I am an atheist

[Jacafamala]

A, do you really think that you can thumb wrestle with God, that you can get your mind around Him? There will always be questions about God throughout eternity. He’s BIG. Real BIG.

*I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this I believe–that unless I believe, I should not understand. – St. Anselm of Canterbury

Believing is an act of the intellect assenting to the divine truth by command of the will moved by God through grace. – St. Thomas Aquinas*

 

[hansgsa]

Dear friend… it begs the question - when you’re posting your little text there on a “Catholic Forum” that this might be a little cry for help!

I suspect that there are two types of atheists: those who are religious in their hate of ‘God’ and those who are truly mixed up!!(that’s not to say that there aren’t a lot of Christians/Catholics who aren’t truly ‘mixed up’!! - I have met my share!)

But getting back to the topic: assuming your not a militant “I hate God and those phoney Catholic types” - I would assume that you may be wondering if there is a ‘god’ - somewhere out there. The bad news is - there’s no quick and easy answers. I mean Faith is a gift and nobody knows how to say X number of words to justify his faith in Jesus. But the good news is: if you pray & love enough - Read some good spiritual books like the holy Bible and the Catechism… You never know Who might just come knocking on your door.

God tends to knock people off their horse. You know: you think you’ve got Him all figured out and things are going smooth in life. Then someone you love dies or worse, like my situation, your marriage and family break down and you become tragically numb with sadness. Sometimes, its the hard times or even death that cause you to search for the hard questions about God. Fr. Borg, my Carmelite mentor says: “There are no atheists on the deathbed.” I personally believe that. Sooner or later you’ve got to ask youself some of the hard questions: What’s life all about? How did I get here? Is this all there is to life? What about God? Until you get to that point… what can I say? Most people who don’t believe in God, I think like to play it safe. Do not rock my world GOD or so help me…

I don’t know if I’ve helped you… but hey, I think about these things all the time. I personally can’t understand how many people choose atheism when Jesus is so absolutely wonderful! I like to talk to people who think about these things. Thinking about them is a step in the right direction. But in the end - I think God will reveal himself to those who search for Him with sincere hearts. But if you’re looking for quantifiable proof or just intellectual amusement… I know He’s not into that game. Just ask Thomas.:ehh:
Pax et bonum

 

[BCH]

@BCH

It’s perfectly reasonable to feel that awe, I do too sometimes when I learn about some absolutely amazing thing that something in the animal kingdom can do. But all that diversity is explained by evolution, and to describe the process as ‘willy-nilly’ shows a lack of understanding of it, no offence at all intended.

You are a gentleman, no offense taken.
I don’t believe that I supported a “willy-nilly” design. If that was how it sounded, that was not my intent.
One of my points is that it is not “willy-nilly” and that it would never happen without intelligent design. Non-intelligent design is, to me, illogical. Even if you say it is nature or evolution that causes these things to happen, that’s fine. But, I still see God’s hand in the very power of nature. If you don’t believe this, you don’t. I can’t determine what speaks to your heart or not.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

In Ezekiel 26:7-12, it is made clear that Nebuchadrezzar would be the one grinding Tyre to dust and looting the city.

The prophecy was wrong.

some of it may end up right.

I think our difficulty A is expressed well by Socrates who taught his friend about the risk of interpreting an author’s work:

I cannot help feeling, Phaedrus, that writing has one grave fault in common with painting; for the creations of the painter stand there true as life, and yet if you ask them a question they maintain a solemn silence. The same may be said of written words. You would imagine they had intelligence, but if, out of a desire to learn, you ask for an explanation of something that has been said, they produce the same unvarying meaning, over and over again. Once they have been written down, they promiscuously knock about the world anywhere at all, among those who understand them, and equally among those for whom they are completely unsuitable; they do not know to whom they should or should not speak; and if they are mistreated or unjustly slandered, they always require the author of their being to rescue them; for the book cannot protect or defend itself.(Phaedrus, 275-276)
That is, it is obvious that either you are slandering Ezekiel or i am, or we both are equally guilty of misrepresenting him. Either you misunderstand them or i do not understand them, or we both are ignorant of the true meaning of his words.

I think then the best way to proceed is to be careful to give him the benefit of the doubt. He claims his God revealed the future to him. Is there any reasonable and objective way that the history that unfolded after he penned his work is indeed in accord with his words?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

In Ezekiel 26:7-12, it is made clear that Nebuchadrezzar would be the one grinding Tyre to dust and looting the city.

The prophecy was wrong.

some of it may end up right.

