athism

Atheism always seemed like a bold statement. The absolute non-existence of the divine. It just looks like a difficult road.

But that may be little more than a difference of personalities. Perhaps some individual are born with the perspective of an atheist, regardless of culture or any other factors.

Why do some many loud self-proclaming atheiest have an attiude that everyone else is just too ignorant or stupid to see things their way?

Hello Truatman. Welcome to the forum.

Not all atheists are that way. 93% of scientists are atheists and only 1% of the people in prisons are atheists. I was not born an atheist (although one can argue the point, a young child does not believe in any deities until he is taught to do so). In fact, i had to shake off a lot of social conditioning, that takes strength, courage, and inquisitiveness. It is a difficult road as you say.

if i told you that microscopic imps produced the electricity that powers your PC you would probably laugh at me. If i then went on to say that you can’t disprove them, where then does the ground lie with that kind of reasoning? You can posit any supernatural thing with that standard of proof. Why just one God? Why not a whole pantheon, or better yet, wicked Gods? This is the common reasoning i get from many theists who would not dare use such reasoning in their work, or to balance their checking account, or for any of the myriad activities necessary to survive on this earth. The only thing that makes my statement bold is the fact that the majority of people in the World espouse some kind of deity, but it doesn’t matter if 5 billion people believe in something or only one, reality stays the same and our wishes remain impotent.

What do you think?

That is possibly the most clear, concise and to the point summary of the gaping hole in theism I’ve ever read.
Kudos, Sir.

Hi Marshall,

Sorry for not answering before, I’ve been back and forth to Düsseldorf and was whacked by the time I got home.

I appreciate your position and I agree with it’s logic. That is why (as you know) I am a Mystic. The general position against Atheists (a term I don’t generally use – rather I 'd call you a Humanist – it seems more esteemable) by believers is as you have presented. It suggests that the mere fact that there is no proof against there being a God is enough to support the position taken. In fact, if this is the only argument presented, I would doubt that there really was Faith behind it.

I experience (‘real’) Faith differently. It is not a desire to ‘prove’ God in any way, it is a simple trust based on positive experience that is prepared to rest in itself – since experience is personal and not transferable. I get the feeling that those who do try to ‘prove’ are lacking in true experience. At the same time, religious language is based on everyday terminology, since religious experience is seldom a language experience – much more an experience beyond words or at best served with symbolic language.

The attempt of most Theists, and I suspect that most of them are conservative Christians, to reason the way they do, is a ready taught form of Evangelism that wants to reach the ‘remorseful sinner’ with the message of forgiveness. In fact, the ‘reasoning’ is a covert form of Evangelism and the only reason for communicating with ‘Non-Believers.’ If they would take their opposites seriously, they would admit that Faith is not ‘reasonable.’ The Psalms are full of pleas and complaints by Believers, that God does not present himself to all of Mankind: “Oh that thou wouldst rend the heavens, that thou wouldst come down, that the mountains might flow down at thy presence…“. It is obviously an accepted problem in the Tenach.

Instead of accepting this, the Gospel of John tells us that the Word (a translation of logos) became Flesh – meaning that ‘God’ was personified or incarnated in Jesus. The Author of the fourth Gospel was implying more than the other Gospels, namely that Jesus was God in the flesh, interpreting radically what the old prophets had wished. Even Paul is more careful in his statement: “God was in Messiah reconciling the world unto himself.” Moreover he seems to regard Messiah not as a human figure but as a divine Idea and the means of reconciliation. Jesus on the other hand is the faithful servant of God and the personification of the ‘idea’ Messiah.

Putting the details to one side, somehow the Gospel of John became strangely dominant and the other Gospels more interpreted with regard to it’s dogmatic thrust than the other way around. It may be that the original Jewish Christians had died out and that the Gentile Christians sought acceptance of their Religion in the Roman Empire through the deification of Jesus. But it completely changed the vision of the divine. God no longer being a Mystery, the Roman Church pressed the Unknown into an image: The Trinity – sacrilege in Jewish eyes.

The reason for the lack of honesty amongst Christians lies in the weakness of their Faith due to a lack of experience and this dogmatic corset into which Churchgoers are pressed.

Religious experience, on the other hand, is incapable of describing the source of the experience. The descriptions of the Tenach and New Testament have given rise to all sorts of speculation and strange dogmatic – although it must be clear that these descriptions make one thing above all apparent: The experience is so ‘other worldly’ that those making the experience are desperate about being alone with it, and do not go about trying to push some vision down other peoples throats. Rather, they used poetic methods to transport that which they take to be the consequences of their encounter - but which is expected to be confirmed by common experience.

