If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out...

[Manta]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

I'm liking where this thread is going, and that these ideas are amongst us ~ I was going to reply with many points, but you guys have already beat me to most of the good ones =)


-Manta-

 

[Y-Disciple]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

You don't convert from theism to atheism. You're already an atheist for the other 11ty billion gods out there, you just believe in 1 more god than the other atheists.

What's your point?

No it's actually not the only theory people have thought of. I seem to recall universes giving birth to other universes in black holes as one theory... also membranes hitting each other causing big bangs as another.

I already addressed this in another post.

No, they don't. They took a survey in both the USA and England, and it shows an overwhelmingly large number are atheist and only a small number believe in some sort of god(s).

Link?

Why would you limit a discussion to opinions when facts exist and are so much better?

Depends on what you call fact. Since God is not yet proven to exist, the atheists in the thread are gonna be all "It's fact that God doesn't exist because science is responsible for everything," or vice versa, which is not fact, it's an opinion. Show me hard facts that show God doesn't exist, or whatever you're trying to prove. Otherwise, it's an opinion.

Why does god exist? Why does god need to exist? If god didn't create the big bang, god didn't create the matter in the universe, god didn't create the Earth, god didn't seed it with life, god didn't cause evolution, and god hasn't done any miracles attributed to him/her/it, then what does god do? Why does god exist? If god has absolutely no point and doesn't do anything at all besides cause things like 9/11, the Crusades and genocide all over the world, why would you believe he exists? And if he does, is he really worth worshiping?

You know as well as I do that no one knows this. So what are you trying to say?

 

[LKV]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

if you claim that something exists, then then burden of proof is on you. it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something.

part of the problem with these types of arguments is that faith in something intangible or not-yet proven is not arrived at by reason, but by some set of experiences. since it has no logical and empirical motivation, it's almost silly to try to impose reason on a belief that is fundamentally irrational. that is not to say that those who believe in a god are irrational people-- certainly we all have some sort of irrational beliefs-- it's just to say that since this type of belief is at its core not rational, and therefore cannot be defended from a rational or logical framework.

 

[Archangel]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

if you claim that something exists, then then burden of proof is on you. it is impossible to prove the non-existence of something.

part of the problem with these types of arguments is that faith in something intangible or not-yet proven is not arrived at by reason, but by some set of experiences. since it has no logical and empirical motivation, it's almost silly to try to impose reason on a belief that is fundamentally irrational. that is not to say that those who believe in a god are irrational people-- certainly we all have some sort of irrational beliefs-- it's just to say that since this type of belief is at its core not rational, and therefore cannot be defended from a rational or logical framework.

Best post in thread. It should end the argument, but of course it won't.

 

[BlackDragon37]

If I had $1 for every time God bailed me out..

i tend to agree with this line of thinking, but if everyone shared at least one moral principle, could this particular principle be considered objective, at least within the domain of humanity?

I think if everyone shared at least one moral principle, then it would be collectively subjective, not objective. This is because regarless of whether or not everyone agrees to it, it is still a created truth rather than a discovered one. It still relies on experinces and preferences as its foundations.

If the one principle is mind-independent, then it's not a moral. It's an instinct. Because then it's dispositional, unlearned, and inherited. Therefore no one would question it. Morality gives leeway to question.