Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

tommy2bad

SebBerkovich wrote: »

So, God's existence is completely unprovable.

So in column A (the "god exists" column) i've got nothing.

In column B (the "god doesn't exist" column) i've got mostly circumstantial and anecdotal evidence. Which isn't bad considering God is supposed to be untraceable by science.

I think it's pretty clear that a reasonable person raised would religion would be very unlikely to convert.

Not sure what ye are talking about because in column A you have all the anecdotal and circumstantial evidence. It's column B that has nothing.
The thing is, anecdotal and circumstantial evidence isn't evidence at all, it's a hypothesis at best and a misinterpretation at worst.
So a reasonable person has to choose between some testimony supported by a theory and Ahhhh... nothing. I can see how they would chose to believe.

MrPudding

onlinenerd wrote: »

The believers will believe even if they cant prove the existence of God because Christ himself said Blessed are those who not seen me yet believe and this is what is known as faith because you cant prove God is present yet you know he is there always.

That does not make any sense. You believe in the existence of god basically because a book has told you that god said that god exists...?

Can you lend me €1000? I am good for it. You can believe I am good for it because I have told you in a post that I am good for it.

MrP

onlinenerd

MrPudding wrote: »

That does not make any sense. You believe in the existence of god basically because a book has told you that god said that god exists...?

Can you lend me €1000? I am good for it. You can believe I am good for it because I have told you in a post that I am good for it.

MrP

MrP you seem to a non believer and so you say that you believe in something made up y the people which is atheism and I say can you give me 1000 euro claiming on your beliefs that God is not real?

FISMA

SebBerkovich wrote: »

Any proof would be a good start though.

What proof would be acceptable to you? Please provide one example.

MrPudding

onlinenerd wrote: »

MrP you seem to a non believer and so you say that you believe in something made up y the people which is atheism and I say can you give me 1000 euro claiming on your beliefs that God is not real?

Your sentence really lacks sense, but i think I see what you are getting at. I think you are trying to say that someone has shown me that there are no gods and I believe that, that is not strictly accurate. Atheism is not something made up by the people in the sense that religion is. I do not believe in gods because the evidence presented to me is inadequate to convince me that they exist.

See, this is not me listening to atheists, looking at evidence they present and favouring that evidence over evidence for gods, it is simply me rejecting the "evidence" for gods.

I can't say for sure whether or not there is a god, all I can say is that I have yet to see any evidence that would suggest to me that gods exist, and as a result I will live my life as if they don't.

So, I reject the evidence presented to me for the existence of gods. I have looked at the evidence and deemed it to me insufficient to prove what it claims to prove. Having rejected the evidence for the existence of gods I find myself, merely by a binary process of elimination, believing that gods do not exist. There is no faith, there is no evidence that gods do not exist, there is simply a rejection of the evidence for gods.

Atheism is belief in the same way as bald is a hair colour.

MrP

onlinenerd

MrPudding wrote: »

Your sentence really lacks sense, but i think I see what you are getting at. I think you are trying to say that someone has shown me that there are no gods and I believe that, that is not strictly accurate. Atheism is not something made up by the people in the sense that religion is. I do not believe in gods because the evidence presented to me is inadequate to convince me that they exist.

See, this is not me listening to atheists, looking at evidence they present and favouring that evidence over evidence for gods, it is simply me rejecting the "evidence" for gods.

I can't say for sure whether or not there is a god, all I can say is that I have yet to see any evidence that would suggest to me that gods exist, and as a result I will live my life as if they don't.

So, I reject the evidence presented to me for the existence of gods. I have looked at the evidence and deemed it to me insufficient to prove what it claims to prove. Having rejected the evidence for the existence of gods I find myself, merely by a binary process of elimination, believing that gods do not exist. There is no faith, there is no evidence that gods do not exist, there is simply a rejection of the evidence for gods.

Atheism is belief in the same way as bald is a hair colour.

MrP

What evidence would be high enough for you to believe in God?

MrPudding

onlinenerd wrote: »

What evidence would be high enough for you to believe in God?

What evidence have you got?

MrP

onlinenerd

MrPudding wrote: »

What evidence have you got?

MrP

Enough evidence contrasting from my Mums cure to watching thousands of people testify cures from cures such as cancer, AID and many diseases including which have come from right in front of my eyes and experiencing them myself.

