Technically speaking, everyone is agnostic

[Elioenai26]

Only sometimes is the evidence open to interpretation.

You are wrong.

When discussing evidence and whether or not something is "good" evidence, the term "good" implies that a person is making a judgment or forming an opinion about said evidence. This necessitates interpretation.

Most of the time, an 'interpretation' is simply a bogus conclusion. 1 + 1 = 2, the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and vaccines don't cause autism. Sometimes, the evidence unambiguously supports once conclusion.

Your analogies are a bit mixed here...

1+1 being 2 is what is considered to be a mathematical axiom and there is no interpretation here. There is no "evidence" to be weighed and "examined" and "interpreted" so this example is kind of irrelevant.

The earth being 4.5 billion years old is a completely different matter than 1+1 being 2. In this scenario, there is evidence that exists that needs to be examined, weighed, interpreted to come to an approximate age of the earth. It also must be remembered that the possibility of the discovery of more evidence related to the subject could shed more light on the age of the earth and thus, there is no "right" answer regarding the earth's age in the same manner that there is a "right" answer to mathematical equations.

Some scholars interpret the data or evidence differently and come up with different answers. This actually serves to reinforce my point. While there is a general consensus among scholars regarding the earth's age, interpretation of the data lends us with only an approximation, not an exact number.

You may well believe that a child's smile proves God exists,

I do believe a child's smile is evidence of God, although I would not use that as a reason when presenting my case to an atheist.

but sadly that doesn't constitute valid logic. Sometimes, your interpretation of the evidence is simply wrong. This is what I believe to be the case with your five points: despite your claim, they do not actually demonstrate God exists.

Ok, so you believe my interpretation of the data is wrong. This means that you must have an interpretation that you think is right. What is it?

For example, what do you think is the best explanation for our existence?

I'm a trained scientist, and I'm fully aware of psychological biases - as well as how to counter them. Conclusions can be confidently wrought, and biases and preconceptions can be suppressed in favour of cold logic and reason.

Of course they can be. But once again, I am not concerned with what is possible, but how people actually behave and conduct their lives.

Humans are endowed with the gift of a rational mind.

Endowed by???

We can anticipate and counter out biases - it's not for nothing clinical trials are double blind.

I agree....

We are capable of rational conversation, of talking as adults about our beliefs and ideas. Confident conclusions can be made - the Earth is round, regardless of any biases or interpretations of evidence.

Actually, the earth is not round, but I gather your point....continue....

You're right that I'd rather the god of the Bible to be non-existent, but your subsequent psychoanalysis is naive.

Thank you for being honest here....continue....

An interesting question with an interesting answer. The world is mysterious, yes, but there are answers. Not everything can be dismissed with "Ah, we all have biases, so no conclusion can be wrought".

You did not answer the question though.

Is the universe and all that is within it the product of a Creator who superintended it all, or is it the result of a random collocation of atoms by pure chance from nothing?

And you seem utterly convinced that I am unwilling to follow the evidence, seemingly based only on your observation that I'd prefer a world without the god of the Bible. If you think a person's entire philosophical outlook and methodology can be deduced from that fact alone, you're mistaken.

Since I have very good reason to believe that our thoughts about God are the most important things that we can think and that God's existence is the single most important subject a human can endeavor to take up and learn about, yes, I believe that I can understand your entire philosophical outlook and methodology. Belief or disbelief in God shapes your entire outlook of reality and as such, is a good indicator of how you view reality.

Either there is no God or there is.

I can predict what your views are regarding a number of issues based solely upon how you answer this one question:

"Does God exist?"

No.

Please, tell me what conclusions you draw from this. I think I already know, but I'm not one to put words in peoples' mouths, nor thoughts in their heads.

I gather from this that you share the same thoughts as Aldous Huxley and Thomas Nagel.

Huxley once said:

"I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. … For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political." --Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means (London: Chatto & Windus, 1946), pp. 270, 273

Now, you say you do not want the God of the Bible to exist. But why?

Notice what Huxley says here. I love his transparency, his brutal honesty. Notice how he does not talk about God being a sadistic, phenomenally wicked tyrant who persecutes the innocent as his reason. He says his reasons for not wanting a world with God in it was because it provided him freedom, liberation to do as he wished without the scruples that would accompany a world with God. He wanted to be free from the demands that a God could place upon him. He wanted no one to be able to accuse him of wrong when he engaged in his sexual escapades and political machinations.

Now please understand that I am not insinuating you are sexually deviant or that you want to use politics as a means of gaining control and power over people, those were his personal reasons. Nor am I implying that all atheists are sexually promiscuous and immoral and use their atheistic views to soothe their conscious.

