It's 2019, not 1519.

[durangodawood]

I'm pretty sure he stated that atheism is not a religion.

oh I know.

I just like the idea of denominations of atheism..... though Id have guessed orthodox rather than non-denom.

 

[Josheb]

I didn't say that I'm a non-theist. I said I'm an Atheist.

Atheism is a response to the Theist claim that god exists. No more, no less. Atheism isn't a belief system. Atheists simply state that the Theist hypothesis that a god exists has failed to meet its burden of proof and, as such, reject the hypothesis.

Note that Atheists do not state that god does not exist. Apologies for the double negatives. Atheists merely reject the god hypothesis on the basis that the claim has not met its burden of proof.

That's what atheists tell themselves.

The prefix a- simply means "without" or "not." Non-theism is the same as a-theism. A distinction without a difference was argued.

The fact that you just explained your atheism contradicts the content of that explanation. In other word, the method betrayed the content.

Furthermore, you've come into a Christian discussion forum where many of us have been where you're at while you haven't been where we're at, and you're telling us what's what. Do you see how pinheaded that reads? Have some respect and we'll get along fine but unnecessary and postured hair-splitting will be noted as such and then ignored.

If the god hypothesis does meet its burden of proof, then it would be dishonest and illogical not to amend our stance.

What "burden" of proof? Yours? Science's? Science isn't capable of determining God's existence.

You are avoiding the question.

Why is a lack of scientific research relevant?

 

[BNR32FAN]

You may believe what you will but this does not constitute proof of anything.



Complexity and 'apparent' intelligent design is no proof of god - or anything else for that matter. Evolution is accepted by most scientists as the most likely explanation of the diversity of life on Earth. Besides, I used the term "'apparent' intelligent design" because the human body could and should have been better designed had there been an intelligent designer. Let's take DNA. Who the hell designs a molecule that, when it divides and multiples, could give rise to a cancerous mutation? Who the hell designs a human being with an orifice down which one pours water and food and which is also used to breath through such that choking is a real possibility. And now, to be crude, for which I sincerely apologise, which intelligent creator put a female's pleasure beach right next to the sewage works? This intelligent design business doesn't seem intelligent to me. Someone with even a modicum of intelligence would never design a human this way. I could go on but the suggestion of intelligent design is ludicrous.

If you think that god is more likely than evolution, the please provide proof.

You make claims about the improbability of life. Improbability does not mean it is impossible. Further, because life without god is improbable, god does not make it more probable because the improbability of god is ignored.

How improbable is god?

In the OP you claimed there is a lack of evidence and want to know how and why people become theists. Evidence and proof are two different things my friend and I believe I have met the requirements of the OP by giving a very common reason why people become theists. Hence the winner rating I’ve already gotten just a few minutes after posting. So evidently someone does agree that this is one reason people become theists.

This therefore begs the question: How and why do people become Theists and, given the lack of evidence and recent scientific research, remain so.

 

[Halbhh]

Then how did you conclude that there is a god?

I read the teaching of the one who is widely considered the one who would know of God best, the one Jesus, as generally thought by people from around the world to be the superior, accurate guide.

So, by following the directions from the best guide, who knows better, more accurately.

That way I avoided the mistakes people make (like from listening to people speculating about this or that), in favor if the actual instructions.

 

[lostinthought]

Ok, so what would it take to convince you to believe in God? And I apologize if somebody already covered this, I'm too busy/lazy to read the whole thread.
Could it be something as simple as an amazing coincidence? What if God showed you something in a way only you would understand?
If he spoke to you audibly would that do it?
Maybe it's not just a book that prompts us to believe. Maybe it's a million little miracles.

Good question, well phrased.

Amazing coincidence? No. Even amazing coincidences have a > 0 probability of happening.

If he spoke to me audibly? No. This could be the result of some form of illness.

A million little miracles? No. However unlikely a miracle is, the probability is > 0.

If god showed me something in a way that only I would understand? No. I could easily fool myself.

So what proof would convince me?

1. The scientific community would have to reach a consensus, based on the scientific methodology, that whatever information is submitted, is acceptable as proof.

2. If god is the all powerful being that people claim, then he would know what proof is required.

 

[Strathos]

Contrary to scientific conclusions special creation is the only logical origin of the material universe, most notably life. The TOE may be a carefully constructed (strong) delusion, by God, to keep unbelievers in the dark, for the time being.

ToE =/= origin of life.

One becomes a theist because he is persuaded by logic and the evidence that there must be a God. You aren't so persuaded.

That's it.

And if I may suggest...the reason Theists may tend to shy away from your Atheist forums is because Atheists are united in denigrating Theists, but there is little for them to debate among themselves. "Don't believe in God" pretty much exhausts the discussion for Atheists whereas there are a myriad of events and concepts that Theists deal in.

The most infighting among atheists these days is between the 'social justice atheists' (those who vote for Hillary or Bernie) and the 'libertarian/anti-SJW atheists' (those who vote for Trump).

