Gods are only a figment of mans imagination. God(s) (all of them) were created by man to explain what was not understood. There is no god or gods, never have been. The old argument "prove god or no god" is a waste of time and since neither case is provable it's a waste of time and effort.
I am so tired of the philosophical arguments for and against an un-provable or provable possibility of something that doesn't exist that I want to puke. We are so inculcated with religion especially Christianity that we don't seem to be able to think outside the box. Even those who find God(s) ridiculous still grant the theists tha the possibility of some sort of supernatural being created the universe and all in it. It's bullshit, there is no such being/thing.
I have no problem with the idea that life is random, just as random as the universe itself. Those of you who feel/think the universe is not random, that is your prerogative, but it doesn't change reality. That the universe may not be random is something we have no indication of, but what caused (a term I have real problems with) it is a question for which we have no answer.
Why is it so important to prove or dis-prove the existence of something that supposedly created reality? What a waste of time, we can argue for centuries without ever reaching a definitive answer that anyone will be able to accept.
The Christian god exists in the same dimension as the Greek, Egyptian or other gods, i.e. some other dimension, but none of them exist. I cannot see why, or any reason that, the Christian God can be any realer than those others. The Christian God is as much myth as any other historical god.
If people want to believe the universe has some meaning, direction, reason for being or what ever; have at it. If it makes you feel better and you need to believe go ahead, but if you think you are a candidate for "heaven" you'd better re-think your beliefs.
If anyone wants me to "prove" my thesis they can go straight to Hell (if you will pardon the expression). Just because I make a categorical statement it doesn't mean it is not correct. I admit I do not like to make categorical statements since they are often faulty; in this case I make an acceptation. You want to argue with me? Go ahead but if you expect me to acquiesce to your demands you can go jump in a lake or preferably an erupting volcano.
Anyone who believes there is a god is terribly terribly misinformed.
End of rant.
Oh Yea....I know for a fact that Thor exists I've seen the movie...So THERE!!!
Totally right. People can get lost in the finer details of philosophical debates and the semantics of various issues. But at the end of the day we have absolutely no evidence of a god. Until we get that evidence of a god the notion really should be treated as the nonsense it is.
To me, its the difference between a well reasoned conclusion, and 'proof".
I readily accept that you can't prove a non-falsifiable negative claim, albeit, CAN support a non-falsifiable negative conclusion, with evidence.
In contrast, the claim that gods DO exist is a POSITIVE claim, and, theoretically, if true, IS PROVABLE.
That is WHY it is quite fair for an atheist to ask a theist for proof, as it IS possible TO prove, IF TRUE.
It is also WHY its an invalid request for a theist to ask an atheist for proof that gods DON'T exist.
So, a theist COULD prove gods exist, if gods exist.
The fact that they have failed, is evidence of their weak case, consisting of zero credible evidence to support their position.
So, from a practical stand point, I can honestly say that if they had SOME credible evidence, I would look at it, and consider its significance, etc....especially considering it took thousands of years to come up with some, finally.
I can also say that I have about zero expectation that that evidence exists for them to find it.
If I had to bet, everyone I love's life, or a penny, it doesn't matter, I'd bet there's no supernatural entities...at all.
And so forth. Overwhelming evidence is an acceptable bar to clear...and, its cleared it, there's zero reason to believe in gods.
As for the faithful who have no realistic bar to clear...the bar is typically the one they are geographically born to, and in their soles, positioned by the ground they are raised upon, on top of that bar, so, its as low as possible....so they can stand upon it as the foundation for their beliefs.
If they raise the bar, they are more likely to topple off, as, in this case, evidence that raises the foundation, decreases its stability, only if unsound.
I agree we cannot prove a non-falsifiable negative. However that does not lend credence to any arguments for a god existing. When theists claim, as they all eventually do, that we cannot prove that their god does not exist, all they are doing is highlighting a weakness in their own faith.
It is at this point in the debate that they should be able to introduce their “evidence”. It is because they have none that they are forced to ask us to prove a negative (i.e. God(s) does not exist). They seem to think that this puts an onus of proof on us to negate their claims and because we can’t that it somehow increases the probability that they are correct. It is a tedious and intellectually immature argument.
I am at the stage where I understand belief in any god to be obsolete. I see religious belief as a legacy of the dark ages. It has nothing to offer me. I know there are no gods. It does not matter to me that I cannot prove this to anyone. If they want to cling to their faith, that is fine with me. Belief in god is a delusion. When I look around and see so many people spouting this nonsense about knowing the Creator of the Universe or communicating telepathically to him via prayer I almost despair for them. I have no idea what they are talking about. Sometimes I start to think I am a different species to them.
