God or No God - that is the question (for atheists)

quote:

---

the answer is 'No God' - on what basis do you say that?

---

He didn't light the candle.

quote:

---

If God exists, then he 'created' us, the most exquisite thing, as far as we can tell, in all his Creation.

---

Why do you think we are the most exquisite thing on the planet? Quite frankly, we function more like a disease on the planet.

quote:

---

the only possible way that a mere man could come to any knowledge and understanding of him, would be if God was the one to reveal that knowledge of himself - to man.

---

He still hasn't lit the candle.

quote:

---

Whilst man can examine the world around him, he can only tentively decide, from analysis of 'Creation', whether or not a Creator exists. In other words, there is nothing in the 'Creation' which points, in and of itself, inarguably towards a Creator.

---

Because God resides in the imaginations and writings of mankind, not the real world.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

If God and he's omnipotent then it follows that his standards for what defines good and evil are the ones which count. Not ours.

---

His omnipotence only exists within the confines of the written text. His standards are our standards. Mankind created those standards and have changed them over time. How do you see them as higher?

quote:

---

His standard means looking at a woman and thinking lustfully about her is 'evil'.

---

Actually the God of the Bible did not set that standard. That was supposedly Jesus of the NT. But since the Book of Matthew is probably a satire, it was not meant to be taken seriously.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Hey crashfrog,I've seen you and others use the term falsify or falsified in other threads concerning God's existence.I never understood what you all were talking about. I found this on FalsificationismIs this what you all are referring to?If yes, then concerning your statement:

quote:

---

Nonetheless there are many Gods that we can falsify

---

What gods have been falsified and how?What is the theory or statement made about the Christian God that can't be falsified?Sorry about all the questions, I just never understood if some gods could be falsified why the Christian god can't be.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

There hasn't been much activity on the Athiest one so far

---

What type of activity were you looking for?You didn't even address my posts (Message 14 and Message 28)I even asked you some questions:Why do you think we are the most exquisite thing on the planet?How are the standards of the God of the Bible higher than ours?Gods do not exist outside the texts and imaginations of mankind.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

but your post said things like "He didn't turn on the light" and "God resides in the imagination..."

---

I said he didn't light the candle. Very different. I asked God to verify his existence by lighting the candle within one minute. The candle never flamed. Therefore, no God.Since you addressed your question to atheists, who by your definition are people who don't believe that a supreme being exists, what type of response did you expect? What did you truly expect to discuss with that type of person?God is not a real entity, otherwise he would have lit the candle.Therefore the idea of a supreme being only exists within mankind's imagination along with angels, demons, fairies, etc.

quote:

---

you would see that there is nothing known in the Universe which is of a higher order than man.

---

What do you mean of a higher order and how does that make us exquisite? Who determined the order?There are many animals who are stronger than us, better eyesight, etc. We can be eaten just as easily as any other creature. Natural disasters kill us just as easily as any thing else on the planet. We don't even know how to consistently eat right. We create things that are hazardous to the planet and ourselves. Not the brightest star in the sky, I would say.

quote:

---

He can even make nuclear reactions...

---

So we have the power to destroy the entire planet! Just like your God.Therefore mankind created his gods in his own image.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

Man has not the means within himself, to know if God exists or not. God has to be the one to show he exists. Thus, any argument as to the non-existance of God, based on science or experience or gut feeling, etc. is, I will argue, an inappropriate vehicle on which to arrive at a 'No' conclusion.

---

Are they appropriate for a "yes" conclusion though?I agree that definitions of good and evil have nothing to do with the independent existence of a supreme being.If you believe that your God exists, why do you say IF?

• If God exists then he is big.
• If God exists it means there exists a being who is first cause for everything.
• If God exists, then he 'created' us, the most exquisite thing, as far as we can tell, in all his Creation.
• If God exists, then it should be apparent that he is so very.....BIG, the only possible way that a mere man could come to any knowledge and understanding of him, would be if God was the one to reveal that knowledge of himself - to man.
• In other words, there is nothing in the 'Creation' which points, in and of itself, inarguably towards a Creator.

How does the existence of a supreme being automatically mean that it is BIG, that it was the first cause or that it flung the stars in the sky? Why does its existence mean it created us?You yourself said that there is nothing on this planet that points towards a creator.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

If we define God as a being with unlimited power and unlimited goodness then either this universe does not exist or that god does not.

---

Unlimited power and goodness are subjective and have evolved to this extreme today. The OT does not describe their God as having unlimited power. They did describe him as more powerful than the other gods.The ancients considered the sun to be God. That's why they couldn't look upon his face.So the sun has been proven not to be a being as have the planets and stars. As I've said before: As mankind gained knowledge of the world around him, he moved God beyond the boundaries of what can be proven. Would something that is real be that easily changed?Other gods that you consider falsified, do they still have strong follwers, believers?Quite frankly I think the term "unlimited good" is fantasy terminology.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

You appear to have made the leap into realising that it needs God to reveal himself in order for you to have proof of his existence.

---

Not really.There are no beings visible who match the various descriptions of a supreme being. Therefore there is no God.Those who believe claim God must reveal himself to mankind, as you did in the OP. So I asked him to light the candle. He didn't. Therefore there still is no God.

quote:

---

That supposes that God is at your beck and call - which is not rational.

