Atheism And "Lack Of Hope"

[Ahab]

I would argue that the it is the "idea" of god that brings hope (for eternal life) and comfort, not an actual god.

I think I understand what you mean, but for me I wouldn't give the idea of god much thought, or at least not for very long, if I didn't get to know him (or them) somehow. Imagination and fantasy can get a person so far, for so long, and then it's as there is nothing to it. I prefer to know what is real in reality.

The fact is that the existence of god cannot be proven, and likewise, I concede that the absence of god cannot be proven.

It's actually very easy to prove the existence of god/God, although you might not know which person or being that is. God/god is a term we use to refer to the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, and out of all of them there has to be one that is the most supreme. That's simple logic.

All that we are left with is theories and arguments.

Until you get to know God, and then you know regardless of how ignorant anyone else is about him (and them). Btw, when I use the word "God" I'm usually referring to our Father in heaven, although I realize there are other persons who are the same kind of being he is.

When you say that god offers "real" comfort and hope, well, that is speculation, at best.

For you, maybe, but when I say that I'm saying it based on my experience with him while knowing what he has given to me.

The only thing that we can be absolutely certain of is that it is the "idea" of god alone can bring hope and comfort (for most), and thus it does not matter whether or not god is real.

The "idea" of God, alone, won't do anything at all for you. If you don't believe me, just try it.

Think of God. Imagine him (or them) as whatever you think God is or could be. Does that do anything at all for you? I say the idea in your head is doing nothing at all for you, and wouldn't even if you were to believe he is real. Go on. Try it. Think or believe God is real, for just a moment. If that does anything for you you're quite a bit different than I am. I need to know the difference between reality and just imagination or fantasy. It something isn't real it doesn't do a lot for me, even though I might like the idea for a lilttle while, kinda like how I like thinking about the Hobbit and Star Trek and Star Wars sometimes, until I get bored with those ideas because I know they're not real.

In the end, you are correct, we all have to die to find out whether we are right with regard to the afterlife.

A lot of us, our kind of being, know that and we haven't died yet. You're just a slacker who doesn't know yet and because you don't know you think nobody else knows either.

Regarding your question of " What hope does this belief (in atheism) offer you other than the satisfaction of being right?" Actually, as an atheist, I am not concerned with being "right," and personally, I would be pleasantly surprised to find out after it is all over that there actually is a loving and forgiving god (though he'd likely punish me for my disbelief). My atheism is not rooted in a need to be "right", but rather, a need to live an authentic life, one with integrity. For me personally, that cannot be accomplished by clinging to a belief system which I do not believe is true.

And yet you now believe something which isn't true, anyway, while you believe there isn't a god. Ironic, isn't it. I wonder when you will find out how reality really is rather than continuing to deny what is real.

[go_utes01]

I don't think calling people slackers for not coming to a truth that you have is helpful. Just my opinion. It seems from what Walden has explained that he is not a slacker. That he has tried, just has not received the personal experience/evidence you have (emphasis on received - or received yet).

[Ahab]

As one atheist posted, "Even if there is life after death, that doen't mean there is a God." What exactly would he see in the spirit prison that would change his mind?

I think you'd first need to know what God is, at least on some basic level, otherwise how would you know if you found God when you found him?

Just think of God as the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, out of all of the kinds of beings there are.

From there, do your own search of who God is, like in Dr. Seuss's book called 'Are You My Mother?' until you figure out which being is God. You may mess up for a while, thinking someone is the most supreme until you find someone even better, but out of all there is one that is the most supreme of all others, even if there are many individuals who have attained that supreme level.

[Ahab]

I don't think calling people slackers for not coming to a truth that you have is helpful. Just my opinion. It seems from what Walden has explained that he is not a slacker. That he has tried, just has not received the personal experience/evidence you have (emphasis on received - or received yet).

Alright, fine, I'll apologize for calling someone who hasn't found God a "slacker" even though I believe anyone can find him fairly quickly if they really want to. It's not a slow process, or at least it wasn't for me and a lot of other people I know, even though most who find him don't know everything there is to know about him (our Father in heaven).

[thesometimesaint]

As one atheist posted, "Even if there is life after death, that doen't mean there is a God." What exactly would he see in the spirit prison that would change his mind?

I believe we'll see pretty much what we see now. We still get to decide what we believe. God gets to decide if and when what we've seen is enough.

