Do atheists have any evidence to support their beliefs?

[Ken-1122]

Atheism seems to lack evidence more than Christianity does. Christians have the historical gospel to point towards their truths. What do atheists have other than a blind faith that they are right? Is such blind faith morally similar to Christianity but with less evidence in support of it?

To NOT believe in God is a result of lack of belief; not belief.

 

[FredVB]

Before Christianity, before Darwin, before the scientific method there have always been sceptics (Atheists).

"Do not pass by my epitaph, traveler.
But having stopped, listen and learn, then go your way.
There is no boat in Hades, no ferryman Charon,
No caretaker Aiakos, no dog Cerberus.
All we who are dead below
Have become bones and ashes, but nothing else.
I have spoken to you honestly, go on, traveler,
Lest even while dead I seem talkative to you."
Ancient Roman tombstone

The reason is that you argument is intellectually wanting, let me see if I can break it down (other people do this better than me so forgive me).

You basically state that the world is complex and must have a creator - lets just call him a universe creating factory.
You state this because of the golden rule "no complex thing could have come about naturally". Therefore their must be a Universe creating factory.

But here is the think that bothered pre-Christian Atheists (and more modern atheists), A Universe creating factory is much more complex than a Universe and going back to the golden rule. Something must therefore have created the factory and so on and so on.

We exist so something must have started it - and with no other knowledge at all it is simple to state that "The universe has always existed" as a universe is infinitely less complex than a universe creating factory (in your case a Christian God).

I would go as far as saying that almost any explanation you can come up with is much more likely than a all powerful, all knowing, al seeing being. As how is it possible that you state the most complicated thing imaginable could pop into existence (or always has been in existence) and yet all those reasons imagined are not possible?

My points in what I posted were then not really all looked at and understood, as they are not intellectually wanting as you concluded. I will deal with your points below. I still should say that I try hard to communicate the reasoning that yet is being entirely missed by atheists that it is for, that I almost can't help thinking it is maybe being blocked. I still hope the logic will be seen.

Here is one thing showing the reasoning in what I post is really being missed. I put effort in showing the reasoning that not complexity, but random complexity doesn't explain intelligence among us for knowing what is really true. Random complexity would show higher entropy. If intelligence is really from complexity it must be highly ordered, and it is not adequately explained from natural processes that there is intelligence among us for knowing what is really true.

I communicate through what is posted about necessary existence, and what that means is apparently missed, whether intentionally or not I don't know at all.

If what necessary existence means is really understood and calling this a universe creating factory seems desirable, I won't argue against that. But when it is said the universe creating factory was necessarily created, it shows the meaning of necessary existence is missed or is being neglected. Maybe it would be better to go back to speaking of necessary existence with using that term. What do you say explains why there isn't just total nonexistence, and there is everything there is instead? It is not just that it would be said, we don't know enough to answer that now. Without necessary existence, you and anybody else won't ever have the knowledge to answer that, forever. There wouldn't be anything at all, except that there is necessary existence, and there can't be no necessary existence, and there always was necessary existence. Existence did not pop into existence, and existence was not created. This universe though did start, with a beginning, and it was not always around. It is not about likelihood of there being necessary existence, it is the only possibility. This is without speaking about that being all powerful, all knowing, all seeing, though I can speak for those qualities, it is speaking to what should be seen right away, if this isn't being blocked.

The universe is not this necessary existence, it wasn't always here, for one thing.

Unsupported aserrtions are not a good way to start.
I see it often. "God did it."

I see it often asserted, the multiverse of many many universes explains it. I am sure you think that is so well supported that you could show. You know, to say that there is no need of God to explain it.

Really? because in this very post you have just confirmed exactly what I though you were stating.
You are stating that you find yourself in your current position in the universe questioning the odds of it happening due to the complexity (or "random complexity") and concluding there must be a God.

Let us put this in different terms I sit in front of 8 six sided dice and marvel at the fact that in front of is a roll that the odds of getting in this particular order is 1/1.6million. 1,5,6,1,2,5,5 and 4 -> No joke the odds of getting that roll is over 1 in 1.6million and yet I have it!

You have asserted that it is all "Random complexity" but as we have found with Evolution by natural selection what first appeared as random is anything but. Who knows with a little more knowledge of how the universe was created it may not be random at all.

But even if it turns out you are correct and it is completely random this is still much more likely to occur than a God figure - as stated before such a being would be infinitely less likely to occur.

You are committing a fallacy begging the questions - Obviously if you start out with the assumption only God could have produced this, then you will come to the conclusion God exists.
Issue is that you must you need to prove that assumption.

As an Atheist I don't dismiss the idea that it is possible a God could have done it all, but currently it seems like the least likely of all explanations - infact I find it harder to even make up an explanation that is less likely than an all knowing, all seeing, all powerful being existing (and anything less than this is not God).

You miss what is actually being said. Sure we don't need much explanation for unordered complexity of things, we can have that with increasing entropy. But we need the explanation for the most ordered complexity.

