Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Would the amount of people who believe something be enough evidence for you?
You, the article, and a previous poster make my point perfectly. The article stumbles around a number of "could have been"s, "might have"s and "possibly"s, offering a number of alternative views, but strictly avoiding the one additional possible truth, that God exists. It's presuppositional, much like your "no actual deities required" comment.There is also evidence that religion is a by-product of human evolution, that it had adaptive value in our past.
Evolutionary psychology of religion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No actual deites required.
You, the article, and a previous poster make my point perfectly. The article stumbles around a number of "could have been"s, "might have"s and "possibly"s, offering a number of alternative views, but strictly avoiding the one additional possible truth, that God exists. It's presuppositional, much like your "no actual deities required" comment.
Do you seriously think that Christians don't KNOW that non-Christians think differently?
This is where you misunderstand both the title (which doesn't refer to science) and the term "evidence". If you read my previous post you'll see that I'm not describing evidence of anything as proof. It's presuppositional.Noting the title of this thread, where did you establish that "God exists" is "possible"? Keep it to science, please.
Ha ha ... If you could not prove anything, how could you disprove anything?
Nothing will be "left". They are all there. You adopt an evidence you like and you go with that. It take a great wisdom to be able to stick with such an evidence.
Then you misunderstood me. I was only proposing more parsimonious explanations. There is evidence of biological evolution. Deities, not so much.This is where you misunderstand both the title (which doesn't refer to science) and the term "evidence". If you read my previous post you'll see that I'm not describing evidence of anything as proof. It's presuppositional.
Agreed. One would first need a testable definition of this "God".Science plays no part in evaluating the truth or otherwise of God. God isn't studied by science, period.
Or, we dont know. Or, there may be some other explanation.Take the theories about the existence of everything. Science can work backwards causally to a single point of origin, referred to in one theory as the Big Bang. It can describe how it happened, but not why. It can even tell you that prior to the BB time itself didn't exist. This is a concept which is impossible for mere mortals to fully grasp, yet it is a logical consequence of BB theory. Conversely, theists believe that the origin of everything is caused by a sentient, omnipotent being. That belief is as logical a consequence as the conclusion that "nothing" caused everything to exist.
My view? where did I say that? Are you telling me what I believe?Your view that God is an impossible construct leads me to believe that your atheism is of the strongest kind, ie "there is no God", rather than the more honest, "I have no evidence for God".
What is the point in positing a deity that is so elusive?And before the Flying Spaghetti Monster rears his ugly head I must confess that my honest answer regarding his existence can only be "I seriously doubt it", rather than a definitive "No, he doesn't exist", until I have the power to search every nook and cranny of the universe to determine his non-existence. Which I also seriously doubt either of us will gain.
How would one differentiate it from self-deception? Or deceit? What method would you employ to verify that someone else, say, at your church, believes what you do? Compare notes?But the real evidence a Christian has for the existence of God isn't rooted in pure analysis. It's a highly subjective experience.
Really? I expect that I could scientifically compare gravitational experiments conducted on Mars with those done by myself on Earth.It leads to an inner knowledge which means that believers believe in God in exactly the same way everyone believes in gravity.
Very weak evidence. Without corroborating evidence, particularly scientifically testable evidence, it would be dismissed as an appeal to popularity.
It would depend on the sample of your "population".
Then you misunderstood me. I was only proposing more parsimonious explanations. There is evidence of biological evolution. Deities, not so much.
Are you making those claims, in claiming that this thing is possible?
That is why I asked *you* if such a thing were possible. It is something that has not been demonstrated to me.
Noting the title of this thread, where did you establish that "God exists" is "possible"? Keep it to science, please.
You, the article, and a previous poster make my point perfectly. The article stumbles around a number of "could have been"s, "might have"s and "possibly"s, offering a number of alternative views, but strictly avoiding the one additional possible truth, that God exists. It's presuppositional, much like your "no actual deities required" comment.
Do you seriously think that Christians don't KNOW that non-Christians think differently?
Then you misunderstood me. I was only proposing more parsimonious explanations. There is evidence of biological evolution. Deities, not so much.
...
<snip flame bait>
An "atheist"/"non-believer" is always going to chose another disproven hypothesis to avoid the facts, God exists and Christianity is The Objective truth.
"Maybe the atheist cannot find God for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman." - Francis Thomson
Does the popularity of other religions show that yours is wrong?
Do you have anything of significance to contribute to this thread?
The arrogance of your position is astounding.
Just because you personally believe that a particular hypothesis is disproven, does not mean that others judge it in the same way.
I can guarantee, both from personal experience and from experience with other atheists, that you that you are mistaken. We're not atheists because we're trying to avoid facts. We see the world differently than you do, and typically because we embrace facts.
For instance, we accept evolution over religious creation stories due to the facts involved.
Oh yeah? What proof and evidence is there for "atheism" to be accurate and correct? if you fail to answer that question then you become a liar and hypocrite as "atheism" is not facts nor does it have facts. "atheism" is a man made myth that uses unscientific presupposition, myths("naturalism") and "assumptions.
"Maybe the atheist cannot find God for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman." - Francis Thomson
That analogy compares atheists to criminals. That's nice. And it implies that we know god exists but are denying him because we don't like the implications.
Two can play at that game. Maybe theists cannot leave religion for the same reason a domestic abuse victim can't leave their abuser.
Maybe Christians cannot find allah for the same reason an alcoholic cannot find an intervention.
he didn't answer the question,
"The question is ill-formed. The question is :'what proof and evidence do you have that atheism is true?' Well, atheism is the position of not accepting the theological explanation. It is not accepting the god hypothesis. It is in fact the null hypothesis. It cannot be proven to be true. It is the default position. And christianity and buddhism and hinduism and islam, they have all failed to meet their burden of proof. It's not up to me to prove that there are no gods any more than it's up to me to prove that there isn't bigfoot or fairies of UFOs. The default, the null hypothesis is that these things aren't true. And we wait and reserve belief until they are demonstrated to be true. Does that make sense?"
so I'll ask again in any definition of "atheism", I'll even reword it to the "agnostic" definition,
What proof and evidence is there for "lack of belief" to be accurate and correct?
allah is false, as islam is false. that's why Christians don't care about "islam" but about The True God, Which Is The Trinity of The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit.
[FONT=verdana, sans-serif]I didn't read the entire post as it was a bit[/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif] long, but the above jumped out at me. [/FONT][FONT=verdana, sans-serif]Like it or not, we all believe. Even when the things we believe have been established on empirical evidence, this is usually based not on our own observations of the evidence, but on acceptance of the findings of others. This is especially so in this increasingly specialised world.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?