# Explain this Atheist logic to me. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 25, 2009, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589 "2009-08-25T02:42:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/141 "2009-08-26T19:58:59Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > I would ask you if your Love of Jupiter exists only in your head, or in your heart. If it was only in your head, I would choose to give you fellowship to place your faith in your heart, and live as your heart directed. But I feel no dissatisfaction, other than a lingering intellectual doubt that your faith in Jupiter may be hypothetical. > > The Lord has not given me the authority to rule the hearts of others. Nor the ability. > > Tris We actually had a similar issue here on the board in real life, in that SDMB member **Freyr** considered himself to have had theophanies from both YHWH and the Vana Freyr (see Norse mythology; hence his username). Assertions regarding God deserve to be dealt with on their own terms, without bringing allegations that are not relevant into the argument. For example, **Tris** and I claim to have encountered God and to have experienced His love and reciprocate. Thiss does not necessarily mean that we subscribed to a Universal Flood based on the Book of Genesis, or to the (supposedly) logical inferences that Aquinas drew from the proposition God. Nor does the fact that others have not had similar encounters necessary imply that ours are delusional. One does not find echidnas beneath bushes in the United States or in Europe – it does not therefore follow that Australians must be lying about having seen them. Some people perceive indigo as a distinct color; I do not. I do not therefore believe them to be lying or misled about their experiences in doing so. And, as **Gaudere** pointed out at one time, some “real” things are not subject to objective analysis. No one is able to observe the love borne between a couple (at most we may note expressions of it), yet few would doubt that there is truly an emotion shared by them. I have never met Mrs. **Bricker** and probably never will, but I have not the slightest doubt that **Bricker** is referring to a real person in mentioning her from time to time as it becomes appropriate to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/142 "2009-08-26T20:02:28Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > Not to speak for Tris, but you’ll probably get the same answer: there is no “now what?”. > > At least for him, he doesn’t care if you believe in God or not. Some other religious people might not answer the same way Tris answers, but then you should argue with them, not him. It’s his job, and mine, to “witness” for God in the appropriate way. For both of us, however, that usually means _acting like a Christian ought to_, rather than being the sort of drive-by condemner that hasmade “witnessing” a bad word around here. Sometimes, “you say it best when you say nothing at all.” ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/143 "2009-08-26T20:15:39Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Now what? Don’t worry. The things I mentioned that were admonitions to do something are not dependent upon the reality of God. They are, in my unqualified opinion the things that God wants you to do, but that is not why you might consider doing them. Love each soul you encounter in the world as if that were The Lord God of the Universe himself. Couldn’t hurt. God will figure out the part where you are having trouble with faith, when the time comes. And if I am absolutely wrong, and deluded, and psychotic, still, it would be a good idea, for you. Love and let yourself be loved. Oh, and I do care if people have faith in God. I just don’t think I can give it to them. I care for them. And will care for them, even if they reject and despise God, or me. Tris ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/144 "2009-08-26T22:37:50Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > Love each soul you encounter in the world as if that were The Lord God of the Universe himself. > > Couldn’t hurt… > > And if I am absolutely wrong, and deluded, and psychotic, still, it would be a good idea, for you. > > Love and let yourself be loved. This would seem to be an improved variant on Pascal’s wager that requires no feigned belief, but rather allows for honest skepticism while promoting moral and loving deeds and (for us terribly empirical and pragmatic types), is supported by game theory. That’s very cool **Tris**. Ever thought of founding a church/sect/denomination? (Seriously: I mean it. Very cool. And I have a lot of respect for you and **Polycarp** and other thoughtful believers). ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/145 "2009-08-26T23:04:30Z")
How about if I just try to love them as themselves? I find it easier to love human beings than gods. If I thought of everybody as God, I’d just want to kick their asses. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/146 "2009-08-26T23:25:44Z")
[SMACK]That’s for the cosmological constant! [SMACK]That’s for dark energy! [SMACK]And that’s for the second law of thermodynamics, you bastard! ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [August 26, 2009, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/147 "2009-08-26T23:32:20Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > [SMACK]That’s for the cosmological constant! > [SMACK]That’s for dark energy! > [SMACK]And that’s for the second law of thermodynamics, you bastard! This is hilarious when you think of a person doing it to _everyone they meet_. One after the other! I wasn’t going to respond to the original suggestion to love everyone as if they God, but now I feel I must. Personally, I can’t love the idea of God - too much negative baggage associated with the Christain one and variants, and that’s the only one I think of when I hear the title ‘god’ used as a proper name. And worse yet, I cannot prevent myself from forming opinions, possibly negative opinions of people as I interact with them, which impedes my ability to love them. And worse _yet_, I can’t bring myself to default to the ‘loving’ position; my love must be _earned_. So yeah. I’m a right bastard, all told. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/148 "2009-08-27T00:23:47Z")
