Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

Safehands · 20-11-2014 11:37am

Festus wrote: »

Is there evidence God does not exist?

Absolutely! Loads.

Festus · 20-11-2014 12:06pm

Safehands wrote: »

Absolutely! Loads.

I'll take the position of a lack of belief in that assertion.

tommy2bad · 20-11-2014 7:34pm

Safehands wrote: »

Absolutely! Loads.

Presumably this apply to an interventionist god rather than the deist god who by definition has no evidence of either existing or not existing.
Again this evidence of the non existence of an interventionist god would depend very much on the definition of intervention. We can go round and round all day (and as this thread proves, all decade) but we ain't gona settle this in the next couple of posts.

RikuoAmero · 20-11-2014 9:13pm

Festus wrote: »

I'll take the position of a lack of belief in that assertion.

Wow...talk about hypocritical and ironic. You're taking the position of a lack of belief in the other guy's stance on there being loads of evidence for the non existence of your god.
Just in case you're wondering what I'm talking about, you stated point blank

I believe atheists probably don't exist

So it's not okay for anyone to take the stance of a lack of belief in your god, in fact you deny that such people exist...but you think it's okay for yourself to take the stance of a lack of belief in what someone else says.

Safehands · 20-11-2014 9:23pm

Festus wrote: »

I was asked where the evidence is and I answered honestly. I see it everywhere, everyday.

No Festus, you are seeing things which can be quite easily explained by physics and science.

Scientists accept that the universe came into existence about 14 billion years ago after the big bang. What existed before that nobody knows for sure. It would be lovely to think that God blinked his eye and created everything, as outlined in the Bible. Obviously that did not happen. I say obviously, because there is nothing anywhere to suggest he did, except a book written by ignorant people. We do know for example, how the mountains and the firmament came into existence. We know what all the visible the stars are, we know where they are and we know how old they are (roughly). When Genesis was written these facts were unknown.
So you take the position that you see evidence for God Everywhere. You see beauty in Nature, in the world, in humankind. A snowflake is beautiful, but we know how it is formed. It is nice to think of it as evidence for God's existence, but it is not, unfortunately.

Festus wrote: »

If you want to find God you will. All you have to do is look for Him.

I could say the same thing about Zeus or Apollo, if I had a mind to do that. It is just as accurate to say that I can't prove they don't exist as it is to say that I can't prove the Christian God doesn't exist. There is as much evidence for their existence as there is for your God's existence.

Having said all that Festus, I would truly love to really believe that Gad exists, I really would. Unfortunately I don't.

Festus · 20-11-2014 11:01pm

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Wow...talk about hypocritical and ironic. You're taking the position of a lack of belief in the other guy's stance on there being loads of evidence for the non existence of your god.
Just in case you're wondering what I'm talking about, you stated point blank

Just ironic. And I stated probably. And I provided my source in a later post to another poster. Did you read it?

RikuoAmero wrote: »

So it's not okay for anyone to take the stance of a lack of belief in your god, in fact you deny that such people exist...but you think it's okay for yourself to take the stance of a lack of belief in what someone else says.

I didn't say it's not ok. I disagree with it, obviously, but you have free will. And I did not deny that such people exist. and yes I do think it is ok for someone to say "I don't believe you". I'm a little surprised to see that you do not agree that it is ok to say "I don't believe you".

RikuoAmero · 20-11-2014 11:10pm

Festus wrote: »

Just ironic. And I stated probably. And I provided my source in a later post to another poster. Did you read it?

I didn't say it's not ok. I disagree with it, obviously, but you have free will. And I did not deny that such people exist. and yes I do think it is ok for someone to say "I don't believe you". I'm a little surprised to see that you do not agree that it is ok to say "I don't believe you".