How can you determine "how likely God would occur"? God is there, or not there (for you to show reason to say), but independently. If God is there, God is the necessary being, and that does not involve likelihood.

Of course, the problem here is that you can just declare that ANYTHING is a necessary being and you don't need to provide any evidence.

So before you continue, please show me that God fits the criteria of being a necessary being.

The necessary existence which we can recognize there is by logic is not described with the characteristics of the universe, but we see evidence of design from the parameters that there would have to be for the universe to exist with any sentient beings as us from the big bang, if it all came from that. But necessary existence would have no beginning, and would be unlimited, and have capacity to design with intelligence if this necessary existence explains this universe coming into being, the universe and what we find in it do not have those characteristics. And if we are very well provided for being here, and care for any others with being in this circumstance, that is strong evidence that there is such care from the necessary existence, which explains that, and such care would be unlimited from such unlimited being. Talking about God fits that better than anything I see or would see from others with different ideas. They are just sure that there is no God to be the explanation.

To NOT believe in God is a result of lack of belief; not belief.

It seems that would be the case for any of you being agnostic, but atheism says more than just lack of belief.

 

[AirPo]

I see it often asserted, the multiverse of many many universes explains it.

How often as compared to "God did it?"

I am sure you think that is so well supported that you could show.

I hope you're not a betting man, because you'd lose that one.

You know, to say that there is no need of God to explain it.

Since there is no need to explain it at all, there's no need of God to explain it.

 

[Ken-1122]

It seems that would be the case for any of you being agnostic,

No; agnostic is about what you know, not believe.

but atheism says more than just lack of belief.

Really? So what else does atheism say?

 

[Allandavid]

It seems that would be the case for any of you being agnostic, but atheism says more than just lack of belief.

No...that’s exactly what it is...no more.

 

[Kylie]

The necessary existence which we can recognize there is by logic is not described with the characteristics of the universe, but we see evidence of design from the parameters that there would have to be for the universe to exist with any sentient beings as us from the big bang, if it all came from that. But necessary existence would have no beginning, and would be unlimited, and have capacity to design with intelligence if this necessary existence explains this universe coming into being, the universe and what we find in it do not have those characteristics. And if we are very well provided for being here, and care for any others with being in this circumstance, that is strong evidence that there is such care from the necessary existence, which explains that, and such care would be unlimited from such unlimited being. Talking about God fits that better than anything I see or would see from others with different ideas. They are just sure that there is no God to be the explanation.

In other words, assume that the universe needs a creator, therefore the universe had a creator, and also that creator happens to be your God.

Even if your logic that the universe needed a creator was sound (it isn't), you still have not shown that this creator is the Christian God. It could be Zeus for all you know.

 

[Holoman]

41 pages can be summed up in one answer. No.
Atheists just try to fall back on "oh we dont need a reason, atheism is the default." It's a poor argument.

The truth is, there is scant evidence that atheism is true. There are some arguments, such as the Problem of Evil, which are the best atheists have, but in my opinion these have been refuted adequately by Christian philosophers.

 

[Allandavid]

41 pages can be summed up in one answer. No.
Atheists just try to fall back on "oh we dont need a reason, atheism is the default." It's a poor argument.

The truth is, there is scant evidence that atheism is true. There are some arguments, such as the Problem of Evil, which are the best atheists have, but in my opinion these have been refuted adequately by Christian philosophers.

Pardon...?? “That atheism is true”...? What does that mean? As an atheist, I am not making a claim which I have to prove as being “true”...

I am simply rejecting the claim that you make...

 

[Holoman]

Pardon...?? “That atheism is true”...? What does that mean? As an atheist, I am not making a claim which I have to prove as being “true”...

I am simply rejecting the claim that you make...

You know what it means. The belief there is no God. Where is the evidence there is no God?

Plenty of atheist philosophers have had the balls to tackle this question yet so many more hide from it. What is really going on is that people are content living their lives as they see fit and don't really want or care that God exists.

 

[Allandavid]

You know what it means. The belief there is no God. Where is the evidence there is no God?

Plenty of atheist philosophers have had the balls to tackle this question yet so many more hide from it. What is really going on is that people are content living their lives as they see fit and don't really want or care that God exists.

Common error. As an atheist, l am absent a belief in a god. That is a different position from what you have stated; ie, that there are no gods...

Watch...it’s quite simple. Muslims claim that the god Allah exists and that Mohammed is his prophet. I presume that you are a Christian and that you reject that claim. I join you in that rejection. However, unlike you, I do not then proceed and make an affirmative claim of my own...

 

[Holoman]

Common error. As an atheist, l am absent a belief in a god. That is a different position from what you have stated; ie, that there are no gods...

Watch...it’s quite simple. Muslims claim that the god Allah exists and that Mohammed is his prophet. I presume that you are a Christian and that you reject that claim. I join you in that rejection. However, unlike you, I do not then proceed and make an affirmative claim of my own...

