There is no evidence for God

Announcements Posted on
How helpful is our apprenticeship zone? Have your say with our short survey 02-12-2016
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidoriakhi)
    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=RrtRhGOpeNY

    We tell you the truth, but your shallow minds just cant comprehend it.
    Wait its not that, you just dont want to admit there is a creator of this gigantic universe, so you want to devise theories that will make you feel better.
    Everyone knows there is a God, but because of pride and guilt you just cant confess it.
    Its amazing how you easily reject that which has saved your life.
    You dont need a million pounds from a plane that is about to crash from 30,000 feet. But you do need a parachute...
    We dont need god to explain how the universe came into being.Just like we dont need the almighty zeus to explain how thunderbolts are formed.There is an explanation for both,one has been found the other will be discovered if we do not destroy ourselves first.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    So you're refuting yourself then. If God cannot be seen then the point about squinting at the sun is irrelevant.

    I just asked you why you picked the sun to make that point when the majority's of things can actually be looked at easily without having to squint.
    So whats the moral lesson from what you just said
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidoriakhi)
    So whats the moral lesson from what you just said
    :confused:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Jumping in here:

    1. What's your belief if you have one or so? Don't think athiesm as in "disbelief in the existence of a deity" counts as a "belief" or it does but state otherwise if you do so. (The reason I say that is because a had a few atheists get annoyed that I called atheism a belief system instead of a "disbelief" system I guess. But I also did read a few atheists state that they are more leaning towards the agnostic side of things which confused me a bit but never mind.)

    2. To the original question, There is no evidence of God, my answer would be what is your definition of God?

    I believe that basically something had to be created by something with the capacity to create. The universe was created therefore something had to create it, and it had to be powerful and also intelligent since I also believe that something intelligent had to be created by something intelligent (Unless someone has proof showing that an unintelligent force produced intelligence or whether nothing could ultimately create something). Debating whether this thing is immaterial or material isn't something I've went very far in so I don't see my self in the right position to debate that however I do believe in this series of creations there had to be a singular force which started the whole cycle of creation. Whatever you want to call it, whatever attributes who want to associate it with is fine by you, but I believe, with my current understanding of this all, is that there had to be a singular, powerful, intellectual force, eternal as well, which started everything. What are your thoughts?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rohan187)
    Jumping in here:

    1. What's your belief if you have one or so? Don't think athiesm as in "disbelief in the existence of a deity" counts as a "belief" or it does but state otherwise if you do so. (The reason I say that is because a had a few atheists get annoyed that I called atheism a belief system instead of a "disbelief" system I guess. But I also did read a few atheists state that they are more leaning towards the agnostic side of things which confused me a bit but never mind.)

    2. To the original question, There is no evidence of God, my answer would be what is your definition of God?

    I believe that basically something had to be created by something with the capacity to create. The universe was created therefore something had to create it, and it had to be powerful and also intelligent since I also believe that something intelligent had to be created by something intelligent (Unless someone has proof showing that an unintelligent force produced intelligence or whether nothing could ultimately create something). Debating whether this thing is immaterial or material isn't something I've went very far in so I don't see my self in the right position to debate that however I do believe in this series of creations there had to be a singular force which started the whole cycle of creation. Whatever you want to call it, whatever attributes who want to associate it with is fine by you, but I believe, with my current understanding of this all, is that there had to be a singular, powerful, intellectual force, eternal as well, which started everything. What are your thoughts?
    I think one of the reasons why defining atheism as "the absence of a belief in God/religion" has become so popular recently is because it's a non-position disguised as a position. It's not easy to challenge/debate it because it's an attempt at not committing to a clearly defined position.

    I think it's clear that someone who considers himself to be an atheist lives as though God doesn't exist. So you might assume that that is their belief. It's not simply a "lack of belief".

    If someone were to ask me "what is a camel?", my answer wouldn't be "it's not an elephant". That doesn't tell me very much about what a camel is. It's the same with "a lack of belief in God". To that I say "but what do you believe?" I'm looking for a positive statement that we can actually work with. "I believe there is no God", or "I'm not really sure", "I haven't got a view on this topic" or "I believe all the major religions propose a God that doesn't exist" for example. These are positive positions that can actually be approached and debated.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pride)
    I think one of the reasons why defining atheism as "the absence of a belief in God/religion" has become so popular recently is because it's a non-position disguised as a position. It's not easy to challenge/debate it because it's an attempt at not committing to a clearly defined position.

    I think it's clear that someone who considers himself to be an atheist lives as though God doesn't exist. So you might assume that that is their belief. It's not simply a "lack of belief".

    If someone were to ask me "what is a camel?", my answer wouldn't be "it's not an elephant". That doesn't tell me very much about what a camel is. It's the same with "a lack of belief in God". To that I say "but what do you believe?" I'm looking for a positive statement that we can actually work with. "I believe there is no God", or "I'm not really sure", "I haven't got a view on this topic" or "I believe all the major religions propose a God that doesn't exist" for example. These are positive positions that can actually be approached and debated.
    I agree with that. So correct me if I'm wrong, it's not a "lack of belief" or "disbelief of a deity/God" but to some or most it's more, "disbelief in the Abrahamic view of a diety", right?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Secure the bag alert!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    "Only" the physical world? The physical world is "only" everything that exists, everything that is capable of being observed. If you have anything to say about anything else, it would be utterly meaningless.
    this is a perfect example of begging the question.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rohan187)
    I agree with that. So correct me if I'm wrong, it's not a "lack of belief" or "disbelief of a deity/God" but to some or most it's more, "disbelief in the Abrahamic view of a diety", right?
    I think it depends on the atheist. I've spoken to some who say they believe there is no supernatural (naturalism). I've spoken to others who commit to "deism" - an impersonal god who has left the universe to itself. Some will say "I don't believe in the Christian God".

