This is getting a bit silly as it seems. Firstly, I don't want to claim to be exclusively neither atheist or theist. Secondly, the only thing that the argument over the existance of god only proves one thing. Neither side can win. Theists are wrong because they cannot prove that god exists. Atheists are wrong because they cannot prove that god does not exist. Theists are convinced that they are 'saving the world' and doing 'the right thing' by trying to make others belive exactly what they believe. Athiests are trying to make people leave things like religion so that we can focus on such things that are 'truely important' and to stop religious wars and prejudice. I am yet to see an argument that is so overly convincing that I should believe it. Obviously both sides cannot be convinced by each other. Why not accept the possibility of each others views instead of completely denying them? It's great to be able to have open discussions, but when such matters are involved they often escalate into downright aggression and everybody leaves a little more pig-headed and annoyed at everyone elses ignorance. It does no good for either side! There shouldn't be two sides in the first place! Be Open. It takes atleast two sides to start a war remember that.
moonman, You are wrong of course since it cannot be true that both theism and atheism are false, one of them must be right. Either a god or gods exist or they don’t. Either way the implications for humanity are huge. The primary reason that agreement between the two sides is never likely is because neither side will agree to the same set of rules. The key to a solution is evidence and while the majority of atheists favor the scientific method the theists claim a ‘higher’ form of evidence. Until both can agree on the same criteria for a conclusion then the debate will be much like one side playing baseball and the other playing basketball, and one wonders why there is confusion. Mainly because each side very strongly believes the opponent’s view is not possible. That is often true. Some begin with such prejudice, others argue for years against a seemingly solid brick wall and they eventually flair up with utter frustration. This is the nature of a debate without common rules, and is what makes the subject so fascinating, at least for me. If you have a way to achieve a consensus then I’d love to hear it. It would of course mean you must show one of three outcomes: - (1) god(s) exist, (2)god(s) do not exist, (3) insufficient evidence for either conclusion.
Ok, I'm open to this.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! But perhaps to me it doesn't matter wether god exists? If in the end I am damned to going to hell for being a non-believer, I'm going to have to overcharge god's judgement untill I get to the Interuniversal-court of omnipotent entities and sue him for unfair ruling. As the defendant, god, purpousfully disguised his existance from me, and judged me thereof to burn in hell for all eternity. If my conciousness simple fades away into nothingness after my life, well then there's not a bloody lot I can do about it. So I don't care if god exists or not, either way I will continue to live my life how I want to.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And if someone wants to come along and tell me otherwize, well then they can go and rot in that place that they fear so much.
Jan, Not really, but your perspective is much like the time when the flat-earthers (the real position) made their claims and those who opposed it were ridiculed. The fact that a claim can be made gives no indication of whether it is true or not.
moonman, As it doesn’t to the vast majority of the world’s population, they are mainly content to believe whatever they are told or whatever is the predominant opinion. It is only a few like us who take a real interest and seek to understand the implications. You must be interested to some degree otherwise you would not be here. Or rather by then it would be too late. But then I see this as the primary evil of religion. It has convinced too many that there is a life beyond death and that there is no chance of avoiding death that too few people strive to find alternative solutions. Had this insidious false hope not existed then science would have been playing a much larger role in trying to develop anti-aging and life extension programs long ago. Ok but when you come to face death how will you deal with it? If there is no afterlife then you will cease to exist. A greater effort now by a lot more people might just be able to develop a way to cheat death. Unfortunately religion has encouraged an apathy towards such goals. Religions have little interest in real life but seek instead an imaginary paradise beyond death.
A thought on religion. We don't believe in god as a default. If a child is never taught about god, and never has contact with anyone who even talks about the possibility in their life. They will go through life perfectly happily not knowing or caring about this 'god' person. You say that's why god wrote the bible? An innocent little tribe on a dessert Island and all their ancestors are condemnd to go to hell forever just because the church-people haven't discovered them yet. This logic doesn't work for me. If the biblical god existed, then he should make it obvious to us that he DOES exist and then give us the choice to deny it. Then again, 'god' would work in ways that we could not comprehend, and it's just people who make up stupid things like the Bible and Jesus. My problem isn't with GOD but rather with the religious god who eg. in christianity, seems quite the opposite of fair and just. Which is the whole basis of christianity in the first place!!
the God of gods always and eternally exists. Theists are not wrong in accepting the existence of God. Maybe, other theists are wrong in the manner of acknowledging God.
Enton, Baseless assertion. What is your proof? They are if gods do not exist, which you can't show otherwise. It is worth showing it exists before it is acknowledged.
You can't prove wether God exists or not, but you can prove that religions have a distorted view of the one they call God. Also that religion does more harm than good in most societies which can easily be seen when comparing secular societies like Europe to religious societies like America and the Middle East (currently at war funnily enough).
People have squabbled over this theme long before message boards, and long before science and organized religion. The moment that two human beings could be in each others presence and interact with eachother, was where there began to be conflicting ideas. More powerful is the fact that a man can envision and believe in God and carryout remarkable things; rather than wether collectively humans reject or accept the idea. Faith exists and everyday people act by faith. Faith that their job will be there when they arrive, and their family will be in their home after they return from work. Faith that you can get an education or a degree 4 years down the line, inspite of the possiblities you could be struck down by lightning before you ever get there; you still believe and pursue it. This is faith. Believing in something that is not seen but is true, or is possible. Everyone acts by faith wether it's in a small porportion as simple as moving from one place to the next, or a great porportion such as Ghandi, Mohamad, Jesus, Buddha, Alexander, Hitler, American, Jew, Gentile, Man, Woman, Theist or Athiest. Your mind wanders when you try to imagine God... or have faith in Him. Rightly so, finite minds will have alot of struggle as they attempt to understand the Infinite. To understand what God is you have to concede to faith, and believe in things not seen, and simple aspirations of the spirit. Without faith you will never imagine nor see God. You will be bound by the confines of logic, only being able to attain to the next degree of secular knowledge or the latest "Facts". So the question should more appropriately be stated as such; What do you believe in and have faith in? Because this will dictate every final degree of either your triumph or failure, throughout your mortal sojourn.
What do you believe in and have faith in? Because this will dictate every final degree of either your triumph or failure, throughout your mortal sojourn. There are two (at least) opposing definitions of faith. One is relevant to theists while the other is not. You'll need to distinguish between the two to make your point.
Nisus, Concepts of gods and the supernatural were invented to help explain observations that were not understood. I.e. gods were invented out of ignorance. As Q has stated you will need to differentiate between evidential and non-evidential faith. One is better known as inductive reasoning and has real practical value while the latter (religious faith) is simply the absence of logical reasoning. You are simply advocating that we should all become illogical. I don’t see any value in this. Faith without a rational basis is better known as gambling – something of dubious value.
You're misusing the word, or concept, of faith there. People go to work because there is no evidence to suggest that the job won't be there. People study for a degree because the evidence suggests they'll get it. Can you imagine applying for a degree course without showing previous academic results? - "I want to do this course because I have faith". What a crock. KennyJC you could have left out the final six words of that sentence Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Debating theism vs. atheism is sensless. Theists have enough of a problem trying to debate which theism is the right one among themselves. "...under God..." in the pledge, "In God We Trust" on coins, "...so help me God." in the courtroom; just words. Why get bent out of shape pissing and moaning about it.
a rose by any other name would smell as sweetly perhaps what some call god to others is something else entirely in that sense the theists could be right and the athiests too your god could be my science your science could be my god