> [@Apollyon](#): > > That’s very cool **Tris**. Ever thought of founding a church/sect/denomination? OK, I will shut up now. \ Tris ---
**Author:** ![Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Blut\_Aus\_Nord](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blut_Aus_Nord)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/149 "2009-08-27T01:02:41Z")
JESUS IS BLACK. Oh, wrong topic. ---
**Author:** ![Apollyon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/apollyon/32/4238_2.png) [@Apollyon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apollyon)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/150 "2009-08-27T01:17:59Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > OK, I will shut up now. > \ > Tris ☹ I thought the idea you captured there was pretty amazing and I rather wished it was a position that more believers might take. (Even if like **Diogenes the Cynic** I’d want to love them as people not God, and like **begbert2** I very much doubt my ability to be loving by default – I can probably manage an iterated prisoner’s dilemma approach of initial trust and co-operation). I didn’t mean to upset or offend you, and I apologize unreservedly if that is what I’ve done. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/151 "2009-08-27T01:32:07Z")
> [@TNWPsycho](#): > > “If there was a God, He would leave more of an impression, something to make Himself known.” Only if He cares whether or not people pay any attention to Him – which is not something necessarily implicit in the concept of God. (Nor is it necessarily implicit that He cares whether people are happy or not, BTW.) ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/152 "2009-08-27T02:32:01Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > But, I love Sam Gamgee, and Hazel-rah, and many others who do not exist. They do not exist, yet my love does. I love my Lord as well. I know you don’t believe He exists. I think that _convincing_ your that He does exist would be a disservice to you,but can you see that despite that, my love for him might exist? > > Tris I trust you don’t love these characters in the same way you love someone or something who can love you back. I also trust that you understand the characters who you love aren’t even the ones the authors created, but rather your transformation of them. If religion were like the Baker Street Irregulars, I’d be fine with it - so long as the adherents are able to go out of character every so often and admit Holmes didn’t really exist. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/153 "2009-08-27T02:36:34Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > This is hilarious when you think of a person doing it to _everyone they meet_. One after the other! Heh. Thou art God. And Thou art a putz. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Jerseyman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/bbce88/32.png) [@Jerseyman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jerseyman)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/154 "2009-08-27T02:45:21Z")
What’s the problem with ‘loving’ fictitious characters? That is the way traditional religions taught their children to admire the Hero and then to get them to understand that the Hero is really just part of them. The difference is that when the ancients talked about ‘inner Christ’ they meant the ‘divinity’ that the Bible says is part of all of us but we don’t know; when ‘Christians’ talk about it, they mean some kind of Voodoo ‘possession’ by an external force. ---
**Author:** ![Triskadecamus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b19c9b/32.png) [@Triskadecamus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Triskadecamus)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/155 "2009-08-27T03:33:18Z")
**Voyager** I love some non-fictional characters who do not love me back, and to be honest I am not sure anyone is who they really are, who I think they are, or who they think they are. It isn’t important. Giving love is. Having it returned is also good, but it isn’t essential. Tris ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/156 "2009-08-27T05:10:23Z")
The famous Hindu mystic, Ramakrishna, advocated a philosophy very similar to **Triskadecamus’** – that God was in all things – but still advised staying away from “evil-minded” people. He said, “God is even in the tiger; but you cannot embrace the tiger on that account.” He also told a parable about a Guru who teaches his disciples to see God in all living things, and to bow before them and praise them. One newbie disciple is very moved by this. One day he’s out in the street and he sees a mad elephant charging down the street right at him. He reasons that he is God and the elephant is God, so nothing bad can happen. The mahout riding on the elephant is screaming at the disciple to get out of the way, that the elephant has gone mad and he can’t control it. The disciple ignores the mahout and stays where he is, bowing to the elephant. The elephant picks the disciple up with its trunk and tosses him aside. The disciple is carried back to his ashram, injured and dazed. When he sees his guru he says, “I thought you said God was in all things. Was God not in the elephant?” The guru says, “yes, God was in the elephant, but God was also riding on the elephant’s back telling you to get the hell out of the way. Why did you ignore the word of God?” ---
**Author:** ![freedumb2003](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@freedumb2003](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/freedumb2003)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/157 "2009-08-27T05:34:17Z")
The nature of God’s existence or not, is best displayed in His Children grappling to understand Him: [http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr99.html#LutherAndErasmus](http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr99.html#LutherAndErasmus) > [@](#): > > At the time of the Reformation, many hoped Martin Luther and Erasmus could unite against the errors of the Roman Catholic Church. Luther himself was tempted to unite with Erasmus because Erasmus was a great Renaissance scholar who studied the classics and the Greek New Testament. Examining the Roman Catholic Church, Erasmus was infuriated with the abuses in the Roman Catholic Church, especially those of the clergy. These abuses are vividly described