World views with no God

[pianodwarf]

Nature and love exists now.  That is the reason we cherish them.  We exists now.  We are not living 30 billions years from now (or however long the heat death of the universe is suppose to be).  Beside, does something have to last forever for you to value something?  A house will not last forever, so why bother buying a home?  Marriage will either end with death or divorce, so why bother getting married?  A pet will eventually die, so why bother getting a cat?  The simple answer to all of those is that the time now is what matters.  We have to make use of that time before it's gone.

Peter Beagle examined this question in his novel, "The Last Unicorn".  His characters discuss the nature of beauty and how it relates to immortality vs. non-immortality, and one of his characters even goes so far as to argue that we appreciate beautiful things because we know they won't last, and that in a way, if beauty were eternal, it actually wouldn't be beautiful anymore.

[Boots]

If we are just going to poof out of existence forever When we die, I don't see why there is any reason for us to try and do good and why should we cherish things such as nature and love, because if all things in the cosmos will eventually be totally extinct, then there will be no drop of any memory of anything at all.(the laws of thermodynamics stating the eventual heat death of the cosmos)

There are few things theists say that anger me more than this.

If you are going to have an eternal bliss after this life, what point is this life???  Are you not smarter to simply kill yourself once you find god and believe your soul is purified (say, after confession)??

Picture this: two people get a nice big juicy bacon-double-cheeseburger fixed the way they want it.  One person is told "after your'e done with this, you're going to get the biggest, most bountiful banquet ever--you'll never get full, you can eat all your favorite foods all you want!"  the otehr is told "this is the only BDCB you'll ever get, there's nothing after this."

Which of these two will cherish their BDCB??

[nogodsforme]

^^^That is why I eat every burger as if it was my last.

[JeffPT]

Let me tell you all now my own understanding of God in a few different ways. The scriptures for me comes first and mainly Jesus there, and we will just need a whole different thread on the bibles integrity and the contradictions you all say it has. Then comes my prayer and relationship with God, and then science to me continues to unfold more and more of the mystery of nature. Science continues to show the complexity in the universe, if you are at all scientific you can admit the nature and life of the universe has this perfect underlying balance, some times it seems chaotic others orderly, a little scary but other times extremely beautiful. The laws of nature as well a seem less coherency, to me all these things help me understand God's nature.

Alright, now that you've had your turn, here is another possible understanding of God. 

1.  The scriptures are fictional tales about a man who may or may not have existed.  The bible is loaded with contradictions, errors, absurdities and atrocities, and has been manipulated by scribes and their masters over several hundreds of years. 

2.  Prayer does not work.  Period.  It simply doesn't do anything in a tangible sense.  It provides no statistical benefit to any real life event, and this has been proven out in several large studies.  Every time you perceive prayer to be working, it is nothing more than the way the events played out naturally.  Laws of statistics and probabilities say that uncommon events are going to happen in our lives from time to time, and with millions and millions of believers, at some point, someone is going to pray for an uncommon event to take place and it will. 

3. Your relationship with God is entirely fictional.  It's completely and utterly inside your own head.  And if you don't think it's possible that you could be having a fictional relationship with a non-existent God, then look around the world at the multitudes of other people who have relationships with other gods that you do not believe in, and ask yourself whether or not its possible that all of them are deluded and you're not?  Yes, Sam.  You're all suffering from the same delusion.  I know it feels real, and I know you really want it to be there, but it's not.

4.  Science does not point to God at all.  In fact, a scientific understanding of the universe STARTS and FINISHES with the notion that at no point in time is there an overriding, willful force that can intercede at any moment and change things if it wants to.  It doesn't look at gravity and say, "If you drop that ball 1000 times, it will fall to the ground 1000 times, unless of course God steps in and throws it upward."  Science only works if you remove such foolishness and look at the world the way it really is.  Nature and life is anything BUT a perfect balance.  It's a daily struggle for power.  Life and death hanging by a thread.  The universe is constantly expanding faster and faster, and eventually our sun is going to burn up, thus ending life as we know it on this planet. 

