Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
New potential response to "Belief in God is dumb because there is no evidence"
Collapse
X
-
Well a couple things, for one, existence is presumed. And the reason there is no "evidence" is that God's identity (Proverbs 21:30) being that He is the self existent uncaused existence is not recognized. To question God's "existence" is tantamount to questioning if there be any existence itself. There is plenty of evidence that there is existence. Even a supposed regress of an infinite series of caused existences without any first existence coming into being would still require an uncaused existence for them to be.Last edited by 37818; 05-14-2016, 05:03 PM.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
-
"Belief in God is dumb because there is no evidence" is a meaningless combative challenge. The proper wording is simply; 'Is there any objective evidence for the existence of God?
Extra heavy front loading with 'Begging the Question' assumptions. Odd you propose a question concerning the existence of God, but not present any evidence.
The answer is no, The existence of God is based on the belief that God exists and not a significant rational nor logical argument.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post"Belief in God is dumb because there is no evidence" is a meaningless combative challenge. The proper wording is simply; 'Is there any objective evidence for the existence of God?
Extra heavy front loading with 'Begging the Question' assumptions. Odd you propose a question concerning the existence of God, but not present any evidence.
The answer is no, The existence of God is based on the belief that God exists and not a significant rational nor logical argument.
I presume an uncaused existence which is self existent and not in need of any kind of god. And I identify that "self existent" as the God of the Hebrews (Exodus 3:14-15).. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostYou presume existence do you not?
Why should existence of any sort need a God?
I presume an uncaused existence which is self existent and not in need of any kind of god.
And I identify that "self existent" as the God of the Hebrews (Exodus 3:14-15).Last edited by shunyadragon; 05-14-2016, 08:37 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 37818 View PostYou presume existence do you not? Why should existence of any sort need a God?
I presume an uncaused existence which is self existent and not in need of any kind of god. And I identify that "self existent" as the God of the Hebrews (Exodus 3:14-15).
Comment
-
They are not apprehensions, they are beliefs. By using the wording you do, you have your desired conclusion already set in your premise. Certainly "God" and the "afterlife" have compelling arguments against them in that we have no evidence of either. They are beliefs, not apprehensions.Last edited by JimL; 05-15-2016, 06:44 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostThey are not apprehensions, they are beliefs. By using the wording you do, you have your desired conclusion already set in your premise. Certainly "God" and the "afterlife" have compelling arguments against them in that we have no evidence of either. They are beliefs, not apprehensions.
I think the universality of these beliefs across the ages, throughout countless cultures, and given that we seem to even be hardwired for belief, would suggest that these beliefs should be taken as at least rational beliefs to hold in the absence of an actual demonstration that they are false.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MattMurdock View PostPerhaps the wording is clumsy, but regardless I think the argument stands. Again, I don't even wish to argue that these beliefs are true (not in this context anyway). The argument only aspires to dismiss the claim that these beliefs are irrational.
I think the universality of these beliefs across the ages, throughout countless cultures, and given that we seem to even be hardwired for belief, would suggest that these beliefs should be taken as at least rational beliefs to hold in the absence of an actual demonstration that they are false.
Comment
-
The evidence is simply any data such that, in its absence, the belief it is meant to support becomes less plausible. As such, the cognitive predisposition of man toward belief could be taken as evidence of our hypothesis. Even if it is taken as considerably minute, it should be regarded as a contribution to the discussion. Of course, it is an obvious one. It isn't so much, "Hey, all of these people cannot be wrong about this!" That is not what I'm getting at. It's more that the fact that the belief in some intelligence beyond all of this and belief in the afterlife is a belief that we would more expect humankind to be predisposed to on Theism than Atheism. You might say that we would only somewhat expect this observation more on Theism, but the point still stands.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MattMurdock View PostThe evidence is simply any data such that, in its absence, the belief it is meant to support becomes less plausible. As such, the cognitive predisposition of man toward belief could be taken as evidence of our hypothesis. Even if it is taken as considerably minute, it should be regarded as a contribution to the discussion. Of course, it is an obvious one. It isn't so much, "Hey, all of these people cannot be wrong about this!" That is not what I'm getting at. It's more that the fact that the belief in some intelligence beyond all of this and belief in the afterlife is a belief that we would more expect humankind to be predisposed to on Theism than Atheism. You might say that we would only somewhat expect this observation more on Theism, but the point still stands.
Comment
-
Rather than get caught up in that old semantic debate, I can change it to Theism vs. Metaphysical Naturalism.
As for infants having a blank slate, calm down Locke! Infants have all kinds of predispositions, even if they cannot articulate them. I'm surprised you don't acknowledge a predisposition toward belief, as this is precisely the same argument that many atheists have tried to make against God! Of course, it amounts to a genetic fallacy. But, it is being widely argued that there is a God-part of the brain.
Countless cultures having a belief in an intelligence beyond nature is due to ignorance? That is a pretty bold statement! Every individual in every culture ever to propagate the existence of a deity was doing so based on their ignorance.
To move from, "I don't know what causes x in nature" to "there is an intelligence beyond nature" is a pretty big leap. Why think that is a natural leap for every culture and would just naturally endure over centuries?
Comment
-
To me "rationality" in a particular kind of context simply means making decisions while keeping a good and strong grip on one's emotions. Surely every waking moment everyone is emotional to a degree. One could still make rational decisions, though, keeping oneself disciplined throughout.
I've pointed out before that atheists reject the notion that the universe does constitute evidence of a Creator, though I conceded that was not close to being decisive. The Bible is evidence in that way also. It looks like people like Tassman simply ignore all that argument, though.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MattMurdock View PostThe evidence is simply any data such that, in its absence, the belief it is meant to support becomes less plausible. As such, the cognitive predisposition of man toward belief could be taken as evidence of our hypothesis. Even if it is taken as considerably minute, it should be regarded as a contribution to the discussion. Of course, it is an obvious one. It isn't so much, "Hey, all of these people cannot be wrong about this!" That is not what I'm getting at. It's more that the fact that the belief in some intelligence beyond all of this and belief in the afterlife is a belief that we would more expect humankind to be predisposed to on Theism than Atheism. You might say that we would only somewhat expect this observation more on Theism, but the point still stands.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 04-22-2024, 06:28 PM
|
17 responses
100 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
04-23-2024, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
70 responses
392 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-26-2024, 05:47 AM | ||
Started by Neptune7, 04-15-2024, 06:54 AM
|
25 responses
160 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cerebrum123
04-17-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
126 responses
681 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 04-30-2024, 09:12 AM | ||
Started by whag, 04-07-2024, 10:17 AM
|
39 responses
252 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
04-12-2024, 02:58 PM
|
Comment