Can former atheists explain what atheism is?

[Jan Ardena]

Why couldn’t the Bible contain enough for us? Why evoke more, when it’s all there ? It makes much sense. “Here’s the message, now live.”

The Bible does, but generally understood from a Christian perspective. The general Christian perspective, which we all sort of know, suppresses the information,?IMHO. The general institute does this to maintain the idea that A+E were there first ever humans, so there is only one revelation. Anything that contradicts this discussion idea, is treated as lies or works of the devil.

Right now you’re engaged in a discussion about evolution, genesis, the age of the universe, and I can tell you now, your Christian understanding alone cannot help you. Because you are limited.

Well, it depends on what the true God wants. If the real God says I want/need X and not Q,R,T, then that’s it.

Whatever the one true God says must be truth? It’s not limiting God, it what He told us.

God wants us to love Him, because God is Love.
If we live God, then we will be like Jesus, because that is his greatness, his love of God.

That’s what he exemplified.

Jan.

 

[Write4U]

Yes, yes we do. Amazingly, many feel they fit perfectly into biblical chronology. But that’s whole other topic.

The bible (Genesis) has no chronology, other than a six day creation of all species and people which managed to live 800 years.

p.s. "people" (hominids) have believed in gods for maybe 200,000 years.

We can observe this belief system in the modern non-human great apes.

I saw a clip from a study group who recorded a Chimo family during a heavy thunderstorm.

While the rest of the troupe sought shelter and huddled the Alpha began to run around the clearing, beating the brushes with a stick, then raising the stick to the sky and hooting loudly, showing this unseen "enemy" above, who was makes loud noises and then throwing fire and water down to make him uncomfortable, wet, and very angry, but not afraid (fight or flight).

You can truly see the upward "directed" agitation of the Alpha's ire.

While this is primitive behavior, I can well see that a 100.000 years later Thor emerged from the "heavens" for human homonids and became part of their theist mythology.

Sky gods are probably the oldest species of created gods. As are the Water gods. As are the Air gods, do I need to go on?

Today we have doubled down on the SKY GOD and it has evolved in sophistication into a Universal God who created EVERYTHING! ........

 

[billvon]

Related to what we were talking about -

Scientists just found a huge deposit of fossils about half a billion years old. The quality and completeness of the fossils is remarkable, and will add a lot to our knowledge of the ancient world and the tree of life. They even have good fossils of Cnidarians (jellyfish) which is almost unheard of - it is rare to get good fossils of soft bodied organisms. Really cool stuff.

I am glad I'm on the science side of things, and will not be required by a religion to ignore or deny them.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-47667880

 

[Goldtop]

If God is the creator of this material manifestation, then God must be outside of it.

There is no indication whatsoever that God MUST be outside of the universe. God could very well have always been inside of the universe and has always remained here. Your claim is an opinion that ignores logic.

God’s nature is referred to as “Spiritual”

The term "Spiritual" literally has no meaning. At the very least, we know the term "Unicorn" has meaning, a horse with wings and single horn on its head. There is more meaning in the term unicorn than there is with spiritual.

So God is a Spiritual, Transcendental, Being

That is about as vague as vague can get. You have explained absolutely nothing. If one were to analyze your claims overall, they would be indistinguishable from and empty thought bubble.

If I were to claim that Leprechauns race Unicorns in the Kentucky Derby, I'm sure some could probably understand what that is, could picture it in their minds eye and even run scenarios of the race itself.

 

[billvon]

The bible (Genesis) has no chronology, other than a six day creation of all species and people which managed to live 800 years.

Well, right. And since the Bible lists a lot of people (and how long they live) they can come up with a chronology. Which is where Biblical scholars got the "6000 year" thing,

 

[Write4U]

There is no indication whatsoever that God MUST be outside of the universe. God could very well have always been inside of the universe and has always remained here. Your claim is an opinion that ignores logic.

No, you cannot create the universe if you are already inside it. That is what defies the logic.

