Atheism (2)

[Dave Ellis]

but I can't prove there is no green tiger in your basement until I travel there, same with the edge of the universe......God MAY exist somewhere far away.

So what's your point? You have no justifiable reason to positively believe God, or the Green Tiger exists until they are observed.

To assert that God exists is therefore an unjustified postion, the intellectually honest route to take is to withhold belief until it is proven to be true.

 

[Gadarene]

okay then as the odd man out, prove that God doesn't exist.

Why? I have not claimed that God does not exist. Red herring.

 

[createdtoworship]

Why? I have not claimed that God does not exist. Red herring.

yeah but variant did, in this post

http://www.christianforums.com/t7665409/#post60899072

he said "there doesn't appear to be a god"

 

[Gadarene]

yeah but variant did, in this post

http://www.christianforums.com/t7665409/#post60899072

he said "there doesn't appear to be a god"

What does that have to do with what I said? I responded before variant made that post.

Utterly feeble.

And if I were to hazard a guess at what variant was referring to, I'd say he was referring to the lack of positive evidence for a god. In other words, the exact same argument you failed to grasp already.

 

[KCfromNC]

List of former atheists and agnostics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So?

 

[KCfromNC]

that would be a violation of free will. He wan'ts us to believe by faith.

This is nonsense. We have evidence for all sorts of things which really exist. None of that evidence or knowledge changes anything about us having free will or not.

How can we make truly free, informed decisions if information is being kept from us? That's not having free will, it's playing a guessing game and hoping for the best.

 

[createdtoworship]

This is nonsense. We have evidence for all sorts of things which really exist. None of that evidence or knowledge changes anything about us having free will or not.

How can we make truly free, informed decisions if information is being kept from us? That's not having free will, it's playing a guessing game and hoping for the best.

to give absolute knowledge is to take away your free will to have faith.

 

[Gadarene]

to give absolute knowledge is to take away your free will to have faith.

Where did anyone ask for absolute knowledge? More knowledge, perhaps. But not absolute knowledge.

In addition, one can still believe in the existence of something without being forced into following it. That choice still remains.

 

[createdtoworship]

What does that have to do with what I said? I responded before variant made that post.

Utterly feeble.

And if I were to hazard a guess at what variant was referring to, I'd say he was referring to the lack of positive evidence for a god. In other words, the exact same argument you failed to grasp already.

now you are quote mining variant! You are saying he is saying something completely different than what was actually said in order to cover up your tracks, but this is obviously in error.

no he said that there was little evidence for God and this is why he didn't believe. So how can there be little evidence if he hasn't gone to the other side of the universe? Isn't that where he would have to go to get that conclusion?

 

[Gadarene]

now you are quote mining variant! You are saying he is saying something completely different than what was actually said in order to cover up your tracks, but this is obviously in error.

I'm quote mining variant? I was responding to a quote mine of variant made by you. I hazarded my own guess as to what he was saying, and I was upfront about this being a guess, rather than saying it was definitely what he meant. Ergo, not a strawman.

For the best idea of what variant meant, ask variant - and lest we forget, variant's quote has nothing to do with what I claimed beforehand - as he made his post after mine, by definition!

Yet another failed attempt at identifying a fallacy from you.

no he said that there was little evidence for God and this is why he didn't believe. So how can there be little evidence if he hasn't gone to the other side of the universe? Isn't that where he would have to go to get that conclusion?

How do we know there IS evidence there? To repeat what you should have grasped several pages if not threads back - we make our decisions based on CURRENT AVAILABLE INFORMATION, and are open to change that decision based ON PRESENTATION OF POSITIVE EVIDENCE. We do not consider things to exist based on nothing more than a lack of positive evidence and idle speculation.

You've failed this argument at least twice now. Seriously, learn when you're beaten. It's a useful skill.

 

[createdtoworship]

I'm quote mining variant? I was responding to a quote mine of variant made by you. I hazarded my own guess as to what he was saying, and I was upfront about this being a guess, rather than saying it was definitely what he meant. Ergo, not a strawman.

For the best idea of what variant meant, ask variant - and lest we forget, variant's quote has nothing to do with what I claimed beforehand - as he made it after me, by definition!

