(May 12, 2023 at 1:56 pm)Kingpin Wrote: OK, reaching out to my agnostic/atheist friends.  I'm very curious, genuinely interested, are there are "arguments" that theists have provided for proof of a God's existence (not even the Christian God), that you found compelling?  Or caused you to pause and perhaps say, there might be A God out there?

I found that when it's all broken down in most debates, an agnostic/atheist boils down to moral arguments/judgments against God, which in and of themselves does not disprove there being a God per se.  Just that they refuse to accept a God they find reprehensible.

I find that there are a lot of shitty arguments and unjustified confidence on both sides. I've not met what I consider to be a necessarily valid argument against the existence of God, or a god, but what passes for arguments for the existence of God, or a god, tend to be even worse. I don't believe, but I lean toward the spiritual. In the past I've found solace in Taoism and Hindu belief. I am recommitting to my Taoist beliefs these days, but I'm aligned with Hume that any book (or doctrine) which contains metaphysics should be consigned to the flames. Reason is the only true light, and the further into the weeds we go, the more likely we are to end up lost, arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Those who lose their way
Are lost.

― Tao The Ching, Ch. 23

Quote:I wouldn't call these arguments.

they are you simply don't like them. You by contrast produce nothing on this forum but hot air.

Let's be honest, very few atheists read all the variants of standard theistic arguments and properly refuted them.

(May 12, 2023 at 3:38 pm)Angrboda Wrote:

(May 12, 2023 at 1:56 pm)Kingpin Wrote: OK, reaching out to my agnostic/atheist friends.  I'm very curious, genuinely interested, are there are "arguments" that theists have provided for proof of a God's existence (not even the Christian God), that you found compelling?  Or caused you to pause and perhaps say, there might be A God out there?

I found that when it's all broken down in most debates, an agnostic/atheist boils down to moral arguments/judgments against God, which in and of themselves does not disprove there being a God per se.  Just that they refuse to accept a God they find reprehensible.

I find that there are a lot of shitty arguments and unjustified confidence on both sides.  I've not met what I consider to be a necessarily valid argument against the existence of God, or a god, but what passes for arguments for the existence of God, or a god, tend to be even worse.  I don't believe, but I lean toward the spiritual.  In the past I've found solace in Taoism and Hindu belief.  I am recommitting to my Taoist beliefs these days, but I'm aligned with Hume that any book (or doctrine) which contains metaphysics should be consigned to the flames.  Reason is the only true light, and the further into the weeds we go, the more likely we are to end up lost, arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Those who lose their way
Are lost.

― Tao The Ching, Ch. 23

One need not devise a "valid argument" against something whose existence has never been proven in the first place. I'm an atheist because I have never heard an argument or seen evidence for God's existence which will stand up to rational scrutiny. The degree of confidence I have in this position is irrelevant.

The burden of proof lies on he who alleges. Religious people should know that I’m perfectly willing to believe in god(s), ghosts, mediums, demons, angels, spirits, channeling, miracles, horoscopes, astrology, psychics, Ouija boards, the supernatural, and anything else for that matter as long as they adhere to one proviso: Prove it! Don’t give me speculation, guesses, hopes, dreams, wishes, desires, beliefs, faith (or appeals to faith), or indoctrinations. Don’t give me one-time-only, non-repeatable, non-testable events. Don’t give me internal alterations in one’s psychology or physiology that can’t be tested observed, or demonstrated, only felt or believed. And don’t give me effects that can’t be clearly related to the supposed cause.

I have no objection to believing in a god as long as proof based upon a rational standard of knowledge is forthcoming. Is that too much to ask? But surely theists can’t expect me to adopt their beliefs on the basis of what has been presented thus far. Every “proof” I’ve heard and every piece of evidence I’ve seen for the existence of god(s) is easily countered by rational evidence and arguments to the contrary. No convincing evidence for the existence of any deity has ever emerged. But I’m more than willing to listen to theistic arguments or view theistic evidence as long as cross-examination is permitted. As conditions now stand, theology rests far more on superstition and faith than upon facts and reason.

(May 12, 2023 at 5:54 pm)The End of Atheism Wrote: Let's be honest, very few atheists read all the variants of standard theistic arguments and properly refuted them.

And vice versa.

Quote:Let's be honest, very few atheists read all the variants of standard theistic arguments and properly refuted them.

According to you....

Right, so, atheists don't actually read the theist arguments properly, but also...too.... atheists are authoritative when they totally do say that those arguments that they haven't read can't be shit on mercilessly.

Makes all the senses.

(May 12, 2023 at 1:56 pm)Kingpin Wrote: OK, reaching out to my agnostic/atheist friends.  I'm very curious, genuinely interested, are there are "arguments" that theists have provided for proof of a God's existence (not even the Christian God), that you found compelling?  Or caused you to pause and perhaps say, there might be A God out there?

I found that when it's all broken down in most debates, an agnostic/atheist boils down to moral arguments/judgments against God, which in and of themselves does not disprove there being a God per se.  Just that they refuse to accept a God they find reprehensible.

None.   Not only are there none that is compelling, there are none that is not laughable.    Not one rises anywhere close to being the most vaguely suggestive evidence,   It is comical that anyone can be so clueless about the meaning of the word “proof” as to grandiloquently style such airy claims for god “proof”.   It is as if they don’t know what proof actually is, but like the fact that this “proof” thing seem to convince some people in things like mathematics and rhetorics, therefore it can’t hurt to call anything that seem to them to be enough to persuade the gullible a “proof”

You don’t need to refute every variant.   It is a waste of time to refute any variant fanatics dreamt up.   You only need to see what is the base of which this is but a variant.   If the base is bullshit, any variant of it is just more bullshit attempting to obfuscate the bullshitness of known bullshit.

I was exiled from Sunday School when I was seven, for asking awkward questions about the Noachian myth.

Well, okay so if we are being honest then as a believer I have to say that serious atheism...the kind that is not just a negative reaction to religion or simple lack of belief; but rather, a deep reflection on the absurdity of the human condition in a world devoid of transcendence...that kind of bold and noble atheism that dares to look into the abyss.
..serious atheism like that is more complimentary than opposed to theistic belief.