[Walden]

Alright, fine, I'll apologize for calling someone who hasn't found God a "slacker" even though I believe anyone can find him fairly quickly if they really want to. It's not a slow process, or at least it wasn't for me and a lot of other people I know, even though most who find him don't know everything there is to know about him (our Father in heaven).

Thank you for the apology, as I am sure that a person as intelligent as yourself does not consider everyone who doesn't come to the exact same conclusion as you regarding the god question to be a "slacker." I don't know if you have ever had a faith crisis, but I can assure you that my current thoughts on the existence of god are not the result of "slacking." Believe me, in my devoutly LDS family, it would be much easier to just fake it; I do not enjoy causing my family to grieve or worry about my lack of faith in the existence of god. For me, it would be "slacking" to just bury what I perceive as truth in order to fake belief in the "hope" that god is real and/or to foster cohesion in my LDS family, all of whom I love dearly. Leaving the LDS faith, and theism in general, was one of the most difficult experiences of my life, one of heartache and pain, but just as a faithful TBM cannot deny that which he/she "knows" to be true, neither can I. My experiences have taught me that truth is relative, and is a matter of perception. What is true for me may not be true for you, but our own personal truths are the result of our experiences and observations over our lifetime. Your experiences and observations have led you to believe that there is a god, mine have led me to believe that there is no god.

Regarding the your ability to "find god quickly" I tried the LDS way (via Moroni's Promise) for my first 24 years, and never did find the answer that god was real. I spent the next 6 years attending, studying and pondering other Christian denominations, as well as Buddhism, none of which led me to the conclusion that god is real.

If you have a "quick" manner in determining if god is real that I have not yet attempted, I would love for you to share it.

[Tacenda]

Thank you for the apology, as I am sure that a person as intelligent as yourself does not consider everyone who doesn't come to the exact same conclusion as you regarding the god question to be a "slacker." I don't know if you have ever had a faith crisis, but I can assure you that my current thoughts on the existence of god are not the result of "slacking." Believe me, in my devoutly LDS family, it would be much easier to just fake it; I do not enjoy causing my family to grieve or worry about my lack of faith in the existence of god. For me, it would be "slacking" to just bury what I perceive as truth in order to fake belief in the "hope" that god is real and/or to foster cohesion in my LDS family, all of whom I love dearly. Leaving the LDS faith, and theism in general, was one of the most difficult experiences of my life, one of heartache and pain, but just as a faithful TBM cannot deny that which he/she "knows" to be true, neither can I. My experiences have taught me that truth is relative, and is a matter of perception. What is true for me may not be true for you, but our own personal truths are the result of our experiences and observations over our lifetime. Your experiences and observations have led you to believe that there is a god, mine have led me to believe that there is no god.

Regarding the your ability to "find god quickly" I tried the LDS way (via Moroni's Promise) for my first 24 years, and never did find the answer that god was real. I spent the next 6 years attending, studying and pondering other Christian denominations, as well as Buddhism, none of which led me to the conclusion that god is real.

If you have a "quick" manner in determining if god is real that I have not yet attempted, I would love for you to share it.

Do you think it is easier for your family that you are an Athiest rather than say a bornagain EV? Being that you might come back to Mormonism easier than if you affiliate with another religion?

[Walden]

Do you think it is easier for your family that you are an Athiest rather than say a bornagain EV? Being that you might come back to Mormonism easier than if you affiliate with another religion?

Personally, I think that my LDS family would have less despair for me if I at least believed in a god, whether it be the evangelical, lutheran, baptist, etc. version, than the despair that they currently feel regarding my godlessness.

Especially now that I have children.

[Ahab]

Thank you for the apology, as I am sure that a person as intelligent as yourself does not consider everyone who doesn't come to the exact same conclusion as you regarding the god question to be a "slacker."

That's true, not necessarily a slacker, or someone who takes a lot of time to find the answer to the question on whether or not god exists. Sometimes it's just a mattre of not understanding the question or what it would take to find the answer, rather than how much time it actually takes.

I don't know if you have ever had a faith crisis, but I can assure you that my current thoughts on the existence of god are not the result of "slacking." Believe me, in my devoutly LDS family, it would be much easier to just fake it; I do not enjoy causing my family to grieve or worry about my lack of faith in the existence of god. For me, it would be "slacking" to just bury what I perceive as truth in order to fake belief in the "hope" that god is real and/or to foster cohesion in my LDS family, all of whom I love dearly. Leaving the LDS faith, and theism in general, was one of the most difficult experiences of my life, one of heartache and pain, but just as a faithful TBM cannot deny that which he/she "knows" to be true, neither can I.