I think your error is in not understanding that what we have here is a tale of two cities (or perhaps more accurately, a tail of two halves of one city). Half of the ancient city of Tyre was on the coast and half was on an island off the coast. This portion of a National Geographic article makes the point:

**Alexander the Great Conquered **
City via Sunken Sandbar

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/images/070515-alexander-great_big.jpg

The full article is here:

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070515-alexander-great.html

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

A:

Today the place where the twin cities of Tyre once stood is a peninsula, which is the result of years of deposits building up on Alexander the Great’s causeway.



In Ezekiel’s day, there was no land bridge between the city on the coast and the city on the island. Tyre was, for all intensive purposes, two cities.



In light of this it is easier to see how Ezekiel’s predictions came true exactly as he said they would. Allow me to explain.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

In Ezekiel 26:7-12, it is made clear that Nebuchadrezzar would be the one grinding Tyre to dust and looting the city.

The prophecy was wrong.

some of it may end up right.

Your assertion is that the following words of Ezekiel to not accurately reflect history. Therefore, since history proves them to be false, my assertion that only Ezekiel’s God could have revealed them to him is false. In effect, i have failed to provide proof that an omniscient being exists.

To see if you are correct, i’d like to quote from this article again:

middleeast.com/tyre.htm

Early in the sixth century B.C. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, laid siege to the walled city for thirteen years. Tyre stood firm, but it was probable that at this time the residents of the mainland city abandoned it for the safety of the island.
Please notice the text in italics. When Nebuchadnezzar arrived with his ominously large army and siege engines, the city on the mainland. This makes sense, as the mainland city could not hold out for 13 years against the onslaught of the Babylonian king’s army. An island fortress protected by the ancient world’s most powerful navy, however, might be able to hold out indefinitely. Nebuchadnezzar, no doubt, made short order of sacking Tyre on the coast before setting out to blockade Tyre on the island.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Now, lets see if this account of historians jives with Ezekiel’s predictions in chapter 26:

1a. Ezekiel:

“For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army.”

(verse 7)

1b. Modern historians: Nebuchadnezzar’s army did siege Tyre.

2a. Ezekiel:

“He will ravage your settlements on the mainland with the sword; he will set up siege works against you, build a ramp up to your walls and raise his shields against you.”

(verse 8)

2b. Modern historians: Nebuchadnezzar did set up siege works against the mainland city.

3a. Ezekiel:

“He will direct the blows of his battering rams against your walls and demolish your towers with his weapons.”

(verse 9)

3b. Modern historians: Nebuchadnezzar did demolish the towers protecting the mainland city.

4a. Ezekiel:

“His horses will be so many that they will cover you with dust. Your walls will tremble at the noise of the war horses, wagons and chariots when he enters your gates as men enter a city whose walls have been broken through.”

(verse 10)

4b. Modern historians: It is highly likely that Nebuchadnezzar sacked the mainland city and the Tyrian survivors fled by boat to the walled island city.

5a. Ezekiel:

“The hoofs of his horses will trample all your streets; he will kill your people with the sword, and your strong pillars will fall to the ground.”

(verse 11)

5b. After sacking the mainland city, Nebuchadnezzar’s army would have killed those who had not fled to the safety of the island city and demolished the buildings and fortifications of the mainland city.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

In the light of this A would you say it is reasonable and probably that the words of Ezekiel do accurately reflect the history that transpired after he penned his predictions?

 

[Hellisreal]

Well, the ‘scripture’ is just a book of fiction. That is a good place to start.
If we have to go along with your belief that the Yahweh character in that book is good, then we should use the definition of good that is most common. Then we see if he fits it.
He does not.
It is not good to torture, or to threaten, or to kill.

Is it the Hewbrew Scriptures that are problematic, say Leviticus mostly?
Or the NT also? Sorry, I missed a lot of posts here.

 

[phooney]

@Socrates4Jesus

Hello again,

Aside from the problem of who was supposed to be doing all the conquering and scraping that A has pointed out, I have a couple of problems with the prediction.

“When I make you a desolate city, like cities no longer inhabited”

and yet many years after Alexander the great:

“At this time the town witnessed a second golden age as can be seen from the remains of its buildings and the inscriptions in the necropolis.”

and

“the city offered no resistance and continued to prosper under its new rulers, exporting sugar as well as objects made of pearl and glass”

and what about:
“You will be sought, but you will never again be found, declares the Sovereign LORD.”"

and yet:

“For a period of nearly 50 years the General Directorate of Antiquities excavated in and around Tyre, concentrating on the three major Roman archaeological sites in the town, which can be seen today.”