What source? All I remember seeing is you mentioning you don't believe atheists exist, and then saying that atheists believe in moral relativism or that you took my actions here on this forum to paint a broad brush of all atheists.
So yes or no - are there people out there, like me, who say (and mean it) that they do not have a belief in your god?
No, I never said it's not okay to say "I don't believe you" (after all, that is my stance toward everything you said about your religion). What I am pointing out was that you denied that there were people who exist who don't believe in your god, (in other words, espousing that other people cannot have a lack of belief) and yet being perfectly fine with saying it of yourself.

Festus · 20-11-2014 11:17pm

Safehands wrote: »

No Festus, you are seeing things which can be quite easily explained by physics and science.

You are being presumptious again. Or omniscient. Tell me what I am seeing?

Safehands wrote: »

Scientists accept that the universe came into existence about 14 billion years ago after the big bang. What existed before that nobody knows for sure. It would be lovely to think that God blinked his eye and created everything, as outlined in the Bible.

Not "would", "is".

Safehands wrote: »

Obviously that did not happen. I say obviously, because there is nothing anywhere to suggest he did, except a book written by ignorant people.

Insulting the Jews now. That's anti-semetic.

Safehands wrote: »

We do know for example, how the mountains and the firmament came into existence. We know what all the visible the stars are, we know where they are and we know how old they are (roughly). When Genesis was written these facts were unknown.

Once certain things are set in motion yes, but what set them in motion?

Safehands wrote: »

So you take the position that you see evidence for God Everywhere. You see beauty in Nature, in the world, in humankind. A snowflake is beautiful, but we know how it is formed. It is nice to think of it as evidence for God's existence, but it is not, unfortunately.

Why isn't it? Snowflakes are easy - hydrogen bonding, weak forces, cold, crystalization, point group theory all help explain snowflakes. But they need hydrogen and oxygen. Where did they come from?

Nature is beautiful, and sometimes ugly, but yes there are questions. Not only why there is beauty but how there is beauty and how did it really happen? We're talking science here, yes? Can we reproduce Nature? If it is science we should be able to, yes? We should be able to create the way we think it happened, yes?

Safehands wrote: »

I could say the same thing about Zeus or Apollo, if I had a mind to do that.

You could but why? This is the Christianity forum not the pagan forum so there would be no relevance.

Safehands wrote: »

It is just as accurate to say that I can't prove they don't exist as it is to say that I can't prove the Christian God doesn't exist. There is as much evidence for their existence as there is for your God's existence.

It is not accurate because they are the subject of classical mythology and what were are about there is theology.

Safehands wrote: »

Having said all that Festus, I would truly love to really believe that Gad exists, I really would. Unfortunately I don't.

Go looking for Him brother.

I asked before why you do not want to find God. You have not answered.

Festus · 20-11-2014 11:21pm

RikuoAmero wrote: »

What source? All I remember seeing is you mentioning you don't believe atheists exist, and then saying that atheists believe in moral relativism or that you took my actions here on this forum to paint a broad brush of all atheists.

Read my postings to other posters, you'll find it. It came from science20

RikuoAmero wrote: »

So yes or no - are there people out there, like me, who say (and mean it) that they do not have a belief in your god?
No, I never said it's not okay to say "I don't believe you" (after all, that is my stance toward everything you said about your religion). What I am pointing out was that you denied that there were people who exist who don't believe in your god, (in other words, espousing that other people cannot have a lack of belief) and yet being perfectly fine with saying it of yourself.

Please, read the source I provided from science20. It's not a joke.

RikuoAmero · 20-11-2014 11:33pm

Festus wrote: »

Read my postings to other posters, you'll find it. It came from science20

Please, read the source I provided from science20. It's not a joke.

Very well then, I found your source. I'm having a read of it now, only part way as I type this. Just as a brief note, many of the things that link says atheists do, I do not. It mentions atheists praying, or holding a belief in an immortal soul (I do not).
I do not pray. Since I realised my former religious beliefs had no justification, I have prayed only a small handful of times, as experiments, not out of a sincere expression of belief towards the deity.
I will have to fully read the article, and see if I can get at the study and/or research papers before I can offer up a more complete response. However, that will be tomorrow evening, as I'll be going to sleep soon.