Yet another failed attempt at identifying a fallacy from you.

How do we know there IS evidence there? To repeat what you should have grasped several pages if not threads back - we make our decisions based on CURRENT AVAILABLE INFORMATION, and are open to change that decision based ON PRESENTATION OF POSITIVE EVIDENCE. We do not consider things to exist based on nothing more than a lack of positive evidence and idle speculation.

You've failed this argument at least twice now. Seriously, learn when you're beaten. It's a useful skill.

you can make your decisions based on current available information, but then why believe in evolution? I mean there is no current available information for macro evolution (evolution without the genus level of taxonomy). secondly, to make conclusions based in insufficient evidence is inconclusive at best.

 

[Gadarene]

you can make your decisions based on current available information, but then why believe in evolution? I mean there is no current available information for macro evolution (evolution without the genus level of taxonomy).

This is a query about a specific use of the standard, not the standard itself.

I'm not about to hold an opinion without positive evidence, but the actual criticism needs to hold up.

The matter of evolution is entirely unrelated to the matter we're already discussing, however, the existence of god - and proving evolution wrong won't do anything to prove the existence of god.

secondly, to make conclusions based in insufficient evidence is inconclusive at best.

In an absolute sense, sure. But it's what everyone does, all the time, so to do so with deities is hardly inconsistent. If your standard for knowing anything is to examine all existence, it is so impractical you will end up knowing nothing. No-one has complete knowledge of everything, but if you're going to start insisting that I have to have complete knowledge of the universe in order to spare one particular concept you can't bear to see questioned from scrutiny, then no dice.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

no he said that there was little evidence for God and this is why he didn't believe. So how can there be little evidence if he hasn't gone to the other side of the universe? Isn't that where he would have to go to get that conclusion?

This works both ways you know. Somewhere on the other side of the universe may be evidence that Christianity was a prank from some alien race that visited earth.

Prove that isn't true...

 

[Dave Ellis]

yeah but variant did, in this post

http://www.christianforums.com/t7665409/#post60899072

he said "there doesn't appear to be a god"

"There doesn't appear to be a god" is not the same as "there is definitely no God"

He didn't make an assertion, he made an observation based on the fact there is no compelling evidence to support a belief in God.

 

[Dave Ellis]

to give absolute knowledge is to take away your free will to have faith.

This is a weak argument that can be categorically dis-proven. Based on the teachings of your own religion, Satan has absolute knowledge and still chose to reject God.

That would prove having absolute knowledge would not prevent someone making the choice to accept your God or not. It's still free will, it's just informed free will.

 

[Dave Ellis]

you can make your decisions based on current available information, but then why believe in evolution? I mean there is no current available information for macro evolution (evolution without the genus level of taxonomy). secondly, to make conclusions based in insufficient evidence is inconclusive at best.

You're trying to change the topic, so I will keep my response brief.

There is plenty of documented, verified, mutually supporting evidence for Evolution. Just because you're ignorant of the science behind it, doesn't mean it's not available, or factual.

 

[quatona]

to give absolute knowledge is to take away your free will to have faith.

And this would be a problem exactly why, how and for whom?

 

[variant]

okay, fine you are an athiest because there doesn't appear to be a God.

prove it.

how do you know God doesnt' exist on an asteroid at the far corner of the universe?

I don't. Never made the claim so I don't really feel the need to support it.

God dosen't appear to exist. < this is the claim I made. Pay attention. It helps in discussions.

 

[SeraphimsCherub]

1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Now that's what i call amazing! Here is the Apostle Paul 1800 years before the time,warning believers that "false" science would become a great opposition to faith. And Who can deny how true that is,even right "now" this very day.

 

[variant]

to give absolute knowledge is to take away your free will to have faith.

And this would be a problem exactly why, how and for whom?

Yes, I don't really understand this theology.

God apparently wants something from me but can't tell me himself.

Is apparently perfectly willing to allow people to speak for him and say differn't things to make things irritateingly confuseing.

And, to top it all off God hates me a lot for not doing the thing that he wants, and is willing to enact supreme vengance on me for all eternity (according to some theists) because I have not come to the right conclusion despite contradictory unverifiable messages.

Why is my "free will" so important that I can't even be clearly informed?