None of that speaks of God UNLESS you first start with the belief that God is real, and plug everything I just said into it.  That is what you are forced to do.  You MUST make sense of it all in your brain, and your entire paragraph that I quoted above is nothing more than the way your mind squares your God belief with the world around you.  It would be the same thing if I believed in a different God than you.  I, too, would be forced to take the supposed characteristics of whatever god I believed in, and mash them together with the reality we see around us.  Don't believe me?  Alright, let's take an evil God for example. 

I am suddenly going to start worshiping Gorthron the evil ice god (just making him up).  Now, Gorthron is evil to the core.  Loves to see people suffer, but has to find a way to keep them alive long enough to do it.  I have this really old book that you say is full of contradictions, but I simply tell you that what you see as contradictions, are nothing more than Gorthron deceiving you.  You take things out of context and constantly misinterpret the book.  I also tell you that my prayers to Gorthron are always answered, as I constantly pray for the death and suffering of millions around the world (which, if you look at reality, all comes true).  But you might respond by saying look how great and wonderful things are, and how beautiful nature is, and I say to you that all of that is done on purpose to make you think things are great.  That way, when Gorthron tortures you, you are that much more of a victim. 

See?  This is the same thing you're doing with you're God.  You are taking theological positions, based on what you believe about God, and saying them as if they were true.  What you don't do, (and neither would a Gorthron worshiper), however, is START by asking yourself whether God or Gorthron exists, and letting the evidence lead you.  The evidence doesn't lead to Gorthron, no matter how much theological wrangling I want to do, any more than it leads to your version of God. 

Fiction, Sam.  All of your God belief is fiction.  All of it.

To add a little there I just want to say that in mind of all this balance, complexity, and marvelous intelligence we find in the universe, to say that all of it came from nothing and one day it will all be nothing again is a bigger leap of faith. If we are just going to poof out of existence forever When we die, I don't see why there is any reason for us to try and do good and why should we cherish things such as nature and love, because if all things in the cosmos will eventually be totally extinct, then there will be no drop of any memory of anything at all.(the laws of thermodynamics stating the eventual heat death of the cosmos)

There are so many problems with this paragraph.  Others have dealt with it, so I'm not going to touch on how bad it is.   

But it is through the Bibile, relationship with God, and his revealing of himself through his creation( which is stated throughout the entire Bible) proves to me without a doubt, that God does exist.

Here are some facts about the bible and Christianity that make that reasoning fall apart completely. 

1.  We have no idea who wrote the gospel stories.
2.  We have no copies of the original works.
3.  There is no contemporary historical record of Jesus and his life outside of the bible.
4.  There were more different sects of Christianity in the early years than there are even today. 
5.  There is not a single thing in the bible that indicates it was written by divine authority. 
6.  There is no evidence of a resurrection anywhere to be found.

That's just a starting point. 

In the bible it does say that God reveals himself through his creation.  That is nothing more than a fancy way of saying creation exists, therefore god did it.  There is no proof in that.  It's a statement that could be either true or not true, and without significant proof, it is simply more likely to be not true.  If I said Gorthron reveals himself through his creation, what would you think of me?  Would you think that was a good argument? 

Now of course I can't prove it for a fact to you all, but I would like to try and show you the rationality behind it but we will see how that goes I guess. But to conclude there, I don't hang my belief on any one thing listed, it is the coherent set of all of them.

And that is one of the reasons it is so difficult to pull you out of it.  Because when we dismantle one of your arguments, you move on to the next one.  And by the time we're done shredding that one, you've already forgotten about the other one we dismantled.  Plus, waiting at the bottom of all of it is your faith that it's all true no matter what anyone else says.  But you really, really could be wrong Sam.  And you really, really are. 

The reason I've said a lot of this is because many times in questioning it is portrayed like I'm hanging my faith on one thing, and that's just not it at all. It is going to take me a while to explain everything and maybe even a few different threads.

It doesn't matter how many reasons you have for your faith in God; if they are all bad reasons, or if there are other, more logical explanations than "God is responsible for this", then you should abandon your faith.