Sometimes when I am enjoying somebody company and they announce something like “My faith is important to me” or “I will pray for you”, all I hear in my head is my own voice saying “Oh not another one of them”. I just can’t take them seriously anymore.
I do not care if anyone is offended or upset by my attitude. There are no gods. They do not exist. They never existed. It is a delusion to believe otherwise. I know most of the world thinks differently but I consider them all to be wrong.
I will continue to debate theists because every now and then I help one to see it for what it is and exit their cave. I will continue to fight against the incursion of the delusional into areas of government, education and justice when I can.
Well said. I agree with you. Theists are an irrational bunch. There is no arguing with them.
I still don't understand why anyone even debates the existence or non-existane of a God. I agree with Reg The Fronkey Farmer that there is some use in debating theists in the hopes of enlightening them.
I am also surprised at the number of posts agreeing with my stance. As time goes by and the more I read in various atheist forums the more rabid an atheist I become and the less tolerant of theists I become. Not that I don't have theists friends (most if not all who have no idea of my atheism).
If any theist wants me to prove the non-existence of some immortal being well they can just go fuck off, I say go argue with some other atheist. On the other hand I sincerely wish those people the best of luck because I know they are stuck in an absurd existance and see no way out even if they have questions that religion in general and educated religious leaders are incapable of answering.
Well, I seem to have gone of on another rant so I suppose I should stop.
I tend to ask them if they believe other gods were real, like Odin, Zeus, etc...and if they believe tossing a virgin into a volcano appeases it.
If they say no, I then ask them why they reject the claim that tossing a virgin into a volcano appeases the volcano...
...and why they reject the claim the Odin exists, etc.
...and if their parents lived in Saudi Arabia, and were Muslim, and they were raised a Muslim, and all their friends and family were Muslim, would they be a Christian (Default religion for most discussions at least)?
IF they actually try to answer these questions honestly, it tends to get them thinking.
If they think ENOUGH, it can get us to the point where they consider why a Muslim believes what Muslims believe, and why all religions believe what they believe, and why they all tend to reject all the others, etc.
If they think even more, they can even get to the point where they RECOGNIZE that they, too, fall into that statistical trend, and ONLY believe what THEY believe, for the same reasons everyone ELSE does.
Everything you know comes through the filter of your mind, including pain which, though it may be real, is still in your mind.
If you believe a table is a chair and can find others who agree, that truth is real and true, to those that believe it so. Yes, reality matters but one's opinion about reality can stand the test of time, whether it's true (objectively, whatever that may mean) or otherwise.
Therefore, if you believe in God and have a working definition of God, God exists, for you and for others who share a similar view. Same is true otherwise.
So it's OK to accept that evidence that God exists because others believe such and, for them, God does exist, defined as their accumulated agreements on a definition that they all can agree to. Even if God doesn't exist, it doesn't matter as there are many who believe the existence and, so, the concept exists. If they depict God as "real", then God is real...for them. Same otherwise.
We are all misinformed on one level or another and, in dealing with our mutual existential angst, any number of ways may work, including a belief in God, or not.
As long as we aren't denying the lawful rights of others, our beliefs are OK if they help us go where we need to go.
Hello everyone. I am a theist, and this thread of conversation interests me. I recognize that I am a little late to the discussion, but may I jump in?
Before examining whether God exists, there is a preceding question helps set a foundation for the conversation. Does truth exist? I submit that it does. Truth (that which corresponds to its object, or that which describes an actual state of affairs) is absolute, exclusive, and knowable. Absolute - that what is true in Brunswick is also true in Miami, and is also true in India. Exclusive - the Law of Non-Contradiction states that contradictory claims cannot both be true at the same time in the same sense (a woman cannot be pregnant and not pregnant at the same time). Known - using self evident 1st principles of thought, the Law of Non-Contradiction and the Law of the Excluded Middle (something either is, or is not - there is nothing in between), specific truth about specific topics can be revealed and known.
If you believe or accept that truth can be known, then I’m very interested in a discussion about the existence of God. We can observe the effects of what goes on about us (or before us) and induce whether its cause is natural or beyond natural. I believe there is reasonable scientific and philosophical evidence to support the belief in the existence of God. I hope we can discuss these ideas in this thread.