Lady Chuckles · 21-11-2014 12:09am

Safehands wrote: »

It would be lovely to think that God blinked his eye and created everything, as outlined in the Bible. Obviously that did not happen. I say obviously, because there is nothing anywhere to suggest he did, except a book written by ignorant people.

Care to elaborate?
I think this statement is very offensive. Maybe I read it wrong or maybe you used a poor word to make a point....

Safehands · 21-11-2014 12:13am

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

Care to elaborate?
I think this statement is very offensive. Maybe I read it wrong or maybe you used a poor word to make a point....

I mean ignorant in the literal sense, not being offensive. Everyone was ignorant of facts back then.

Safehands · 21-11-2014 12:22am

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

Care to elaborate?
I think this statement is very offensive. Maybe I read it wrong or maybe you used a poor word to make a point....

I mean ignorant in the literal sense, not being offensive. Everyone was ignorant of facts back then.

Lady Chuckles · 21-11-2014 12:25am

Safehands wrote: »

I mean ignorant in the literal sense, not being offensive. Everyone was ignorant of facts back then.

Back then as in BC?
Ignorant like Archimedes, Socrates and Plato?

I still don't think your statement is quite right. Not everyone was "ignorant /.../ back then". In either meaning.

Festus · 21-11-2014 12:54am

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Very well then, I found your source. I'm having a read of it now, only part way as I type this. Just as a brief note, many of the things that link says atheists do, I do not. It mentions atheists praying, or holding a belief in an immortal soul (I do not).
I do not pray. Since I realised my former religious beliefs had no justification, I have prayed only a small handful of times, as experiments, not out of a sincere expression of belief towards the deity.
I will have to fully read the article, and see if I can get at the study and/or research papers before I can offer up a more complete response. However, that will be tomorrow evening, as I'll be going to sleep soon.

You disagree with this article on prayer. Lets put that into context. What the article says on prayer is...

" If a loved one dies, even many anti-religious people usually feel a need for a farewell ritual, complete with readings from old books and intoned declarations that are not unlike prayers. In war situations, commanders frequently comment that atheist soldiers pray far more than they think they do."

In context it mentions atheists praying in war situations and probably not realizing it. Or perhaps when facing the potential for imminent death they "find God" ...but you're different I guess and are prepared to be a martyr to the cause of atheism unto death.
No doubt there are commited atheists who would not seek solace in the God of their childhood when facing imminent death but many do and at least one brought you into this conversation on the NDE thread.

The article says that on the death of a loved one some people make declarations like prayers. it does not say that they pray.

and you mention the soul. Here is what the article says:

"
This line of thought has led to some scientists claiming that “atheism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think,” says Graham Lawton, an avowed atheist himself, writing in the New Scientist. “They point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.”

Now where does it say they hold a belief in an immortal soul?

I'll give you hint as to why I frame the question that way. I know what tacit means. I suggest you find out what it means or refresh your understanding of the term so you can understand what the avowed atheist who penned it meant before you post any more embarrassing comments. Lawton is making a summary point which cannot be reasonably critiqued in the manner you did without access to the raw data.

If your response to this article is anything like what you have just posted having skimmed the article or anything like your review of the NDE video you will forgive me for thinking it might not be worth the time to read it. It is highly likely that if you continue to read into articles and postings things that are not there, mis-interpreting them, or re-interpreting them to suit your own agenda you may find my responses being limited to "that's not what it says, read it again".

Safehands · 21-11-2014 11:45am

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

Back then as in BC?
Ignorant like Archimedes, Socrates and Plato?
I still don't think your statement is quite right. Not everyone was "ignorant /.../ back then". In either meaning.

There were brilliant thinkers and philosophers throughout history. Aristotle was way ahead of his time, but don't forget, these people lived thousands of years after the book was written and even they didn't know some very basic facts that we take for granted today.

