How do religious people account for the existence of atheism/atheists? If we are all made in the image of God, why is it that so many people are completely unable to perceive the divine? Why does God go to such lengths to hide himself from so many?I'm hoping for some serious answers.
>>18762570God gives you freedom to turn away from Him because God is not a tyrant. Atheists exist because they either fail to outgrow the edgy phase or because they don't live a life that challenges them to actually search for truth (which inevitably leads to God)
>>18762667Someone would still have the freedom to turn away from God even if he revealed himself. Free will doesn't really enter into this scenario.>which inevitably leads to GodIt doesn't. People genuinely search for the truth and come to all manner of different conclusions, including the conclusion that there is no reason to assume gods exist.
>>18762689Then they're willingly mistaken. There's literally no way to arrive to atheism if you think about it rationally for 5 minutes.
>>18762667>actually search for truthThis is called science, and the civilization-killing vile nuisance christrasites have literal multibillion dollar industries whose explicit purpose is to undermine it.
>>18762689And to elaborate. There is of course no proof that God doesn't exist. The only argument here is Russell's teapot, but it fails because the teapot indeed has 0 testimonies about it. Whereas existence of God has plenty of evidence and testimonies. Atheists will usually demand "scientific" evidence or discount testimonies. Which is stupid and uneducated, because history of science is rife with examples when people claiming "no evidence/scientific explanation = testimonies are fake" failed.For example, Ignaz Semmelweis noted that the maternity ward staffed by doctors (who routinely came straight from performing autopsies) had a maternal death rate from childbed fever several times higher than the ward run by midwives. He ordered doctors to wash their hands in chlorinated lime, and mortality dropped to 1-2%. The medical establishment largely rejected him. Germ theory didn't exist yet, and doctors found the idea that they were the cause of death of patients insulting. Semmelweis lost his position and was committed to an asylum, where he died. A less dramatic example is that indigenous people of the north as well as explorers noted that northern lights made sounds - crackling or hissing. Scientists dismissed that and claimed it's impossible/lies/hallucinations, until in 2012 clear sounds were recorded during auroral display. It turned out the source wasn't the aurora but electric charges accumulating during temperature inversion. Regardless, a "scientifically impossible" thing was proven to exist. Same for halos, ball lightning, etc. So, the testimony about God indeed points God or something similar existing. Whether it's a Christian God, or a Buddha, or Apollo, or something else, is not known; but SOMETHING is there, and discounting it is about as smart as rejecting ball lightning.
>>18762703>>18762703>Human Genome Project was run by an Evangelical>Big bang, genetics, discovered by Catholics>Gravity discovered by protestants>Evangelical universities have donor (Evangelical) funded labs>Notre Dame, Georgetown, Boston College, KU Leuven, the Catholic University of Louvain, Universidad de Navarra funded by RCC>Jesuit astronomy>RCC as general patron of science in Europe historicallyNOOO THAT SCIENCE DOESNT COUNT SCIENCE HAS TO SUPPORT ABORTIONS OR ITS NOT REAL SCIENCE
>>18762570I'm atheist. I'm also a druid. What now?
>>18762736That only makes it more tragic.
>>18762753The only tragic thing is you being conditioned to hold a self-destructive position as gospel.
>>18762570> How do religious people account for the existence of atheism/atheists?Sweet ain’t as sweet without the sour
>>18762692>rationallyI don't think you know what that word means.
>>18762736>No one ever had the idea of dropping things and see if they fall before protestantsHoly shit christcucks are so fucking retarded.
>>18762689Truth is truth there is no guess work. Either Gods exist or don't exist. The problem with Athiesm is it's a position that's only reason for existing is the premise of an idea of god/gods exist in the first place. The position of Athiesm becomes a position based on faith that God/gods don't exist. If you want a simple answer to your question it's based on faith in their deity/deities. Why would they have concern about matters that are not of their concern? if they truly have faith based in a divine being with knowledge and power beyond human comprehension then that's all that's needed.
>>18762692You are both arrogant and delusional if you think no one can honestly arrive at any position save your own. You should probably spend less time in echo-chambers and actually interact with people who have different beliefs (in real life, not some online shit-hole like this board.)>>18762734>So, the testimony about God indeed points God or something similar existing.Going from "scientific consensus has failed to account for observed phenomena in the past and had to be amended" to "god(s) must exist" is quite a leap in logic. By that same reasoning, it seems we must conclude that aliens, bigfoot, ghosts, the Loch Ness monster, etc. all exist because numerous people have testified about their existence. I'm not saying that personal testimonies "don't count": they can be counted as evidence and absolutely merit consideration, but claiming that they are actually proof of anything is a stretch.The concept of those personal testimonies also leaves the question in the OP open. If you assume at least some of them are true, why is the divine revealing itself to some people and hiding from others?