It has either been found, or never been lost.

The prediction looks to me to be depicting a tidal wave, when God would “bring the ocean depths over you”, but in actual fact, it is the city that is brought under the water, a subtle but definite difference.

Why was Ezekial only able to tell the name of the person from his own time, and not the name of Alexander? Do we know if Alexander was aware of this prophecy? Prophecies where people are able to make them come true are simply self fulfilling and not really predictive.

Next!

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… The prediction looks to me to be depicting a tidal wave, when God would “bring the ocean depths over you”, but in actual fact, it is the city that is brought under the water, a subtle but definite difference. …

Hey, Phooney!

You’ve asked several questions. Let me address this one first, as best as i am able, and then you may suggest what question to answer next.

There is a basic principle of scriptural interpretation (which also applies to interpreting any ancient text) that context dictates the meaning. Your suggestion is that the passage you quoted predicts a tidal wave, but the context indicates something different, for just a few sentences earlier Ezekiel writes:

“12 They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. 13 I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. 14 I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken,” declares the Sovereign LORD. *(Ezekiel 26)*Ezekiel is claiming that his God would bring the depths of the Mediterranean Sea over the remains of the city when his God would cause one of the kings to “throw [the city’s] stones, timber and rubble into the sea.”

Alexander the Great did just that more than 200 years after Ezekiel was in the grave.

 

[_A]

You ask very hard questions.

God only allows evil in this world if a greater good will come from it. Even God Himself was willing to suffer most horribly in this world.

What could men do do cause an all-powerful god to suffer? I would have to say that he publicly ‘punished’ himself for a few days, then went back to whatever his real life was. We don’t have a crime so light that 3 days in jail is the regular sentence. He chooses to torture some beings for eternity for crimes that can only be considered tiny by comparison.

  We'll *all* suffer in this world, that's a given. You don't need me to tell you that.  But this life is but a blink of the eye in the sight of eternity. Not all will suffer in the next world, in eternity.

No, but some will suffer for eternity. Think about that - eternity of torture and torment for, at most, a hundred years of evil.
That sounds fair to you? Just?
To me it is a positively beastly story. I am told that my outlook would change if I were to ‘believe’.
I still have no reason to believe.

 

[_A]

A, do you really think that you can thumb wrestle with God,

No I don’t, because there is no real god to have such a contest with. I was merely pointing out one of the problems with suggesting that the god you believe in is all-powerful. If he does not appear in the next 10 seconds, I will have to declare the win be default - I would rather not do that…but…
Sorry, the time is up, and your god lost by default.

Still say all-powerful?

 

[stringbeanduck]

What could men do do cause an all-powerful god to suffer? I would have to say that he publicly ‘punished’ himself for a few days, then went back to whatever his real life was. We don’t have a crime so light that 3 days in jail is the regular sentence. He chooses to torture some beings for eternity for crimes that can only be considered tiny by comparison.

First off we did not do anything to cause Him to suffer. His love is so great for us that He on his own account died for our sins and our salvation. Because of His love he choose to send His son to die for us.

Seconded He does not choose to let “some” people suffer for eternity. He gave us free will to either love Him or not to love Him. By choosing not to love Him those individuals won’t be in communion with Him. By not loving Him they choose to live in hell for eternity. Jesus will judge those to hell who disobey Him not because He feels like it, but because they have made the choice themselves by not loving or obeying Him.

 

[stringbeanduck]

If he does not appear in the next 10 seconds, I will have to declare the win be default - I would rather not do that…but…
Sorry, the time is up, and your god lost by default.

Still say all-powerful?

Why. He said in the sciptures when He will be back. Just because you want to see Him now does not mean He’s obligated too live up to your demands.

 

[Daddums]

I don’t believe that there is no god.

there is no real god

You contradict yourself. I suspect the later is what you truly believe. I also suspect that you’ve come here merely to amuse yourself at our expense.

Daddums

 

[_A]

Dear friend… it begs the question - when you’re posting your little text there on a “Catholic Forum” that this might be a little cry for help!

I appreciate that you are paying attention for an opportunity to help your fellow man here, but I am not ‘crying’ for help. I am crying for dialog and understanding of the people around me.

I suspect that there are two types of atheists: those who are religious in their hate of ‘God’ and those who are truly mixed up!!

I hope you are not saying that you think I am a hater or mixed up. I am thoughtful and caring, and feel hate very seldom. As to how being mixed up goes, I am sure we are each and neither mixed up equally.