 

[durangodawood]

God plays by his own rules.

2 Thessalonians 2:11
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

Ah, your edit^^^ came after I replied...

in context that verse is super baffling and doesnt seem to accord with every other description of God. Furthermore, its plain mean.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

2. If god is the all powerful being that people claim, then he would know what proof is required.

He already said.

No other sign will be given to those seeking proof, than one that was given.

 

[lostinthought]

I read the teaching of the one who is widely considered the one who would know of God best, the one Jesus, as generally thought by people from around the world to be the superior, accurate guide.

So, by following the directions from the best guide, who knows better, more accurately.

That way I avoided the mistakes people make (like from listening to people speculating about this or that), in favor if the actual instructions.

How do you know jesus actually had an Earthy existence?

Richard Carrier, and others, have researched the historicity of jesus and concluded that he never actually had an Earthly existence.

 

[lostinthought]

He already said.

No other sign will be given to those seeking proof, than one that was given.

And you know what he said, how exactly?

 

[BNR32FAN]

You may believe what you will but this does not constitute proof of anything.



Complexity and 'apparent' intelligent design is no proof of god - or anything else for that matter. Evolution is accepted by most scientists as the most likely explanation of the diversity of life on Earth. Besides, I used the term "'apparent' intelligent design" because the human body could and should have been better designed had there been an intelligent designer. Let's take DNA. Who the hell designs a molecule that, when it divides and multiples, could give rise to a cancerous mutation? Who the hell designs a human being with an orifice down which one pours water and food and which is also used to breath through such that choking is a real possibility. And now, to be crude, for which I sincerely apologise, which intelligent creator put a female's pleasure beach right next to the sewage works? This intelligent design business doesn't seem intelligent to me. Someone with even a modicum of intelligence would never design a human this way. I could go on but the suggestion of intelligent design is ludicrous.

If you think that god is more likely than evolution, the please provide proof.

You make claims about the improbability of life. Improbability does not mean it is impossible. Further, because life without god is improbable, god does not make it more probable because the improbability of god is ignored.

How improbable is god?

Have you truly examined ALL that is required for life to exist on this planet? Have you calculated the odds of all these necessities coming together by chance? Until you’ve accomplished that you can’t say that the existence of God is more improbable. You want to get logical? Ok let’s talk about man’s infinitesimal knowledge of what is truly out there throughout the galaxies and calculate the chances that man is actually correct on everything he thinks he knows about the universe. Man today saying there is no God could be just as ignorant as a man in the 10th century saying that man cannot fly. In the 10th century no man had flown and there was no proof that man could ever fly yet today men fly everyday. So in answer to your question what is the probability of God’s existence, that’s easy it’s 50/50. Either He does or He doesn’t. Neither of us can prove anything in favor of His existence or against it.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Proverbs 14:31 ESV / 2 helpful votes

Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker, but he who is generous to the needy honors him.

Proverbs 3:5-6 ESV / 2 helpful votes
Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.

Psalm 86:5 ESV / 2 helpful votes
For you, O Lord, are good and forgiving, abounding in steadfast love to all who call upon you.

What Does the Bible Say About Those Who Chose Not To Hear?
At the link >>
100 Bible Verses about Those Who Chose Not To Hear

 

[durangodawood]

....Man today saying there is no God could be just as ignorant as a man in the 10th century saying that man cannot fly. In the 10th century no man had flown and there was no proof that man could ever fly yet today men fly everyday. So in answer to your question what is the probability of God’s existence, that’s easy it’s 50/50. Either He does or He doesn’t. Neither of us can prove anything in favor of His existence or against it.

Whoa wait.... you cannot reason from human ignorance to a specific probability of a fact of reality. Can you?

No. Thats not sensible at all.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I'll have to ask forgiveness then. My impression of "A (without) theism (belief in God)" is of a belief that there is no God.

Not quite, look at your own etymology more closely.

Atheism describes those without a belief in any gods.

This is different from the assertion that one believes no gods exist. This stronger position is often described as positive atheism or strong atheism.

Regardless, whether you don't believe in any gods, or you believe no gods exist, neither position requires one to be against gods.

While I've seen a few Christians here who bear some animosity against Santa, most are content to simply not believe in his existence.

 

[Josheb]

The scientific method is single most reliable group of methods which most reliably explains the universe that we occupy.

You cannot prove that claim scientifically. Neither is it wholly correct. Centuries ago science told us illness was due to imbalances in the four humors. That turned out to be completely incorrect. "Science" told us the earth was the center of the universe. That, too, turned out to be incorrect. Spontaneous generation? Oops! Time and space fixed? nope. It takes just as much faith to believe in science as it does God, maybe more so.

Besides, I asked how it was relevant. All you've done is doge the question. Why is the purported single most reliable group of methods relevant?

And you can support this claim how?

Nice attempt at shifting the burden. The answer to your question is: Reason.