Lady Chuckles · 21-11-2014 12:06pm

Safehands wrote: »

There were brilliant thinkers and philosophers throughout history. Aristotle was way ahead of his time, but don't forget, these people lived thousands of years after the book was written and even they didn't know some very basic facts that we take for granted today.

Unless I understood things seriously wrong, they did NOT live thousands of years after "the book" was written.
The bible has lots of sections written at different times: 800 BC, 400 BC, 200 BC, 160 BC. New Testament and the Gospels around 150 AD. I'm not native in English so you may have to look up what parts come from what time yourself, if you're interested enough

And here are some of your thinkers:
Aristotle 384 BC-322 BC
Pythagoras 570 BC-495 BC
Archimedes 287 BC-212 BC

... Yes, some parts of the bible are older than the great thinkers (but not by thousands of years). Some parts are newer.
This is drifting off topic at this stage - but I am not OK with you so casually saying that the bible was written by a bunch of "ignorant people".

Safehands · 21-11-2014 12:22pm

Lady Chuckles wrote: »

Unless I understood things seriously wrong, they did NOT live thousands of years after "the book" was written.
The bible has lots of sections written at different times: 800 BC, 400 BC, 200 BC, 160 BC. New Testament and the Gospels around 150 AD. I'm not native in English so you may have to look up what parts come from what time yourself, if you're interested enough ... Yes, some parts of the bible are older than the great thinkers (but not by thousands of years). Some parts are newer.
This is drifting off topic at this stage - but I am not OK with you so casually saying that the bible was written by a bunch of "ignorant people".

I take the point about thousands of years. However, when I wrote "It would be lovely to think that God blinked his eye and created everything, as outlined in the Bible. Obviously that did not happen. I say obviously, because there is nothing anywhere to suggest he did, except a book written by ignorant people." I was talking about Genesis. Relatively speaking, the authors were ignorant of basic facts, such as a sun centred solar system, or most likely even a spherical Earth, let alone what the stars are.

Anyway, the point is that the universe came about due to a process involving the "big bang", not by a super being clicking his fingers over a period of 6 days and making it all happen.

Marion Morrison · 21-11-2014 4:49pm

None of the mainstream denominations that I am familiar with believe in six literal days, as the rest of the bible explains God is outside of time. Everything in the bible is not explained in the first few books. E.g. The new covenant cannot be ignored when it comes to the common but false internet yarn that Christians should not eat pork or wear mixed fibres. Whole parts of a library cannot be ignored when making claims about what a library contains and says. It's about as silly as picking one science textbook in a library, and triumphantly trying to claim it isn't a poetry library, a religious library or spiritual library. You can't categorize an entire library, and claiming what it contains, by quoting one page of one book. You wouldn't pick up a poetry book, or an art book, or a spirituality book to learn science, or a science book to learn about a religion, and yet these are the types of claims being made that you should.

Out of interest, exactly what irrefutable evidence would prove God ? To someone who does not want to believe, there is no evidence that I can think of, that could not equally be explained away as some extremely advanced alien species/spirit, pretending to be God.

God and the angels are the original 'extra-terrestrials' after all.

The strange thing is most of the atheists I've come across believe strongly in the likelihood of alien life in the universe and beyond, but as of yet, by their very own standards for belief, not a single shred of evidence of alien life has yet been found. It seems even stranger that they consider the only form other beings in the universe and beyond can take is a purely physical one.

If God appeared in front of you and created a planet for you, it would still not be evidence, as it could be explained away as the work of an advanced alien or a pure hallucination on your part. Any and all actions by God can be explained away, and are.

Christ carried out many miracles in front of people, and yet many still refused to believe him, and instead explained away his acts as being the power of demons instead.

Over half the worlds population and rising, now believe in the one God of Abraham, so presumably the evidence and reasons are already pretty sufficient for belief for those who want to believe, and not for those who don't.

Exactly what type of evidence, and give specific examples, would irrefutably prove God exists and how exactly would it prove it ?

