Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Is God An Atheist?

In realm of the natural, humans differ in their views about how the universe came into existence. While some claim that a supernatural being created the universe, others claim that the universe came into existence without having been created by some supernatural influence. Traditionally, we call the first group "theists" and the second group "atheists".

Let's assume for the sake of argument that God does indeed exist, and that he created the natural universe that we live in. Let's also further assume that religions that claim to be revealed by God are in fact revealed by God. Let's go even more and assume that what God revealed is what God believes is true (ie. God is not lying to us). So what is revealed to us through religions is that God of religions created this universe, and that he was not created, but rather God came into existence without having been created by some kind of "super god".

The question becomes: Is God an atheist? Certainly God cannot prove nor disprove the claim that he was created by some "super god"... So in reality the fact that God does not believe in "super god" in a very real sense makes him super-atheist!!

24 comments:

Haitham هيثم Al-Sheeshany الشيشاني said...

is this yr take on deductive thinking! :)

Devil's Mind said...

Well, this post works on three different levels:

1- If God exists and him being an atheist, it seems unreasonable for him to punish people who are atheists. It would be hypocritical to punish a sin that you do yourself!

2- Some theists might disagree with the claim that God is an atheist, and while trying to show that God has every reason to disbelieve in a higher entity, those very same arguments are good reasons for humans to disbelieve in a higher entity.

3- It shows the weaknesses in the argument for the existence of God from a logical point of view.

Doomish said...

Off topic maybe but
Why "him" not "her"

Devil's Mind said...

Referring to God as a "he" is a compliment to women. I have to quote George Carlin on this:

"Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed. Results like these do not belong on the résumé of a Supreme Being. This is the kind of shit you'd expect from an office temp with a bad attitude. And just between you and me, in any decently-run universe, this guy would've been out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago. And by the way, I say "this guy", because I firmly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man.
No woman could or would ever fuck things up like this."


On a more serious note, God is more of an "it" rather than a he or a she. So the choice for he/she is completely arbitrary as far as I am concerned. I use "he" simply because that it is customary to do so.

David H said...

Theism: Belief in the existence of a god or gods, esp. belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

If god exists, he's a theist.

Devil's Mind said...

It is clever what you did there David. You argument is basically that God believes in himself therefore he is a theist...

But this goes contrary to theistic beliefs because God is (implicitly defined) outside of the normal...

If God can claim to be his own God and still be a theist. We can call the universe it's own God, but regardless of the confusing way we put it, believing that the universe is it's own God is atheistic ideology!!

Believing you are your own God is intrinsically atheist!!

David H said...

How so?

Are you saying "God is outside the norm so definitions don't hold true?"

If so, that applies to the definition of atheism as well.

Bollocks. The universe is not, so far as we know, sentient. God is, so they're different.

"Believing you are your own God is intrinsically atheist!!"

And believing you are red is intrinsically seven.

You can say anything you want, and it doesn't even have to make sense, if you don't bother to provide support for your argument.

Unfortunately, under those conditions, what you say is also meaningless.

Devil's Mind said...

Alright, I guess I need to explain my position in more details.

Here, we are using the definition of "God" as a creator. But strictly speaking a "supernatural creator", which means that it acts from outside of this world.

In the natural world (our world), if we say that the universe was created without divine intervention (ie. Created on it's own), we can loosely say that the universe is it's own God!!

But saying that the universe is it's own creator/God is indeed an atheistic view that contradicts with theism. Would you really say that someone who says: "The universe is it's own God!" as a theist? Probably not. However, if you are willing to answer this last question by yes, then that leads to a whole different discussion.

By the same logic, if God believes that he created himself then I would say he is an atheist with respect to his own "supernatural" world!

This logic supports the statement: "Believing you are your own God is intrinsically atheist!!", because in the natural world it means you don't require mystical/supernatural beings to explain your existence. In the supernatural world, it has the same implications...

David H said...

Hmm, that seems a bit relativistic and relies a little too heavily, IMO, on clumsy definitions.

I grabbed my dictionary, and here are the definitions I found. (I am aware that this hardly definitive)

God: A superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a creator deity

I haven't encountered many belief systems where "god" does not refer to a being. In a naturalistic worldview, which I assume we're both operating from, the universe is certainly not a being. So I don't think you can really call the universe it's own god.

Using the definition, you could (I guess.....) argue that a god, to god, would be something with power over over deific nature or forces but that's an awful lot of stretching and it leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.

Devil's Mind said...

To make my argument even clearer, opposed to popular view that believing in God is definitive of theism, I disagree.

You can believe in existence of God and still be an atheist, insofar that your belief does not involve mysticism or some entity that acts outside of the universe.

David H said...

Yes, if you choose to redefine the terms you can absolutely make any argument you wish.

...but it seems strange, because atheism is defined by a lack of belief in deities. It says nothing about other supernatural forces.

Devil's Mind said...

Clumsy definition maybe... But it sounds weird because we are not used to think in that manner. We rarely think of "the God of God", so our definitions of atheism might not be clear on those respects.

However, if you tried to find a consistent definition that accommodates the idea of multi-tier realms, I think you are likely to find the same answer I am proposing.

Of course, this all relies on definitions... So it might be good idea to state the definition you have in mind...

Devil's Mind said...

True... Deities are by definition suernatural... So I am still in line with the definition...

But I personally go with the "creator God" definition, so I feel it is necessary to add that clause...

But if God is a deity by definition, then he is supernatural by definition...

