How Much Evidence Will It Take You To Believe In God???

[Edward John]

1)Opinion Then, it would seem, that without God you would have to explain how the universe came into existence.  Can you please do that?  Tell us how the universe came into existence from your atheistic perspective?

2)There is no evidence for God, You can't say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the world. That isn't possible.

3)True and already proved on page 1.

1) Not opinion but evidence. The existence of the modern world is testament to the validity of science. It would not exist were it not for science. Science can explain to a greater or lesser extent how everything has come about since the Big Bang. We don't know everything, like for example why the Big Bang happened. But we know enough to make any form of god completely irrelevant to every day life. The gap that God can fit into is getting smaller the more we learn. This is why we no longer have a god of thunder for example. As for how the universe came into existence, we know that energy cannot be created not destroyed, but we know that matter came from energy. Can a universe consisting of nothing but energy be rightfully deemed to exist?

2) I do not need to look at all the evidence in the world. First there are enough theists looking for evidence who would only be too happy to tell us all about it if they ever found any. No evidence that stands up to any scrutiny has yet been found. Secondly, there can be no evidence because a god can't even be defined. You would first need to know what a god was in order to show evidence for it. No one can come up with a proper definition of what a god could even be.

3) So you are openly admitting that you are making a strawman argument.

Again, all you are doing is offering your opinion. Why should any of us in here adopt your position, your opinion, as the best representation of reality? The Big Bang, for example is essentially the claim that the universe came into existence spontaneously in the distant past. I assume that you acknowledge the Big Bang. If I am wrong, please let me know. Nevertheless, how would you explain the cause of this sudden initial "bang"? You cannot and no one can. Does any scientist know the physical properties of existence before the universe began? No. Can something bring itself into existence if it does not already exist? No. The universe began and it had a cause. How did it begin and why? No explanations can be offered with any evidence to explain the conditions before the Big Bang. Yet, people, scientists and atheists included, merely accept that an unknown, unexplainable cause brought the universe into existence. Isn't this faith? Where is the proof? 

[robvalue]

Nope, no one knows what happened before the big bang. Our reality may have already existed before it. We don't know.

Don't know =/= Make up whatever you want

If you have to have a story to make yourself feel better, that's up to you. I'm quite comfortable accepting the current limits of our ability to test the origins of our reality.

[FatAndFaithless]

Again, all you are doing is offering your opinion. Why should any of us in here adopt your position, your opinion, as the best representation of reality? The Big Bang, for example is essentially the claim that the universe came into existence spontaneously in the distant past. I assume that you acknowledge the Big Bang. If I am wrong, please let me know.

Bolded mine. Okay, you're wrong. That's not what the Big Bang Theory is. You're either ignorant of its actual meaning (which could be remedied by 20 seconds on google) or you're being dishonest. Either way, I don't think people should waste their time with this.

[Minimalist]

I'll put $10 on ignorant for this fuckhead, F&F.

[pocaracas]

The irony is back! With a vengeance!

Again, all you are doing is offering your opinion.

You too!!

Why should any of us in here adopt your position, your opinion, as the best representation of reality? 

Yeah, why would any of us adopt YOUR position, YOUR opinion, as the best representation of reality?

The Big Bang, for example is essentially the claim that the universe came into existence spontaneously in the distant past. I assume that you acknowledge the Big Bang. If I am wrong, please let me know. Nevertheless, how would you explain the cause of this sudden initial "bang"? You cannot and no one can.

If no one can, then the honest answer is "no one can. No one knows."
But is that what you propose we do? NO!
So, you are, inherently, being dishonest.

Does any scientist know the physical properties of existence before the universe began? No. Can something bring itself into existence if it does not already exist? No. The universe began and it had a cause. How did it begin and why? No explanations can be offered with any evidence to explain the conditions before the Big Bang. Yet, people, scientists and atheists included, merely accept that an unknown, unexplainable cause brought the universe into existence. Isn't this faith? Where is the proof?

Are you seriously wanting proof for something that is admittedly unknown and unexplained by science?

And you think I'm arrogant?!

How about YOUR position, YOUR opinion, huh? Where's the proof?

[Edward John]

So you deny god.  You don't lack belief, or have a non position. You openly deny. Since you cannot demonstrate that there is no God, all you have is your opinion.  Why are you in here arguing about your opinion?  I think it is arrogant for you to want others to believe in your opinion.

Your ability to understand other people's posts is appallingly deficient. Just because God isn't a very good as an explanation (doesn't really help us understand what actually happened) doesn't mean it's not the case. Your desperate need to have atheists deny God so they can watch pornography seems to be biasing your understanding of what we actually say.

Btw, there's no statistical evidence that belief in God in general or Christianity in particular prevents people from viewing pornography, so how could not being able to view pornography be a disincentive for atheists to believe? If you imagine that we have too much integrity to cherry pick Christianity for the parts we agree with and ignore or reject the parts that we don't like or find inconvenient, you may be on to something.