[Samuelke]

To add a little there I just want to say that in mind of all this balance, complexity, and marvelous intelligence we find in the universe, to say that all of it came from nothing and one day it will all be nothing again is a bigger leap of faith.

Seriously, who are these atheists that claims the universe came from "nothing"?

What does "be nothing again" even mean?

Also, even if it is a "bigger leap of faith", why do you consider this a Bad Thing?  Religion is about having faith.  The more, the better.

If we are just going to poof out of existence forever When we die, I don't see why there is any reason for us to try and do good and why should we cherish things such as nature and love, because if all things in the cosmos will eventually be totally extinct, then there will be no drop of any memory of anything at all.(the laws of thermodynamics stating the eventual heat death of the cosmos)

Nature and love exists now.  That is the reason we cherish them.  We exists now.  We are not living 30 billions years from now (or however long the heat death of the universe is suppose to be).  Beside, does something have to last forever for you to value something?  A house will not last forever, so why bother buying a home?  Marriage will either end with death or divorce, so why bother getting married?  A pet will eventually die, so why bother getting a cat?  The simple answer to all of those is that the time now is what matters.  We have to make use of that time before it's gone.

Also, I doubt there are very many atheists that thinks "well, the universe will be gone someday, so why even bother?".  In fact, the only ones I see making argument are theists.

Ok so to your first statements, I'm not trying to be rude at all I'm really curious that's all, but if you don't believe that all this came from nothing what do you believe? Something like, science hasn't yet found out but it is possible it will find out?

Now your next claims, this is just false I'm sorry but it isn't the Christian belief that the more faith the better, it is the more trust in God. To show that is what we think of faith:

Literally the Greek of Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is the reality of things being hoped for, the proof of things not being seen."

Ok I wasn't trying to use that as an argument, I was really curious how you all thought about that idea. But you say nature and love do exist, I agree whole heartily, but for me these are two things I'm greatly thankful for daily. One supports our very physical existence and nature also enriches my life with its beauty and marvel. And then love, which is basically what supports our emotions, thinking, and many different aspects of our lives.

[Samuelke]

I really wasn't trying to argue that because of the eternal or finiteness of life that is why I think there is a God. That was purely out of curiosity. The quotes were not to defend what I'm saying and going to say, but simply hint at some things.

[Dante]

Sam, we don't yet know where it all came from, but we do know that, so far, everything we have been able to explain requires zero supernatural occurences. Not one. To posit that a god, your god, is responsible for the universe takes more than what you call faith. It takes an unwillingness to seek out the truth, the answers that lie hidden in the cosmos.

To believe your god created all this, created you, takes an arrogance. You think that you have the answer, when in fact your god has been shown to be irrelevant for the great many mysteries that science has already uncovered. We have no reason to believe your god will be the answer to any question asked of reality, solely because its never been required so far.

Your god is not required, my friend, because your god doesn't exist.

[none]

Ok so to your first statements, I'm not trying to be rude at all I'm really curious that's all, but if you don't believe that all this came from nothing what do you believe? Something like, science hasn't yet found out but it is possible it will find out?
...

what part of all this needs explanation?

[Graybeard]

…To add a little there I just want to say that in mind of all this balance, complexity, and marvelous intelligence we find in the universe, to say that all of it came from nothing and one day it will all be nothing again is a bigger leap of faith. …

complexity… difficult, made up of many arguments or parts, hard to comprehend, Difficult for the mind to grasp.

This is religion speaking. “I don’t understand it, so it must be God.”

Religion is the worship of ignorance and lies. It is the denial of mankind’s ability to understand the real cause of events.

Back in the day, thunder, lightning, flood, disease, drought, etc. were not understood and so, in the Bible, all these things are credited to God. “God did it!”

We now know that all the above have a real cause that requires no intervention by God. The more we know, the less ignorant we become and the less need there is for any gods.

But it is through the Bible, relationship with God, and his revealing of himself through his creation( which is stated throughout the entire Bible) proves to me without a doubt, that God does exist. …

A picture is worth 1000 words – this is what you have just said:


Moving on to Darwin.

