Objective morality, Evidence for God's existence

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,390
11,318
✟433,509.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I already answered the other part of your question. Atheism claims it's reasonable to lack belief in God, but in reality atheists either believe God does not exist or believe God is possible. There's no lacking belief in the concept of God, you either accept it as false or you accept it as true or at least possible.

I can see how it might look this way to a theist...but you really need to try to see it from the atheists' point of view. Imagine this...

Someone is telling you that something exists...but they can't really tell you what that thing is. Instead of telling you what it is, they give you these vague and confusing descriptions of it. Some are useful (god is the creator of the universe) some aren't clearly defined concepts (god is timeless/omnipresent/omnibenevolent) some are flat out nonsensical and contradictory (god is love/truth/knowledge). After this person is done describing this incomparable entity to you...they ask you if you believe it exists.

At that point, it's entirely appropriate to tell them that you lack a belief in their god. After all, you can't really make a decision on the existence of something that you don't even fully understand (something that the theist will often admit of himself). If the theist were giving you a more complete picture of what his god actually is...perhaps you could give him an answer regarding its existence. Until such a time though, it's more accurate to say that you "lack a belief in god".

Hope that helps.
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,301
✟175,292.00
Faith
Seeker
I'm not redefining God, I'm defining Him in a more clear way.
Yes, you are redefining the term as you walk along. I have seen several definitions of "God" from you before, and none of them mentioned this, whereas this new definition forgets about a lot of elements that were included in your previous definitions.

I already answered the other part of your question. Atheism claims it's reasonable to lack belief in God,
Ok.(I think you are misrepresenting atheism again, but let´s work from the assumption that this is the tenet of atheism) So, in case there´s no God it seems the claim "it´s reasonable to lack belief in God" is as correct as it gets.

You seem to be on the rational side of atheism by believing God is possible. No?
Why sure. With all those various and permanently changing god concepts it seems that everyone can call "God" whatever they see fit. So I can´t exclude the possibility that someone happens to call "God" something that actually exists. E.g. nobody could keep me from calling my computer keyboard "God" and becoming a theist.
 
Upvote 0

Hieronymus

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2016
8,427
2,998
52
the Hague NL
✟69,862.00
Country
Netherlands
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
So you're aware of the term...are you aware it's not the same thing as evolution?
Are you not aware "evolution" is not just the 'theory of evolution' concerning the origin of species?
Evolution means something evolves.
Like 'the singularity' evolving into the universe, like our assumed spirit evolving into higher being, etcetera...
Why would i ask them about DNA?
Because it's code, obviously.
What does random data corruption do to code?
You made the claim. Since you can't back it up, I'll just assume it's false.
It's not a "claim", it is a fact that there are geneticists who do not subscribe to evolution.
Who cares what their names are?
Your assumption is just an excuse to deny it.
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,301
✟175,292.00
Faith
Seeker
It's not a "claim", it is a fact that there are geneticists who do not subscribe to evolution.
Regarding this discussion, so far it´s just your claim. If you want it to be considered a fact, substantiate it.
Who cares what their names are?
Well, we do care what their scientific education, their credentials are. We do care if they can be considered authorities in the field of genetics (or e.g. are just some self-appointed sunday school "geneticists").
If you don´t care about these things, that may already be the explanation for your reluctance to share your knowledge.

Anyway, it´s always funny to watch how - when a philosophical argument for God´s existence is disassembled - we get the totally irrelevant "...but...evolution..." thing.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,390
11,318
✟433,509.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Are you not aware "evolution" is not just the 'theory of evolution' concerning the origin of species?

I don't know what point you're trying to make here. Do you have any evidence for god that you'd like to present?

Evolution means something evolves.
Like 'the singularity' evolving into the universe, like our assumed spirit evolving into higher being, etcetera...Because it's code, obviously.

You've already established your lack of knowledge concerning evolution. You don't need to keep doing it.

What does random data corruption do to code?
It's not a "claim", it is a fact that there are geneticists who do not subscribe to evolution.
Who cares what their names are?
Your assumption is just an excuse to deny it.

If it's a fact, let's hear who they are. Frankly, it sounds made-up. If you want people to take your claims seriously...you'll need to back them up with facts. You make it sound like there's this whole group of geneticists who don't believe in evolution and are being kept quiet. I don't need the whole list...just give me three.
 
Upvote 0

quatona

"God"? What do you mean??
May 15, 2005
37,512
4,301
✟175,292.00
Faith
Seeker
I don't have a list.
So what?
It indicates that you don´t check your facts.