RikuoAmero · 21-11-2014 6:51pm

Festus wrote: »

In context it mentions atheists praying in war situations and probably not realizing it. Or perhaps when facing the potential for imminent death they "find God" ...but you're different I guess and are prepared to be a martyr to the cause of atheism unto death.

Recently, I went through a suicidal phase, and I do have to admit, there was a brief time, where a part of me wanted to pray to your god. However, during this period, I reminded myself that
1) there was no justification for a belief in your god on my part
2) I would have been falling victim to Pascal's Wager, since, without evidence, how was I supposed to determine if I would have prayed to the right god? Many religions teach that their god is a jealous god, who doesn't want humans praying to/worshipping other gods, so if I had uttered for example a catholic prayer, then how would I have been able to rule out the possibility of Allah punishing me after death for not praying according to what the quran teaches?

No doubt there are commited atheists who would not seek solace in the God of their childhood when facing imminent death but many do and at least one brought you into this conversation on the NDE thread.

...no-one brought me here. I went on to the christian section, saw the thread about NDEs, read it, watched the video and gave my initial critique, as you well know I did. Someone in the past may have told me "Go to boards.ie", I can't remember if someone did or if I found it myself, but no-one brought me to the NDE thread that day. That was all me.
Where's your evidence for this claim, that I was brought there by someone else?

The article says that on the death of a loved one some people make declarations like prayers. it does not say that they pray.

Fine, then a slight misreading on my part. It does say that atheist soldiers do pray, it's right there.

Now where does it say they hold a belief in an immortal soul?

I will give the obvious answer that you are expecting and say, right bloody there. As for tacit
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tacitly
adjective
1.
understood without being openly expressed; implied:
tacit approval.
2.
silent; saying nothing:
a tacit partner.
3.
unvoiced or unspoken:
a tacit prayer.
So you're saying that as per the article, atheists have an unspoken belief in an immortal soul. Well, not me. I've never been given evidence for a soul - I know that there is an open question on why no other creatures share our level of consciousness and intelligence, but that doesn't give one licence to throw in the concept of soul as an answer, a la God of the Gaps, and to start talking about what it is.
One can certainly suspect the existence of a soul, and to think of it in hypothetical terms, but if one doesn't have evidence for it, one lacks justification to believe it is there.

Lawton is making a summary point which cannot be reasonably critiqued in the manner you did without access to the raw data.

If your response to this article is anything like what you have just posted having skimmed the article or anything like your review of the NDE video you will forgive me for thinking it might not be worth the time to read it. It is highly likely that if you continue to read into articles and postings things that are not there, mis-interpreting them, or re-interpreting them to suit your own agenda you may find my responses being limited to "that's not what it says, read it again".

I did tell, did I not, that that last response from me was an initial response, while I was busy reading it? Therefore, I expected you not to take it as though I was giving a final critique. That response was akin to someone saying 10 mins into a movie "So far this movie is good, but not great, but I'll give you a final answer at the end"

Festus · 21-11-2014 8:52pm

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Recently, I went through a suicidal phase, and I do have to admit, there was a brief time, where a part of me wanted to pray to your god.

I am sorry to hear that and I am glad you didn't follow through on the suicide. However, are you being presumptive or judgemental in referring to my "god"? There is God. By using the term "your god" you are implying there are different flavours of god. There isn't. There is one. God.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

However, during this period, I reminded myself that
1) there was no justification for a belief in your god on my part

2) I would have been falling victim to Pascal's Wager, since, without evidence, how was I supposed to determine if I would have prayed to the right god? Many religions teach that their god is a jealous god, who doesn't want humans praying to/worshipping other gods, so if I had uttered for example a catholic prayer, then how would I have been able to rule out the possibility of Allah punishing me after death for not praying according to what the quran teaches?

Perhaps I am wrong here but in reading this I get the sense that rejecting God is more important to you than anything else. So much so that in contemplating suicide you could not figure out which god to pray to. Do you not think that perhaps God, seeing you facing suicide, encouraged you away from suicide so you might have more time to find Him?

