velocirafter wrote: » well there is some evidence but its pretty thin on the ground. Religious text are the main one and they are pretty easy to discredit. Other than its all personal accounts that cant be substantiated and anecdotal evidence, which isn't evidence its an anecdote. Is there something else major that I'm not thinking of?
The cosmological argument argues that there was a "first cause", or "prime mover" who is identified as God. It starts with some claim about the world, like its containing entities that are caused to exist by other entities. The teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity are best explained by reference to a creator god. It starts with a rather more complicated claim about the world, i.e. that it exhibits order and design. The ontological argument is based on arguments about a "being greater than which can not be conceived". It starts simply with a concept of God. Alvin Plantinga formulates this argument to show that if it is logically possible for God (a necessary being) to exist, then God exists.[17] The mind-body problem argument suggests that the relation of consciousness to materiality is best understood in terms of the existence of God. Arguments that some non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as justice, beauty, love or religious experience are arguments for theism as against materialism. The anthropic argument suggests that basic facts, such as our existence, are best explained by the existence of God. The moral argument (or axiological argument) argues that the existence of objective morality depends on the existence of God. The transcendental argument suggests that logic, science, ethics, and other things we take seriously do not make sense in the absence of God, and that atheistic arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency. The will to believe doctrine was pragmatist philosopher William James' attempt to prove God by showing that the adoption of theism as a hypothesis "works" in a believer's life. This doctrine depended heavily on James' pragmatic theory of truth where beliefs are proven by how they work when adopted rather than by proofs before they are believed (a form of the hypothetico-deductive method).
Húrin wrote: » For me personally, some of the strongest evidence is the existence of a moral conscience (that is distinct from instincts) that seems to vary little across all human cultures.
-JammyDodger- wrote: » From reading a few of your posts, do you just contradict what people say, just to cause a debate?
Jakkass wrote: » Not really, most Christians would argue that there is circumstantial evidence for God, and that God is very much present in our lives and in the world today. Even if it was to start a debate, it's a debate that probably needs to be had, if we are going to have two different sets of people one claiming that there is no circumstantial evidence for God, and the other claiming that there is. Surely it's worthy of discussion to get to the crux of the issue. Or do you just expect us to accept the atheist position and go on our merry dismal way (after rejecting Christianity)?
Jakkass wrote: » Surely it's worthy of discussion to get to the crux of the issue. Or do you just expect us to accept the atheist position and go on our merry dismal way (after rejecting Christianity)?
Dades wrote: » That would be one mighty thread! A lot of ground rules would have to be set out. There's a huge difference between purported circumstantial evidence for a "god" (or "instigator") and evidence for the Abrahamic God, for example.
Galvasean wrote: » When I was in school (5 years ago) it was still relatively taboo to be an 'out' atheist. Usually if you said so you'd have to explain to people why ("How can you not believe in ANY kind of God?") which I wasn't bothered doing every couple of days. It was much easier to be an 'agnostic', although looking back that just makes you look like a fence sitter.
sukikettle wrote: » What if God exists and so too the promise of heaven and the very gruesome eternal hell.We can all die at any moment. Are you willing to enter into something catastrophic beyond human comprehension to hold onto your views and disbelief due to 'lack of eveidence'
-JammyDodger- wrote: » I worship Zeus for that very reason. What if he's real and you, in not believing in him, risk spending eternity in damnation?
sukikettle wrote: » To LZ5by5, I think organised religion is poisonous for the youth. If they are searching for God, wouldn't they be better off engaging in a father/child meaningful relationship with Him, telling Him exactly what they find so difficult and where they feel challenged and then allowing Him the opportunity to respond. How many people have never done that instead hating God for everything humanity stands for and against thinking it was Him all the time.
sukikettle wrote: » I don't believe you can be an aethiest during a relationship with Him. You either decide to skip knowing Him or fall out with Him because He actually by invitation starts to do something in your life to turn it around that you don't agree with. Surely there are things happening in your life that require a supernatural turn of events. Do you really not want His help. Are you really happy to go it so alone. Where is your joy and hope and your surety of more. Are you just grazing here waiting to die because you sort of just happened.
sukikettle wrote: » I don't follow God in case of hell. Hell is not a big stick He uses to beat up humanity. He has no alternative but to send you there
if you reject Him because rejecting Him leaves only one alternative you are Satan's and to the awful abode created for his demise only originally you will go. So your belief hell is a threat if you don't get with God is a bent lie. He has no choice when you reject yours
sHnaCk wrote: » So you believe, it is just that you choose to reject eh? however, predestination comes into play which immidiately makes your rejection null and void. You cannot reject if you have not YET been chosen; because it is His will that all come to Christ... also... love without faith is nothing
sukikettle wrote: » Velo....never the two shall meet mate.I can't reach you unless God opens your ears and eyes and you will never come up with an argument to shut me up because they are two completely different realms. I live in God's spiritual realm having a human experience and you are not
velocirafter wrote: » i prefer my realm:D Its funny how after about 3 pages all these threads dissolve into a debate over the standard theist vs atheist arguments.