View Thread

 Print Thread
Rejecting god?
Bob of QF
Not.... really.

As this video outlines:


Quantum Junction: Use both lanes

Reality is that which is left, after you stop believing.
Bob of QF, I will respectfully disagree with the basic tenet of this video. I do in fact reject god and do so because it is a flawed human concept that poisons far too many people. I cannot and will not reject all believers because some are family members. I will and do reject the concept of god as both flawed and destructive.

God is in general the great father, the alpha male the MAN in charge. This is now and will be for some time a horrible way to order human society.

Rejecting god is rejecting the ways that the powerful control society. It is in fact a natural and good thing to do.
I would further say that rejection is an outcome of skepticism where the skeptic does not find the arguments to be convincing.

You either reject the idea, accept the idea or withold judgement until more evidence is discovered. However, the last is still a rejection of the initial Technical Specification of the argument/concept, but with a note to say 'must try harder'.

Looking at God:=believer then rejection in the Skeptical assessing of a concept does become the rejection of the Believers person (as the emotional turmoil physically affects the believer).

I just think that is a bit rubbery, it doesn't go any way to helping a theist understand where their hatred of atheists comes from, because you first have to posit that they have made their god up out of whole cloth.
I'm kind of up in the air on this one.

The point of the video, that God is really a projection of the believer, is well made. When I reject the concept of God I am usually addressing a specific that some individual has come up with.

God is such a vague figure that I wonder if there is even a need to reject the concept absent it's believers.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana
One can't reject what one thinks does not exist. The rejection, if anything, is directed towards theist's private conceptions that they present as claims. But god itself cannot be rejected, unless you believe it exists. You can't reject a figment of imagination. The whole idea of rejection is predicated upon the supposition of existence.

Which is why theists will claim atheists reject god - to them it is real, were they to "reject god" they would be actively turning away from that which they think exists. An atheist by definition does not believe that this god exists, and so it is pure projection on behalf of the theist to assert that the atheist is being contrary, or rejecting a real thing.

When JohnH disagrees, I don't think he does. He said "I do in fact reject god and do so because it is a flawed human concept that poisons far too many people.", that isn't rejecting god as an existent entity, that's rejecting a claim put forth by theists, an entirely different thing.
Yes Photon, you have with insight corrected me.

I found the tenor of the video troubling. Rejection of the great MAN in the sky is an acceptable position. It is one that more of us should affirm.
I don't believe there is a god therefor I can not reject a god. nuff said
That's right, I said it...
So is it an issue that should be delved into in the video - we reject the concept as defined by a theist of their particular god, but we do not concur on its presence then reject it for its implications.

I think many theists will think, as described in the video, that we do indeed do the latter.

I reject god as I reject cold fusion.
[url=]Theory_Execution wrote:[/url]

I reject god as I reject cold fusion.

What? Haven't you heard the Good News? Accept Cold Fusion into your heart, ask Cold Fusion to be your personal Lord and Saviour, and you will have everlasting energy.

For the Bible says Rev 3:15-16 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Repent, and join with Cold Fusion, so that you may know spewing, rather than swallowing thee, I think, or something.
No no NO Photon, you are miss-under-interpreting that passage.

The neither cold nor hot, refers to a mildly attractive out-going woman, who leads to the down fall of man (once again, tut) in the end times.
I had to read rev 3:15-16, what wonderful nonsense. I will try to find what J. Vernon McGee made of it. His detailed interpretation of bible verse always made me chuckle. It demonstrated in a way no argument could how much a work of man god and the bible is.
Jump to Forum: