If God existed…Question to an atheist! first of many to follow

I know that you don’t believe in the existence of God, but in order to deny something you would have to have some idea of that something-

For example in order to deny that an apple is an orange, you would need to have some idea of what an apple is and what an orange is-

In the same sense in order to deny the existence of God, you would need to have some idea what God is, and the consequences of his existence!

In order to gather information from an atheist on the latter I would like to ask them

If God existed do you believe that it’s only logical he will send down revelations to mankind!

My honest opinion is if God existed the evidence would be quite easy to find and all around us, unfortunately it just is not. So to answer your question I don't think he would require to send any messages.

Additionally, I would understand how man's wish for absolute proof would inspire a falsification (such as religions) in an attempt to give credibility to what they have constructed.

I don't think he would require to send any messages.

Click to expand...

fair enough he does not need to send messages to prove his existance as the signs all around is sufficient, and any many if understanding should be able to deduce his existance from those signs!

But what about revelations to mankind addressing the purpose of his creation?

i should really preview my messages before posting them- what i ment to say any man of understanding not

any many if understanding

Click to expand...

fair enough he does not need to send messages to prove his existance as the signs all around is sufficient, and any man of understanding should be able to deduce his existance from those signs!

But what about revelations to mankind addressing the purpose of his creation?

Soldier2000 said:

If God existed do you believe that it’s only logical he will send down revelations to mankind!

Click to expand...

No. Why would He? Moreover God, if He existed, is clearly beyond our comprehension, so it is a mistake to talk about logic. It does not apply to God or what He does or does not do. Admittedly, if God were like us in some way and so our logic applied to Him, He might send down revelations, but presumably it would be more logical that He would simply have designed His creation better so it did not need constant reminders of the right and wrong thing to do.

Greetings Soldier2000,

It seems almost like you're asking two questions - or at least giving an argument then asking a separate question. I'll try to respond to both.

Soldier2000 said:

I know that you don’t believe in the existence of God, but in order to deny something you would have to have some idea of that something-

1. For example in order to deny that an apple is an orange, you would need to have some idea of what an apple is and what an orange is-

2. In the same sense in order to deny the existence of God, you would need to have some idea what God is, and the consequences of his existence!

Click to expand...

(I've labelled your propositions 1 and 2 for clarity).

Your example of an apple not being an orange is only logically analogous to the question of god's existence in quite an obscure way. If you had compared "I deny that an apple is an orange" to "I deny that god is a turnip", then fine, I would have been able to see your point more easily. But you're questioning something's identity in your first example, whereas in the second you're questioning something's existence. I suppose that if you wanted to include 'existing' and 'non-existing' as part of something's identity then the two propositions would be analogous, but they're still confusing examples to use. It's not as if someone is questioning the existence of apples, after all.

However, I take your point about having to know what it is that one is denying, so all I can do is look up definitions of god and find out about his supposed attributes from those who believe they know. My view is this: I deny the existence of god according to all standard definitions of that term. It is a human construct, and a very successful one at that.

In order to gather information from an atheist on the latter I would like to ask them

If God existed do you believe that it’s only logical he will send down revelations to mankind!

Click to expand...

You'd have to ask god, I suppose! After all, from my point of view you're asking about a fictional character, so logic doesn't really come into it. It's a bit like saying "is it logical for Hamlet to contemplate suicide?"

Peace

but presumably it would be more logical that He would simply have designed His creation better so it did not need constant reminders of the right and wrong thing to do.

Click to expand...

Like the angels you mean!

any way-

i am talking about mankind, a creation he created and given them the gift of free will, would he send revelations to them?

Greeting czgibson!

yours is pending, unfortunately, iam running out of time, but i will read through your posts and further contributions made by others later Inshiallah!

Take Care my freinds,

Soldier2000 said:

i am talking about mankind, a creation he created and given them the gift of free will, would he send revelations to them?

Click to expand...

Well again, God, if He existed, would be beyond our understanding and so there is no logical answer to that question. You would have to rely on tradition I guess. However if you could apply human logic to God, why? Why would He design creatures that needed constant reminders? Why would He not forsee problems before they occurred? I never get that constantly sending Revelations either - you'd think that once would be enough, but then, as I said, the logic of God is not something humans can deal with.