Let us not forget that is a half-truth:

This neglect of medical studies annoyed his father, who shrewdly sent him to Christ's College, Cambridge, for a Bachelor of Arts degree as the first step towards becoming an Anglican parson

So we have a young Darwin who was brought up in a religious household and was to train as a vicar. But nevertheless, deconverted and became an agnostic.”

In court, you are required to tell “The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” There is a reason for having to tell the whole truth, and this is it…

“[Reason tells me of the] extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capability of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity.  When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist.”
–Charles Darwin, as quoted in his autobiography.

Yes, this is Ray Comfort who is “quote mining” and telling his followers half-truths and deceiving the gullible so that they believe a lie and you have believed him without looking any further. (Remember what the Bible says about false propets?)

Yes, Darwin did say those words, but he said more and the full quote is somewhat different:

Another source of conviction in the existence of God, connected with the reason, and not with the feelings, impresses me as having much more weight. This follows from the extreme difficulty or rather impossibility of conceiving this immense and wonderful universe, including man with his capacity of looking far backwards and far into futurity, as the result of blind chance or necessity. When thus reflecting I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man; and I deserve to be called a Theist. This conclusion was strong in my mind about the time, as far as I can remember, when I wrote the 'Origin of Species;' and it is since that time that it has very gradually, with many fluctuations, become weaker. But then arises the doubt;-- can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animals, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions? May not these be the result of the connection between cause and effect which strikes us as a necessary one, but probably depends merely on inherited experience? Nor must we overlook the probability of the constant inculcation in a belief in God on the minds of children producing so strong and perhaps an inherited effect on their brains not fully developed, that it would be as difficult for them to throw off their belief in God, as for the monkey to throw off its instinctive fear and hatred of a snake.
I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic.

(More at http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/darwin_god_religion_religious_belief.html)

And

“You accept the historical Jesus?”

“Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”

–Albert Einstein, from an interview with the Saturday Evening Post

But Einstein’s argument is pretty subjective, isn’t it? It’s based on “feeling” rather than fact. Einstein did not “feel” that E=mc², did he?

[Anfauglir]

.....I don't believe God to be hidden in any sense....

So....if I look for god today, I will find him today?  He will answer me directly and unambiguously?

Hallo Samuel - you appear to have missed this direct question from me. 

You said that you don't believe your god to be hidden "in any sense" - your words.  So if I look for your god today, I will find him today?  Clearly and unambiguously, I will find your particular god?

Once again, its a simple yes or no question Samuel. 

[screwtape]

Now your next claims, this is just false I'm sorry but it isn't the Christian belief that the more faith the better, it is the more trust in God. To show that is what we think of faith:

Literally the Greek of Hebrews 11:1 says, "Now faith is the reality of things being hoped for, the proof of things not being seen."

Sam,

you seem to misunderstand faith and how it is defined.  This verse you quoted has nothing to do with trust in yhwh.  It has to do with wishful thinking and poetic language.  WTF is the "reality of things hoped for"?  What is the "proof of things unseen"?  What does that even mean?  I hope you can explain it to me, because neither phrase makes any sense to me at all.  If I had to take a stab at it, I would say it is describing blind faith, something xians vehemently deny.

The quotes were not to defend what I'm saying and going to say, but simply hint at some things.

Sam, let us not hint at things.  Let us be explicit and clear and not mince words.  Let us not be distracted by tangential points.  Let us stay focused. 

If the quotes were mainly irrelevant to any point you were making, you should not have posted them.  Because pretty much anything you post will be scrutinized, analyzed and rebutted as necessary.  It is a waste of our time and effort to do that for a throw away comment or quote.  Please do not apologize.  It is okay that you did it, but going forward, just please do not do it again.  Thanks.

[jdawg70]

Ok so to your first statements, I'm not trying to be rude at all I'm really curious that's all, but if you don't believe that all this came from nothing what do you believe? Something like, science hasn't yet found out but it is possible it will find out?

