RE: "God doesn't Exist"- Claim or Conclusion
December 20, 2016 at 8:44 pm
(This post was last modified: December 20, 2016 at 8:45 pm by Simon Moon.)
I do not claim to know, with absolute certainty, that a god does not exist.
But the only place that my lack of absolute certainty resides is:
I do not believe that we can be absolutely certainty about anything, except maybe esoteric concepts, like: I am certain that I exist, or I am certain that I am not omniscient.
But my certainty with regards to a generic deistic god is pretty close to certainty. Even closer with regards to man made gods (Zeus, Allah, Yahweh, Shiva, Et Al).
But when it comes to debate, the claim that gods do not exist, does not have to be defended, so I really don't worry about it. All that has to be defended is the fact that the case for the existence of gods has never met its burden of proof.
It's not my fault that theists, have lowered the basketball hoop to 8', then brag about how well they can dunk.
But the only place that my lack of absolute certainty resides is:
I do not believe that we can be absolutely certainty about anything, except maybe esoteric concepts, like: I am certain that I exist, or I am certain that I am not omniscient.
But my certainty with regards to a generic deistic god is pretty close to certainty. Even closer with regards to man made gods (Zeus, Allah, Yahweh, Shiva, Et Al).
But when it comes to debate, the claim that gods do not exist, does not have to be defended, so I really don't worry about it. All that has to be defended is the fact that the case for the existence of gods has never met its burden of proof.
It's not my fault that theists, have lowered the basketball hoop to 8', then brag about how well they can dunk.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