But getting back to the topic: assuming your not a militant “I hate God and those phoney Catholic types” - I would assume that you may be wondering if there is a ‘god’ - somewhere out there.

I live my day to day life operating on the principle that there is no god. None. Not Baal, Zeus or Yahweh.

The bad news is - there’s no quick and easy answers.

Lots of people get it at birth, and never doubt their faith. That sounds pretty easy.

But the good news is: if you pray & love enough - Read some good spiritual books like the holy Bible and the Catechism… You never know Who might just come knocking on your door.

Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu is a somewhat famous Catholic who spent decades not getting answered, while working famously hard for the church, and ‘her lord’. She got nothing. In letters to many of her most trusted friends, she is quoted many times saying that she has not felt the presence of her god for years.
I know a severely developmentally disabled girl who will (maybe) one day hold down a job. Her faith is rock-solid, and has been since I have known her. Why so easy for one so unlikely to work for it while being so hard for Agnes, who worked all her life?

Fr. Borg, my Carmelite mentor says: “There are no atheists on the deathbed.” I personally believe that.

It is clearly wrong, this ‘belief’ of yours. Many infants die, who have not had a chance to be taught about the different gods. They are atheists every one. While facing death, many DO NOT seek god - is that proof that there is no god? I can certainly that this is proof that some of your beliefs are incorrect.

Sooner or later you’ve got to ask youself some of the hard questions: What’s life all about?

Not a very clear question, but for me, it is increasing the comfort and happiness of those around me in the immediate, and improving the world around me a little for the next generations.

How did I get here?

Evolution by natural selection is the method. It is quite interesting, and offers many beautiful (and falsifiable) answers which I can only repeat plainly and boringly.

Is this all there is to life?

Yup, and it’s plenty beautiful that way!

What about God?

Which god do you mean? There have been (and still are) so many described in different myths that it is a meaningless question.

Until you get to that point… what can I say?

I think I have demonstrated that I have already considered those questions. I have considered them well and for a long time.

Most people who don’t believe in God, I think like to play it safe. Do not rock my world GOD or so help me…

How large a sample group are you basing these assertions on? Are these all from atheists you know personally, or anecdotal atheists your friends have described to you?

I don’t know if I’ve helped you… but hey, I think about these things all the time. I personally can’t understand how many people choose atheism when Jesus is so absolutely wonderful!

Wonderful, but if you touch your own body too often, in a way that he doesn’t approve of, he will see that you are tortured for an eternity.
Wonderful.

I like to talk to people who think about these things. Thinking about them is a step in the right direction. But in the end - I think God will reveal himself to those who search for Him with sincere hearts. But if you’re looking for quantifiable proof or just intellectual amusement… I know He’s not into that game. Just ask Thomas.:ehh:
Pax et bonum

I think that praying repeatedly (and honestly) creates an hallucination of the presence of a god. You think this is the real presence of god. How could we tell the difference between the two?

 

[stringbeanduck]

You contradict yourself. I suspect the later is what you truly believe. I also suspect that you’ve come here merely to amuse yourself at our expense.

Daddums

I think so too

 

[_A]

I think our difficulty A is expressed well by Socrates who taught his friend about the risk of interpreting an author’s work:

I cannot help feeling, Phaedrus, that writing has one grave fault in common with painting; for the creations of the painter stand there true as life, and yet if you ask them a question they maintain a solemn silence. The same may be said of written words. You would imagine they had intelligence, but if, out of a desire to learn, you ask for an explanation of something that has been said, they produce the same unvarying meaning, over and over again. Once they have been written down, they promiscuously knock about the world anywhere at all, among those who understand them, and equally among those for whom they are completely unsuitable; they do not know to whom they should or should not speak; and if they are mistreated or unjustly slandered, they always require the author of their being to rescue them; for the book cannot protect or defend itself.(Phaedrus, 275-276)
That is, it is obvious that either you are slandering Ezekiel or i am, or we both are equally guilty of misrepresenting him. Either you misunderstand them or i do not understand them, or we both are ignorant of the true meaning of his words.

I think then the best way to proceed is to be careful to give him the benefit of the doubt. He claims his God revealed the future to him. Is there any reasonable and objective way that the history that unfolded after he penned his work is indeed in accord with his words?

I have read similar stories in other books. It is a story that was written about prophecy - right down to the fulfillment. You are claiming that this was written before the event (both of which happened several years ago).
I would like to know who has been in charge of keeping the bible honest and accurate in the intervening years? I am suspecting mostly the church, and pious typesetters.
It is just a book. Not a fax from heaven, something that a FOR PROFIT business paid to get printed and distributed.
And edited.