God exists external to that which He creates. Science studies the physical realm in specifically limited ways and scientists using the scientific method will not consider other means. Furthermore, a god whose existence could be proven by human measurements would not be a God. S/he/it might be a superior lifeform, but not a God. We are the earthly amoeba unaware of the cosmic.

Here's a simple analogy: A telescope is used to observe very distant phenomena. Microscopes are used to examine very small objects and events. A telescope is the wrong tool to observe small things and a microscope is the wrong tool for observing distant objects and events. Science is the wrong tool for the job and it is a completely unscientific belief to believe otherwise.

Until scientists are prepared to acknowledge something might exist outside the universe they are not even trying to evidence God's existence.

I will and, for your part, please read some books on Logic and Proof.

Taught it. You're the one arguing fallaciously unawares.

Again I will remind you that you've entered a Christian discussion forum where many here have been where you're at when you aren't anywhere close to where we're at and you have the temerity to tell us what's what. Have some respect.

This op asserts a premise (and incorrect one that is justifies solely by ideology, not science), and asks a single question, to which no answer will satisfy you, because you've already decided the matter and want justifications you won't receive no matter how reasonable they may be.

[/quote]lostinthought]If one begins with the premise: I don't know whether a god exists or not and one then follows the evidence in a logical and honest manner, one does not end up at the conclusion: There is a god.

This therefore begs the question: How and why do people become Theists and, given the lack of evidence and recent scientific research, remain so.[/quote]​

The fact is there are reasons for believing in God science has yet to address, such as the existence of inherent information, not assigned or attributed information in the universe. Information, not data, implies intelligence. Evidence, not proof.

How and why people become theists, or Christians, is diverse. I had a conversion experience much like Saul of Tarsus' on the road to Damascus and I'd gladly tell you all about it but you're not interested if all you can deem appropriate as a means of proving God's existence is science.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Richard Carrier, and others, have researched the historicity of jesus and concluded that he never actually had an Earthly existence.

This isn't even a fallacious argument from authority, since Carrier has very little authority. Although he has written popular books on the topic, he has not really addressed his arguments to the scholarly journals. At best, one could say that a fictional Jesus is an extreme minority view among historians. But to cherry pick your expert is hardly a rebuttal to Halbhh.

 

[Basil the Great]

So... whats an example of this evidence?

Science believes that the Universe is billions of years old and has so many stars and planets that we cannot begin to estimate the numbers. We also cannot fathom how large the Universe is or if if even there is a limit to it. All of this, plus the fact that the Universe has not somehow destroyed itself for countless generations is indirect evidence of a Supreme Intelligence behind all of it.

 

[renniks]

. If god is the all powerful being that people claim, then he would know what proof is required.

If God is all knowing, then he knows that some people will never be convinced by the kind of " proof" you claim to seek. God requires faith, because if we have proof that can't be explained away, then belief would have no meaning.
Most people find plenty of evidence for a God's existence. If you're going to explain away even an audible voice, then you don't even know if you exist. Perhaps everything you think you see, and feel and taste and touch is only an illusion.

 

[lostinthought]

I don't find it odd at all. Jesus' audience was the Jews in Judea not gentiles anywhere. It was at least 14 yrs. after his death that Paul went to the gentiles. Yes, there were a few Roman converts, and that's assuming there were more than Cornelius after Pentecost. But Cornelius was already a believer in the Jewish God.
However, there is a Roman historian who wrote about Jesus and his Christian followers, named Tacitus.
Tacitus on Christ - Wikipedia

Oh dear (Again). Tacitus wrote about christians in 116 AD. That's 83 years after christ was supposedly crucified. Hardly an eye witness account. He tells of christians who followed their master who paid the 'ultimate price'. AFAIK he doesn't actually tell us that he was crucified. Further, he doesn't tell us from whence the information came because he didn't actually witness jesus doing anything. At the very best, this is tertiary evidence. There is no doubt that christians existed at the time of Tacitus. I do not dispute that. What I have a problem with is that because Tacitus claims that he was told something about jesus by someone unknown to us, and then tells us, does not constitute proof of jesus. All it claims is that Tacitus makes claims about jesus.

 

[lostinthought]

Science believes that the Universe is billions of years old and has so many stars and planets that we cannot begin to estimate the numbers. We also cannot fathom how large the Universe is or if if even there is a limit to it. All of this, plus the fact that the Universe has not somehow destroyed itself for countless generations is indirect evidence of a Supreme Intelligence behind all of it.

Science can estimate how old the universe is and estimate how many stars and planets there are. Please go read some science.

 

[durangodawood]

Science believes that the Universe is billions of years old and has so many stars and planets that we cannot begin to estimate the numbers. We also cannot fathom how large the Universe is or if if even there is a limit to it. All of this, plus the fact that the Universe has not somehow destroyed itself for countless generations is indirect evidence of a Supreme Intelligence behind all of it.

I dont see how the very-bigness of the universe is a reason for a creator. Would a creator be less necessary if the universe was 0.001 as big as we think it is? I just dont see how size indicates one way or the other re a creator. What is the connection?