A Quick and Easy Guide to God. Your thoughts?

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on August 7, 2011 at 11:22pm

So I guess that means you have no evidence for this god claim of yours?

Comment by Liam P Burke on August 7, 2011 at 11:24pm

What logical axiom? A belief that is just as absurd as mine is logical but mine isn't? How do you figure?

 

The basic proof of God is the necessary creator. Nothing creates itself... Except for god or the universe... But which one can you prove? Oh that's right... neither.

Comment by Stephen Walski on August 7, 2011 at 11:27pm

The picture you critiqued is a logic flow that proves a circular argument to god is good not the creation of the universe. 

 

 

Comment by Akshay Bist on August 7, 2011 at 11:28pm

Pray tell me where one person has pointed out an inconsistency or flaw to me?

I was generalizing. I have debated enough creationist closed minded folks to know one when I read their comments.

Because I believe so. And no one has shown me anything that makes more sense.

Did you read the holy books of those religions cover to cover before dismissing them as making less sense than catholicism? A few comments back you asked Heather to read the bible cover to cover to understand your religion, seems only fair you give the same courtesy to other religions before dismissing them.

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on August 7, 2011 at 11:29pm

Liam, you are attempting a prime-mover cosmological argument but you don't have the necessary understanding of the cosmos to begin to support it.  If nothing creates itself, then who created this god of yours?  Maybe it was my uncle, Ted.  Can I come and teach that in your Sunday school at your church?  I mean if one idea is the same as the other, why not?

Comment by Liam P Burke on August 7, 2011 at 11:29pm

@Heather

Science does not disprove God, and God does not disprove Science.

 

You cant accept that there is God because there is no proof. By that, then you can not accept that anything that science cannot explain actually exists. How do you believe anything?

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on August 7, 2011 at 11:33pm

Liam, I believe that for which there is evidence.  If my computer starts when I press the button, then I accept that as evidence that my electricity is still connected.  I don't actually 'believe' in electrons but I do find the purported model accurate because it provides useful, accurate calculated results in electronics, chemistry, physics, and even biology.  If atoms don't actually exist, then how the hell do nuclear weapons work?  Prayer?  Don't be ridiculous.

 

Now, offer some evidence of this god of yours and I'll believe in it.

Comment by Akshay Bist on August 7, 2011 at 11:34pm

@Liam

Science does not disprove God, and God does not disprove Science.

Well, if you really think that bible is the word of god, then well Science does disprove god.

Comment by Liam P Burke on August 7, 2011 at 11:52pm

@Heather

The proof is already stated.

The basic proof of God is the necessary creator. Nothing creates itself... Except for god or the universe... But which one can you prove? Oh that's right... neither.

 

@akshay

How exactly does something that by its very nature is incapable of disproving anything... disprove something?

 

Science is based on inductive reasoning. Inductive reason can only disprove something if all the facts are known. If all the facts are already known, what then is the reason for science?

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on August 7, 2011 at 11:59pm

Liam - if nothing creates itself, then what created your god?  If everything has a cause then causes must infinitely regress.  Science gets back to the expansion just before the big bang but we can't see any further.  If you want to say there is a god just over the horizon that's fine, but I won't actually believe it without evidence.  There is no evidence, though, and that is why science doesn't claim to know.

 

The Atheist claim is an agnostic one.  I can give you metaphysical proofs as to why it's impossible that gods exist using the Gettier problem of epistemology but you wouldn't understand it and it isn't actually 'evidence' anyway- just argument, but much better argument than you are offering me.

 

The theistic claim is a gnostic one - you claim to know what is on the other side of the horizon.  Now either you have evidence or you don't know either.  To bad, so sad.  Cult indoctrination is not evidence, Liam.  Sorry.

Comment

You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service