if youre atheist you can sleep late on Sunday morning..LOL
imo SIN is only Self Inflicted Nonsense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-RGN21TSGk&feature=youtube_gdata_player
and xian religion svks www.evilbible.com
Reason To be athiest?
- Thread starter RoadmapsToThere
- Start date
imo SIN is only Self Inflicted Nonsense
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-RGN21TSGk&feature=youtube_gdata_player
and xian religion svks www.evilbible.com
Not quite convincing: the same would hold for the Universe. Furthermore, I can imagine a world where 'complexities' have no preceding parts within that world.
In the words of Q (Star Trek): "Must you be so linear, Jean-Luc?"
Example: imagine, some day we may be able to build computers strong enough to be 'intelligent'. Some programmer may make a virtual world so rich that there are several intelligent entities living in it. One of this entities may hold the same beliefs as you have.
Most theist would not hold the view that their god is 'doing everything'. (There may not be direct evidence of the programmer in the virtual world.)
I am not a theist. Still, I know that it is impossible to know for certain that there either exisits or does not exist a God.
It is imposible to say something sensible about the matter, so why not hold the agnostic point of view?
The first way to answer your question, is to ask yourself why you are atheist.
If you're really honest with yourself, you'll find that there is no reason to be atheist, other than you just are. The excuse of ''no proof'' or ''evidence'' only serves as validation for what you believe. One has to ''believe'' something in order to come to a definate conclusion.
What do you believe?
jan.
Jan Ardena:
Atheism isn't a definite conclusion, at least not for most atheists. Most atheists say "There's no persuasive evidence that any gods exist, so I am justified in believing that gods do not exist unless and until such evidence comes to light."
By your own faulty argument, you have no reason not to believe in invisible pixies at the bottom of your garden: the excuse of "no evidence" only serves as validation for what you (don't) believe. If we follow your argument through to its conclusion, people ought to believe in all manner of fanciful things for which there is no evidence.
Do you believe in the invisible pixies, Jan?
Atheism isn't a definite conclusion, at least not for most atheists. Most atheists say "There's no persuasive evidence that any gods exist, so I am justified in believing that gods do not exist unless and until such evidence comes to light."
By your own faulty argument, you have no reason not to believe in invisible pixies at the bottom of your garden: the excuse of "no evidence" only serves as validation for what you (don't) believe. If we follow your argument through to its conclusion, people ought to believe in all manner of fanciful things for which there is no evidence.
Do you believe in the invisible pixies, Jan?
James R,
Yet for some theists there is persuasive evidence, so it boils down to what is accepted as evidence. Your acceptence of evidence insures you that there is no God, because you have set the bar as to what IS to be accepted as evidence to each and every individual. This IS a definiate conclusion.
Why is my argument faulty?
As I stated before, you can be atheist (obviously), but you have no reason to be atheist other than you just are. The idea of ''lack of evidence'' merely validates your atheism.
If I'm not correct, then please explain to me what IS evidence of God?
What do you know that makes you so sure there IS NO evidence of God?
What would it take for everyone in the world to accept that God is real?
Yes.
jan.
Yet for some theists there is persuasive evidence, so it boils down to what is accepted as evidence. Your acceptence of evidence insures you that there is no God, because you have set the bar as to what IS to be accepted as evidence to each and every individual. This IS a definiate conclusion.
Why is my argument faulty?
As I stated before, you can be atheist (obviously), but you have no reason to be atheist other than you just are. The idea of ''lack of evidence'' merely validates your atheism.
If I'm not correct, then please explain to me what IS evidence of God?
What do you know that makes you so sure there IS NO evidence of God?
What would it take for everyone in the world to accept that God is real?
Yes.
jan.
