Question

[HitchSlap]

Gotcha.

Good.

So you didn't need evidence of an eternal God not existing in order to believe an eternal God does not exist?

This is nonsensical. Clarify if you need to.

Do you accept soundly reasoned explanations as evidence of truth?

Of course.

 

[Chriliman]

Okay then. I understand that you do not have a good description of the thing that I should be confirming or denying.

I have no idea how anyone can believe that something exists without being able to give properties of that thing. It sounds completely insane to me.

You find it difficult to grasp the concept of an eternal God who has always existed? If you can grasp that concept then you should be able to answer the question posed earlier, assuming you won't continue evading.

 

[Chriliman]

Good.

This is nonsensical. Clarify if you need to.

Of course.

You claim to believe no God or gods exist right? Yet you were not presented with evidence of an eternal God not existing, so what's your belief based on, since it's not based on evidence?

Can you explain why you believe no God or gods exist? Because I also accept soundly reasoned explanations as evidence of truth.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

You find it difficult to grasp the concept of an eternal God who has always existed? If you can grasp that concept then you should be able to answer the question posed earlier, assuming you won't continue evading.

So the only quality this god possesses is that it's eternal? Seems like an odd concept for a god.

Then I don't think there's a "soundly reasoned explanation" to be made either way. There's no possible evidence it exists and no possible evidence that it doesn't.

It's much easier to discuss gods with, you know, describable qualities...

 

[Ana the Ist]

For me, its been the opposite, I set out to figure out why I believed what I believed. IOW, I wanted to know the truth about God and not just rely on beliefs that had been handed down to me from my parents and siblings and teachers and professors.

Thanks for your response

That's a refreshingly honest statement...you wanted to learn why you believed what you believe. I can't tell you how many times I've been in a conversation with a believer who couldn't tell me exactly that.

I think it's important to remember that most of the atheists here on C.F. were christians at one point. Maybe the question to ask them is what argument against christianity was the one which started them down the path to atheism.

 

[Chriliman]

So the only quality this god possesses is that it's eternal? Seems like an odd concept for a god.

Then I don't think there's a "soundly reasoned explanation" to be made either way. There's no possible evidence it exists and no possible evidence that it doesn't.

It's much easier to discuss gods with, you know, describable qualities...

Okay so you think there's is no evidence either way? So the truth of whether an eternal God exists or not will never be determined by anyone ever? Is that really a reasonable position to hold considering humans are pretty intelligent and capable of discovering amazing truths?

 

[Chriliman]

That's a refreshingly honest statement...you wanted to learn why you believed what you believe. I can't tell you how many times I've been in a conversation with a believer who couldn't tell me exactly that.

I think it's important to remember that most of the atheists here on C.F. were christians at one point. Maybe the question to ask them is what argument against christianity was the one which started them down the path to atheism.

That is a good question and I have asked many atheists about their change in beliefs.

 

[Oafman]

Okay so you think there's is no evidence either way? So the truth of whether an eternal God exists or not will never be determined by anyone ever? Is that really a reasonable position to hold considering humans are pretty intelligent and capable of discovering amazing truths?

It's a perfectly reasonable position. The claim that something exists outside of our observable universe is unfalsifiable, by definition. It can never be proven, either way.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Okay so you think there's is no evidence either way? So the truth of whether an eternal God exists or not will never be determined by anyone ever? Is that really a reasonable position to hold considering humans are pretty intelligent and capable of discovering amazing truths?

What possible test could there be for a god who's only property consists of being eternal? Since it doesn't interact with the world in any way, or do... anything... it's the equivalent of a being that doesn't exist at all.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Okay then. I understand that you do not have a good description of the thing that I should be confirming or denying.

I have no idea how anyone can believe that something exists without being able to give properties of that thing. It sounds completely insane to me.

I find it ridiculous when in one breath they describe a set of characteristics for a god they claim to have a personal relationship with...then in the next breath claim god is incomprehensible.

 

[Chriliman]

It's a perfectly reasonable position. The claim that something exists outside of our observable universe is unfalsifiable, by definition. It can never be proven, either way.

I don't require proof to believe something, I require evidence to believe.

I do require proof to claim I know something is true.

 

[Chriliman]

I find it ridiculous when in one breath they describe a set of characteristics for a god they claim to have a personal relationship with...then in the next breath claim god is incomprehensible.

Sorry I'm trying to convey simple concepts as a basis for understanding. I could go on forever describing the nature of God, but what would be the point if the one I'm describing Him to has no basis for understanding?

 

[Cearbhall]

I'm interested to hear if any non-believers have seriously considered believing in God based on an argument or reason they heard from someone else, either on these forums or elsewhere.

No. I would say that I'm an agnostic atheist in the sense that I think the existence of something rather than nothing means that there could have been some sort of intelligent force which began the universe. However, I haven't seen any argument or evidence that would make me jump to the conclusion of a narrow concept such as a "deity," much less the Abrahamic God specifically.

 

[Chriliman]

What possible test could there be for a god who's only property consists of being eternal? Since it doesn't interact with the world in any way, or do... anything... it's the equivalent of a being that doesn't exist at all.

Are you familiar with the God that Christians describe? I'm a Christian so it's safe to assume I'm talking about Jesus.

Is it fair to say Jesus has not interacted with the world?

 

[Davian]

Are you familiar with the God that Christians describe? I'm a Christian so it's safe to assume I'm talking about Jesus.

Is it fair to say Jesus has not interacted with the world?

With nothing but stories to go on, and having to toss out virtually all of mainstream science for them to be true, I think it is fair to say that it never happened.

 

[Chriliman]

No. I would say that I'm an agnostic atheist in the sense that I think the existence of something rather than nothing means that there could have been some sort of intelligent force which began the universe. However, I haven't seen any argument or evidence that would make me jump to the conclusion of a narrow concept such as a "deity," much less the Abrahamic God specifically.

Thanks for the response. Please read through the thread if you wish

 

[Chriliman]

With nothing but stories to go on, and having to toss out virtually all of mainstream science for them to be true, I think it is fair to say that it never happened.

Your free to believe that.

 

[Davian]

Your free to believe that.

At least it is a belief that comports with observations of reality.

 

[Cearbhall]

Thanks for the response. Please read through the thread if you wish

You're welcome. Thanks for starting the thread.

 

[Chriliman]

At least it is a belief that comports with observations of reality.

Good thing there's still more reality to be observed.