Hey Agnostics & Atheists: Do you ever worry?

More to the point I think, is that if a God exists who would punish somebody for not believing he exists, then that God is a petty God, and not one I would not consider worthy of worship.

format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim

i agree with this, if i send an armless man shopping im a fool, because he has no arms and cannot carry out the task.

Yes, I agree to an extent. But consider: Even if you send a person with arms, but are knowing enough to foresee he will not shop even for you even if you order him too, it is still wise to ask him to shop and then punish him when he does not?

God created man to worship him and every man is given the tools which make him capable of doing so. In islaam the only ones who do not have to pray are the ones who are unconcious or mentally ill (insane) and the females during their time of the month.

Yes, I understand why Muslims see it like that. But as an atheist, I have not yet accepted that God created us to worship him, or the God is a coherent enough of a concept for me to accept yet. And if it is only the insane who do not worship God, then there are a millions of insane people living today. These alleged insane people happen to include Nobel prize winners like Marie Curie. Carl Sagan, Bill Gates, Thomas Edison reportedly do not worship God. Many people probably even Muslims would call wise except for the sole fact they do not worship. I certainly do not think I am insane.

We must pray with our eyes if we cant move a single limb, i saw my own father pray this way before he passed away.

I am sorry to hear your father is no longer with us to share his thoughts. He was a strongly devoted man. I respect that.

So your attempt to call God a fool was hugely mistaken and i hope you will admit to that.

It is a quote that applies universally to any being and I think even you agree it holds a grain of truth. It is not specially aimed toward God.

format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim

im sure this little comment of yours has been answered a million *sighs*

Yes.

However, most of these comments have been very poorly answered.

format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim

along with worshipping God comes a whole list of other things, you become a better person, you start living for better reasons, your whole view of life changes, you achknowledge the one who gives you everything.

With this explanation here you automatically presume that becoming a better person and living for better reasons are impossible without belief and acceptance of Islam.

Why does acknowledgment of God specifically mean so much in Islam?

format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim

to consider punishment for disbelief as petty you must have completely misunderstood just what worshipping God entails.

I would honestly go further than Pygoscelis. I would say that a God that punishes people for disbelief in himself is beyond petty and into the outright immoral category. Belief is not a choice, but a conviction. To disbelief in the existence of God as an atheist is to simply be honest to oneself. How such an honest standpoint is at all deserving of eternal torture in a hypothetical hellfire is beyond any kind of ethical understanding ever.

format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim

worshipping isnt just bowing to God, thats not it. Worshipping is completely devoting your life to him, living the reason he created you, being patient grateful and abstaining from evil.

to punish the absence of the reason for your creation is certainly NOT petty

None of this answers the contention that torture in hell is immoral.

How can you justify torture for an individual who is guilty of nothing more than being mistaken?

format_quote Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim

thing is he had the absolute free-will to carry the task out. He had everything at his disposal, there is absolutely no excuse for not carrying it out. Therefore it is punishable and justified. Your knowing hasnt changed anything, you didnt force him to not shop.. you didnt even make it more appealing to him, he chose himself

Of the man or the reasons why he was disobedient is not what I am aiming at, it is the nature of this alleged God. I agree with your overall assessment, but I think knowing has changed something.
Consider: If a being give a creation free-will, and foresaw that the creation would used it’s free-will incorrectly (foresaw he would choose incorrectly and disobey), do you think it is wise and merciful to create this creation at all, and see him punished eternity? Is it wise to create this a particular free-willed being with that knowledge? Would you?

In order to accept God created us you need to seriously consider how you would function without a God... thats what helps me most.

I am not sure what you mean by this. I and many others are atheists. Nobel Prize winner Marie Curie whose work changed the course of man, or Bill Gates (who’s at least agnostic) who has given more to charity than any other in history. We function without belief in God.

In my experience, those who disbelieve in God do not change their minds due to debate or conversation. They do so after having a personal religious experience.