For me, I simply do not know the answer.  I do not know if it is legitimate to ask 'why something rather than nothing' or the like.

As for what I believe?  I believe that making up answers to questions that I do not know the answers to is a poor way to find the real answer.

Which of these two will cherish their BDCB??

New.  Favorite.  Acronym.
I know that, from now on, I will order bacon double-cheese burgers as BDCBs.

[Garja]

This has been touched on by others, but to spell it out a little more, excuse the format... its a bit of a combo between sentence fragments listing (ive spent all day grading papers and my brain is fried):

Meteorology- Rain, lightning, thunder, good weather, bad weather, hurricanes, tornadoes, too much rain, not enough rain, rainbows, snow, hail, crop failures....

Astronomy - Movement of the sun, movement of stars, movements of planets, comets, the only planet, one of 9 8, only sun, one of billions of stars, oops billions of galaxies. Tide goes in, tide goes out, ya cant explain that. The Universe is 6000 years old because the Bible tells me so.... Okay, maybe a weeeee bit older.

Biology/microbiology- human/animal reproduction, photosynthesis, "creating" flies from rotten meat, dinosaurs are planted by the devil/a test from God, oh wait they are real but used to exist with humans, locust swarms, simultaneous creation of all life that earth has ever had (over 99% now extinct) how much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

Medicine- all illnesses of all humans ever. Illness a sign of Gods disfavor/sinful nature, infant/mother death, death in general. Human racial characteristics. Human emotion (kinda) Germ theory, whats that?

Physics and Chemistry - pretty much everything about how everything actually works, not a fairy tale.

Physical/Earth Science and "other" - flood, volcanoes, earthquakes, war, famine, pestilence, ocean currents, sulfur pools, poisonous gas from underground (see oracle at Delphi) human language, fossils (like dinos above) are all sent here by the devil to fool us or by God to test us.


Have I made my point yet?  THIS IS ALL SHIT GOD HAS HISTORICALLY GOTTEN CREDIT/BLAME/PRAISE/WHATEVER FOR THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY WHICH IS NOW ESSENTIALLY ALL EXPLAINED BY SCIENCE.  God is now basically pushed to.... "well, what caused the big bang?" and "what cause the first spark of life?"  Big questions to be certain, but it is pretty shortsighted to say given all the other advancements that humankind has made over the last 100,000 or so years that God is now reduced to.... well... not a hell of a lot.

Do I KNOW there is no such thing as God?  No.  But, again, if he exists he doesn't really do a hell of a lot around here.

[Samuelke]

Sam, we don't yet know where it all came from, but we do know that, so far, everything we have been able to explain requires zero supernatural occurences. Not one. To posit that a god, your god, is responsible for the universe takes more than what you call faith. It takes an unwillingness to seek out the truth, the answers that lie hidden in the cosmos.

To believe your god created all this, created you, takes an arrogance. You think that you have the answer, when in fact your god has been shown to be irrelevant for the great many mysteries that science has already uncovered. We have no reason to believe your god will be the answer to any question asked of reality, solely because its never been required so far.

Your god is not required, my friend, because your god doesn't exist.

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims. Go right ahead and believe all that, that's perfectly fine. But untill you can provide me with the actual proof you speak of for God not existing I will remain with my belief. You or science has done nothing at all to show that this world doesn't need a supernatural, what science is doing is showing natures balance and complexity. Science shows us how only a system with such fine tuning and complexity can support life like ours, everything is interdependent and relys on other sources for energy(fort law of thermodynamics energy neither can be created or destroyed) just transferring of high and low quality energy. Basically I'm trying to show you how we agree science hasn't explained the origin of energy and so on, but what I'm trying to ask, how do you then deduce, that science explains some of nature and it's intelligibility and order, but no origin yet,  that therefore there can be no supernatural and the natural will explain its own origin?

Contrary to your claims I do not believe science has made god irrelavent, I think science has done many great things for man, but while it does explain many things very clearly it usually creates more questioning then answering.