What do you claim to know regarding whether or not there is a god/God (referring to the most supreme being in all existence) ?

Using logic, you can know there is one at this very instance, right now. Can you now acknowledge that there must be?

My experiences have taught me that truth is relative, and is a matter of perception. What is true for me may not be true for you, but our own personal truths are the result of our experiences and observations over our lifetime. Your experiences and observations have led you to believe that there is a god, mine have led me to believe that there is no god.

Truth is relative to reality, otherwise what you think is true really isn't. There is a God. That's truth, and not just my personal belief. Even if I didn't believe there was a God it would have no affect at all on reality. God exists whether or not I believe in him/them.

Regarding the your ability to "find god quickly" I tried the LDS way (via Moroni's Promise) for my first 24 years, and never did find the answer that god was real. I spent the next 6 years attending, studying and pondering other Christian denominations, as well as Buddhism, none of which led me to the conclusion that god is real.

As I suggested earlier, just start with the idea that God is the most supreme being in all of existence, meaning that whatever being is the most supreme is the one you can properly refer to as god/God. That's just plain logic with a basic understanding of what the word god/God means. You don't have to go on groping in the dark about this issue. You should instantly be able to see that god/God does really exist, even though you may not know which being is the most supreme from all others.

If you have a "quick" manner in determining if god is real that I have not yet attempted, I would love for you to share it.

See above. All it requires is a little thought and contemplation.

[TAO]

For me, the question is not about usefulness, it is about integrity. Sure, I would love to believe that god exists and that he is infinitely loving and forgiving and has a nice big reward waiting for me in heaven. I've just never seen any evidence of such.

Well, my question kinda is... why do you need evidence of such?

Edited January 11, 2013 by TAO

[TAO]

Science is concerned with explaining the natural world, not the supernatural. Thus, it doesn't specifically "rule out God from the beginning," it just has never found verifiable evidence in that natural world of such

Mmm.... I'd say you can't have verifiable evidence of the supernatural. That's what makes it supernatural. It's sort of begging the question, in a sense of the word, I guess.

Edited January 11, 2013 by TAO

[Ahab]

Mmm.... I'd say you can't have verifiable evidence of the supernatural. That's what makes it supernatural. It's sort of begging the question, in a sense of the word, I guess.

No, a person can have supernatural evidence, from a supernatural soure, even though they may not be able to prove to someone else that they have it.

Faith from God is a supernatural gift, from God who is supernatural, and with it God is verifying to us that something is true, when it is true, by his assurance that it is true.

Heck, a lot of things are supernatural even though we may not think of them that way. The love of God, for another example. When we have that, and feel that, and share that with others, it is one of the best supernatural gifts we can share with each other even if others don't recognize the fact that we're giving it to them.

[mfbukowski]

In pondering the question of god over a lifetime, I have considered many possible scenarios and explanations. That explanation that I offered is just the one in which I have come to conclude as my truth, an explanation that does not require supernatural interference in a world where I have never seen evidence or felt the presence of the supernatural.

And again, science does not care about god and is not concerned with proving whether or not he is real. Science is concerned with studying the natural world around us. It studies those things that can be verified by the natural world, and relies on observational data and evidence to do so. Science is concerned with explaining the natural world, not the supernatural. Thus, it doesn't specifically "rule out God from the beginning," it just has never found verifiable evidence in that natural world of such. For me, I do not bow at the altar of science, I adhere to the realm of my personal knowledge and my experience, just as the theist does. Only my experience has never led to the conclusion that there is a god.

The problem is that it defines "natural world" as excluding subjective experience and value judgements which are among the most important parts of human experience.

I can't look at the "natural world" while excluding the idea that it is "beautiful" or "tasty" or sometimes even "dangerous". If one is being chased by a grizzly bear is one observing the natural world?

If one is describing a painting by Leonardo Da Vinci soley in terms of the chemical composition of the paints he used and the thread count of the underlying canvas, is one perhaps leaving something out?

If one describes a murder scene only in terms of precise measurements of blood spatter and tissue damage, is that the whole picture?

I think there is more to the "natural world" than what science investigates.

[mfbukowski]

So receiving revelation cannot be "natural"?

I disagree.

[go_utes01]

So receiving revelation cannot be "natural"?

I disagree.