RikuoAmero wrote: »

...no-one brought me here. I went on to the christian section, saw the thread about NDEs, read it, watched the video and gave my initial critique, as you well know I did. Someone in the past may have told me "Go to boards.ie", I can't remember if someone did or if I found it myself, but no-one brought me to the NDE thread that day. That was all me.
Where's your evidence for this claim, that I was brought there by someone else?

It was a figure of speech. The posting prompted you to post having heard of atheists converting so these converting atheists bear some responsibility for prompting your actions, however I do accept that the final action on your part was self directed.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Fine, then a slight misreading on my part. It does say that atheist soldiers do pray, it's right there.

... more than they think they do. Fog of war and all that. It does tend to focus the mind.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I will give the obvious answer that you are expecting and say, right bloody there. As for tacit
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tacitly
adjective
1.
understood without being openly expressed; implied:
tacit approval.
2.
silent; saying nothing:
a tacit partner.
3.
unvoiced or unspoken:
a tacit prayer.

So you're saying that as per the article, atheists have an unspoken belief in an immortal soul. Well, not me. I've never been given evidence for a soul - I know that there is an open question on why no other creatures share our level of consciousness and intelligence, but that doesn't give one licence to throw in the concept of soul as an answer, a la God of the Gaps, and to start talking about what it is.
One can certainly suspect the existence of a soul, and to think of it in hypothetical terms, but if one doesn't have evidence for it, one lacks justification to believe it is there.

some atheists. Not all, some. As for god of the gaps - what is the relevance. If there is a suspicion of a soul wha tis wrong in pursuing the possibility from all possible angles?

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I did tell, did I not, that that last response from me was an initial response, while I was busy reading it? Therefore, I expected you not to take it as though I was giving a final critique. That response was akin to someone saying 10 mins into a movie "So far this movie is good, but not great, but I'll give you a final answer at the end"

You did, and I accepted you gave it a cursory glance but I was giving fair warning. I guess I was right in thinking spoon feeding wouldn't be of benefit.

For the the article is well written, sourced from atheistic scientists and hence contains a certain bias, but poses the question why so many people atheists included, are interested in God. There has to be a reason for this as there is a reason for everything including our existence.

Or perhaps we don't exist and are only sentient programs existing in the construct of a more powerful entities matrix.

Festus · 21-11-2014 8:56pm

Safehands wrote: »

Anyway, the point is that the universe came about due to a process involving the "big bang",...

glad to find there is something we can agree on. some atheists do have some really wacky ideas on the origin of the universe. BTW who discovered the Big Bang?

Safehands wrote: »

...not by a super being clicking his fingers over a period of 6 days and making it all happen.

so what did make it all happen?

RikuoAmero · 21-11-2014 9:21pm

Festus wrote: »

I am sorry to hear that and I am glad you didn't follow through on the suicide. However, are you being presumptive or judgemental in referring to my "god"? There is God. By using the term "your god" you are implying there are different flavours of god. There isn't. There is one. God.

I meant that the god you talk about and express a belief in. I would use the exact same phrase if I was talking to a hindu or muslim. As for you saying "There is one. God", that is still an unsubstantiated claim. Yes, you've put forward "everything" as your evidence...while later saying you refuse to "spoonfeed" i.e. refuse to provide workable evidence. I say workable because what am I supposed to do with the word "everything" as evidence for your god?

Perhaps I am wrong here but in reading this I get the sense that rejecting God is more important to you than anything else. So much so that in contemplating suicide you could not figure out which god to pray to. Do you not think that perhaps God, seeing you facing suicide, encouraged you away from suicide so you might have more time to find Him?

That's a possibility right there, but what is the evidence for it? Also, why all the hide and seek?

... more than they think they do. Fog of war and all that. It does tend to focus the mind.