David H said...

Cool, we can clarify.

You're talking about a universe that should be thought of as having potentially infinite layers, yeah? Each, in a rung lack manner, being called "supernatural" to the one below. Correct?

That seems unnecessary. Even if, say, we lived in a comic book style multiverse there's no reason to treat those extra (I hesitate to use the word dimensions, but it's the most suitable I can think of) dimensions as supernatural. There is, effectively, one nature and everything outside of it is supernatural.

There's really no reason, logically or otherwise, that I can see to divide the supernatural into a tiering pattern.

In summation, on that, I see no reason to treat the definitions as relative in the manner necessary to fuel that argument. I see how you could do it, and if you're willing to go there more power to you, I guess, but I'm not comfortable with it intellectually.

In response to your bit about atheists...

You said: "You can believe in existence of God and still be an atheist"

To which I responded: "atheism is defined by a lack of belief in deities"

Then you replied: "Deities are by definition suernatural"

...you lost me, how can you be an atheist and believe in a deity? Since atheism is, specifically, the lack of belief in deities.

Devil's Mind said...

Lack of belief in a deity is not the same as lack of belief in God. In other words, God != Deity!!

This is especially true if you use the "creator God" definition. There is no compelling reason to believe that the thing that created the universe is a deity...

Technically speaking what created the universe does not even have to be a thing... It could be a phenomenon or an event!!

"You're talking about a universe that should be thought of as having potentially infinite layers, yeah? Each, in a rung lack manner, being called "supernatural" to the one below. Correct?" - Yes, although I don't believe that this is the actual case, but if we decide to take the theistic view a bit more seriously we can think of the universe in such manner. But then, if we allow ourselves to think in that manner, there is no good reason to limit ourselves to just two layers. There could be more in principle... So when a Deity denies any realm above it, it really has no solid ground to make that assertion!!

David Hamilton said...

Lack of belief in a deity is not the same as lack of belief in God. In other words, God != Deity!!

How not? A god IS a deity!

Yes, it could be a phenomenon or event, but in that case it wouldn't be a god.

Again, I see what you're saying but there's no reason to treat the words "natural" or "supernatural" in a relativistic manner (IMO).

Do you hear the ridiculous mental gymnastics in this:

"What's supernatural here would be natural on a supernatural level so there would be things that are supernatural to the natural order of the supernatural which would then be natural on that supernatural level..." ad infinium.

On a side note, happy new year. :)

Devil's Mind said...

God of Christianity/Islam/Judaism is a deity... God of many religions is a deity...

But I have a problem with the generalization of "Some Gods are deities" to "All Gods are deities".

But once again, this objection is valid or invalid depending on the definition of God being used. In my definition, not all Gods have to be deities.

David Hamilton said...

A god is, by definition, a deity.

I can see saying "being a deity does not necessitate being god" but being god DOES necessitate being a deity in (literally) every definition I've seen.

According to all the definitions I've seen, and the etymology, "god" is essentially a superlative of deity. So something could be a deity without being god, but not vice versa.

Devil's Mind said...

This is the definition of God that Anton Lavey provided in his book "The Satanic Bible":

The concept of "God", as interpreted by man, has been so varied throughout the ages, that the Satanist simply accepts the definition which suits him best. Man has always created his gods,
rather than his gods creating him. God is, to some, benign - to others, terrifying. To the
Satanist "God" - by whatever name he is called, or by no name at all - is seen as the
balancing factor in nature, and not as being concerned with suffering. This powerful force which permeates and balances the universe is far too impersonal to care about the
happiness or misery of flesh-and-blood creatures on this ball of dirt upon which we live.


----

This definition is obviously non-anthropomorphic and non-deity. It is worthy of noting that Laveyian Satanism is a recognized religion in the USA.

Anonymous said...

MOST Gods are atheist. But a select few aren't, such as the Olympians, because they believe that the Titans gave birth to them, and chaos creates the earth, Gaea, which in turn creates the sky, oraunos. Oraunos and Gaea then "created" Titans and you know the rest. BUT, where did chaos come from? Nowhere? Another God/Titan/mighty being? If it was nothing, then chaos was a atheist to. the Big Bang is like an God /mighty being created out of nowhere. I have no idea why I typed this. Probably because I'm very well informed. Please correct me if you spot an mistake. -An_Atheist_597,982

Apollo Mayaimi said...

There is a YouTube video entitled the Self-Non Existent God. According to this argument God causes himself not to exist or at the very least hides all evidence if his existence. This justifies why Atheist are Atheist because they lack evidence for belief in God. The reason why Atheist lack evidence is because lo-n-behold God is a Self Non-Existent God he can cause himself not to exist.

Apollo Mayaimi said...

A good book to read on this subject is by N. Nossirah 'God Is An Atheist'. A very funny book I think we'll written since C.S. Lewis. Anyways, in the book God is walking across the street and gets hit by car. As he is approached by two strangers he takes them to a coffee shop and there tells the two individuals that he's an Atheist.

Apollo Mayaimi said...

Christians better watch out cause there might be a new revelation by God thereby rendering the Christian New Testament in error and obsolete. God could be preparing to rise up an Atheist in his name and making a prophet out of one of us.

Anonymous said...

How can you say the universe is NOT a beeing?
It lives, it moves.. It breathes..
Meteorites..falling stars, exploding stars, eclips.. weather, it's all connected.
We dont control those movements of the planets.. why dont they turn the other way? Or take a different route..