To Atheists: Is the Mormon God a real god or false?

[ndf8th]

I have now talked to atheists on another forum for about 5 months daily
and I fail to get how atheist logic works. it is very odd due to me
thought of myself to be a strong atheists for some 55 years.

But it seems that I've never have been atheist other than formally.

I where most likely a kind of emotional anti-theist and anti-religionist
and atheism being philosophic and me not logical I fail to grasp atheism

The atheists that I have talked to tell me things about gods that I fail to grasp.


the logically important thing about belief in God to these atheists is
that if one have a false god (a god that is God by definition )
then one are by the atheist definition an atheist even if one believe in that God.

while if one believe in a real supernatural God that atheists see as a real God
then one are a theist and a respected believer by these same atheists.

Background.
I am a poor thinker and fail to get logic so ...
this is more social psychology to me but
back to philosophy and theology maybe.

Most Christians would not see Mormonism as a Christians faith.
Most Christians would see Mormon gods as false gods.

What about atheists view on the Mormon Gods.
Are they real or false gods as atheists see them?

A lot of atheist has complained about that my
religious freethinker God is not real God to them.

My God is supernatural by definition in the Bible and as I get it
that is what most Christians would say Mormon gods are too?

Would these atheists see the Mormon God or
gods as real gods? If they do then why the difference?
What is it about Mormon gods that makes them real seen from atheism?

Is it not very obvious to any atheist that the Mormon faith
is a social constructed faith. That their God of gods are gods
by definition based on texts by the founders of LDS?

the atheistic Richard Dawkins has rather recently
complained about Mitt Romney and his gullibility faith in Mormon views.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... faith.html

US election 2012: Richard Dawkins calls Mitt Romney 'gullible fool' over Mormon faith
Richard Dawkins on Sunday accused Mitt Romney of being a "massively gullible fool" as he launched into a furious tirade against the Republican's Mormon faith.

There is a youtube clip on it too. http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=wZFQyj-HzGU

My question is why is it important for atheists
to accept standard Christian faith in God as a real god.
but to see Mormonism as gullible and my faith in God
as so trivially true that it is totally irrelevant and thus false?

Where does the Mormon Gods come in seen from philosophical atheism?
Are they so trivially true that they are irrelevant and Mormonism an atheism
and all Mormons are atheists or are they real believers believing in real gods?

I know some atheists say that all gods are false gods but some other atheists
say that supernatural gods are real gods that one can have lack of belief in
and

the logically important thing to these atheists are their view
that if one have a false god (a god that is God by definition)

then one are by the atheist definition an atheist even if one believe
while if one believe in a real supernatural God
then one are a theist and a respected believer by these atheists.

I know the text is confusing but this is my poor brain I did give it my best.

[help3434]

Have you tried asking your question on a Swedish board? I still think I am not getting it. Are you a deist?

[Goat]

to explain myself better. Take the conclusion that
Erik Sandstrom arrived at after some 12 month of
traveling around the world making interviews for
to make a TV series that explain what it is to be religious.
Or "What are religions? " UR.se a kind of Edu/Science TV company

because those disciples decide
that's the truth about her,
and all religions seem to work the same way
for as soon as the believers put their doubt aside
(then) religion begins to work for them

to me this sounds very true and if I get it
then it means that one can be very open
about such things instead of hiding this truth.

so I want to support and open religion that admit
that they believe in man made gods that exists
only as social constructs inside the religious tradition
and that one have a bit of control in that if the faith
has too many bad consequences then one can change it
to a better interpretation with less bad effects.

I feel for to belong to a reasonable religion that one can rely on.
By being totally open about that it is a social construct that would
make it less manipulative and less a lie compared to standard religions.

Let me point you to a few of those religions that actually exist.

First of all, there is the verison of Judaism known as ' Humanistic Judaism which has totally rejected the idea of a supernatural God.


The Universalist Unitarian Church has very many members that are secular, and they seem to thrive on the concept of social justice more than deities.

[ndf8th]

Humanistic Judaism
Yes that seems to be like you say.
And Universalist Unitarian too.

Sadly them (the UU) have become more and
more into Jesus if I should trust some reports.

I've met and have talked to many Jews that are cultural Jew
but not theistic believers so if we had had a Humanist Judaism
here in Sweden then maybe some of them would have been
active there.

I actually asked the local Synagog if they could tell me about
such active members but they did not know any such locally.

Universalist Unitarian is not organized locally where I live
here in Sweden.

i have looked into them since 1983 and it is not what I look for.
And I am not a Jew so them would find it odd if i got active
among them. We have Universalist Friends/Quakers here locally
but like the Universalist Unitarian them are relativistic too so
that is not my view. I am opposite what they are.

I would not say that I am a Scienctismist but I trust that
a relativist would easily accuse me of being such.

To help3434. Nope I only write about these things in English.
I would need to ask in my poor English even if I talked to
or wrote in Swedish about it. Yes I have asked in Swedish too
but it totally failed. I even met a Priest once a fortnight for to
sort out how we differ and it was not working out well at all.

She does believe God to be supernatural for real as a fact to her.

to me all gods are supernatural by definition only and that is my fact.

formally that makes me an atheist by definition if I get it.

[help3434]

I am sure there are groups that focus on finding a higher purpose in life without being centered in God or superstition. Good luck in finding what you are looking for.

[playhavock]

ndf8th, I hope you read some logic books and better your understanding of it.

I am a skeptic in regards to any claim that has no emperical evidance or repeatable tests that can be perfomed to show that it is in fact true. If there is a logical augment for it, I will admit that there is at least a logicaly valad possiblity of it.