---

Asking one question that requires a direct answer is not asking someone to be at my beck and call. It is quite rational to try and contact the supposed source of information, especially when the flunkies can't get their stories straight. Scams are run by diverting people away from contacting the supposed person in charge.

quote:

---

If blind disbelief then ok... but then their postion is irrational,

---

If blind disbelief is irrational, then blind belief is also irrational.

quote:

---

Someone can chose that there's no God but that has absolutely no bearing on whether God exists or not.

---

Someone can chose that there is a God, but that has absolutely no bearing on whether a God exists or not.

quote:

---

If they deny God on the basis of some thought out argument the ok too.

---

Who determines what is sound?IMO my grounds are very sound.Mankind's view of the sun, planets, stars, etc. have changed over time. We now know that they are not beings to be worshipped or served. Religion based on a deity needs a deity to continue. So to keep the religion alive the deity had to be adjusted to the new information.No matter what I say you will adjust the rules, characteristics, etc. of your god. Unfortunately since your god resides within your imagination and from there the written word, it will never be in the real world.Outside the written word, God does not appear to be capable of:
speaking aloud to large groups of people.
showing himself to a large group of people.
manipulating man made items.
responding clearly to an individual request.Bottom line: You've provided nothing in which to believe.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

Other gods that you consider falsified, do they still have strong follwers, believers?

​

I don't know. Are there any religions that worship a god that's only mostly powerful? That would be comfortable concluding that one thing or another is entirely beyond the power of their God, no matter His will?

---

My reasoning on this question is that since gods are from the imagination and their characteristics are adjusted to fit the needs of the culture or believer, IMO the characteristics of the gods that no longer have followers are no longer altered to avoid falsification. Does that make sense?I hadn't thought of it until reading one of your posts. Now I have a theory to check out.Thanks

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

Your IF’n game and inconsistent stance have actually proven my point of God residing in mankind’s imagination.

quote:

---

Thus, any argument as to the non-existance of God, based on science or experience or gut feeling, etc. is, I will argue, an inappropriate vehicle on which to arrive at a 'No' conclusion.

​

purpledawn writes:

​

Are they appropriate for a "yes" conclusion though?

​

Good point. No they are not. In and of themselves. I would argue that without a direct revealing by God himself, no one can be sure of his existance.

---

But then you state:

quote:

---

Whilst a believer cannot prove his case (because it relies ultimately on unproveable-to-others personal revelation by God) an athiest should be able to, because he is dealing solely with the natural, observable, objective reality - to which we are all privy. Which is why I posed the question.

---

You say we should be able to prove our case dealing solely with the natural, observable, etc; which is science BTW. Yet above you state that an argument to support our position based on science or experience is unacceptable.You are unable to support your position because it is an internal personal experience or gut feeling, but we are not allowed to argue from gut feeling.My little brother used to like wrestling with my sister or I, but he would always yell, "No hands, no feet!" which only applied to my sister and I of course. Obviously that's not wrestling. Just as what you are doing is not a fair discussion.Here is the larger picture as to why there is no god. Now if you wish to poke holes in my logic with actual logic, go for it, but IFs are not an acceptable counter.Since the idea of a supreme being God was created by mankind within his imagination, the characteristics/attributes will always change to evade proof or disproof.The existence of God has already been disproven thousands of years ago, but the legends continue.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

If God, he is not defined by any action or thought of man. God, if he exists, is defined by himself.

---

Thank you.By your own statement God does not exist.An existing god cannot be defined by any action or thought of man.
An existing God is only defined by himself.Therefore, since we only have definitions of actions or thoughts from man and God has obviously not defined himself (all we have is from man), then he does not exist because he has not defined himself.

quote:

---

Alternatively, you could attempt to state the rational proof for athiesm, which provides for a first cause

---

I don't have to provide for first cause. Science has already done that to my satisfaction, plus this is not a science forum. I have stated my rational proof for atheism. You have yet to show me that my theory is irrational.

quote:

---

A proof is something which leaves no rational room for manuoevre.

---

So where is your rational move? All you have provided so far is gobbledygook!

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

I have been dealing with athiests basis for validating their position. The athiest view (the 'strong' ones that is) is that there is no need to include God in the equation, because everything can be explained by along naturalistic lines. There is only the Natural - no Supernatural, ie: If it can't be explained naturally then it can't exist.

---

I see the problem now. I don't fit into your pigeon hole.Just like all the omni words referring to God, supernatural is another fiction word to cover the unexplained. It can be applied to ghosts, witches, fairies, magic, etc. An unexplained or unknown cause doesn't mean the cause is above known natural laws or greater than known natural laws. It just means it is unknown to us.

quote:

---

If it can't be explained naturally then it can't exist

---

Another nonsense statement.If there is something to explain, then it already exists.You choose to call the unknown, God. I don't. The unknown is well...unknown. It doesn't have to be attributed to anything. It is good source material for fiction though.My theory is based on the fact that the unknown was attributed to a god. When the unknown was no longer unknown it was no longer attributed to a god, other than maybe out of tradition.Again you are proving my theory.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

What's your definition of atheism?

---

You've read my posts concerning my position and you have my reasoning in Message 80.
You have yet to address them seriously.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

quote:

---

How has God "obviously not defined himself.

---

I have no definitions that are not manmade. If you have definitions that are not manmade, then you need to provide them.As far as First Cause goes, I am not a scientist and it has no bearing on my reasons for disbelief. Message 80 has the basis for my disbelief, but as I suspected you haven't paid any attention to it.Good Day

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

If that is your response to my reasons for disbelief, then you need to explain to me specifically what that means in relation to what I wrote and how it rationally falsifies my statements.As I said before, all you've provided is gobbledygook.

---

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France