All this proves there might be a higher being has to exist as they are none other than miracles and what about the saints of the church such as Padre Pio and stigmata and many marian apparitions such as Lourdes, Knock and Fatima.

Even scientists cannot explain it.

Gumbi

onlinenerd wrote: »

Enough evidence contrasting from my Mums cure to watching thousands of people testify cures from cures such as cancer, AID and many diseases including which have come from right in front of my eyes and experiencing them myself.

All this proves there might be a higher being has to exist as they are none other than miracles and what about the saints of the church such as Padre Pio and stigmata and many marian apparitions such as Lourdes, Knock and Fatima.

Even scientists cannot explain it.

How do you know your God caused the cure? How do you even know a God was the cause of the cure? How do you know it wasn't because of medical treatment?

And it's an insane stretch to go from "cure of cancer" to "the God of the Bible exists".

Also, why should anyone bother to go the doctor if thousands are healed from cancer through other means? Is it all a big scam?

What can scientists not explain? (As if this is a trump card for you to play - scientists relish the chance to learn something new about the world).

onlinenerd

Gumbi wrote: »

How do you know your God caused the cure? How do you even know a God was the cause of the cure? How do you know it wasn't because of medical treatment?

And it's an insane stretch to go from "cure of cancer" to "the God of the Bible exists".

Also, why should anyone bother to go the doctor if thousands are healed from cancer through other means? Is it all a big scam?

What can scientists not explain? (As if this is a trump card for you to play - scientists relish the chance to learn something new about the world).

If you call upon the name of God and you are cured, it would be a coincidence that the person was cured because of medicine as well. this has happened more than once so it cannot be the medicine that cured the person and I am also talking about terminally ill people with no medicine available.

Science cannot explain this and so is termed as a miracle.

Geomy

Gumbi wrote: »

How do you know your God caused the cure? How do you even know a God was the cause of the cure? How do you know it wasn't because of medical treatment?

And it's an insane stretch to go from "cure of cancer" to "the God of the Bible exists".

Also, why should anyone bother to go the doctor if thousands are healed from cancer through other means? Is it all a big scam?

What can scientists not explain? (As if this is a trump card for you to play - scientists relish the chance to learn something new about the world).

Jezes pipe down if they believe that God cured an illness surely you can accept that.

Why have a canary over it ?

I believe there's something out there helping the believer's, but it's not the one and only Christian God...

Who's to say there's no healing power out there that people can tap into.

Some say it's satanic if it's anything other than Jesus but I don't think so.

I had healings but I don't bother shouting from the roof top about it.

If someone has faith and they rely on that faith or way of living and feel better,how can a strident atheist say it didn't happen...

They weren't there, the thing is spiritual and religious people have one thing in common and that's a belief in something outside themselves.

If you're a believer it works if not im afraid it will never work :-(

Gumbi

onlinenerd wrote: »

If you call upon the name of God and you are cured, it would be a coincidence that the person was cured because of medicine as well. this has happened more than once so it cannot be the medicine that cured the person and I am also talking about terminally ill people with no medicine available.

Science cannot explain this and so is termed as a miracle.

If I say it's going to rain tomorrow, and it does, does that mean that I predicted the future? No, of course it doesn't
Do you what causality is?

onlinenerd

Geomy wrote: »

Jezes pipe down if they believe that God cured an illness surely you can accept that.

Why have a canary over it ?

I believe there's something out there helping the believer's, but it's not the one and only Christian God...

Who's to say there's no healing power out there that people can tap into.

Some say it's satanic if it's anything other than Jesus but I don't think so.

I had healing but I don't bother shouting from the roof top about it.

If someone has faith and they rely on that faith or way of living and feel better,how can a strident atheist say it didn't happen...

They weren't there, the thing is spiritual and religious people have one thing in common and that's a belief in something outside themselves.

If you're a believer it works if not im afraid it will never work :-(

If it is satanic you need to call on the name of satan and not God and when you call God you cannot be cured by satan because he cannot tolerate praising and worshiping God and in order for a cure to work you need faith not just come to church on a random day and pray for a cure and never come again.

Even if satan cured you,it would be for your downfall without doubt.

onlinenerd

Gumbi wrote: »

If I say it's going to rain tomorrow, and it does, does that mean that I predicted the future? No, of course it doesn't
Do you what causality is?

No you didnt predict the future, you just guessed between raining and not raining and you got the correct answer.

