a valuable comfort or a deadly cocktail ready to run amok at times of relapse).

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Oh come on, how am i meant to argue with you if you are suddenly agreeable?


(*For the chap who gave this post a thumbs down, it was actually a joke).

I disagree. 😵

A Good Debate between two "Been There Done That!" types.

One a former Atheist, so he testifies.
The other a former Christian, so he testifies.

Dan Barker (former Christian) vs Jerry Bergman (former Atheist)

" Does God Exist? "
YouTube

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Hello, Duchess. As always, I hope you are well.

I read a good book by Batchelor years ago called Buddhism Without Belief.

Another aspect that I have commented on before, is that “theism”, in a least some Christian circles, excludes any understanding of theos that is not in the form of supernaturalist dualism. That excludes not only, say, the ancient Stoics, but also such Christian thinkers as Meister Eckhart (and, perhaps, St. Gregory of Nyssa, depending on how one interprets his diastema).

I am currently reading (among others) a book by a Franciscan nun and theologian, Ilia Delio, called The Emergent Christ. In it, she also speaks (following, in part, Eckhart) of “the emergent God”. I principally chose her book because I was looking for an introduction to the theological thought of Teilhard de Chardin—but she is an incredible writer and thinker in her own right. I am barely begun, but if theology can be a page-turner, her work is (though, perhaps, my own weirdness is just showing).

[Eckhart, as I recall, also emphasized the feminine nature of God—though perhaps not as much as Dame Julian of Norwich, whom I am also currently reading.]

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Okay, how about if i labelled you as a 'non atheist' rather than a Christian and followed on by saying that it wasn't your Christianity that shaped your outlook on life, but your rejection of atheism. (And by default, that God was just your way of filling the gap left by not believing in atheism?)

And 'atheists' too can believe all human life is 'sacred' even without a God being there to tell them so.

Piercing insight. It cuts through the verbal fog of labels as the well honed blade of a machete cuts a path through the undergrowth in a jungle. In God's view, human beings are in one of three categories during their lives on earth: a) Those who have not yet reached the age of volitional responsibility [God consciousness]; b) Those who have and have decided to accept His grace gift of salvation and eternal life by faith alone in Christ alone [which is their moment of salvation]; c) Those who are not yet convinced God exists [but who are hopefully still pondering the possibility that He does].

Care for an unrated game of chess?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby

Piercing insight. It cuts through the verbal fog of labels as the well honed blade of a machete cuts a path through the undergrowth in a jungle. In God's view, human beings are in one of three categories during their lives on earth: a) Those who have not yet reached the age of volitional responsibility [God consciousness]; b) Those who have and have decided to accept His grace gift of salvation and eternal life by faith alone in Christ alone [which is their moment of salvation]; c) Those who are not yet convinced God exists [but who are hopefully still pondering the possibility that He does].

Do you believe that people can decide or choose to believe in something ~ in this case the same mixture of ideology and superstition that you just so happen to believe in ~ even though they simply do not find it credible? Can people just decide to believe something they don't believe? If so, can you give an example from your own life?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I stand by the term 'rejection,' but should clarify (in my case) that this is better understood as 'not being convinced' that a God or Gods exist. I 'reject' the evidence put forward by others. I didn't stand up one day and proudly declare 'i reject God!" I just out grew the notion of him due to a lack of convincing evidence.

That is exactly right. As an atheist I reject god claims on bad or insufficient evidence. This, apparently, is very hard for some believers to digest, as they believe everything about a person's morals, character and outlook on life hinges on believing in the existence, and following the will of god(s). They can't fathom how you could view life as precious, do good for others, and genuinely find "spiritual" joy in life, if there is no god. I've even been told that even though I don't believe in the existence of god, it is only because of god that I have morals and an inner joy that doesn't depend on immediate, material gratifications. They're confused, is all.

Originally posted by C Hess
That is exactly right. As an atheist I reject god claims on bad or insufficient evidence. This, apparently, is very hard for some believers to digest, as they believe everything about a person's morals, character and outlook on life hinges on believing in the existence, and following the will of god(s). They can't fathom how you could view life as preciou ...[text shortened]... nd an inner joy that doesn't depend on immediate, material gratifications. They're confused, is all.

C. Hess, you've always seemed to be a reasonable and thoughtful man on this public spirituality forum.
Is there a possibility that you've somehow got the recurring issue "does God exist" dead wrong?

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
C. Hess, you've always seemed to be a reasonable and thoughtful man on this public spirituality forum.
Is there a possibility that you've somehow got the recurring issue "does God exist" dead wrong?

C.Hess stated 'As an atheist I reject god claims on bad or insufficient evidence.'

I concur with that statement. Can't speak for C.Hess, but if you want me to recognise the possibility that God exists, present 'better' evidence.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
C. Hess, you've always seemed to be a reasonable and thoughtful man on this public spirituality forum.
Is there a possibility that you've somehow got the recurring issue "does God exist" dead wrong?

Of course, but to be convinced I would need evidence that cannot be understood through a natural explanation. I don't mean evidence that we can't yet explain; mysteries, but evidence that can't even theoretically have a natural explanation. I can't imagine what would constitute such evidence, but then again, I'm an atheist. I'm sure if god exists, he can provide it. But if god exists and needs me to simply have faith in his existence without evidence, I'm afraid I fail miserably. Well then, so be it.

Originally posted by C Hess
Of course, but to be convinced I would need evidence that cannot be understood through a natural explanation. I don't mean evidence that we can't yet explain; mysteries, but evidence that can't even theoretically have a natural explanation. I can't imagine what would constitute such evidence, but then again, I'm an atheist. I'm sure if god exists, he can provide ...[text shortened]... mply have faith in his existence without evidence, I'm afraid I fail miserably. Well then, so be it.

If you had been born nearly two thousand years ago and saw the miracles Christ performed first hand, would that have been sufficient evidence?

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
C.Hess stated 'As an atheist I reject god claims on bad or insufficient evidence.'

I concur with that statement. Can't speak for C.Hess, but if you want me to recognise the possibility that God exists, present 'better' evidence.

What "evidence", may I ask, would suffice?

Originally posted by C Hess
Of course, but to be convinced I would need evidence that cannot be understood through a natural explanation. I don't mean evidence that we can't yet explain; mysteries, but evidence that can't even theoretically have a natural explanation. I can't imagine what would constitute such evidence, but then again, I'm an atheist. I'm sure if god exists, he can prov ...[text shortened]... have faith in his existence without evidence, I'm afraid I fail miserably. Well then, so be it.

This is something I've wondered about and I can think of nothing that could convince except being placed into the position of God. As God, I could believe in God.