I once heard of a philosopher who once said revelation from God is best if it is direct. Anything else, whether an alleged book or prophet, must be viewed with suspicion, as it could be cleverness or trickery.
Some of my best friends are Muslim. They claim the existence of God can be proven by debate. They say Islam has commanded them not to believe on faith like the Christians, but through reason.
The goal is necessarily not to convert each other, but to reach an understanding. I think both atheists and theists feel they are misunderstood.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abdu-l-Majeed

Doesn't God know best, if He already sends a revelation? Honesrly, it's nonsense to believe that God did reveal something to the human being, yet the human being knows a better way...

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

What I was really getting at is the necessity for those who are truly seeking God in their lives to find God on a personal basis. We can sit here and type words to each other, but unless the person who is truly seeking spirituality in their life actually explores religious texts and actively seeks a relationship with God we are all wasting time.

Well, I think the majority of atheists have explored some religious texts and did at one point actively seeks a relationship with this alleged God, but are currently not convince this God actually exists. It's not like we're purposely ignoring the billions of people who are telling us there's a pit of fire at the end.
I am hoping the forums will give me a different perspective, perhaps let others know how one atheists thinks too.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abdu-l-Majeed

I wanted to say the following: we can't use this as a criterion, since God is the One who knows best, and who sends revelation. We can't say that if something came to us from God through a book, it automatically can't be from God, since it's not the best way.

True, this make sense in the eyes of a Muslim. But one can say "God knows best" to justify any religion. Any religion can make a claim, and when we question or challenge it, they say "God know bests." We have intellect and we question. No matter how flawed our intellect is, it is our only guards against absurdities. If our intellect does not accept something, how can we accept it? If God exists, he himself must pay homage to reason, no? True, just because it's a book doesn't mean it not from God, but how can we not remain doubtful.

Consider: imagine you were raised in an island, traveled to the shore, and were confronted with dozens of alleged "revealed" holy books and prophets. Many religions, if not all, have their scriptures, prophets, and "miracles." In the ancient past, people were fooled when false prophets showed their "power" using magnets, which the illiterate peasants never seen before. These alleged prophets also "prophesied" natural events through science that the common folk did not know of. How are you to decide which faith is the true one? When confronted with a true prophet from Allah, how can you not be a skeptic? Direct revelation would remove all doubt.

Also, I think a prophet actually is the best way for us. Because, in that way we have the chance to see how various rulings are applied practically.

Consider a direct revelation. There would be no need for someone to show, you would know. Also, when the prophet has passed, you would not have to rely on hearsay.

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

With these sorts of debates its apparent that theists and athiests speak an entirely different language. The theist makes an argument, that to them, seems like a good one. The athiests makes an argument, that to them, seems like a good one. In my experience, those who disbelieve in God do not change their minds due to debate or conversation. They do so after having a personal religious experience.

There is research to back your hunch up.

Long ago when I was in my undergrad we studied this sort of thing. Bruce Hunsberger (my prof, now deceased) and Bob Altemeyer published a book called "amazing conversions" that documented many cases of converts to religion and apostates away from it. In almost every case those who turned to religion didn't turn to it from argument or reason, but rather from traumatic life event or new group identity (ie, fitting into a group and gaining a sense of belonging and acceptance with them).

Apostates on the other hand were mixed. Some were very dispassionate (the converts were always passionate). It did seem though that the passion in the passionate ones didn't drive them away from the religion but rather came to be after they'd left it and looked back on it.

Conversions were almost always "hot" and apostacy almost always "cold" in terms of emotion and passion. It was also frequent that converts sought to convert others, and much rarer that apostates sought to apostasize (is that a word?) others.

format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis

Indeed. We recently had a thread on this very thing, it should still be on the first or second page. It was "why would a god need a book" or something like that.

Edit: actually it appears that the mods deleted the thread. No idea why. They tend to be trigger happy around here

It is one thing to believe in God, it is another to think he write bestsellers and has an official fan club. I think it is a valid question. I have yet to heard a good answer other than "you can't question God," which can be used to defend against any absurdity.