Gumbi

onlinenerd wrote: »

No you didnt predict the future, you just guessed between raining and not raining and you got the correct answer.

Now when you say if someone prayed and they were cured of cancer, how can you say it was God and not the medical treatment? (Note that medical treatment has been shown to work in clinical trials, etc.).

onlinenerd

Gumbi wrote: »

Now when you say if someone prayed and they were cured of cancer, how can you say it was God and not the medical treatment? (Note that medical treatment has been shown to work in clinical trials, etc.).

Why does the cure have to work only when you pray to God? Couldnt the cure have worked anytime else

Almaviva

Geomy wrote: »

Jezes pipe down if they believe that God cured an illness surely you can accept that.

Wouldnt accept it at all. Someone believing something doesnt make it so. They can be (and in this care are) mistaken.

Geomy wrote: »

Who's to say there's no healing power out there that people can tap into.

Anyone who considers the evidence rationally, rather than with a predisposed irrational belief that the 'power out there' is there.

Geomy wrote: »

If someone has faith and they rely on that faith or way of living and feel better,how can a strident atheist say it didn't happen.

Because the evidence that the someone is deluding themselves is greater than the evidence that their faith is justified.

Geomy wrote: »

They weren't there, the thing is spiritual and religious people have one thing in common and that's a belief in something outside themselves.

If you're a believer it works if not im afraid it will never work :-(

This statement has no foundation. 'It' will never work for the believer or the non believer - just the non-believer recognises the truth.

Doctor DooM

onlinenerd wrote: »

Why does the cure have to work only when you pray to God? Couldnt the cure have worked anytime else

Assuming the curing of a disease is rare: Perhaps it did? If we just assume goddidit and don't check any further we'd never find out.

Assuming it's an easily curable disease: Really terrible argument, as it does all the time.

Geomy

Almaviva wrote: »

Wouldnt accept it at all. Someone believing something doesnt make it so. They can be (and in this care are) mistaken.



Anyone who considers the evidence rationally, rather than with a predisposed irrational belief that the 'power out there' is there.


Because the evidence that the someone is deluding themselves is greater than the evidence that their faith is justified.



This statement has no foundation. 'It' will never work for the believer or the non believer - just the non-believer recognises the truth.

Nice try :-)

Brian Shanahan

Edit:

Seems that I inadvertently double posted. I am a very naughty boy.

Please note the third post was intentional. The topic raised is important, and different enough, to warrant a seperate post.

Brian Shanahan

hinault wrote: »

And I hope that no atheist would require me to provide proof of my belief in the existence of God.

Why not? You are, in fact, asking us to accept the existence of something for which there is no evidence, and for which there is quite a lot of circumstantial evidence suggesting its non existence.

hinault wrote: »

The old saying : for the believer no proof is needed and for the non-believer all the proof in the world would never be sufficient!

Actually if you gave proof I would accept the existence of god*. For example while in college I was pretty much a climate change denier, but upon reading the scientific literature and evidence (as distilled for me by Sci. Am.) I changed my views and accepted that climate change was indeed happening, and is likely to be catastrophic.

* Belief is taking a thing to be true sans evidence. If you have proof, there is no belief position.

Brian Shanahan

Geomy wrote: »

Jezes pipe down if they believe that God cured an illness surely you can accept that.

Why have a canary over it ?

Because people are killed on a regular basis by snake oil salesmen who say "don't go to a doctor, through my intercessionary powers god will cure you. But only if you sign over the deeds to your house".

Or you get people who have wacky beliefs which lead to their children dying of preventable disease.

Seriously, anyone who has an ounce of compassion or human decency would be up in arms about "faith healing", and how it causes mass death and suffering.

Geomy

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Because people are killed on a regular basis by snake oil salesmen who say "don't go to a doctor, through my intercessionary powers god will cure you. But only if you sign over the deeds to your house".

Or you get people who have wacky beliefs which lead to their children dying of preventable disease.

Seriously, anyone who has an ounce of compassion or human decency would be up in arms about "faith healing", and how it causes mass death and suffering.

I know where your coming from but you're taking it to the extreme....

;-)

Gumbi

Geomy wrote: »

I know where your coming from but you're taking it to the extreme....

;-)

No, it's a real life example of a real problem. Not one in a million hyperbole.