It is the ability to rest in itself that gives religious experience strength and leads to following statements:

The Bible (Proverbs 10:19): “The more you talk, the more you are likely to sin. If you are wise, you will keep quiet.”
Tao - (Chapter 5): “The mouth, on the other hand, becomes exhausted if you talk too much. Better to keep your thoughts inside you.”
And your examples:
Wittgenstein: “whereof one can not speak one should remain silent.”
Meister Eckhart: “I pray to God to rid me of the idea of God.”

Shalom
Bob

Bob,

That is a truly beautiful analysis. Attending to the importance of that qualify of mystery that much modern religion strongly lacks. Plus pointing out how strongly evangelistic motivation plays a role in many common efforts to ‘prove’ the existence of the divine. As Carl Jung noted, religion is often there to prevent the individual from having a religious experience. Mysticism seems to be the vital center of effective religion.

Thank you Dr Satanical. I have a friend who calls that argument ‘logical positivism’, although i’m not sure that that is correct.

‘Dogmatic corset’, i wish i had come up with that.

The gospel of John is younger than the other gospels too, and, as you say Bob, much more embellished.

Truatman said:

Jung said that? I never thought about religion in that light, interesting.

‘Judaism has a unique way of remembering to pay attention. It is called beruchah, or a blessing. It begins Baruch ata Adonai, “Holy One of blessing.” Elohenu melech ha’olam, “Your presence fills creation.” Then we add words appropriate for the occaision, like “who brings forth bread from the earth,” or “who removes sleep anf slumber from my eyelids,” or “who spreads the shelter of peace over us.”
Each time Jews recite a blessing, they are effectively saying, “Pay attention. Something awesome is happening all around us.” In this way, they realize again and again that our everyday world conceals wonders and mysteries.’ (Rabbi Lawrence Kushner)

This is the awareness that true religious experience invokes, it makes us wake up to the every day miracle, to see through the illusions that fool our senses, to see God’s handwriting in creation. That is why many of Christ’s parables start of with “To what may we liken the reign of God, or in what simile may we compare it?” There are examples in everyday life that spiritual awareness opens to us.

Shalom
Bob

one can know this very intensively without needing any form of god for it

i don’t see god’s handwriting, i see pure beauty, and pure pain as well, and even more beautiful; mixes of those and the most brilliant structures and balances
things hardly imaginable float around us, mostly we pass by em without even noticing it

why god?

why not beauty? why not miracles? they can all exist without god… they can, they don’t need to, but they can
god’s handwriting doesn’t prove his existence

i don’t see the need for a god… i see what you see, unless i am so different from you that i percieve reality in a different way
but that could show most everything
then we’d be goin in circles, because i or someone else, a true atheist perhaps, could use the same argument

i see reality as such, and i don’t see any god, more over, i see there is none

and so neither could ever be right or wrong

but that’s not the point is it?
it’s about your own experience … right?

greetz

willem

I have what I consider to be a rather unremarkable atheism. Basically I try to limit my belifes as much as possible. I have therefore reaced a state where I have very few belifes and almost completely transiant opionions. So I don’t belive in God. I do however belive that if there was any being deservent of the name God, that he would obviously have the ability to work through my reasoning as flawed as it may be, and forgive me for this unremarkable atheism.

As far as the supernatural, well that only works if you have a clear idea of the natural. Molicules and such items of physics also to me fall under thouse things which I have insuffent reason to belive fully. Thus I can’t distungiush between the merely unusual and the miraculus. I have no paradigm to shape. It would be interesting to see how many people come to belive in some form of God because they first belived in the predictive power of the sciences. I think in modern places it would be quire a few who at least confirmed their belifes in such a way.

God is neigther the question or the answer for me.

Hi Willem,

God is the address for your admiration and thanks, anger or complaint. Whether you regard ‘him’ as a ‘God’ or however, it is the simply the place or person for your comments. The mistake most people make is to assume that a Deity can be described as something clear, concrete, factual, material, objective, physical, real or specific at all - all attempts of which are a reduction of this magnificent universe to something that you and I could imagine or even understand.

The more we understand our planet, the more amazing the facts are that we undiscover. But we can only understand a part of the universe, only our little ‘hidy-hole’ and the rest is shown to us through the Hubble and with computerised pictures. This rest remains distant and mysterious, incredibly beautiful and disturbing at the same time. Those who tell you that religion began with fear have no idea, it began with awe and veneration, a breathtaking and daunting understanding that this spectacle is incredibly beyond our abilities or comprehension.

Only He to whom I bow knows to whom I bow
When I attempt the ineffable name, murmuring Thou,
And dream of pheidian fancies and embrace in heart
Symbols (I know) which cannot be the things Thou art.

Thus always, taken at their word, all prayers blaspheme,
Worshiping with frail images a folk-lore dream.
And all men in their praying, self-deceived, address
The coinage of their own unquiet thoughts, unless
Thou in magnetic mercy to Thyself divert
Our arrows, aimed unskillfully, beyond desert;
And all men are idolaters, crying unheard
To a deaf idol, if Thou take them at their word.

