[Helen_J]

religion is the source of evil (look at twin towers, terrorists etc.) and it is soo far fetched

[Agent Smith]

(Original post by Melancholy)
Usually out of rebellious resentment at the fact that I don't feel he's done too much for me. Perhaps I'm wrong? Yet either way, I see little reason to believe that he's there from what I've perceived of the world. I reckon my honesty should, if he exists, mean something to him.

If only.

I think, if I'm honest, I have a similar view. Although (while I hesitate to implicitly call you selfish) my rationalisation of it is more that he hasn't done much for anyone.

EDIT: On which note, I should flag up "God on Trial", which is on next Wednesday at 9pm (I think) on BBC2. It's about a load of Jews in a shed at Auschwitz to be executed the next day, who put God on trial for abandoning his people. Should be good.

[JointVenture]

I meant in this thread, how the hell do i know how you were treated at school..

[noisy06]

So really, for me at least, the real question is why should I believe in god just because someone else tells me its true and there is no evidence for it?[/QUOTE]

what kind of evidence were you looking for?

[GeoTom]

(Original post by Helen_J)
religion is the source of evil (look at twin towers, terrorists etc.) and it is soo far fetched

Not quite. Religion is the excuse used by extremists, the source is human.

[urbandervish]

(Original post by Helen_J)
religion is the source of evil (look at twin towers, terrorists etc.) and it is soo far fetched

How about money? politics? tv? How many more cliches do you need?

The two most bloodiest wars in human history had virtually nothing to do with religion ...

[Agent Smith]

(Original post by TomQMU)
Not quite. Religion is the excuse used by extremists, the source is human.

True. Many theists often forget this, in their rush to paint every atheist as a copy of their own insulting caricature combining Dawkins, Robespierre and Hitler, but most nonbelievers do actually concede that religion is merely one source of evil among so, so many. And since we further argue that religion is a human construct, the ultimate source is indeed human nature itself.

[Mithra]

(Original post by JoMo1)
Are you kidding me? I've spent the last 6 years as one of the very few atheists in a Catholic school, I've been called stupid, moronic, and ridiculed for being an atheist even when we're not arguing about religion. I could be having an argument about capital punishment and have people point out "well yeah, but you're an atheist, so obviously you're wrong". I call idiots idiots, and an idiot is someone who makes an awful point, I'd do that equally to christians and atheists in a religious argument, like now:

JoMo, I'd agree with you, but you are a utilitarian, so obviously you're wrong .

But being serious, I would have to agree with you on most points there, there really is no proof that any God would have the aspects ascribed to him by most religions, or as good old Nietzsche said "God is dead", now this may well be more symbolic than literal, but there really is no proof that even if God did create everything that he is still around looking at us or that he is even still alive

I'll be honest, this whole post was a thinly veiled reason for the first sentence

[noisy06]

(Original post by Mithra)
Because in that case, if God knows everything we are going to do then at no point do we have the ability to do the other thing as this would then prove God wrong, in which case he wouldn't have known what we would do and so isn't omniscient. Following on from this if God knows what someone will do throughout their entire life, why does he allow them to carry on along that path? e.g. he could have steered Hitler along a completely different path. How can humans be blamed for doing something bad if God has always known they would, and so they effectively COULDN'T have done anything else. Therefore the feeling that you are making your own decisions can only be an illusion.

God knows what everyone has done, is doing and will do, but had He punished man for what He forsaw them do man would cry "If only You gave me the chance". Thus God allows them to do what they want "free will" apart from things already Decreed so that they have no excuses afterwards. What you dont understand is the difference between God KNOWING something and Decreeing SOMETHING. iF He knows what you are going to do then it must also be your own will to do it however if he has decreed that you will do something then there is no escaping it. And yes humans can be blamed for doing something bad but it is their desire, will, intention whatever you want to call it to do that particular evil thing. God has the Power to stop Hitler as you say from doing those things but then Punishment would not be justified against him. Therefore the feeling that you cannot make your own decisions can only be an illusion.

[noisy06]

(Original post by urbandervish)
How about money? politics? tv? How many more cliches do you need?

The two most bloodiest wars in human history had virtually nothing to do with religion ...

i second that

[lucho22]

(Original post by Rhys.)
Why do you NOT believe in the tooth fairy?

It's the tooth mouse anyway.. none of this fairy nonsense!

[suneilr]

As someone who studies physics I need proper evidence before I'll believe in something and I have yet to see any compelling reason to believe in a god.

[Agent Smith]

(Original post by slawaccess23)
God has the Power to stop Hitler as you say from doing those things but then Punishment would not be justified against him.

So wait, the reason God allows us Free Will is so that he can punish us later? What a bastard of a deity!

[Sammerz]

I don't believe in God because God is one of the most unlikely entities that could ever exist, on the same scale as invisible monsters and faeries; God is just the kind of thing that is impossible to prove AGAINST, but it is the kind of entity which is easy to present evidence on its unlikelihood of existing.

I am pretty certain a personal deity does not exist, that is a facile claim to make; the vaguest intelligent theologian will admit that a God who cares about us, answers prayers and looks after us does not and can not exist. No amount of typical religious 'beating around the bush' like, "we cause evil, not God" can ignore facts like when the sun explodes into a red giant, it will consume us...would a loving God do that?