The term "Spiritual" literally has no meaning. At the very least, we know the term "Unicorn" has meaning, a horse with wings and single horn on its head. There is more meaning in the term unicorn than there is with spiritual. That is about as vague as vague can get. You have explained absolutely nothing. If one were to analyze your claims overall, they would be indistinguishable from and empty thought bubble.

I agree.

If I were to claim that Leprechauns race Unicorns in the Kentucky Derby, I'm sure some could probably understand what that is, could picture it in their minds eye and even run scenarios of the race itself.

..

 

[Write4U]

Well, right. And since the Bible lists a lot of people (and how long they live) they can come up with a chronology. Which is where Biblical scholars got the "6000 year" thing,

In spite of 100,000 year old human fossils......
Seems an odd chronology to me. God of a 94,000 year old gap in chronology? ......

 

[Goldtop]

No, you cannot create the universe if you are already inside it. That is what defies the logic.

I think that would precipitate the conclusion that we know what was going on before the Big Bang in that we knew what it was that not only caused it, but also of what it was comprised. Theists like to tell us God is eternal, hence it could be that God is eternal, but was always confined to whatever the universe was before it became our universe. I simply think this is a possibility, however the chance of being improbable.

 

[Jan Ardena]

There is no indication whatsoever that God MUST be outside of the universe. God could very well have always been inside of the universe and has always remained here. Your claim is an opinion that ignores logic.

I’m not surprised you see it like that. You’re an atheist.
As an atheist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make an atheist, for whom there is no s no God, understand there is a God, while your in their atheist state?

That is about as vague as vague can get. You have explained absolutely nothing. If one were to analyze your claims overall, they would be indistinguishable from and empty thought bubble.

That information is not for an atheist.

Jan.

 

[Write4U]

I think that would precipitate the conclusion that we know what was going on before the Big Bang in that we knew what it was that not only caused it, but also of what it was comprised. Theists like to tell us God is eternal, hence it could be that God is eternal, but was always confined to whatever the universe was before it became our universe. I simply think this is a possibility, however the chance of being improbable.

OK, but anything before the BB would still be outside our current universe and by definition supernatural, no?

p.s. If one were to make an argument that a god might be an emergent property of spacetime.

Such a god might be described as becoming explicated via mathematical patterns, which resulted in the mathematical nature of the universe. Of course, this god has no emotions or intentions. It is a universal function.

 

[Goldtop]

I’m not surprised you see it like that. You’re an atheist.

That information is not for an atheist.

Thank you for conceding my points, Jan. I suspected you couldn't defend your claims.

As an atheist, what would you regard as evidence enough

Regardless of what you assume, evidence is not something distinctive from one ideology to another, it is something universal in that it either exists or not. If your evidence is a philosophical statement filled with meaningless words, then it isn't evidence for the existence of something, is it. They are just words.

 

[billvon]

In spite of 100,000 year old human fossils......

And 500 _million_ year old marine life fossils.

Seems an odd chronology to me. God of a 94,000 year old gap in chronology? ......

He's tricky, that God guy. I heard he even buries fossils just to trick people!

 

[Goldtop]

anything before the BB would still be outside our current universe and by definition supernatural, no?

I think in Physics, being "outside" our universe is a meaningless statement. That being said, if our universe did not exist, then there is no inside or outside. We don't know the state of our universe prior to the BB, so we can no more opine on whether something was inside or outside. However, whatever state the universe was in, theists will opine that God was outside of it while my claim is opposite, that God WAS the state of our universe prior to the BB and he merely expanded while always remaining inside. Again, this is all just pure speculation but I think that possibility exists.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Thank you for conceding my points, Jan. I suspected you couldn't defend your claims.

I didn’t concede your points Goldtop.
As an atheist you are forced to not accept God, or theism. That post was directed to a theist, even though it is there for all to read and comment on.

Regardless of what you assume, evidence is not something distinctive from one ideology to another, it is something universal in that it either exists or not. If your evidence is a philosophical statement filled with meaningless words, then it isn't evidence for the existence of something, is it. They are just words.