Geomy

Gumbi wrote: »

No, it's a real life example of a real problem. Not one in a million hyperbole.

Well for a non believer you seem to be very interested in it all.

Maybe you should get a megaphone, stand on top of Grafton St and enlighten everyone.

It's about time the non believers had their say and rid the world of religion and spirituality....

Would that be possible ?

I don't think so. ...

Zombrex

Geomy wrote: »

Well for a non believer you seem to be very interested in it all.

Maybe you should get a megaphone, stand on top of Grafton St and enlighten everyone.

It's about time the non believers had their say and rid the world of religion and spirituality....

Would that be possible ?

I don't think so. ...

Or you know, he could just post on a public forum about the dangers of faith healing.

First you told him to pipe down, what is the harm if they believe they were cured by faith.

When it was pointed out to you the harm is that is supports the notion of faith healing as a real thing you said that was an extreme example

When it was pointed out that it isn't an extreme example it happens all the time you response is to tell him to grab a microphone and go rant at speakers corner.

Maybe a better response would be to simply say good point I hadn't considered that.

Geomy

Zombrex wrote: »

Or you know, he could just post on a public forum about the dangers of faith healing.

First you told him to pipe down, what is the harm if they believe they were cured by faith.

When it was pointed out to you the harm is that is supports the notion of faith healing as a real thing you said that was an extreme example

When it was pointed out that it isn't an extreme example it happens all the time you response is to tell him to grab a microphone and go rant at speakers corner.

Maybe a better response would be to simply say good point I hadn't considered that.

It doesn't happen all the time,if it did everyone would be praying or meditating for good health and peace of mind....

If someone contributed their stroke of good luck, healing or emotional well being to the power of prayer, meditation or a belief in divine intervention by God that's their business. ...

If they force their faith and beliefs or lack of on others ill call them a control freak or Co dependent...

There's no harm in Josie Mc Nulty getting up in the morning thanking God for everything and living a descent life.....

I think the religious, spiritual and atheism plus fanatics are far more dangerous than the people living a simple life. ...

I don't need to get into a circular debate, I think you get my gist. ..

If someone is harmless and they are content with their beliefs or lack of then I think it's best to leave them be....

What's the point in trying to change someone's point of view, that will only show off your own insecurities of trying to fix everyone....especially when the motive is a selfish one..

And I for one have my moment's of insecurities about God, Atheism the cosmos etc

Zombrex

Geomy wrote: »

I don't need to get into a circular debate, I think you get my gist. ..

It is only becoming a circular debate because you keep asking questions and then ignoring the answer. You asked what is the harm, it was explained to you what the harm is. You then just asked what is the harm again, suggesting that this is merely rhetorical and your implied assertion is there isn't any harm.

You are wrong, there is harm.

If you are interested in seriously discussing that I'm happy to engage, but by the sounds of it you aren't and you have already made up your mind.

Geomy

Zombrex wrote: »

It is only becoming a circular debate because you keep asking questions and then ignoring the answer. You asked what is the harm, it was explained to you what the harm is. You then just asked what is the harm again, suggesting that this is merely rhetorical and your implied assertion is there isn't any harm.

You are wrong, there is harm.

If you are interested in seriously discussing that I'm happy to engage, but by the sounds of it you aren't and you have already made up your mind.

Zombrex I would have a discussion with you if it was on even ground.
But your starting the good old cunning and baffling technique I often seen you engage with other forum members. ....

Telling me im not answering your question and saying you explained such and such, and then telling me that I ignored what you said....
You are tactical and if you were s barrister I would definitely recommend you ;-)

You see im aware of your techniques of debating and turning it all back on the other side, and you also have an ability to sound much more intelligent and interesting than a layman like myself....

Gumbi

Geomy wrote: »

Zombrex I would have a discussion with you if it was on even ground.
But your starting the good old cunning and baffling technique I often seen you engage with other forum members. ....

Telling me im not answering your question and saying you explained such and such, and then telling me that I ignored what you said....
You are tactical and if you were s barrister I would definitely recommend you ;-)

You see im aware of your techniques of debating and turning it all back on the other side, and you also have an ability to sound much more intelligent and interesting than a layman like myself....

You're either ignorant, or a liar. You didn't avoid Zombrex's answer (though you are NOW avoiding his challenge), you avoided MY answer. You asked what was wrong with faith healing. I answered. Respond.