Take not, o Lord, our literal sense. Lord in Thy great
Unbroken speech, our limping metaphor translate.
C.S.Lewis.

Shalom
Bob

i think i like religion better than god…
say, bob, thanks for your answer, but it leaves me with a question…
please don’t take this the wrong way, but

is god no more than people’s imaginary friend in times of need?
or is he/she/it ?? beyond this world, in a way…?

gegroet

willem

Elohenu melech ha’olam, “Your presence fills creation,” says one Jew

“The God that made the world and all things therein, he, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in sanctuaries made with hands; neither is he served by men’s hands, as though he needed anything, seeing he himself giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; and he made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation; that they should seek God, if haply they might feel after him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us: for in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain even of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring,” says another (Paul).

‘He’ is not beyond our world, but “in him we live, and move, and have our being” - he is interwoven in the fabric of the universe (his handwriting), we might by chance or accident “feel after him and find him” - beyond imagination, but not imaginary. Beyond description but not impossible. Ineffable but not incommunicable. Be careful not to mix the words of men with the eternal truth, but keep Buddha’s words in mind:

"A traveler built a raft
to traverse a river.
After he had completed his task
he couldn’t seperate himself from it.
So he carried his raft on his back
everywhere he went
and made a laughing stock of himself.

My teaching is like a raft.
It serves to get to the other river bank
but not to keep holding on to."

Shalom
Bob

Bob wrote:

I interpet sin as: to make a mistake. Therefore the proverb teaches you to keep your mouth quiet in order not to make mistakes. Though this is true is it wise? Do we not learn and grow from our mistakes? If I thought the world was flat but never said that then no one would have ever been able to correct my understanding of the world. And wouldn’t you agree that understanding of this world is perhaps one of our most important and main purposes. As is personal growth.

Bob your latter two posts were wonderful. What struck me recently was that humans in comparison to god are the way dogs are comparable to humans. A dog is clearly intelligent, can learn certain things, even think and reason very primitavly but it is nothing compared to a human being. The way a human can reason is phenomenal in comparison to a dog. Now imagine in this light a humans reasoning compared to gods. Wow.

The literal quote: “Transgression doesn’t cease in the abundance of words, and wise is he who restrains his lips” makes it clear that good things are seldom said by those who speak a lot, but by those who give themselves time to think. Apparently it is easy to ‘overtalk’ things, but hard to think them through.

I would say that awareness is one of our most important and main purposes, and that knowledge can serve that aim - but knowledge doesn’t always equate with awareness.

I feel that we are quite dull in comparison to the consciousness and alertness of the great minds. It is to sharpen our senses that we should use knowledge, gained through either intuition or intellectual perception. Each perception is a stepping stone outwards into the gigantic spectacle of life - towards the divine source of life.

Shalom
Bob

This ofcourse I do not contest and is a great piece of wisdom. Abundance being the clear word that makes all the difference. Careful when you quote hehe

Hello,

I wouldn’t say that I am an athiest… I am agnostic… I think… still finding myself! But I do beleive that all God is is an answer to what we can’t answer. I am not saying that there is no god. I see god as hope, as a crutch. It is just something that some people need. I personaly don’t, well haven’t yet. Humans, since the beginning of time have longed to know the origin of the universe, god is an answer to this. I do not beleive god is a person… or a thing… but is a symbol.

Hallo Jessica,

Well that’s a start, the most important thing is to set out and the rest will come.

I understand, that is the way I thought until I was about 28 (a long time ago) but keep asking, seeking and knocking on doors

Shalom
Bob

of course, one can find anything he seeks, if he seeks long enough, it doesn’t matter wheter it’s there or not…
that’s human psychology…

no really, bob, i don’t see …
i don’t see the why god would be needed, you could interpretate the world’s structure as god’s handwriting, but one could just as easily say it isn’t…

so i don’t get it

but that may be just me… lol
so bob, what makes you so sure?

respectfully

willem

Hi Willem,

Religious experience that I can only pass on in the way I have makes me sure. I guess we’ll have to accept that you are blind to those things and hope for recovery soon.

It’s a bit like reading between the lines - of course there is nothing written between the lines, but those who understand are just more fortunate than those who do not. Start with learning to read between the lines and advance slowly to discover the fabric of the universe, and sooner or later you may find him that is woven within the fabric.

Shalom
Bob

if it’s true, recovery may be a good thing

my time is filled with trying to get through to my science books, lol,
but there’s an analogy…
i try and see what’s behind what’s written, and so do you…

then again, it’s not really the same

mmm, i had something sensefull to say, but i forgot…

thanks anyway bob…

willem