What I am saying is this:

People who say that they do not want God to exist have reasons for saying so. They have reasons for thinking that way. And at the end of the day the reasons, whatever they may be, are rooted and grounded in selfishness. For the one who does not want God, they themselves want to be god, masters of their own fate, controllers of their own world, men and women who answer to no ultimate judge of righteousness, no all-seeing, all-knowing God who will reward them for what they have done, whether evil or good.

So really, I think you actually could care less whether God exists. In fact, you clearly have stated that you do not want for Him to exist. His existence would be bad news for you, as it would have been for Huxley, for Nagel. For Huxley, he would have had a hard time enjoying himself while committing sexually immoral acts if, in the back of his mind, he knew God was watching him the whole time, knowing what he was thinking, what he was feeling.

In the end, some people do not want God around because they know that that would mean that they were always being watched, always being held accountable for what they did, what they thought, how they behaved.

For some, this is a nightmarish scenario and in order to deal with it, they simply try to block it out....

 

[Gadarene]

nm

 

[Sectio Aurea]

I did not ask you if you had a reason for a "want", nor did I ask you if you thought it would be nice to know without a doubt of God's existence.

What I asked you was:

"Do you want there to be a God?"

It is rediculous to ask me If I have a want for something when I do not have a reason for the want.

That is like me asking you if you want fuel for your ck3l^?


My needs are satisfied and I am perfectly content with the majority of my wants.

Elio you will need to explain "how" this god could be of benefit to me before I will desire a "want."

If you intend to use the Christian god as an example, please don't bother.

It is a simple question and a yes or no will suffice. You do not have to elaborate at this present moment on why it is a yes or no, but a simple yes or no will suffice.

Elio you have left a trail of unanswered/unadressed question's. Is this a one way discussion? With your type of baneful reasoning as a juror you would almost certainly convict the wrong suspect.

I did not ask you if you were happy and joyful....

What I asked you was:

"Would you be happy and joyful if presented with compelling evidence for the existence of the God of the Bible?"

Once again, for the present, a simple yes or no will suffice.

I refuse to answer loaded questions with a yes or a know?

A simple "Do you want compelling evidence for the existence of the God of the Bible?" will suffice, to which I would answer...I'm all ears my friend.
I'm generally happy and joyful so the presentation of any compelling evidence for the existence of the God of the Bible wouldn't affect my mood.

"would you be resentful, angry, downcast, humiliated, embarrassed at having been so wrong your entire life because all along you thought you were right and that those silly "Christian religious folks" were so wrong..."

You see, I am not concerned with what you claim you at one time once were, I am concerned with what you say you are at the present.

At the present, you are not a Christian, you are not a believer in God and claim that there is absolutely no evidence of such a God or any god for that matter. What this means is that your "devout Christian life" as you call it, and when you look back on it, was simply a charade or sham. It was not based on anything real according to you. So what you were then is really unimportant. And besides, that is not the question I asked you anyway.

I asked you if you would be angry, resentful etc. etc. if you found out that God was real.

A simple yes or no will suffice

When you question the sincerity of my faith so flippantly how can I respond with a simple yes or no? My belief in god was very real, perhaps more than yours. I know my faith was stronger than many of my peers. However to answer your question. No

Interesting...

You say on one hand that you would be happy if you were convinced God existed, and then you also say that your world would be unaffected by this knowledge.....

Would not happiness produced from the knowledge of God's existence be at least one effect upon you?

No.

Would not having been "released for the atheist position" be at least one effect upon you? I cannot think of any greater effect upon a person than moving from atheism to theism.... and yet you treat it as if it were something that would have no affect on you or the way you view the world.........

How society describes my theistic position is of negligible importance in my life.

Would it not change everything?

It would change nothing other than societies description of my theistic position.

How is it a misconception when the view is taken from atheists themselves?

You act as if I am misrepresenting the views of atheists here, but I can assert very plainly that no atheist here that I have spoken with has ever said they wanted to live in a world in which the God of the Bible actually existed. Most atheists here see this God as a "phenomenally wicked" celestial tyrant (to quote someone here)...no no my friend, I would not say it was a misconception to supply a quote from Thomas Nagel or Aldous Huxley regarding why they do not want a world with God in it and then tell you that if you were brutally honest with yourself, that you would say the same.

Elio, you are obfuscating these atheists positions in a wreckless manner, you consistently fail to distinguish "not wanting a god" from "denying the existence" of said god. I get the impression this is deliberate?
As a budding apologetic of the Christian flavour surely you are aware the problems on your hand. The evidence for a tyrant is overwhelming. The evidence for his existence is not.

What do you expect?

Is it possible that Christians are wrong about Christ.....of course it is possible....