 
False, I understand clearly all your moves. God is the only and the best explanation of why we are here and we can't go beyond what we don't know God is only option we have of what actually happend(There isn't any other way) Only God has the power to create the universe and wisdom to create it nobody else can.

Catholic Christians don't watch porn because it is a sin. CCC(Catechism of the Catholic Church)2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

[Mister Agenda]

Again, all you are doing is offering your opinion.  

All you've offered is your opinion. That you've offered proof is also your opinion, one that you hold despite having the logical flaws in your so-called proof patiently (and impatiently) pointed out.

If a logical argument contains a fallacy, the conclusion may be true, but not for the reasoning given. If a logical argument is free from fallacy but is based on an unsound premise; the conclusion may be true, but not based on that premise. The essential feature needed to legitimately claim you've proved something is that people who are not invested in agreeing with you find it convincing; because they accept that the premise is true and the reasoning is not fallacious...if that's the case, the only remaining flaw is that there's no evidence that something is obliged to exist because you've come up with a good argument for it; but reasonable people would at least have to acknowledge that it's a good argument. Yours isn't. If you are correct about the existence and nature of God, it's not because of the reasons you've given.

If I had to point at a single factor that precipitated my atheism, it would be exposure to 'proofs' such as this, which made me actually think about what they were saying and realize that no one has ever devised an argument for the existence of God that isn't flawed. Folks like you do more to make atheists than anyone, because you don't realize that the true purpose of apologetics is not to convert the disbeliever, but to persuade those who already believe that their faith is reasonable...and it's fairly effective at that, so long as the intended audience wants to believe badly enough to avoid scrutinizing the arguments too closely.

[Edward John]

The irony is back! With a vengeance!

Again, all you are doing is offering your opinion.

You too!!

Why should any of us in here adopt your position, your opinion, as the best representation of reality? 

Yeah, why would any of us adopt YOUR position, YOUR opinion, as the best representation of reality?

The Big Bang, for example is essentially the claim that the universe came into existence spontaneously in the distant past. I assume that you acknowledge the Big Bang. If I am wrong, please let me know. Nevertheless, how would you explain the cause of this sudden initial "bang"? You cannot and no one can.

If no one can, then the honest answer is "no one can. No one knows."
But is that what you propose we do? NO!
So, you are, inherently, being dishonest.

Does any scientist know the physical properties of existence before the universe began? No. Can something bring itself into existence if it does not already exist? No. The universe began and it had a cause. How did it begin and why? No explanations can be offered with any evidence to explain the conditions before the Big Bang. Yet, people, scientists and atheists included, merely accept that an unknown, unexplainable cause brought the universe into existence. Isn't this faith? Where is the proof?

Are you seriously wanting proof for something that is admittedly unknown and unexplained by science?

And you think I'm arrogant?!

How about YOUR position, YOUR opinion, huh? Where's the proof?

Atheism has indeed failed.  Please tell me how you know you're atheism is true.  Please tell me why any of us should adopt your opinion as the truth.

[Mister Agenda]

Your ability to understand other people's posts is appallingly deficient. Just because God isn't a very good as an explanation (doesn't really help us understand what actually happened) doesn't mean it's not the case. Your desperate need to have atheists deny God so they can watch pornography seems to be biasing your understanding of what we actually say.

Btw, there's no statistical evidence that belief in God in general or Christianity in particular prevents people from viewing pornography, so how could not being able to view pornography be a disincentive for atheists to believe? If you imagine that we have too much integrity to cherry pick Christianity for the parts we agree with and ignore or reject the parts that we don't like or find inconvenient, you may be on to something.

 
False, I understand clearly all your moves. God is the only and the best explanation of why we are here and we can't go beyond what we don't know God is only option we have of what actually happend(There isn't any other way) Only God has the power to create the universe and wisdom to create it nobody else can't.

Do you know what an unsupported assertion is, and why no justification is required to dismiss one?

Catholic Christians don't watch porn because it is a sin. CCC(Catechism of the Catholic Church)2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

Then Catholic countries should show much lower rates of porn viewing, shouldn't they?

[pocaracas]

The irony is back! With a vengeance!

You too!!

Yeah, why would any of us adopt YOUR position, YOUR opinion, as the best representation of reality?


If no one can, then the honest answer is "no one can. No one knows."
But is that what you propose we do? NO!
So, you are, inherently, being dishonest.



Are you seriously wanting proof for something that is admittedly unknown and unexplained by science?

And you think I'm arrogant?!

How about YOUR position, YOUR opinion, huh? Where's the proof?

Atheism has indeed failed.  Please tell me how you know you're atheism is true.  Please tell me why any of us should adopt your opinion as the truth.

No, you came to this forum.
Obviously, you want to share something with us.
so...

YOU tell me how you know your belief is true... which, btw, I accept that your belief is true. Just like my atheism is true. It is true that my mind has no belief in any god, hence practices atheism. It also seems to be true that your mind has a belief for a particular god, hence practices that belief.

And, also, YOU tell me why any of us should adopt your opinion as the truth.