This is a source of misunderstanding for me as well. Are Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ somehow "supernatural"? I always considered them to be just as natural as you or I, although more spiritually and physically progressed. Or the resurrection, was that a "supernatural" event, did Heavenly Father suspend some natural laws, or do we maybe not fully understand natural laws and Heavenly Father was able to use some natural process?

[Calm]

. The only thing that we can be absolutely certain of is that it is the "idea" of god alone can bring hope and comfort (for most), and thus it does not matter whether or not god is real.

I think it would be more precise to say something associated with the idea of God can bring hope and comfort. At this point where minds cannot be read, one cannot tell if it is the idea itself that is comforting or something that is drawn to the individual to give her hope.

[Calm]

actually is a loving and forgiving god (though he'd likely punish me for my disbelief).

Would you as a loving father punish your child if he was mistaken in how he saw you or misunderstood something you were trying to teach him? Or would you instead exercise that love by forgiving and giving him yet another opportunity to understand?

[Calm]

Yes, it is the same conundrum as the theist, unless you have verifiable proof in the existence of god, which I would love to see.

Neither the existence of god, nor the absence of god, can be proven. In the end, it is all theory, either way.

A theist may have experiences that personally demonstrate that God exists to him at least.

It seems to me there is a significant difference between choosing to believe based on having a personal, private, active and dynamic and yes, nonverifiable to the world proof (as the individual interprets it) of the existence of God and otoh, choosing a belief that God does not exist based on the absence of any active, private or public experience of the divine.

[thesometimesaint]

This is a source of misunderstanding for me as well. Are Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ somehow "supernatural"? I always considered them to be just as natural as you or I, although more spiritually and physically progressed. Or the resurrection, was that a "supernatural" event, did Heavenly Father suspend some natural laws, or do we maybe not fully understand natural laws and Heavenly Father was able to use some natural process?

They are Supernatural by definition. Supernatural by definition means pertaining to God.

[AddamS]

Without God, or more precisely, without an afterlife it doesn't matter if you are good or bad. There may be temporal reasons to act either way but ultimately it doesn't matter.

Avowed Atheist Penn Gillete had an, I thought, interesting answer when asked what motivation does he have to be a decent human being if he doesn't believe in 'God'. He responded "Because I have already raped and murdered everyone I care to, zero."

The answer is, admittedly, a bit snarky. But it shows a big difference in the motivation for acting in a moral manner. It seems to me most religious people believe in mankind being able to to find inherent goodness in an afterlife, while Atheists are more prone to seek and recognize that same goodness in mankind's nature while in this life.

I do find it interesting that Atheists are more likely to understand how a Diest finds hope in spirituality (even if they personally find it silly) than a Diest is to understand how an Atheist finds hope without it. I'm not judging or proposing a reason. Just submitting the food for thought.

[AddamS]

Agnosticism I get. However Atheism is too self assured for that.

I fully agree.

In the same sense, believing in 'God' I get. However; specific religions are too self-assured for that.

[Ahab]

I fully agree.

In the same sense, believing in 'God' I get. However; specific religions are too self-assured for that.

Yes, some are self-assured, but others get their assurance from God to help them know both how and who to worship.

[go_utes01]

I do find it interesting that Atheists are more likely to understand how a Diest finds hope in spirituality (even if they personally find it silly) than a Diest is to understand how an Atheist finds hope without it. I'm not judging or proposing a reason. Just submitting the food for thought.

As it has been pointed out already on this thread, I believe the type of hope that theists have difficulty understanding on an atheist worldview is the idea of ultimate hope. If you believe the earth and everybody on it will certainly die in the eventual heat death of the universe, does anything we do, or anything that was ever done, have any ultimate meaning or can we have any ultimate hope? Of course, everybody understands that we can all have temporal hopes and desires, but only on a theist perspective can we have eternal hopes, right?

Edited January 11, 2013 by go_utes01

[AddamS]

Yet you cling to an idea that you also admit cannot be proven. Why is that?

This is always an interesting position to me. It really gets into what the individual believes is the natural state of man.

The Atheist would argue that it is up to the Diest to prove that 'God' exists in the same way that he would ask someone to prove that 'The Loch Ness Monster' exists. He would start from the premise that man's natural state is without 'God' so it would be up to the Diest to provide evidence that this relatively new concept was indeed fact.

The Diest would argue that 'God' has long existed before man and proving 'God' doesn't exist should be the beginning of the conversation.

Beliefs be tricky, yo.

[AddamS]

Yes, some are self-assured, but others get their assurance from God to help them know both how and who to worship.

Thank you for the example