in the satire of his book, The Praise of Folly. Erasmus called for reform in the Roman Catholic Church. Erasmus could have been a great help to the Reformation, so it seemed, by using the Renaissance in the service of the Reformation. > > But a great chasm separated these two men. Luther loved the truth of God’s Word as that was revealed to him through his own struggles with the assurance of salvation. Therefore Luther wanted true reformation in the church, which would be a reformation in doctrine and practice. Erasmus cared little about a right knowledge of truth. He simply wanted moral reform in the Roman Catholic Church. He did not want to leave the church, but remained supportive of the Pope. > > This fundamental difference points out another difference between the two men. Martin Luther was bound by the Word of God. Therefore the content of the Scripture was of utmost importance to him. But Erasmus did not hold to this same high view of Scripture. Erasmus was a Renaissance rationalist who placed reason above Scripture. Therefore the truth of Scripture was not that important to him. > > The two men could not have fellowship with each other, for the two movements which they represented were antithetical to each other. The fundamental differences came out especially in the debate over the freedom of the will. > [@](#): > > Erasmus On the Freedom of the Will > > Erasmus defines free-will or free choice as “a power of the human will by which a man can apply himself to the things which lead to eternal salvation or turn away from them.” By this, Erasmus means that man has voluntary or free power of himself to choose the way which leads to salvation apart from the grace of God. > [@](#): > > Luther’s Arguments Against Erasmus > > Martin Luther gives a thorough defense of the sovereign grace of God over against the “semi-Pelagianism” of Erasmus by going through much of Erasmus’ On the Freedom of the Will phrase by phrase. Against the cooperating work of salvation defended by Erasmus, Luther attacks Erasmus at the very heart of the issue. Luther’s thesis is that “free-will is a nonentity, a thing consisting of name alone” because man is a slave to sin. Therefore salvation is the sovereign work of God alone. > > In the “Diatribe,” Luther says, Erasmus makes no sense. It seems Erasmus speaks out of both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he says that man’s will cannot will any good, yet on the other hand, he says man has a free-will. Other contradictions also exist in Erasmus’ thought. Erasmus says that man has the power to choose good, but he also says that man needs grace to do good. Opposing Erasmus, Luther rightly points out that if there is free-will, there is no need for grace. Because of these contradictions in Erasmus, Luther says Erasmus "argues like a man drunk or asleep, blurting out between snores, ‘Yes,’ ‘No.’ " Not only does this view of Erasmus not make sense, but this is not what Scripture says concerning the will of man and the grace of God. Follow the logic of this debate and much of how (or IF) God exposes Himself to His children (us) and His expectations. There is more here than mere contradictory Christian Theology. This debate (perhaps inadvertently) deals with the nature of God (and the existence thereof). Clearly I am a Christian, but I understand the dilemma of faith and skepticism. I think this debate adds thoughtful material to the OP question. I am _NOT_ proselytizing. ---
**Author:** ![freedumb2003](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@freedumb2003](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/freedumb2003)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 5:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/158 "2009-08-27T05:35:28Z")
> [@Triskadecamus](#): > > **Voyager** > > I love some non-fictional characters who do not love me back, and to be honest I am not sure anyone is who they really are, who I think they are, or who they think they are. It isn’t important. Giving love is. Having it returned is also good, but it isn’t essential. > > Tris You aren’t doing it right. All my non-fictional characters love the heck out of me! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/159 "2009-08-27T12:56:55Z")
> [@freedumb2003](#): > > The nature of God’s existence or not, is best displayed in His Children grappling to understand Him: > > [http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr99.html#LutherAndErasmus](http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr99.html#LutherAndErasmus) > > Follow the logic of this debate and much of how (or IF) God exposes Himself to His children (us) and His expectations. > > There is more here than mere contradictory Christian Theology. This debate (perhaps inadvertently) deals with the nature of God (and the existence thereof). > > Clearly I am a Christian, but I understand the dilemma of faith and skepticism. I think this debate adds thoughtful material to the OP question. > > I am _NOT_ proselytizing. The big difference between Luther and Erasmus (seems to me) is that Luther believed that the humans that wrote the scriptures knew for a fact that God inspired them to write and call it God’s word. Erasmus took a different view. One could just as well believe that God dictated an entire book to Muhammad,and be just as right.. If God would have wanted a book written I believe he would have had Jesus write a book, and grant everyone who read it the true understanding of what He wanted. I heard that Christianity is the most divided of all religions mainly because they translate the Bible to fit their own beliefs. There are even many differences as to the meaning of the word God. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2009, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589/160 "2009-08-27T13:24:33Z")
> [@monavis](#): > > The big difference between Luther and Erasmus (seems to me) is that Luther believed that the humans that wrote the scriptures knew for a fact that God inspired them to write and call it God’s word. Erasmus took a different view. More importantly, Luther believed the meaning of the Bible was plain and obvious, and everyone who actually read it would interpret it the same way. I doubt Erasmus would have been so naive. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/explain-this-atheist-logic-to-me/507589.md?page=9)