>>18762570Demonic entities or hosts. No other explanation.
>>18762570God is not hidden from them, He is not far from any one of us. Quite the opposite, in their heart of hearts they know full well God exists, but in unrighteousness they suppress the truth in order to justify their sin in their own sight. Calvin explained this in greater detail in the first chapters of the Institutes, see also Romans 1:18-32https://www.biblestudytools.com/history/calvin-institutes-christianity/book1/chapter-1.html
>>18762734>So, the testimony about God indeed points God or something similar existing.Not necessarily. You gave examples of people hypothesizing about things and later they turned out to be correct, but people make all kinds of claims that are never proven to be correct or are proven to be false all the time. There are men in Africa who believes black cats are shapeshifters who sneak into their rooms at night to steal their penises. Maybe some day penis-snatching shapeshifters will be discovered through investigation.I was raised in an atheist household and briefly met Christopher Hitchens one time. Now if I was raised in a Christian or Islamic household then maybe I'd be a Christian or a Muslim but then it likely wouldn't have been something I reached independently but because I went to church or a mosque at a very young age and was socialized into it by my family, relatives, etc. Essentially religion is a man-made proposition.>>18763096>The problem with Athiesm is it's a position that's only reason for existing is the premise of an idea of god/gods exist in the first place. I mean it's a descriptive term for not believing in God. In that sense it's a negative thing (-) defined by its disbelief in something. But often atheists will be interesting in other things like some kind of philosophy.>The position of Athiesm becomes a position based on faith that God/gods don't exist.Maybe some act that way, but I don't think it requires faith. Like to have faith means you're absolutely certain. So for me I'm more of an agnostic-atheist because I haven't seen anything to convince me there's a God or gods, so I don't see a reason to believe in any. But I'm not ruling it out. I'm okay with some degree of uncertainty about things.
>>18763671>I was raised in an atheist household and briefly met Christopher Hitchens one time. Now if I was raised in a Christian or Islamic household then maybe I'd be a Christian or a Muslim but then it likely wouldn't have been something I reached independently but because I went to church or a mosque at a very young age and was socialized into it by my family, relatives, etc. Essentially religion is a man-made proposition.You yourself were raised in an atheist home, yet you stupidly do not apply this fallacious argument to yourself.
>>18763672Yes I do. You have no reason to automatically accept atheism as self-evidently true because I say so. I'm just holding up religion to the same standard.
>>18763674But nobody reasons that Christianity must be true because they say so. Which worldview is correct is the very question of the debate, there is no reason to re-state it like this, let alone to try and present as some kind of rhetorical point. The only reason to bring up upbringings, and normally the explicit reason, is to reason that the faith must therefore be false or dubious. But this is an argumentum ad hominem (an actual one, not like “somebody else said something about me that I dislike”, which is not ad hominem, despite what terminally online imbeciles think). If you were born in India, you might have grown up believing the earth is flat. Why someone believes something or how they came to believe it is totally irrelevant to whether it is true.t. convert that was not raised in the faith
>>18763687>The only reason to bring up upbringings, and normally the explicit reason, is to reason that the faith must therefore be false or dubious.Not necessarily "false," but man-made. It's socially constructed by people. I'm a Feurbachian sort of atheist in that way. It's the same reason why going to church or praying at a temple and doing the ritual together in groups is so important.>If you were born in India, you might have grown up believing the earth is flat. Why someone believes something or how they came to believe it is totally irrelevant to whether it is true.Or believing in Hinduism. Or Islam, Jainism, Buddhism or Christianity to lesser extents. But Islam and Christianity arrived from the outside.
>>18763694>Not necessarily "false," but man-made1. In the case of Christianity these are one and the same 2. It does not follow. That Christian faith typically passes from parent to child should be understood as the faithfulness of God and the fulfillment of their baptism, but there is no reason to conclude the faith did not come from God. Even many who are raised in the Church burn in hell, and to be raised in the Church is of no effect to a person unless God also sends His Spirit to infuse faith in them.>Or believing in Hinduism. Or Islam, Jainism, Buddhism or Christianity to lesser extents. But Islam and Christianity arrived from the outside.Completely over your head, Anon. *Woosh*
>>18763697If Christians stopped going to church, then there would probably still be Christians, but fewer of them. So the social practice of Christianity is very important to its reproduction. Primarily it reproduces itself because of what people do because people are the ones who created it.
>>18763707If Christians stopped going to Church they would not be Christians. Now, Christianity is itself a school of philosophy. The Epicurean lives out his philosophy when he seeks the best pleasures. But when we observe the holy Sabbath day, when we pray to the Lord, when we attend to the means of grace, and when we obey the law of God, this is how we live out our philosophy.
>>18763707>Primarily it reproduces itself because of what people do because people are the ones who created it.Non sequitur. God created it, people live it; they do these things because originally God gave it to them.
