There is no evidence for God

Wouldn't it be safer to believe things based on reason rather than superstitition, instead of taking undue risks?

Mate,look at a chair,a plain simple chair.If I tell you it formed itself,would you believe me?Of course not,that would be utterly foolish of you.Logically,you would answer it was made in the industry or hand made by a human,hence saying that there was a creator.Then,why is it so hard for you to understand that the universe did not form on its own?

How the heck was everything organised so perfectly

and how was consciousness instilled into living beings?

You claim that it is my lack of understanding that I can't answer this question but are you not doing the same thing yourself?

It's pretty sad really.He is a grown up adult man,who is clearly wise,but for him to make such a claim is nothing short of ignorant and reeks of arrogance,a disease which has seemed to plague atheists.

I'd rather not

I don't understand though if there was no God,how on earth did the world get created?How on earth are we alive?How do people die?None of it makes sense.So there must be some being greater than us

Again, the argument from personal incredulity.

We know, to a reasonable degree of certainty, that the current universe came from a singularity of almost infinite density. The processes by which everything since the formed are known to a greater or lesser extent. The only thing that is completely unknown is everything before the singularity expanded. However, there are several possible hypotheses - none of which require a supernatural god.

Everything isn't "organised so perfectly". The universe is fundamentally unstable. Did you know that if humans had evolved at a time in the distant future, we would have no idea that other galaxies exist?

Consciousness wasn't "instilled", it evolved. It is a function of the electro-chemical activity in the brain. Current research suggests it was a means of dealing with the huge amount of sensory input constantly recieved by the brain. As evolution in a particular species led to increased brain size, then the "consciousness" became more complex - just as increasing a computer's power enables it to run more complex programmes. The larger and more evolved the brain, the more developed and complex the consciousness. We know that the consciousness is a function of, and dependent on the physical brain because we can manipulate the consciousness by maniputating the physical and chemical brain. If consciousness was independent of the brain, this would not be possible.

No, because I understand (to a greater or lesser extent) pretty much all the issues which you claim can only have been the work of god. And I am nowhere near an expert in these fields, just a mere postgrad science student.

And there we have it. 'Superstition is a better tool than reason', says theist.

I think that for people who believe in God there is enough evidence for it.

They might have witnessed a miracle, someone being healed through prayer for example

or experiencing the holy spirit.

They may be convinced by the bible as so many different people over different time periods have written books in it and all at least reference jesus.

Maybe simply the fact that so many other people believe in a God may be enough evidence for them to believe in a God themselves, that may be the case for someone who's family is religious and have been brought up in church. Although this 'evidence' might not be enough for some people to believe in a God I think it can be for others.

I'm sick of your sarcastic remarks(which are by the way extremely childish).You are the only one of the lot not providing any reasonings for your statements.

Atheists never classify the levels of rationality.

Mostly,infact all call theists or believers irrational.

I've given you plenty of reasoning. I'm still waiting for your answers about slavery.

Refer to the previous forum.Also,try not to bring up past discussions in new threads.

Past? That's a stretch. This was yesterday, I think.

If god is defined as omnipresent and omnibenevolent, there is very strong evidence that no such being exists. Such a being has never been observed under test conditions.

If god is such a powerful being with the ability to create and destroy entire worlds, then he’s likely to be powerful enough to hide his presence from our measly means of detection.

The Large Hadron Collider is capable of detecting even the very smallest particles of nature: if god is omnipotent, it would have been detected by now.

There is a contradiction in there, isn't there? If these forces are so powerful as to create and destroy cities and worlds then even our measly means of detection should be sufficient.

The Large Hadron Collider is capable of detecting even the very smallest particles of nature: if god is omnipotent, it would have been detected by now.