The real problem with God comes from disproving that he (it is most definitely a he, since the monotheistic God did in fact originate in 500BC in a time of absolute patriarchy, among tribes who feared death and absolute freedom; so God was exactly what they needed) created everything.

There is an abundant amount of logical paradoxes with God being omnibenevolent, omnipotent and omniscient and there is no need to explain them here...

Science throughout the ages has battled with the problem of God and has rendered God unnecessary (as William of Ockham says as a principle, do not multiply the number of entities beyond necessity). This basically means that we and the universe are completely explicable and go on just as we do, without a God or celestial being.

As Christopher Hitchen's says in his book (which I recommend) 'God is Not Great,' God being a all knowing, watching, powerful, controlling and authoritarian figure is merely a politcal precursor to dictatorship, however covered in myths and fables it may be.

Theists still have the problem of explaining who or what created God, why evil exists, why morality is not good IN ITSELF but only good because God says it is. They have to prove the authenticity of holy books, they need to show WHICH God exists (since surely if different faiths proclaim the existence of different Gods, they must ALL be valid).

The list goes on!

The most important thing to say right now is, that there is absolutely NO evidence for the existence of any supernatural being whatsoever, and although that does not dismiss the possibility of such a being existing, it gives me a RATIONAL reason for not believing in such a being.

You only have to look at the accomplishments of biology and cosmology to realise that as the accomplisments rise, the NEED for God (which is the origin of God, the need to know everything) dissipates; God exists only as a thing which closes gaps in our knowledge, but since I believe in science, this is a dogmatic way to handle things.

Since I cannot put all my arguments forward, I ask you to read anything by the authors below which expound better on God:

Sam Harris
Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion)
Christopher Hitchens (The Portable Atheist)
Daniel Dennett
Victor Stenger (God: The Failed Hypothesis)
J.L. Mackie
Carl Sagan (The Demon Haunted World)
A.C. Grayling
Nietzsche
Schopenhauer (his dialogue on religion)
Hume (his dialogues on religion)
Bertrand Russell (Why I Am Not a Christian)


Thank you

[noisy06]

(Original post by Agent Smith)
So wait, the reason God allows us Free Will is so that he can punish us later? What a bastard!

No you're being deliberately manupilative seen as you did not read or read but misunderstood what i wrote.

[Agent Smith]

(Original post by Sammerz)
Since I cannot put all my arguments forward, I ask you to read anything by the authors below which expound better on God:

Sam Harris
Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion)
Christopher Hitchens (The Portable Atheist)
Daniel Dennett
Victor Stenger (God: The Failed Hypothesis)
J.L. Mackie
Carl Sagan (The Demon Haunted World)
A.C. Grayling
Nietzsche
Schopenhauer (his dialogue on religion)
Hume (his dialogues on religion)
Bertrand Russell (Why I Am Not a Christian)


Thank you

I agree with everything but the ordering of your list Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Hume and Russell should be at the top, well above the Dawkins Four, who may be lucid and intelligent but who are certainly not comparable, let alone superior, giants of philosophy.

[Calumcalum]

(Original post by Agent Smith)
Fairly obvious companion thread here

To all those who consider themselves somewhere below 4 on the Dawkins Scale (ie who hold God's existence to be improbable or worse): Why do you not believe?

Personally, my reasons include: The unsolved Problems of Evil and Hell; the good old Euthyphro Dilemma of the origin of morality (similarly unsolved); the slightly subtler argument that God's existence doesn't appear to have made much difference to the Universe (upon which I will happily expand if asked); and the fact that in the absence of proof of a proposition, I find it more logical to view that proposition as false (in other words, the "burden of proof" idea).

Those first two have been solved many times, the Euthyphro dilemma easily solved as a false dichotomy...
That last one, is it evidence or proof you need? It seems illogical to me to require proof of something...

[Sammerz]

(Original post by Agent Smith)
I agree with everything but the ordering of your list Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Hume and Russell should be at the top, well above the Dawkins Four, who may be lucid and intelligent but who are certainly not comparable, let alone superior, giants of philosophy.

well you wouldn't really call dawkins etc. philosophers would you, except maybe dennett, he is a philosopher of mind, biology and science.

The ordering was random, I apologise :P

In all honesty, hitchens should be at the top for being a polemicist and schopenhauer at top for being a philospher

[moneyballs2]

There is no evidence which I know I can trust. Just books written by about 1,000 of different people that have been translated about 30 times.

Might be an exaggeration, but you get the point....

[Calumcalum]

(Original post by Sammerz)
Since I cannot put all my arguments forward, I ask you to read anything by the authors below which expound better on God:

Sam Harris
Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion)
Christopher Hitchens (The Portable Atheist)
Daniel Dennett
Victor Stenger (God: The Failed Hypothesis)
J.L. Mackie
Carl Sagan (The Demon Haunted World)
A.C. Grayling
Nietzsche
Schopenhauer (his dialogue on religion)
Hume (his dialogues on religion)
Bertrand Russell (Why I Am Not a Christian)


Thank you

I would discourage anyone from reading that book