Having never been a soldier, I can't comment on it directly. However, if the claim "atheists pray without realising it in times of combat" is true, then all that is evidence for is that...well, they are praying. Plenty of people who don't worship the god you belief in have fought in combat and prayed to their own gods, and I'd be very surprised if no hindu soldier ever for example didn't go into battle praying to Shiva or Vishnu.

some atheists. Not all, some. As for god of the gaps - what is the relevance. If there is a suspicion of a soul wha tis wrong in pursuing the possibility from all possible angles?

I meant that there is a mystery at the moment about why we are the sole species on Earth with this level of consciousness and intelligence. To throw in "soul" as the answer to this mystery would be like God of the Gaps, where one has a mystery (such as origin of the universe) and throws in "God did it" as an answer - neither case has as of yet any evidence for it.
Nothing wrong with pursuing possibilities. But it is asinine to go from "I suspect that the answer for the problem of human consciousness is souls" to "I believe the answer is souls, despite not presenting evidence"

You did, and I accepted you gave it a cursory glance but I was giving fair warning. I guess I was right in thinking spoon feeding wouldn't be of benefit.

For the the article is well written, sourced from atheistic scientists and hence contains a certain bias, but poses the question why so many people atheists included, are interested in God. There has to be a reason for this as there is a reason for everything including our existence.

Or perhaps we don't exist and are only sentient programs existing in the construct of a more powerful entities matrix.

I for one do it because I want to be sure of my belief or lack of belief in something, especially in something that is claimed to be this uber-important. I do it because the topic is fascinating to me. I do it because I like debating. I do it because I actually like it whenever I'm shown to be wrong.
Now I haven't read the full article as of yet (too busy with work and GTA5), but if I'm remembering correctly what little I did read, it talks about people being interested in the supernatural, not your god specifically (the character called God in the book called the bible).

Festus · 21-11-2014 10:54pm

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I meant that the god you talk about and express a belief in. I would use the exact same phrase if I was talking to a hindu or muslim. As for you saying "There is one. God", that is still an unsubstantiated claim. Yes, you've put forward "everything" as your evidence...while later saying you refuse to "spoonfeed" i.e. refuse to provide workable evidence. I say workable because what am I supposed to do with the word "everything" as evidence for your god?

Look at everything. Examine everything. Test everything. Consider everything.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

That's a possibility right there, but what is the evidence for it? Also, why all the hide and seek?

Free will.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Having never been a soldier, I can't comment on it directly. However, if the claim "atheists pray without realising it in times of combat" is true, then all that is evidence for is that...well, they are praying. Plenty of people who don't worship the god you belief in have fought in combat and prayed to their own gods, and I'd be very surprised if no hindu soldier ever for example didn't go into battle praying to Shiva or Vishnu.

I think they would be more likely to pray to one of their gods of war, probably Kartikey, but you would really have to ask a Hindu.
Anyway, point is not that they pray but that they do it without realizing it.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I meant that there is a mystery at the moment about why we are the sole species on Earth with this level of consciousness and intelligence. To throw in "soul" as the answer to this mystery would be like God of the Gaps, where one has a mystery (such as origin of the universe) and throws in "God did it" as an answer - neither case has as of yet any evidence for it.
Nothing wrong with pursuing possibilities. But it is asinine to go from "I suspect that the answer for the problem of human consciousness is souls" to "I believe the answer is souls, despite not presenting evidence"

So what kind of evidence do you want? What kind of evidence would accept without responding with the standard "god of the gaps" response.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I for one do it because I want to be sure of my belief or lack of belief in something, especially in something that is claimed to be this uber-important. I do it because the topic is fascinating to me. I do it because I like debating. I do it because I actually like it whenever I'm shown to be wrong.
Now I haven't read the full article as of yet (too busy with work and GTA5), but if I'm remembering correctly what little I did read, it talks about people being interested in the supernatural, not your god specifically (the character called God in the book called the bible).

What is it about the topic that fascinates you? Are you like the atheists in the article and fascinated by the supernatural?
What is it about debating it that fascinates you?
Are you actually interesting in discovering God?

