I’d argue that you can still worship supernatural beings that verifyably exist, and gods that “cause trouble” are fairly common across religions (this includes the christian/jewish/muslim god). When in doubt, the trouble they cause is punishment for your sins.
You don’t need to believe in something you can see, you know it exists. The worship element is just an extension of the massively unbalanced power dynamic between a god and their followers. I’d say that atheism is more about the not believeing than the not worshiping. I consider myself atheist, but if a massively powerful, supernatural, entity shows up ‘in the flesh’ as such, I’ll certainly be doing what it demands, until a better option arises.
Would a christian stop being a christian if God or Jesus appeared before them and performed a miracle? What if they don’t actually demand anything or say anything about whether they approve of the christian religion?
Were the apostles Christian? Yes, but their faith wasn’t built on belief without proof, it was based on sure and certain knowledge. Likewise, if a ‘god’ (or suitably godlike entity) turns up, one can be a follower, and follow their tenets as closely as any, but one would not need to be a believer, because any uncertainty has been removed.
Yes, I think we may have slightly different views on exactly an atheist is. I’m saying that knowing a god existed would make it easier to be an atheist as you would not need to believe they exist, rather you would know, and have unarguable proof, that they exist. The way I see it, it is the believe/non belief aspect that is core to atheism. The worship is just an attempt not to be smited by a being unimaginably more powerful than one’s self. Equally, if the entity wished not to be worshiped, one would be wise to heed that wish, for fear of retribution.
One could add caveats around godhood, such as requiring that they created the universe, or that they are omnipotent and omnicient, to try to diferentiate between gods and mearly massively powerful entities, but I feel that exact definitions are getting into theistic philosophy that isn’t helpful here.
As far as I can tell, in the Pokemon universe Arceus is a real, interacts with the wotld and its inhabitants, and either created or shaped the universe. I think that would count as a god by most any definition. Before meeting one, an atheist might maintain that Arceus is just a figment of the imagination, and refuse to believe in it, but after meeting one, there would be no need to believe, making it a lot easier to be an atheist in that regard. Abiding by the Arceus’ wishes would likely be a sound move however.
There’s plenty of them in it. The tribes of the old testament didn’t have to believe, they knew that a vengeful entity would cause the ground to open up, swallowing them and their family, if they didn’t follow the rules exactly. They knew because they’d seen it happen. The apostles didn’t have to believe because they hung out with a guy who called himself the son of god and kept performing miracles to prove it.
Of course, the folk a couple of towns over, who didn’t experience any of this, but heard the stories, would have to decide whether to believe that the step-son of a carpenter, and his real dad, were deities, one deity with multiple aspects, or just a clever ruse that took in the people who saw the performances. They might wonder why their sicknesses weren’t being cured, and decide to believe in the hope of redemption, or not to believe the story of a kind and benificient god who ignored them.
I’d argue that you can still worship supernatural beings that verifyably exist, and gods that “cause trouble” are fairly common across religions (this includes the christian/jewish/muslim god). When in doubt, the trouble they cause is punishment for your sins.
You don’t need to believe in something you can see, you know it exists. The worship element is just an extension of the massively unbalanced power dynamic between a god and their followers. I’d say that atheism is more about the not believeing than the not worshiping. I consider myself atheist, but if a massively powerful, supernatural, entity shows up ‘in the flesh’ as such, I’ll certainly be doing what it demands, until a better option arises.
Would a christian stop being a christian if God or Jesus appeared before them and performed a miracle? What if they don’t actually demand anything or say anything about whether they approve of the christian religion?
Stop being a Christian? No.
Were the apostles Christian? Yes, but their faith wasn’t built on belief without proof, it was based on sure and certain knowledge. Likewise, if a ‘god’ (or suitably godlike entity) turns up, one can be a follower, and follow their tenets as closely as any, but one would not need to be a believer, because any uncertainty has been removed.
But earlier in this thread, you wrote that knowing, as opposed to believing, makes it easier to be an atheist.
And IIRC Arceus never actually wanted to start a religion, so worshipping them would still be firmly in the realm of belief.
Yes, I think we may have slightly different views on exactly an atheist is. I’m saying that knowing a god existed would make it easier to be an atheist as you would not need to believe they exist, rather you would know, and have unarguable proof, that they exist. The way I see it, it is the believe/non belief aspect that is core to atheism. The worship is just an attempt not to be smited by a being unimaginably more powerful than one’s self. Equally, if the entity wished not to be worshiped, one would be wise to heed that wish, for fear of retribution.
One could add caveats around godhood, such as requiring that they created the universe, or that they are omnipotent and omnicient, to try to diferentiate between gods and mearly massively powerful entities, but I feel that exact definitions are getting into theistic philosophy that isn’t helpful here.
As far as I can tell, in the Pokemon universe Arceus is a real, interacts with the wotld and its inhabitants, and either created or shaped the universe. I think that would count as a god by most any definition. Before meeting one, an atheist might maintain that Arceus is just a figment of the imagination, and refuse to believe in it, but after meeting one, there would be no need to believe, making it a lot easier to be an atheist in that regard. Abiding by the Arceus’ wishes would likely be a sound move however.
So the bible is full of atheists? IDK man, that doesn’t really make sense to me.
There’s plenty of them in it. The tribes of the old testament didn’t have to believe, they knew that a vengeful entity would cause the ground to open up, swallowing them and their family, if they didn’t follow the rules exactly. They knew because they’d seen it happen. The apostles didn’t have to believe because they hung out with a guy who called himself the son of god and kept performing miracles to prove it.
Of course, the folk a couple of towns over, who didn’t experience any of this, but heard the stories, would have to decide whether to believe that the step-son of a carpenter, and his real dad, were deities, one deity with multiple aspects, or just a clever ruse that took in the people who saw the performances. They might wonder why their sicknesses weren’t being cured, and decide to believe in the hope of redemption, or not to believe the story of a kind and benificient god who ignored them.
Yeah a god that’s causing you problems directly isn’t a god, it’s just a problem beyond your ken
That’s exactly what ancient peoples thought gods did, though!