If one has none of those things, then I am skeptical about it.

Simuarly, you are, I would assume, and feel free to correct me if I am wrong - skeptical of someone who claims to do magic.

If someone you did not know walk up with a jar of liquid and said that the liquid would give you extra years of life or produce health, I assume you would be skeptical of that liquid and ask what proof they offered for there claims.

In regards to "God" there are meny factors that are issues to my being able to belive in it - even setting aside the fact that (as far as I know) there is no emperical evidance and/or repeatable test and so far no logical augment that I know of that does not contain one or more logicaly flawed premices - so I have nothing to go on with "God" but leaving ALL THAT aside I still have no ontoligical defention of "God" this is totaly up to someone who claims there is such a thing to provide, tell me what it is, and why you think it is, and how you know it is.

Now, when we conseder how all relgions claim they are right about God (for the most part, the Eastern relgions are more universal then Westran) we must logicaly conclude that eather only one of them is right - or perhaps none of them are.

Now, we then ask the question "how do we know what one is right?" since we have no test to perform and no emperical evidance to look at, and no logical augment for any of them - it is this question that I have yet to recive an answer for other then "faith" and that is no better then guessing. You might guess right, but you will never know if you did or did not guess correctly, thus I must contune to be skeptical of the claim because it offers no positve reasion to belive it is true.

Because I do not belive in God of any sort this lands me into the catagory of athest to some extent, by defention if nothing else, but I stand with "skeptic" because there are other things that I am skeptical of besides God, such as the after life, supernatural, angels, demons, and so on - anything that has no way to test it - I'm going to be skeptical of it.

I hope that explains my stance on such an issue, it is not mearly because there is just one "false god" as you put it - but that I can not know if any God is "true" due to the fact that I have no way to determin this other then faith - and that leads me not to a conclusion but to guess work, thats just not good enough for me.

The god of the mormons is no more real to me then any other god is so far. The amount that you disbelive in other gods that are not the god you worship is close to the amount that I disbelive in them, I probley disbelive in them even more then you do, but who knows if such things can be messured. My point is I do not belive in those gods, and just add your god to that mix as well.

[southern cross]

I have now talked to atheists on another forum for about 5 months daily
and I fail to get how atheist logic works. it is very odd due to me
thought of myself to be a strong atheists for some 55 years.

But it seems that I've never have been atheist other than formally.

I where most likely a kind of emotional anti-theist and anti-religionist
and atheism being philosophic and me not logical I fail to grasp atheism

The atheists that I have talked to tell me things about gods that I fail to grasp.


the logically important thing about belief in God to these atheists is
that if one have a false god (a god that is God by definition )
then one are by the atheist definition an atheist even if one believe in that God.

while if one believe in a real supernatural God that atheists see as a real God
then one are a theist and a respected believer by these same atheists.

Background.
I am a poor thinker and fail to get logic so ...
this is more social psychology to me but
back to philosophy and theology maybe.

Most Christians would not see Mormonism as a Christians faith.
Most Christians would see Mormon gods as false gods.

What about atheists view on the Mormon Gods.
Are they real or false gods as atheists see them?

A lot of atheist has complained about that my
religious freethinker God is not real God to them.

My God is supernatural by definition in the Bible and as I get it
that is what most Christians would say Mormon gods are too?

Would these atheists see the Mormon God or
gods as real gods? If they do then why the difference?
What is it about Mormon gods that makes them real seen from atheism?

Is it not very obvious to any atheist that the Mormon faith
is a social constructed faith. That their God of gods are gods
by definition based on texts by the founders of LDS?

the atheistic Richard Dawkins has rather recently
complained about Mitt Romney and his gullibility faith in Mormon views.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... faith.html

US election 2012: Richard Dawkins calls Mitt Romney 'gullible fool' over Mormon faith
Richard Dawkins on Sunday accused Mitt Romney of being a "massively gullible fool" as he launched into a furious tirade against the Republican's Mormon faith.

There is a youtube clip on it too. http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=wZFQyj-HzGU

My question is why is it important for atheists
to accept standard Christian faith in God as a real god.
but to see Mormonism as gullible and my faith in God
as so trivially true that it is totally irrelevant and thus false?

Where does the Mormon Gods come in seen from philosophical atheism?
Are they so trivially true that they are irrelevant and Mormonism an atheism
and all Mormons are atheists or are they real believers believing in real gods?

I know some atheists say that all gods are false gods but some other atheists
say that supernatural gods are real gods that one can have lack of belief in
and

the logically important thing to these atheists are their view
that if one have a false god (a god that is God by definition)

then one are by the atheist definition an atheist even if one believe
while if one believe in a real supernatural God
then one are a theist and a respected believer by these atheists.

I know the text is confusing but this is my poor brain I did give it my best.

To the question posed in the title..........there are no gods

[ndf8th]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject.
I trust I did not explain myself well enough so
I drop it. I am not on the level needed to put my
thoughts in words. Sad indeed.

[wiploc]

Interesting there seems to be three kind of atheists

1. Atheists that only care about real supernatural gods and
they have lack of belief in the existence of such gods
and they see belief in false gods as a kind of atheism.

I've never heard of this before.

If you believe gods exist, you are a theist.

Otherwise, you are an atheist.

Believing in the "wrong" god makes you a theist; it doesn't make you an atheist.

2. Atheists that see any god as something
they have lack of belief in the existence of such gods
and that makes every believer into a true theist to them.

Right. That's what a theist is.