RikuoAmero · 21-11-2014 11:08pm

Festus wrote: »

Look at everything. Examine everything. Test everything. Consider everything.

So far, everything that I have tested and examined when put into relation with your god has come up negative.

Free will.

Ooh boy, that is a whole other ball game right there, which I won't get into here (to put it simply, if your god claim is true, along with this free will claim, then it shows a massive level of irresponsibility on your god's part).

So what kind of evidence do you want? What kind of evidence would accept without responding with the standard "god of the gaps" response.

Something measurable, something detectable. I think yourself or someone else put up the "what if it's aliens with advanced technology" as a possible explanation for perceived phenomena that seem god-like. That is a very real possibility, one which we can't rule out. So basically, since you believe Jesus died and was resurrected, how have you ruled out the possibility of an alien entity acting like Q from Star Trek doing it for the lulz?

What is it about the topic that fascinates you? Are you like the atheists in the article and fascinated by the supernatural?

You might as well ask me why I like my favourite colour. I dunno, that's not a question I've explored, and one I'm not sure I can answer.

Are you actually interesting in discovering God?

Depends on what exactly you mean by this. I'm interested in discovering truth. I'm not going into your religion with a presupposed bias in whatever the truth may be. As I've said to you before, I've prayed a few times since leaving (upon advice from other christians who told me "Pray and you will find God".
No I didn't.
Even back when I was a devout believer and prayed, nothing ever happened.

Festus · 21-11-2014 11:35pm

RikuoAmero wrote: »

So far, everything that I have tested and examined when put into relation with your god has come up negative.

What about life?

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Ooh boy, that is a whole other ball game right there, which I won't get into here (to put it simply, if your god claim is true, along with this free will claim, then it shows a massive level of irresponsibility on your god's part).

and man is not irresponsible ?

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Something measurable, something detectable. I think yourself or someone else put up the "what if it's aliens with advanced technology" as a possible explanation for perceived phenomena that seem god-like. That is a very real possibility, one which we can't rule out. So basically, since you believe Jesus died and was resurrected, how have you ruled out the possibility of an alien entity acting like Q from Star Trek doing it for the lulz?

I have. do you believe aliens exist?

RikuoAmero wrote: »

You might as well ask me why I like my favourite colour. I dunno, that's not a question I've explored, and one I'm not sure I can answer.

Perhaps you should explore it.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Depends on what exactly you mean by this. I'm interested in discovering truth. I'm not going into your religion with a presupposed bias in whatever the truth may be. As I've said to you before, I've prayed a few times since leaving (upon advice from other christians who told me "Pray and you will find God".
No I didn't.
Even back when I was a devout believer and prayed, nothing ever happened.

Forgive me but I do detect serious quantities of bias. For someone seeking the truth you do seem to be quite taken with lies, mis information, half truths and bias. Someone who is open would not call people with faith gullible or use asinine arguments like "god of the gaps" in any seriousness, but no matter. Maybe you just don't realize how biased you are.

Did you pray with all your heart, all your mind and all your soul?
What did you pray for?

Just out of curiosity - how does GTA5 inform your relationships with women?

Squeedily Spooch · 22-11-2014 12:07am

Festus wrote: »

I am sorry to hear that and I am glad you didn't follow through on the suicide. However, are you being presumptive or judgemental in referring to my "god"? There is God. By using the term "your god" you are implying there are different flavours of god. There isn't. There is one. God.

To you. Not to the few billion people who don't worship the same Judeo-Christian version of the God you do.

Festus · 22-11-2014 12:24am

Squeedily Spooch wrote: »

To you. Not to the few billion people who don't worship the same Judeo-Christian version of the God you do.

Which forum are we in?

Squeedily Spooch · 22-11-2014 12:48am

Festus wrote: »

Which forum are we in?

The one with the existence of God debate thread.

Festus · 22-11-2014 12:59am

Squeedily Spooch wrote: »

The one with the existence of God debate thread.

Which God?

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

Comments