Now I admit that can be a very good thing, but in many other senses it can be difficult, for example, certain things in life that we go through demand answers and decisions, which the results most often define our life and who we are. Our worldview, or just the foundations of our minds and thoughts, that work as the roots for all our decisions and choices, in thinking and acting. Personally it hasn't been too long I guess, for 8 years now I have daily struggled with what is true and what is not, but also what also what corresponds best to reality. Now we are really going to have to start a kinda, true or false bible contradictions thread real soon I'm eager to do so.

But please someone tell me if I am incorrect here, right now you all are most concerned with not so much the existence of, but more whether or not this God is even good at all? Let me know if that's wrong though.

One night this week, I will give in length my full answers on the above and whatever else you all add untill then. But one claim I've seen is that it's all just my interpretation of the text, but I would argue against that I think it most often is very obvious when it is speaking figuratively and when it's not. And just to add to that, is that when it does use figurative language to establish a literal truth.

I often talk about my experience with God, just to clarify for me my experience doesn't make God true to me, it's only confirms more to me what I believe to be true. This whole argument that me or any believer of Christ, that we only believe this because of our parents or upbringing. Certain things are true no matter what anyone believes obviously, fire will burn you and you can't defy gravity in the literal sense. We all obviously, as kids believed just about everything our parents said, but for the large majority there comes a time when you want to start establishing some truth on your own. I always will listen and take to heart what my parents say but we are different individuals we don't agree on everything.

Getting to the point sorry, there are many things parents can teach that will stick with you for life, many simple things like the stove can be hot don't touch it. So just because we agree on something with our parents doesn't mean it isn't true, the argument logically breaks down.

Sorry for my slow replying, I'm going to start working on my next reply now though.

[none]

here is a proof... I guess...:
Omnipotent has to exist only in the imagination.
If Omnipotent cannot exist only in the imagination then the Omnipotent is not omnipotent.

[Dante]

No, we're not discussing the attributes of your god. We do not think your god is evil, nor good.

We think your god is imaginary.

[jdawg70]

You or science has done nothing at all to show that this world doesn't need a supernatural, what science is doing is showing natures balance and complexity.

You know, I've always really hated the word supernatural.  These days I don't really process it very well; I can't conceptualize anything about what supernatural actually entails.  It feels kinda like an alternative meds joke:

What do you call alternative medicine that works?  Medicine.
What do you call supernatural phenomena that have any observable effect on reality?  Natural phenomena.

That may not be a fair comparison though.  Do you have a specific definition of supernatural?

Now I admit that can be a very good thing, but in many other senses it can be difficult, for example, certain things in life that we go through demand answers and decisions, which the results most often define our life and who we are. Our worldview, or just the foundations of our minds and thoughts, that work as the roots for all our decisions and choices, in thinking and acting. Personally it hasn't been too long I guess, for 8 years now I have daily struggled with what is true and what is not, but also what also what corresponds best to reality.

You know, there's a lot of good stuff here, but I notice that in establishing the importance of answers, you neglect to give any thought on a method for obtaining those answers.  Just because the answer to the question:

'Why is a raven like a writing desk?'

is important doesn't mean that I have the answer.

Science seems to provide a pretty robust methodology for answering questions about our shared reality.  I'm certainly game for hearing of other methods though if you've got'em.

But please someone tell me if I am incorrect here, right now you all are most concerned with not so much the existence of, but more whether or not this God is even good at all? Let me know if that's wrong though.

I'm concerned with the existence of god.  There are claims to this entity's infinite power, infinite wisdom, and infinite love.  The evidence in the world seems to indicate that an entity with those characteristics does not exist.

Sorry for my slow replying, I'm going to start working on my next reply now though.

No worries - take your time.  Better slow and well-thought out than quick and unconsidered.


edit: more quoting fail from me - fixed

[Anfauglir]

Sorry for my slow replying, I'm going to start working on my next reply now though.

Here's one that will take you all of two seconds to type.

.....I don't believe God to be hidden in any sense....

So if I look for your god today, I will find him today?  Clearly and unambiguously, I will find your particular god?