HeiGou said:

Well again, God, if He existed, would be beyond our understanding and so there is no logical answer to that question. You would have to rely on tradition I guess. However if you could apply human logic to God, why? Why would He design creatures that needed constant reminders? Why would He not forsee problems before they occurred? I never get that constantly sending Revelations either - you'd think that once would be enough, but then, as I said, the logic of God is not something humans can deal with.

Click to expand...

Well said Heigou I have been trying to say that just cos we might be logical that does not mean that the nature of god is logical but Soldier 2000 doesnt want to acknowledge this hmmmmm wonder why?

ISDhillon

Now a word from your local agnostic.

If God existed do you believe that it’s only logical he will send down revelations to mankind!
One would first have to assume that we are god’s special creatures. It is a common theme among theists that some how we are above all other creatures and god created everything for us. That is why I maintain that religion is as much about glorifying man, first as a species and second as a gender, as it is about glorifying god. I don’t accept the theory of our superiority.

He does not need to send messages to prove his existence as the signs all around is sufficient, and any man of understanding should be able to deduce his existence from those signs!
The signs that are all around are sufficient for a theists. Theists see signs every where they look. As for “any man of understanding”, is nothing but your superiority complex showing

But what about revelations to mankind addressing the purpose of his creation?
What revelations? Revelation is just another theist’s concept. I don’t believe that any thing has been reveled by god.

I am talking about mankind, a creation he created and given them the gift of free will, would he send revelations to them?
Only if we are special would the send revelations. Concluding that we are special is again another theist theory.

Now I have some questions for you.
If there is a god and we are his special creation that he created every thing for, why hasn’t he made his intentions and expiations clear?
There is no religion that contains a majority of humanity. If this life is the ultimate test for eternity, why doesn’t he make the rules clear enough that everyone would understand?

How can a perfect god leave us with such an imperfect message?

Br. Soldier2000 has raised to important points. The first point is that before one debates over a concept of denies the existence of an entity, they must ensure they have understood the definition of the concept/entity in question. There is no use in utilizing anti-trinity arguments against a Muslim, because you are arguing against a concept of God to which Muslims do not subscribe.

As far as the issue of revelation is concerned, I agree again. If we accept the existence of an All-Good Creator, He would not abandon His creation to turmoil and confusion. The revelation is not so much about establishing the existence of God - this can be accomplished by someone living on an island who never recieves revelation, simply by following his fitrah (natural human disposition). Revelation is about guiding humanity on how to strive towards God and come closer to Him through righteousness. It is about knowing Our Creator and developing our relationship with Him.

As far as logic is concerned, then logic is not relative. Logic is absolute. It is on this basis that we can reject a concept which is self-contradictory - for it to be valid it must be logically coherent. While the measure and extent of God's attributes is beyond our comprehension, this does not necessitate that the concept of God should be illogical. Actually, I'm rather amazed that atheists would advocate such a view, considering that Atheists have been the foremost in saying that logic forms our basis for examining the validity of concepts! And it is fallacious to say that we cannot examine the concept logically because somepeople view God as fictional - the entire premise of the question is, "what would be the case if an entity with such-and-such attributes did exist?"

Lastly, just a response to Wilber:

If there is a god and we are his special creation that he created every thing for

Click to expand...

While Muslims believe that God has honoured humanity (which is visible from a simple comparison amongst all known creation), we do not believe that we are the cause for creation or the supreme creation.

why hasn’t he made his intentions and expiations clear?

Click to expand...

Why do you assume He hasn't?

There is no religion that contains a majority of humanity

Click to expand...

The imprefection is in the human beings who reject God, not the message of God.

If this life is the ultimate test for eternity, why doesn’t he make the rules clear enough that everyone would understand?

Click to expand...

What do you feel is unclear about the Islamic message?

How can a perfect god leave us with such an imperfect message?

Click to expand...

Unless you can prove otherwise, I repeat that the imperfection is in some of God's creation, not the message itself.

Regards

Satsriakal Ansar Ji:brother:


"this does not necessitate that the concept of God should be illogical"

it doesnt necessitate that the nature of god be logical either, the premise is that man would be unable to accept an illogical god but this is not true i accept it, perhaps man needs to learn humility first before trying to understand the concept of god?