It is also possible that you are a body lying in the matrix right now.

We are not asking about what is possible here, we are asking what is most probable and what is the best explanation for the way the world is as we know it.

The existence of a god is unlikely, the existence the the Christian god even less probable.

Atheists could be wrong....does that necessarily mean their position is "precarious"....? No it does not.



This is actually quite funny....sad....but funny....

An atheist is one who does not believe in the existence of God or gods. So if God did indeed exist, they would be wrong.

How is it that you do not understand this?

Manipulating my definition to suit your distorted reasoning Elio?

This is what I actually said? But I doubt you will acknowledge your error.

An atheist who lacks a belief on the existence of god(s) cant actually be wrong!

You humour and deceptiveness eludes an underlying prejudice my friend. I hope I am wrong.

 

[Elioenai26]

nm

Good evening Gadarene! Hope your evening is going well!

 

[Elioenai26]

It is rediculous to ask me If I have a want for something when I do not have a reason for the want.

I will take that as a no then.

Be that as it may, I have observed several things from your posts...

1. You maintain you were once a most devout Christian, for most of your life in fact were your words.
2. You have no reason to want God to exist.
3. From 2., you therefore state that you do not want God to exist.
4. You are all ears and are ready to be presented with evidence for God's existence.
5. You say that if presented with evidence for God's existence, this would not change your mood because you are generally happy and joyful.
6. You say that if I am going to be present you with evidence for the God of the Bible's existence then do not bother.....
7. You say that an atheist cannot actually be wrong.....
8. You say that you would be happy to find out God actually existed which is a direct contradiction of 6.

Now, if you can, explain to me and the rest of us how any of that nonsense makes any sense whatsoever.....

 

[Sectio Aurea]

I will take that as a no then.

Be that as it may, I have observed several things from your posts...

1. You maintain you were once a most devout Christian.
2. You have no reason to want God to exist.
3. From 2., you therefore state that you do not want God to exist.
4. You are all ears and are ready to be presented with evidence for God's existence.
5. You say that if presented with evidence for God's existence, this would not change your mood because you are generally happy and joyful.
6. You say that if I am going to be present you with evidence for the God of the Bible's existence then do not bother.....
7. You say that an atheist cannot actually be wrong.....

Now, if you can, explain to me and the rest of us how any of that nonsense makes any sense whatsoever.....

You are putting words in my mouth with #3 and I have already explained to you why you are wrong with #7.

Do you have an obstacle in the way of your comprehension?


Which other point's do you not understand? I will explain.

 

[Elioenai26]

You are putting words in my mouth with #3 and I have already explained to you why you are wrong with #7.

Do you have an obstacle in the way of your comprehension?


Which other point's do you not understand? I will explain.

So you do want God to exist then?

With regards to seven, if God actually exists, and a person says God does not exist, are they not wrong?

 

[Sectio Aurea]

So you do want God to exist then?

That is like a salesman asking me if I do not want his kind of product when there could be similar products from other manufacturers that could benefit me that I am presently unaware of. There needs first a reason to be presented to the potential customer before said customer realises a want for the product.

I know at least what I do not want.

With regards to seven, if God actually exists, and a person says God does not exist, are they not wrong?

They would be wrong Elio, I acknowledge this, why do you refuse to acknowledge my point(s)?

 

[Davian]

Thank you for sharing your views with us here. They are noted.



Ok. Once again, your views are noted. Thank you.



I do not really care what he accepts or rejects regarding evolutionary theory. My position allows me to be open to wherever the evidence leads. I can change my views according to the demands of evidence. I am not bound to one view or the other for the Words of God make no demand that I believe or disbelieve in ToE.



Ok. Anything else?

Nope. I'm off to check under my bed for monsters.

 

[Elioenai26]

That is like a salesman asking me if I do not want his kind of product when there could be similar products from other manufacturers that could benefit me that I am presently unaware of. There needs first a reason to be presented to the potential customer before said customer realises a want for the product.

I know at least what I do not want.

To my question there are only three answers:

1. Yes
2. No
3. I do not care

There is no fourth option.

You either want God to exist, you do not want for Him to be real or to exist, or lastly, you do not care if He exists or not.

Which is it?

 

[Sectio Aurea]

To my question there are only three answers:

1. Yes
2. No
3. I do not care

There is no fourth option.

You either want God to exist, you do not want for Him to be real or to exist, or lastly, you do not care if He exists or not.

Which is it?

By specifying a gender "him" I will make the assumption you are defining this deity as the abrahamic one.

So therefore my answer is 2. NO

 

[Elioenai26]

By specifying a gender "him" I will make the assumption you are defining this deity as the abrahamic one.

