(March 12, 2017 at 8:52 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(March 12, 2017 at 8:37 pm)TheAtheologian Wrote: Read the title of this thread again.

You need to read what Min said again. There are no convincing arguments. There just aren't.

I don't because I am the one that titled this thread and they aren't confronting the title question. The question is, What are the most convincing theist arguments you heard of?

You can't know that none of the arguments are convincing overall if you are unaware of the impact of these arguments. If you are aware, then it is likely that you can answer the thread question.

---

(March 12, 2017 at 9:32 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Have to side with Min on this one.  If there were convincing theist arguments, I wouldn't be an atheist.

Boru

The question of the thread doesn't entail that an answer must hold that some theist arguments are convincing on balance.

(March 12, 2017 at 8:37 pm)TheAtheologian Wrote:

(March 12, 2017 at 8:32 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Actually, it does.

Anything that proceeds from "there is a magic man in the sky" has an enormous burden to overcome at the outset.

Read the title of this thread again.

It's not that complicated.  The answer remains NONE.

Quote:“Let us account for all we see by the facts we know. If there are things for which we cannot account, let us wait for light. To account for anything by supernatural agencies is, in fact to say that we do not know. Theology is not what we know about God, but what we do not know about Nature.”

― Robert G. Ingersoll, Some Mistakes of Moses

You are asking me to choose which turd smells best.  I am not interested in smelling turds at all.

The most convincing arguments don't come from theists. They come from psychology/psychiatry and address mans ability to rationalize, justify and believe in delusions when necessary to fulfill an individual or group need.

Thank GOD the US Christian community was united in condemning this movie as blasphemy, I was nearly converted by it.  If not  for the outcry I would be a zealot for the divinity of this version of Christ.

There are no degrees of conviction; something either is convincing or it's not. And as others have said, if I found even one convincing I would be a theist.

That's not to say I can't be convinced, only that I haven't been yet. It's like someone told me that there's a perfect recipe for duck soup, that tastes like nothing of this world. Yet every combination I've been given tastes like snakeoil. Hardly my fault.

Got to agree with Min. None are convincing at all. Of course some are more preposterous than others. But that is a long way from saying any of them are at all convincing.

The most unconvincing argument for me would be the Mormon apologists attempting to explain why God subsequently changed all the revelations after he gave them, and for many revelations, God took several stabs at it till He got it right.

What a way to run a universe !!

I don't see the title of the thread as being restricted to religious subjects, there are many discussions (which have nothing to do with anything religion) where in spite of proof, atheists refuse to be convinced.

So miss me with the "If I see evidence that God exists, I'll accept it" nonsense.

If you can't accept things that are easily provable, such as Denmark not having a secular government.  To this day not one of the atheists involved in that discussion has come out and admitted they were wrong, so either they still aren't convinced, or they will never admit to being convinced...

It seems to be Huggy's nap time again.

If a theist argument was "convincing" (using your word), to me, I would have stopped being an atheist from that moment on.

Oh look. I'm still an atheist.