For the following scenarios to be possible is only expected from a logically impossible god:

-If God can create a rock too heavy to lift, then he is not omnipotent because he cannot lift a certain rock.

-If God cannot create a rock too heavy to lift, then he is not omnipotent because he is unable to create a certain rock.

I love a conceptually self-contradictory god,

Gurfateh

ISDhillon

Why do I assume that god hasn’t made his intentions and expiations clear?
I don’t think it is an assumption. I think that it is obvious because “There is no religion that contains a majority of humanity”. To blame that on the imperfection of humans, to me, is just another theist theory. I still stand by “If this life is the ultimate test for eternity, got would make the rules clear enough that everyone would understand”. To me that is only logical. Since I think god if perfect, I reject an illogical god.
What do I feel is unclear about the Islamic message? My point it not about the Islamic message any more than it is about the Christian message. What makes the whole thing unclear is that there are thousands of messages, many of them contradictory.
Unless you can prove otherwise. In matters of faith there is no proof. That’s why it is called faith. You have no more PROOF than I do.
This is not an attack on Islam or theists, it is an objection to what some claim as obvious.

wilberhum said:

Now a word from your local agnostic.

If God existed do you believe that it’s only logical he will send down revelations to mankind!
One would first have to assume that we are god’s special creatures. It is a common theme among theists that some how we are above all other creatures and god created everything for us. That is why I maintain that religion is as much about glorifying man, first as a species and second as a gender, as it is about glorifying god. I don’t accept the theory of our superiority.

Click to expand...

And from your local Buddhist;

Very well said. That would be my position, with the slight variation in that mankind may concievably be "special" only in that it is the one form from which escape from Samsara is possible. Emphasis on the "may".

The superiority and 'specialness' of mankind is frequently assumed, but nobody has ever justified it to my satisfaction. In such a vast universe, with no doubt so many amazing things and - who knows - intelligent species, I find it rather odd God would be interested in us at all.

I agree with HeiGou too, talking about logic in this context is absurd. Logic depends on rigidly defined rules; in the case of God (if there is one) we not only don't know the rules but we don't even have the capacity to know them.

wilberhum said:

Why do I assume that god hasn’t made his intentions and expiations clear?
I don’t think it is an assumption. I think that it is obvious because “There is no religion that contains a majority of humanity”. To blame that on the imperfection of humans, to me, is just another theist theory.

Click to expand...

One could say that your view is just another agnostic theory. Do you think a message should spread instantly from the person it is revealed to, to the entire world, if it is true?

I still stand by “If this life is the ultimate test for eternity, got would make the rules clear enough that everyone would understand”.

Click to expand...

But you're confusing two issues. On one hand there is the issue of understanding the rules and on the other hand there is the issue of accepting them. Many non-muslims understand the rules for prayer in islam, they just don't accept them to be from God.

Since I think god if perfect, I reject an illogical god.

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

What do I feel is unclear about the Islamic message? My point it not about the Islamic message any more than it is about the Christian message. What makes the whole thing unclear is that there are thousands of messages, many of them contradictory.

Click to expand...

I agree there are thousands of mutually contradictory messages out there and not all of them can be true. There is only one true message of God; it is the duty of human beings to seek it.

Unless you can prove otherwise. In matters of faith there is no proof. That’s why it is called faith. You have no more PROOF than I do.

Click to expand...

I think we discussed this (maybe partially) in another thread, but my view is that faith is constrcuted upon logic and understanding.

Regards

another agnostic weighing in.
something i have never understood about atheists is how can you believe in the non-existence of something? you have no more proof than the believer.

snakelegs said:

another agnostic weighing in.
something i have never understood about atheists is how can you believe in the non-existence of something? you have no more proof than the believer.

Click to expand...

Does that make atheism another faith ... another religion?

Does that make atheism another faith ... another religion?

Click to expand...

Under my understanding of faith I don't think atheism requires faith.

I define Belief as accepting something as truth without 100% evidence.

I define Faith as accepting something as truth while there is more evidence against it then for it.

root said:

Under my understanding of faith I don't think atheism requires faith.

I define Belief as accepting something as truth without 100% evidence.

I define Faith as accepting something as truth while there is more evidence against it then for it.

Click to expand...

Interesting, root.

According to that statement, there is more evidence against the existence of God than for it?

According to that statement, atheism is a belief, but not a faith?