Total Posts:1|Showing Posts:1-1
Does God Exist
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/21/2016 8:56:45 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Following an exchange in the comments section of one of the debates I'm having, I thought I'd start a new topic to address a number of arguments in favour of the existence of a God:
Since you think materialistic proof is needed to explain God and believers are apparently burdened to prove that, can I hear your physical evidence that a baby has no knowledge of theism?
In a discussion about something's existence, you either believe it and the conversation ends or you claim that it is a fact, in which case you are subject to scientific scrutiny. Facts need evidence. Belief doesn't. 'Facts' about anything supernatural, are fake. It's my opinion that a new born baby has no knowledge of theism.
( I don't believe a baby has to have knowledge of theism but you see my point) we cannot fathom the power of God plays in the miracle of a new life, also a baby cannot be an atheist because it cannot be convinced a God doesn't exist, at the very least a baby can be agnostic.
Atheism is the lack of belief in a God. No atheist is convinced a God doesn't exist because nobody knows either way. We just think it's unbelievably improbable to the point of stupidity, or at least I do. A baby probably lacks belief in anything and everything so yes it is an atheist and an agnostic and a secularist.
Life is about teaching and learning not just as a child but this is why we teach our children/anyone about God, because he instructed us to do that.
Do you threaten your children with the idea of Hell?
I can see where you are coming from with the default position but I suggest you re-read my comment on Adam and Eve (the actual default position of the first human beings with souls) where God reveals/teaches his existence directly to them.
Anecdotes aren't really of interest to me.
I think you mean modern religion not God, God is eternal and not bound by time. Since the physical evidence is of great importance, what evidence do you have to back up your claim that religion has to be a certain age for it to be correct?
Sure. I didn't claim that, I asked why your God and not any of the others, particularly the ones that preceded it?
I know God exists for a fact, it has been revealed to me because of my persistence in faith.
Faith is hope, how can hope/faith/belief/trust somehow turn into fact?
If you don't believe me then that is your issue not mine, you cant tell me what I know or tell me that I don't know something.
I know something you don't. I know that you don't know that you don't know that a God exists. As I've said before, if you know God exists, science would be able to test and prove it. You believe your God exists, there's nothing wrong with just believing. Most theists can admit that.
God is a question of philosophy
Then how could you possible know your God exists?
not science, science is just a method we use to understand the physical world.
Absolutely. But God is not testable in the physical world currently.
I would say it is a lie to say God does not exist without knowing 100%:
I completely agree.
and then cop out by saying you don't have to prove it.
No one says that God doesn't exist so no claim has been made. Only stupid people say God doesn't exist. Even if that is true, regardless of its likelihood, there is no proof so no claim is valid.
If you call yourself atheist (convinced God doesn't exist) you have to back it up.
Again, atheism is a lack of belief, not the belief that a God does not exist. This is a widely accepted definition. You are either unaware of this or you are redefining it to suit your argument. Both possibilities are unfortunate.
I agree Impartial, something could come from nothing but you are still not providing evidence of how this can happen.
I said could, I merely acknowledged that something may be possible.
We can't be naive to think science MUST prove it or its not true.
Science has no interest in theism. The two are in conflict.
In your own comments you are answering your own question...
If it doesn't have to be logical previous to the big bang then why does God have to be logical to us?
It doesn't, that's for you to figure out for yourself. I have no vested interest in it.
I wouldn't say we have no knowledge just that we choose to reject certain knowledge.
Knowledge is useless to science unless it can be tested.
God is not a being like us, he is not bound by space and time, and is eternal, he is existence itself and did not begin to exist. His existence is not fully fathomable (understandably, because we are not God) debating between different Gods is something I cant get into on a comments section but would be happy to debate.
This is a little off topic, don't you agree?
I will say, there is only one God, you cannot have more than one God that would contradict his omnipotence, having more than one God would mean that one of those Gods would know something the other doesn't and vise versa.
If you say so. If your claim concerns the physical world then you know what you have to do. If it's within the realm of the supernatural then I'll treat that as a statement and leave it at that.
To believe is to know nothing.