You didn’t answer the question.

As an atheist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make an atheist, for whom there is no s no God, understand there is a God, while your in their atheist state?

Jan,

 

[Write4U]

I think in Physics, being "outside" our universe is a meaningless statement. That being said, if our universe did not exist, then there is no inside or outside. We don't know the state of our universe prior to the BB, so we can no more opine on whether something was inside or outside.

But the God I proposed is not physical, it is expressed in physical forms (patterns) from various universal constituents of spacetime geometry.

However, whatever state the universe was in, theists will opine that God was outside of it while my claim is opposite, that God WAS the state of our universe prior to the BB and he merely expanded while always remaining inside. Again, this is all just pure speculation but I think that possibility exists.

OK, I can empathize with this perspective. However, my main objection to the use of the word God is that it is associated with "love, hate, reward, punishment, intentional creation".

A mathematical God does not need these attributes to become explicated in reality. It becomes explicated as orderly patterns in all physical forms of expressions

A mathematical God is a metaphysical pseudo-intelligence which functions deterministically, devoid of emotion other than "movement in the direction of greatest satisfaction".

As to a self-referential communication ability, I am getting intrigued by physical (mathematical ) "quorum sensing".

One could make a case that quorum sensing is an object's or set of objects' self-referential communication system and allows us to assign inherent (latent) potentials to physical objects.

signing off, Jim......

 

[Goldtop]

I didn’t concede your points

Of course, you did. You offered no defence.

As an atheist you are forced to not accept God

Sorry, but that is simply not true. You can't just fabricate a false idea about the other person to make your defence. You actually have to defend what YOU say.

As an atheist, what would you regard as evidence enough, to make an atheist, for whom there is no s no God, understand there is a God, while your in their atheist state?

Feel free to reword that question so that it isn't a loaded question based on your fabricated false ideas of me, then I'll be happy to answer it.

 

[Goldtop]

the God I proposed is not physical

Okay. Is there some way to distinguish that which is not physical from the physical other than it being indistinguishable from the non-existent?

the word God is that it is associated with "love, hate, reward, punishment, intentional creation"

I don't associate the general term, "God" with those traits as that would assume a specific God.

It becomes explicated as orderly patterns in all physical forms of expressions

Perhaps then, the best we can say is that our universe is assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic as far as orderly patterns.

devoid of emotion other than "movement in the direction of greatest satisfaction"

That's a fair statement.

allows us to assign inherent (latent) potentials to physical objects.

Possibly, but one of the biggest mistakes theists make is when they attempt to compare any trait, characteristic or action of God to something that verifiably exists in our universe. (;

 

[iceaura]

The Bible is not a detailed science book, agree, it’s a history book ( how God dealt with those before us ) and a instruction manual how to live and to prepare our deaths.

It is not a history book either - that also would be in the realm of physical facts, not Bible stories.

The Bible is a collection of stories. All of its biological and historical information is wrong, one way or another.

 

[Write4U]

Okay. Is there some way to distinguish that which is not physical from the physical other than it being indistinguishable from the non-existent?

It's mathematical.

I don't associate the general term, "God" with those traits as that would assume a specific God.

Mathematical values and functions are not specific, they are universal.

Perhaps then, the best we can say is that our universe is assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic as far as orderly patterns.

Close enough.

Possibly, but one of the biggest mistakes theists make is when they attempt to compare any trait, characteristic or action of God to something that verifiably exists in our universe. (;

LOL, that is the inherent contradiction in the whole supernatural aspect of a conventional God.

But "potential" fundamentally describes a mathematical metaphysical state, an unrealized latent value, ability, or function.
Potential = That which may become reality.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Of course, you did. You offered no defence.

What or who, do I need to defence against?

Feel free to reword that question so that it isn't a loaded question based on your fabricated false ideas of me, then I'll be happy to answer it.

So you won’t answer if?
That’s what I thought.

Jan.