So therefore my answer is 2. NO

Thank you for your candor and your sincerity.

I am here only to understand and to be of help however I can. I appreciate you telling me how you feel about God.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Continually to presuppose a singular deity is also a fatal error in your reasoning Elio.

Theist vs atheist is not just a 2 way debate.

There are numerous theists competing for the right to have their own deities proven.

Christianity is diminishing in popularity (at least in my nation)

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Thank you for your candor and your sincerity.

I am here only to understand and to be of help however I can. I appreciate you telling me how you feel about God.

CF Netiquette prevents my total honesty in telling you how I feel about your god Elio, it would be very unlikely that you would appreciate me telling you how I feel about your god.

But it would be of help if you accept and acknowledge valid points that are made so we can believe you when you say "I am here only to understand"

 

[Elioenai26]

Continually to presuppose a singular deity is also a fatal error in your reasoning Elio.

Hear O Israel, the LORD our God the LORD is one.

CF Netiquette prevents my total honesty in telling you how I feel about your god Elio, it would be very unlikely that you would appreciate me telling you how I feel about your god.

But it would be of help if you accept and acknowledge valid points that are made so we can believe you when you say "I am here only to understand"

Surely you can send me a private message or even email me. I would love to hear how you really feel. Although I can sense that you feel God has let you down in some way, some dreadful way, maybe even that He abandoned you somewhere in the past, but I assure you, He has never left you.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

Hear O Israel, the LORD our God the LORD is one.

Praise Cthulhu

Surely you can send me a private message or even email me. I would love to hear how you really feel. Although I can sense that you feel God has let you down in some way, some dreadful way, maybe even that He abandoned you somewhere in the past, but I assure you, He has never left you.

Thank you for your kind words my Christian friend.

 

[Gadarene]

Praise Cthulhu

Actually, this comparison strikes me as increasingly apt for the Christian god. At least in terms of how unpleasant such an entity would be, and the delusion and denial his followers engage in.

 

[Elioenai26]

Praise Cthulhu





Thank you for your kind words my Christian friend.

Actually, this comparison strikes me as increasingly apt for the Christian god. At least in terms of how unpleasant such an entity would be, and the delusion and denial his followers engage in.

Both of your signatures are great.

I like them both, especially the quote from the Gulag Archipelago...... so true.....so true

But I see the most evil, not outside of myself in other people, but rather, inside my own heart....

 

[Archaeopteryx]

When I use the word "God", I am referring to the Greatest Conceivable Being i.e the Highest Good or Summum Bonum. Being even more specific I then add to that concept the God as revealed in the Bible i.e. God Almighty, The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God and Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I.e., the God of the Bible.

Nowhere have I ever used to word "God" to refer to any other being. That is why I always capitalize the word so that you can understand what I am talking about.

Read the Bible, read the work of every philosopher who has spoken on the subject for the last thousand years. Do your homework, do your research.

You act as if you do not know what the word "God" means when people on a Christian philosophy forum use the word.

If you do not understand what we mean when we say God, then trying to devise clever arguments and rebuttals against the Christian position is like trying to do advanced Calculus without knowing what addition and subtraction is.

If you are referring to the God who set Adam and Eve up to fail and then blamed them for their inevitable failure, the God who drowned the majority of the world's animal population because his omniscience apparently didn't extend to foreseeing his own so-called "regret", the God who killed the first born of Egypt for Pharaoh's intransigence while also making Pharaoh's heart impermeable to persuasion, the God who commanded the destruction of an entire people, and who punished David's innocent son for David's sin; if that is the God you are referring to, then I would prefer this character remain a fiction.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Atheist philosophers like Sartre and Camus, just to name two, are among those who have thought very seriously about the implications of God's existence and admit that the existence of God makes a tremendous difference for man and is of inconceivable importance.

Belief in the existence of God has enormous implications on your views of life, humanity, morality, and destiny. The question: 'Does God exist?' is arguably the most important question that one will ever ask because as I have already stated numerous times, the answer to this question affects how one views reality, morality, ethics, values, and life’s decisions.

American philosopher and author Mortimer Adler once stated: “More consequences for thought and action follow the affirmation or denial of God than from answering any other basic question.”[1]Mortimer Adler, Great Books of the Western World (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 1952), p. 561.

God, by definition, would be the very locus or source of reality, the very source of our life, the very source of the cosmos, the very source of all that is, the very REASON for life itself and logically it follows that if God exists, that learning about God and communicating with Him would be the single most important and meaningful endeavor a human could ever engage in.

This simply is not contestable.​

Of course it is contestable. If God were an apathetic God who did not trouble himself with human affairs, then investing a great deal of time and energy into communicating with this deity would be a colossal waste.​