Once again, its a simple yes or no question Samuel.

Two - or three - keystrokes, plus hitting the enter key.  Takes no time at all.




<<edit - fixed quotes>>

[3sigma]

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims. Go right ahead and believe all that, that's perfectly fine. But untill you can provide me with the actual proof you speak of for God not existing I will remain with my belief.

Did you believe Santa Claus was real when you were a small child, Samuelke? If so, do you still believe Santa Claus is real? Why not? Was it because someone proved to you that Santa Claus is imaginary? Could you prove that Santa Claus is imaginary? Of course you can’t—no one can. So should all the children today who believe Santa Claus is real just continue to believe that into adulthood because no one can prove that Santa Claus is imaginary?

That’s what you are saying when you use this burden of proof fallacy. You are arguing that adults should continue to believe in Santa Claus because no one can prove that he doesn’t exist. Does that seem reasonable and logical to you? If it doesn’t then perhaps you can see why your statement above is equally unreasonable and illogical.

You or science has done nothing at all to show that this world doesn't need a supernatural…

On the contrary, science is constantly showing that this world doesn’t need a supernatural. Human history is littered with examples of phenomena that were once imagined to have supernatural causes, but science has now shown the causes to be natural. People imagined gods caused thunder and lighting and demons caused diseases. Science has shown those phenomena and many more have natural causes.

Tell us, Samuelke, how many phenomena that were once considered to have natural causes have now been shown to have supernatural causes? Can you name one phenomenon that has been proven to have a supernatural cause? Again, of course you can’t because nothing has ever been proven to have a supernatural cause. All the discoveries have been one way. Science has constantly dispelled the myths and superstitions of the ignorant.

Assuming a supernatural cause is an admission of ignorance and defeat. It is admitting you have neither the intelligence nor the will to investigate any further.

Contrary to your claims I do not believe science has made god irrelavent…

Please tell us where your God is relevant, Samuelke? Is it relevant in science? No. Mathematics? No. Economics? No. Just where has your God ever been proven to be the answer to anything at all?  As far as I can tell, belief in your God is only ever used to provide emotional comfort to the insecure or as an excuse for intolerance and violence.

But please someone tell me if I am incorrect here, right now you all are most concerned with not so much the existence of, but more whether or not this God is even good at all? Let me know if that's wrong though.

You claim your God is real, Samuelke. The first task you need to accomplish is to establish the truth or validity of that claim. If you can’t prove your God is real then any discussion of its alleged qualities is no more than worthless speculation. It would be as pointless as discussing the colour of the quidditch shed at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.

I often talk about my experience with God, just to clarify for me my experience doesn't make God true to me, it's only confirms more to me what I believe to be true.

This is called confirmation bias. It’s just one of the many ways religious believers deceive themselves into believing their God is real. You already believe your God is real and then you take trivial occurrences or coincidences as confirmation of that belief. For example, you see a meteor—a common natural event—and take that as a sign from your God directed specifically to you because you expressed minor doubts. You must feel so special to have the claimed creator of the entire universe altering the course of a celestial object just to quell your insecurity.

[pianodwarf]

'Why is a raven like a writing desk?'

This was originally supposed to be the quintessential "riddle that has no answer".  Then some smart-ass went and created an answer anyway, which is:

Poe wrote on both.   

[Anfauglir]

'Why is a raven like a writing desk?'

This was originally supposed to be the quintessential "riddle that has no answer".  Then some smart-ass went and created an answer anyway, which is:

Poe wrote on both.   

I thought it was "because they both have wings" - I have a writing desk with a door that opens down like a wing, that you then write on.

[pianodwarf]

'Why is a raven like a writing desk?'

This was originally supposed to be the quintessential "riddle that has no answer".  Then some smart-ass went and created an answer anyway, which is:

Poe wrote on both.   

I thought it was "because they both have wings" - I have a writing desk with a door that opens down like a wing, that you then write on.

Never heard that one, but I guess that works, too.

Anyway, where were we?