    My point being, it's a label people give to themselves. It doesn't say very much about what they truly believe.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pride)
    I think it depends on the atheist. I've spoken to some who say they believe there is no supernatural (naturalism). I've spoken to others who commit to "deism" - an impersonal god who has left the universe to itself. Some will say "I don't believe in the Christian God".

    My point being, it's a label people give to themselves. It doesn't say very much about what they truly believe.
    Okay, I get you. Thanks
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidoriakhi)
    https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=sf3XGql8wAY

    I think you guys should watch this
    You know if you want to put a YouTube video in the chat, what you should do is embed it by using the [youtube] [/youtube) tags. You can also click the "insert video" button on the advanced bar. It just means we don't have to click a link to watch the video.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pride)
    You know if you want to put a YouTube video in the chat, what you should do is embed it by using the [youtube] [/youtube) tags. You can also click the "insert video" button on the advanced bar. It just means we don't have to click a link to watch the video.
    Glad you watched it
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rohan187)
    I agree with that. So correct me if I'm wrong, it's not a "lack of belief" or "disbelief of a deity/God" but to some or most it's more, "disbelief in the Abrahamic view of a diety", right?
    Pride is incorrect, it's not a position disguised as a non-position. Atheism is fundamentally a lack of belief in God, not an active disbelief. The vast majority of atheists are therefore agnostic atheists.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Pride is incorrect, it's not a position disguised as a non-position. Atheism is fundamentally a lack of belief in God, not an active disbelief. The vast majority of atheists are therefore agnostic atheists.
    Thats incorrect, you guys actively disbelieve in the existence of God, who created the universe, as well as you and I. Its only inactive if you don't show it, which is clearly not what you are doing
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davidoriakhi)
    Thats incorrect, you guys actively disbelieve in the existence of God, who created the universe, as well as you and I. Its only inactive if you don't show it, which is clearly not what you are doing
    No, you are incorrect. How on Earth would you know what I believe? :lol:

    I lack a belief in God as do most atheists. Inactive has nothing to do with not showing it, it's a fundamental difference of position.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
    Pride is incorrect, it's not a position disguised as a non-position. Atheism is fundamentally a lack of belief in God, not an active disbelief. The vast majority of atheists are therefore agnostic atheists.
    I was saying that when you ask the question "what do you believe?" or when you're in a discussion and you're trying to get an idea of someone's beliefs, saying "I lack a belief in God" is not a helpful answer because it's not a positive statement.

    It's like this conversation:
    "Who are you?"
    "Well I'll tell you who I'm not..."
    "No thank you! Just tell me who you are."

    Do you see what I mean?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pride)
    I was saying that when you ask the question "what do you believe?" or when you're in a discussion and you're trying to get an idea of someone's beliefs, saying "I lack a belief in God" is not a helpful answer because it's not a positive statement.

    It's like this conversation:
    "Who are you?"
    "Well I'll tell you who I'm not..."
    "No thank you! Just tell me who you are."

    Do you see what I mean?
    Honestly, I don't see what you mean.

    If someone's answer is that they don't believe then they don't believe. I don't understand why that is not a helpful answer.

    How is it not a positive statement?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Patrick Wallace)
    Honestly, I don't see what you mean.

    If someone's answer is that they don't believe then they don't believe. I don't understand why that is not a helpful answer.

    How is it not a positive statement?
    That would be helpful, as it sounds like they are saying they believe there is no God. It's when people say their atheism is a lack of a belief in God. It can be difficult to understand what their specific position is.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pride)
    It can be difficult to understand what their specific position is.
    It's very simple really. The vast majority of atheists are agnostic-atheists which means while they don't believe gods exist they are open to the possibility that one day someone will prove that gods do exist. They do not wish dogmatically to state that gods don't exist as there may be unseen evidence (or proof) that they do.

    For all practical purposes they believe gods don't exist but their scientific sensibilities make them hold back on that.

    If atheism is on a scale of 0 (believe they don't exist with no doubts) to 10 (believe they exist with no doubts) I am at 0.001, but I have found myself moving further towards 0, with respect to the Abrahamic god, as I have got older and learned more about how little historical authenticity there is in those parts of the Bible that are supposed to be historical accounts but which, in fact, are ancient legends dressed up as history.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dima-Blackburn)
    You've already provided a plausible example, but I don't have to. Again, arguments from ignorance are not enough to establish metaphysical naturalism.
    Like swimming against the tide! You must feel like you are having a conversation in the 40's. A.J Ayer and Flew would be proud (if they, too, hadnt recounted ofcourse).

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 16, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
Would you rather have...?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.