Lack of evidence is the reason I'm an atheist. I was merely an agnostic until I read up on it and realized that theism is based on hearsay, or a book, or a personal experience, not real physical evidence. The prophecies of religion are vague and open to interpretation. The miracles that they claim happen are either not open to proper investigation, or people that debunk them get persecuted, or they happened so long in the past, they might as well be fiction.
kx000
Valued Senior Member
Why believe not?!?!?!?! He can turn the universe into toast, theoretically, if he is out there to toast us. Are you curious as to why he has not performed a miracle for us? Have you observed that he truly is not there? How does one tell? Maybe he is undercover as the Rocky Mountains.
Your claim should be this. SHOW ME MORE.
Thoughts, Spidey?
I don't demand evidence for every fool idea, I'm simply acknowledging that there isn't any. If you want to prove it go ahead. Have you observed that the flying spaghetti monster isn't there?
No matter what we regard as the 'material', a complexity cannot be First, nor would an evolved alien be 'God', but just a higher life form.
It sounds like you know there is no God, and have no need of evidence to make your conclusion.
It sounds like you have used ''lack of evidence'' to validate your conclusion. Yet you cannot state any kind of evidence that would have a rational basis for belief in God. Your position, when looked at a little closer, is a tricky one with no basis.
jan.
kx000
Valued Senior Member
What im saying is God can be un-observeable. Or, maybe we have observed him, and he is thin air, or a starry sky.
Fiction sounds good to me. Many people want to believe so much that it over rides the reasons not to believe. They are like old men who think they are in love with a young beauty, whom they think loves them back. They just refuse to believe any evidence to the contrary.
I don't know, I'm still an agnostic. But I'm also an atheist now because I've seen the arguments for God, and they all fail in one way or another, so I don't believe there is a God. I've also realized all the human faults and desires that the creation of theism indulges. I've also read about the scholarly findings regarding the evolution of individual religions, which aren't too different from any other kind of legend or myth.
It's not up to me to describe what kind of evidence would prove a God. I tend to think nothing can prove it since it's a nonsensical idea in the first place. There is no coherent definition of God, no physical predictions the premise can make, even no consistent conception about what God is and how it manifests, if it's one thing or multiple or a trinity. In short, it cannot be disproved because it's ridiculous and should be abandoned by any logical person.
It's not up to me to describe what kind of evidence would prove a God. I tend to think nothing can prove it since it's a nonsensical idea in the first place. There is no coherent definition of God, no physical predictions the premise can make, even no consistent conception about what God is and how it manifests, if it's one thing or multiple or a trinity. In short, it cannot be disproved because it's ridiculous and should be abandoned by any logical person.
Nothing un-observable can be said to exist.
What exactly are you regarding as ''fiction''?
And if you're implying that God is a fictional character, please give more
detail as to how you know this?
And if i'm not mistaken, you have imlied that there IS evidence that contradicts any notion of God, but we refuse to accept it.
Can you please cite such contradictions?
jan.
If God existed and was the source of the stories about him, then those stories should have a consistency that is lacking. First he says we shouldn't kill, and then he commands us to commit genocide. Obviously these contradictory ideas are the result of a created mythology, just like all the other religious ideas that no human being no longer believes.
LOL - that's a good one, Spidergoat.
Sciwriter, I used this example to make this clear:
if there is a creator-god, they need not have a beginning within the world we know as our universe. Within the 'devine plane' in which this god resides, time could be absent, or circular, or ...
Thanks, I hope it was understood, it might have gone over Jan's head. They aren't incompatible. An agnostic doesn't know, an atheist doesn't believe.
Last edited:
kx000
Valued Senior Member
Therefore, you have no evidence against the existence of God because his existence would entail the power to hide from us, thus making him un-observable, perfectly hidden (entailing Abrahamic religions as false). Given the logicality of God being greater than you, Jesus Christ, or I how would we go about reaching out to him?
Maybe we are all observing him always and forever.
Does a God with great powers to behold signify the earthly ability to obtain these powers?
His existence would also entail interfering with our physical universe, which would be observable. Otherwise he wouldn't do anything.