Is it about lists of people or is it about the subject?
To me it's about the subject, to you it's about the loudest peer group apparently....
You were the one to bring them up as though it were relevant for the subject.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hieronymus

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2016
8,427
2,998
52
the Hague NL
✟69,862.00
Country
Netherlands
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Despite your aspirations to be a psychic, don´t quit your dayjob.
I didn´t dismiss it. Au contraire, I did your homework for you.
No, you only show youŕe not able to understand simple concepts.
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟163,501.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, you are redefining the term as you walk along. I have seen several definitions of "God" from you before, and none of them mentioned this, whereas this new definition forgets about a lot of elements that were included in your previous definitions.

I'm working off the most reasonable definition of God, which is that He is eternally alive and able to speak creation and life into existence because He's God and we're His creation.

Ok.(I think you are misrepresenting atheism again, but let´s work from the assumption that this is the tenet of atheism)

You need to have serious discussion with Ana the Ist then because this is exactly how he represents his atheism(he even calls it "my atheism") and it's his type of atheism that causes so much confusion between theists and atheists.

So, in case there´s no God it seems the claim "it´s reasonable to lack belief in God" is as correct as it gets.

IF it becomes a fact that an eternal God does not exist then lacking belief in God is unreasonable, it would instead be reasonable to believe an eternal God does not exist, but I've already stated how even this is impossible because IF evidence arose that disproved an eternal source of all knowledge(God), then wherever that evidence came from would become the eternal source of all knowledge(God).

As I've said before, it's impossible to lack belief in a concept that has been made known to you. You either believe it's false or you believe its true or at least possible.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,390
11,318
✟433,509.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I don't have a list.
So what?
You can find them with Google i suppose.

Is it about lists of people or is it about the subject?
To me it's about the subject, to you it's about the loudest peer group apparently....

It's about the subject...to be certain. However, that's the only clear claim you've made...so what else am I supposed to consider?
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,390
11,318
✟433,509.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
No, someone claimed all geneticists are evolutionists, which is just silly.

We found one retired plant breeder...are we counting those no longer in the field? I'll admit, if we start to include dead geneticists...I'll retract my statement.
 
Upvote 0

Ana the Ist

Aggressively serene!
Feb 21, 2012
37,390
11,318
✟433,509.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
You need to have serious discussion with Ana the Ist then because this is exactly how he represents his atheism(he even calls it "my atheism") and it's his type of atheism that causes so much confusion between theists and atheists..

I still stand by my statement that atheism is a reasonable position to hold.



it becomes a fact that an eternal God does not exist then lacking belief in God is unreasonable, it would instead be reasonable to believe an eternal God does not exist, but I've already stated how even this is impossible because IF evidence arose that disproved an eternal source of all knowledge(God), then wherever that evidence came from would become the eternal source of all knowledge(God)..

This is so much nonsense it's almost dizzying lol. Why would it be unreasonable to lack a belief in god if god doesn't exist?

That makes no sense at all.

So, hypothetically, if someone managed to disprove the existence of a god with mathematics...you'd declare mathematics as your new god?

Again...this is pure nonsense.

.
As I've said before, it's impossible to lack belief in a concept that has been made known to you. You either believe it's false or you believe its true or at least possible.

Your understanding of what it's possible to believe or lack a belief in is severely broken.
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟163,501.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I still stand by my statement that atheism is a reasonable position to hold.





This is so much nonsense it's almost dizzying lol. Why would it be unreasonable to lack a belief in god if god doesn't exist?

That makes no sense at all.

So, hypothetically, if someone managed to disprove the existence of a god with mathematics...you'd declare mathematics as your new god?

Again...this is pure nonsense.

.

Your understanding of what it's possible to believe or lack a belief in is severely broken.

If I don't accept something as true, it's either because I believe it's false or I believe it's possible, just not proven true. There's no "lacking belief" involved at all.

If I ever claim to lack belief in something, it's because I'm not willing to really consider the implications of it being true or false.

I'm always willing to consider the implications of all possibilities.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hieronymus

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2016
8,427
2,998
52
the Hague NL
✟69,862.00
Country
Netherlands
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Just an overwhelming majority... no biggie.
It's not relevant.

Nobody is able to dismiss the problems surrounding the idea of purposeful data writing itself.

In fact, nothing can bring forth itself.
Because otherwise it had to have existed before it existed in order to bring forth itself.
 
Upvote 0