[Boots]

Sam, we don't yet know where it all came from, but we do know that, so far, everything we have been able to explain requires zero supernatural occurences. Not one. To posit that a god, your god, is responsible for the universe takes more than what you call faith. It takes an unwillingness to seek out the truth, the answers that lie hidden in the cosmos.

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims.

Try looking one post up from this reply, post by Garja.

[Graybeard]

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims. Go right ahead and believe all that, that's perfectly fine. But untill you can provide me with the actual proof you speak of for God not existing I will remain with my belief.

Tell me, what would the proof be that would cause you to stop believing?

[Garja]

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims. Go right ahead and believe all that, that's perfectly fine. But untill you can provide me with the actual proof you speak of for God not existing I will remain with my belief. You or science has done nothing at all to show that this world doesn't need a supernatural.

Reread my post #331 Could a being have designed the world to work the way it does?  Yes, that certainly is possible.  Is a being necessary for such a world? No.

[writerstephen]

Sam, we don't yet know where it all came from, but we do know that, so far, everything we have been able to explain requires zero supernatural occurences. Not one. To posit that a god, your god, is responsible for the universe takes more than what you call faith. It takes an unwillingness to seek out the truth, the answers that lie hidden in the cosmos.

To believe your god created all this, created you, takes an arrogance. You think that you have the answer, when in fact your god has been shown to be irrelevant for the great many mysteries that science has already uncovered. We have no reason to believe your god will be the answer to any question asked of reality, solely because its never been required so far.

Your god is not required, my friend, because your god doesn't exist.

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims. Go right ahead and believe all that, that's perfectly fine. But untill you can provide me with the actual proof you speak of for God not existing I will remain with my belief.

I would love to see some evidence for all these empty claims. Go right ahead and believe all that, that's perfectly fine. But untill you can provide me with the actual proof you speak of for God not existing I will remain with my belief. You or science has done nothing at all to show that this world doesn't need a supernatural.

It's not the JOB of science to show that this world doesn't need "a supernatural." Science is not concerned with the supernatural at all. It is concerned with what is observable, testable, repeatable, falsifiable. If it should so happen that science shows, through overwhelming evidence, that "a supernatural" isn't responsible for natural phenomena, then you can choose to accept that or not. You can choose to ignore logic, evidence, and the conclusions they support as you see fit. However, don't presume to judge those who refuse to turn their back on good sense in the name of a god that offers NO evidence to back up his existence.

I find it interesting that you came to this board with your little, innocuous, broad question, and sort of backed your way in to hard core proselytizing. Why did you come to an atheist board anyway? Church project to try and convert a few infidels?

[writerstephen]

Very sloppy quote job by me--sorry about that. I'll do better next time.

Meantime, here's what I wrote in response to SamuelK:

It's not the JOB of science to show that this world doesn't need "a supernatural." Science is not concerned with the supernatural at all. It is concerned with what is observable, testable, repeatable, falsifiable. If it should so happen that science shows, through overwhelming evidence, that "a supernatural" isn't responsible for natural phenomena, then you can choose to accept that or not. You can choose to ignore logic, evidence, and the conclusions they support as you see fit. However, don't presume to judge those who refuse to turn their back on good sense in the name of a god that offers NO evidence to back up his existence.

I find it interesting that you came to this board with your little, innocuous, broad question, and sort of backed your way in to hard core proselytizing. Why did you come to an atheist board anyway? Church project to try and convert a few infidels?

[Emily]

Welcome to the site, writerstephen.

Very sloppy quote job by me--sorry about that. I'll do better next time.

Yeah, that looks pretty bad, but it happens. Just an FYI for the future: posts can be edited for a few hours after the post was made. In the upper right hand corner of the post there's a modify button, if you ever want to edit a post. But as I said it'll only be there for a few hours.

[writerstephen]

Yeah, that looks pretty bad, but it happens. Just an FYI for the future: posts can be edited for a few hours after the post was made. In the upper right hand corner of the post there's a modify button, if you ever want to edit a post. But as I said it'll only be there for a few hours.

Yeah, i missed the window on that one, but thanks for the tip