Posts Tagged ‘Existence’
Atheist arguments often include presuppositions of what god/God must communicate, do, & even the methods. Why?
Posted by admin | Filed under Religion & Spirituality
That is, I notice that many of the argument include assumptions like, “If God really existed, he would immediately heal everybody in the hospitals.” or “He would appear before me right now at my request and converse with me.” or “He would prove himself to vast crowds by means of miracles and otherwise unexplainable wonders.”
But if a god/God has such power, knowledge, and superiority to his creation (and his creatures), WHY SHOULD WE ASSUME that he would do things “our way”??
MORE DETAILS IF YOU NEED THEM:
Logically speaking, would it not be likely that an “infinite god/God” would have his own agenda, so to speak? Perhaps even his own timing or ultimate process? I don’t presume to know — but I do feel confident that ASSUMING THE DEFINITION OF A CREATOR GOD, I have few logical grounds for assuming that I can predict what god/God will do and how he will do it, right?
I certainly understand why someone would choose to conclude that God has provided insufficient proofs for his existence. (No argument there.) But I do NOT understand why god/God’s failure to “live up to” human presuppositions tells us much of anything.
And just to cite an example of one presupposition that I’ve often seen presented as a MUST DO for god/God: “He should want to do everything possible to show himself and convince all humans of his existence.” YET, if god/God is like the God of the Bible, the text says that (1) it is part of the “glory of God” to conceal himself and be selective about who will come to believe [e.g. "And because of their lack of belief he did no miracles there." and 'It is to the glory of God to conceal a matter and the glory of kings to see it out."], and (2) to look upon God is fatal [perhaps depending upon the circumstances, according to the text….and the reaction of people confronted by the Holy was to fall on the ground flat in fear.
So, putting aside for the moment the unhelpful whining of “But god/God doesn’t exist” and “But the Bible is a book of fables”, isn’t it LOGICAL to assume that the difference between a Creator Deity and mere humans would be such that it would be presumptuous to assume what god/God “must do” if he exists and is as he is defined/described in the Bible?
======================
Yes, people, there are a host of OTHER questions, issues, whatever I COULD have asked, but I asked about THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT. If you don’t LIKE the question, there are plenty of others that might better fit your interests. MY PURPOSES are to solicit ideas for a PARTICULAR TOPIC that is part of an article I’m doing on how people approach the idea of DEITY.
The ubiquitous complaints about “The bible being a book of fables” and “God doesn’t exist” are not WHINING ON THEIR OWN but they ARE WHINING WHEN THEY ARE IRRELEVANT to a particular question. (Yikes, people. It’s not brain surgery!)
======================
GRASSHOPPER:
“Atheists dont assume that he would, they ask why he doesnt do those things.”
But isn’t the negative form of a presupposition just another kind of presupposition? After all, the very fact that you ASK why he DOESN’T do those things involves a particular interest in knowing why he does NOT do what you presume. Right?
===> PEOPLE: There is no CRITICISM in saying that someone has PRESUPPOSITIONS! Everybody does about most things! The purpose of the question is to draw out the REASONS why you think various presuppositions are VALID/logical.
======================
DAKIN:
“You do realize that you are projecting so hard that I could shove a flash light up you and show a power point right?”
OF COURSE, Einstein! The purpose of the question is to describe a very common phenomenon and collect the most common rationale/reasoning of why the presuppositions are valid/reasonable/
But the anger provoked by simple questions of this sort is fascinating in itself — so the exercise is not in vain, in any case.
(But if Daken and others think that this would represents some sort of effective apologetics exercise — if that is your inference — that part DOES seem illogical. How would soliciting your views of the concept of deity (and there are an almost infinite number) somehow bring your thought process to some particular conclusion??
======================
MATHIUSDRAGOON:
Yes, I can see what you mean. Excellent observation. R&S often seems to draw out these kinds of “extreme answers” as if every question on this forum has some sort of ulterior underlying meta-question or statement behind it.
But what is particular interesting to me is if the question and details are worded just right, BOTH ends of the spectrum go into meta-mode and take off on their wildest arguments of issue which aren’t even on the table. (In this instance I got a few from the Christian side but they were not as emotive for the most part and perhaps not as interesting. But data is data.)
======================
DAKIN:
The psychological ramifications of viewing the Creator and the Created relationship?
Posted by admin | Filed under Philosophy
Was having an interesting conversation with a devout christian and was wondering what are the psychological ramifications of viewing creation’s relationship with god as
The Creator and the Created being seperat, I.E. The divine created man, You have the divine being, then you have us who were created by the power.
compared to
The creator and created are one in the same, I.E. All existence, all creatures, are simply different manifistations of divinity.
Atheist :How can you consider yourself rational when you exclude any possibility of a creator ?
Posted by admin | Filed under Religion & Spirituality
An important issue like the existence of a creator with so many arguments over it should give anyone with rational thinking some doubt that he could be wrong and the other side is right yet you consider yourself always as being logical and rational . What is so rational about it ?
email advertising