Why I'm not an atheist

[Trout]

I can find a sharpener for you. Let's start with this idea of yours that God is non-existent.

4 out of 5 dentists surveyed said that you made a boo boo in your appeal to the masses. The other dentist was firstfloor

[Juvenal]

In some of the details, yes, but not on the existence of a divine being.

Beings, actually, and by any fair accounting for angels, demons, cherubim, and devils, Abrahamic monotheism is anything but monotheistic as well. If y'all want to straighten up that mess, you could learn a thing or two about consistency from the Brahman.

For most of history, those details included the number and distribution of powers of the divine beings, with the manner of the changing distribution itself the most interesting part of the tale. Usually the handover comes via parricide, which is why I've always had a soft spot for Inanna. No epic or grisly battles, just get the old man Enki drunk enough to give them away to you.

Gotta love that girl.

I'll have a double of whatever it was they were drinking.

For example, you may know in your heart that Trout is a [redacted] whereas I know he's a flaming [redacted]; however, our disagreements concerning his nature doesn't address his existence.

^---- If I were you and I wanted to counter that I'd ask why God does such a poor job of communicating His true nature to the masses (1).

I prefer to give Him the benefit of the doubt. If He exists, and we can't know anything meaningful about Him, why not assume that's His plan?

NOTES:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1: I'm so bored with apologetics that I write my own rebuttals; however, that shouldn't discourage you from adding your own healthy dose of sophistry to the mix.

This is apologetics?

From the OP, I figured Trout was trying to bring another board down in smoking ruins. When you showed up, I became certain.

Was that supposed to be a secret?

[Juvenal]

4 out of 5 dentists surveyed said that you made a boo boo in your appeal to the masses. The other dentist was firstfloor

In point of fact, you're the only one who's suggested there's an argument for non-existence in my rebuttal of seer. I could straighten that out for you, but first you'd have to convince me this thread was serious.

[firstfloor]

Here's what you said, first floor:

It is openly obvious that theism isn't localized at all and is available on demand throughout the space of the earth. And I fail to see how you shall recover from these two contrary statements.

You can't have it both ways.

I think my point stands, the atheist is missing a piece of data and can therefore only come to the wrong conclusion.

God, the name, is well known. God, the object is not. In fact, the object (Supreme Being) God is completely unavailable to everyone at all times.

Unfortunately, this does not stop the godly making bold claims but you can easily see that only God, the name, is needed for that. It makes no difference to the discourse about God that God Himself is totally absent.

[Trout]

Beings, actually, and by any fair accounting for angels, demons, cherubim, and devils, Abrahamic monotheism is anything but monotheistic as well. If y'all want to straighten up that mess, you could learn a thing or two about consistency from the Brahman.

Instead of the blind man describing the elephant, we have an old reprobate feeling up a Gerbil.

[rogue06]

Instead of the blind man describing the elephant, we have an old reprobate feeling up a Gerbil.

mind-brain bleach.jpg
Available from roguetech at half the normal price.

Since the return of Trout it has been flying off the shelves so get it now before shortages drive up the price (supply and demand folks)

[Trout]

God, the name, is well known. God, the object is not. In fact, the object (Supreme Being) God is completely unavailable to everyone at all times.

Unfortunately, this does not stop the godly making bold claims but you can easily see that only God, the name, is needed for that. It makes no difference to the discourse about God that God Himself is totally absent.

Don't you think it's a pretty "bold claim" to suggest that God is completely unavailable to everyone at all times?

Do you know everyone at all times?

Seems to fly in the face of your evidentualism.

[Trout]

In point of fact, you're the only one who's suggested there's an argument for non-existence in my rebuttal of seer. I could straighten that out for you, but first you'd have to convince me this thread was serious.

I can't think of a worse hell. Being the chosen convincer of you, toasty.

[Juvenal]

Instead of the blind man describing the elephant, we have an old reprobate feeling up a Gerbil.

This, kids, is why you don't brew your own. Even if it doesn't drive you blind, you're still at risk of oversampling.

[firstfloor]

So you agree that you can not justify the existence of other minds.

I am not a philosopher. I do not understand the finer points of that type of argument. It does not matter to me. I am convinced that other minds do exist. I am sure that you are not a zombie. It is a matter of being sensibly pragmatic about the issue.

[Juvenal]

I can't think of a worse hell. Being the chosen convincer of you, toasty.

A bit late for that, in any case. While you've been gone, I've come to terms with the existence of God. Existence as it conforms to Platonic idealism, of course, which isn't likely to satisfy the Biblical believer, but nonetheless, there you go.

I believe God exists.

[firstfloor]

Don't you think it's a pretty "bold claim" to suggest that God is completely unavailable to everyone at all times?

I hereby issue gratis, my cast iron guarantee that no living soul has ever seen or will ever see the face of God. Would you like that in triplicate?

[Sea of red]

I would agree with that to a point.

The overarching point being that atheists don't have enough information to be theists. They lack a key piece.

What do you think it is?

...

[Carrikature]

I'm so bored with apologetics that I write my own rebuttals

I might have to try this.

[Meh Gerbil]

Beings, actually, and by any fair accounting for angels, demons, cherubim, and devils, Abrahamic monotheism is anything but monotheistic as well. If y'all want to straighten up that mess, you could learn a thing or two about consistency from the Brahman.

I don't see where monotheism is inconsistent with a spiritual realm (powers) above man but below God.

I prefer to give Him the benefit of the doubt. If He exists, and we can't know anything meaningful about Him, why not assume that's His plan?

I'm maintain that if he exists it would be impossible for us to not know something meaningful about him.
For example, if you believe he hasn't contacted us then it would indicate he doesn't care about us.
That would be pretty meaningful.

From the OP, I figured Trout was trying to bring another board down in smoking ruins. When you showed up, I became certain.

It was like this when I got here.
I know it has been like this for quite some time since someone has been drawing Yin and Yang in the ashes.