I have reasons for rejecting Islam, positive reasons that are not simple refutations of Islam itself i.e. the evidence for Christianity and its incompatibility with Islam.

Here, I will give you a cookie cutter argument for atheism

P1 - If God exsited we would expect to see X
P2 - We do not see X
Therefore, God does not exist.

I understand why atheists are so reluctant to provide an argument for atheism, because the arguments are scant and refutable.

 

[Non sequitur]

You know what it means. The belief there is no God. Where is the evidence there is no God?

Plenty of atheist philosophers have had the balls to tackle this question yet so many more hide from it. What is really going on is that people are content living their lives as they see fit and don't really want or care that God exists.

What's really going on is you can't know what people really think and are projecting.

 

[Belk]

I have reasons for rejecting Islam, positive reasons that are not simple refutations of Islam itself i.e. the evidence for Christianity and its incompatibility with Islam.

Here, I will give you a cookie cutter argument for atheism

P1 - If God exsited we would expect to see X
P2 - We do not see X
Therefore, God does not exist.

I understand why atheists are so reluctant to provide an argument for atheism, because the arguments are scant and refutable.

It appears that you do not understand why we don't provide arguments for atheism. Even after it has been explained to you in this thread that atheism is not a positive claim.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Atheists just try to fall back on "oh we dont need a reason, atheism is the default." It's a poor argument.

It is Logic 101. It's not a poor argument by any reasonable standard.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Ken-1122]

You know what it means. The belief there is no God. Where is the evidence there is no God?

Plenty of atheist philosophers have had the balls to tackle this question yet so many more hide from it. What is really going on is that people are content living their lives as they see fit and don't really want or care that God exists.

You seem to assume “God” equals YOUR concept of God. As an atheist, I recognize what many choose to call God does exist, but I don’t call it God, therefore I am atheist. There are those who worship nature, the Sun, even people as human as you and I. But because I don’t call them God, I am atheist towards those religions. In theory an atheist could believe Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, and others may exist, but if the Atheist simply sees them as advanced evolved beings from another planet that people on Earth chooses to call God, he would still be atheist towards those religions. So its not a matter of not being able to see “X” it’s a little more complicated than that.

 

[Kylie]

41 pages can be summed up in one answer. No.
Atheists just try to fall back on "oh we dont need a reason, atheism is the default." It's a poor argument.

The truth is, there is scant evidence that atheism is true. There are some arguments, such as the Problem of Evil, which are the best atheists have, but in my opinion these have been refuted adequately by Christian philosophers.

First of all, atheism is the default argument. Unless you think a baby given no religious instruction whatsoever will grow up to believe in God.

Secondly, I'd love to see any response to the problem of evil that comes close to being "adequate."

 

[Kylie]

I have reasons for rejecting Islam, positive reasons that are not simple refutations of Islam itself i.e. the evidence for Christianity and its incompatibility with Islam.

Here, I will give you a cookie cutter argument for atheism

P1 - If God exsited we would expect to see X
P2 - We do not see X
Therefore, God does not exist.

I understand why atheists are so reluctant to provide an argument for atheism, because the arguments are scant and refutable.

Exactly. We are pointing out a LACK of evidence FOR God. That's different to pointing evidence for NO God.

 

[Holoman]

First of all, atheism is the default argument. Unless you think a baby given no religious instruction whatsoever will grow up to believe in God.

Secondly, I'd love to see any response to the problem of evil that comes close to being "adequate."

Firstly, of course people can grow to believe in God without instruction, otherwise religion would never have arisen. We are all born agnostic. We don't know whether God exists or not.

Secondly, this is one of the best defense Ive seen if you're genuinely interested
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/wri.../existence-nature-of-god/the-problem-of-evil/

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Kylie;

Exactly. We are pointing out a LACK of evidence FOR God. That's different to pointing evidence for NO God.

Lack of evidence?

Some have argues that a "spiritual" or "religious" aspect to the universe is axiomatic, or the default position, and that atheists live in psychological denial.

As a Mulsim I use indicative signs also. Like, secularists on a binge drink having a great time, in some respect falsifies secularism.

Teen Muslims, not out to cause trouble, or make it to gangsta status etc, can serve as evidence for Islam.

After all if God transcends the universe, then such signs are all we can have.

"Travel through the earth and see what was the end of those who rejected Truth." Koran.

See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayah

 

[Allandavid]

I have reasons for rejecting Islam, positive reasons that are not simple refutations of Islam itself i.e. the evidence for Christianity and its incompatibility with Islam.

Here, I will give you a cookie cutter argument for atheism

P1 - If God exsited we would expect to see X
P2 - We do not see X
Therefore, God does not exist.

I understand why atheists are so reluctant to provide an argument for atheism, because the arguments are scant and refutable.

Oh, you were so close too....

P1 - if any claim of a god existing were true, the claimant should be able to provide evidence.
P2 - no claimant has produced any evidence.
Therefore, belief in the claim is withheld...