RE: Question for atheists...
February 19, 2013 at 2:23 pm
(This post was last modified: February 19, 2013 at 2:39 pm by Simon Moon.)
(February 19, 2013 at 1:01 pm)BeeDeePee Wrote:(February 19, 2013 at 12:17 pm)Simon Moon Wrote: The main reasons for me is the lack of demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid logic to support the existence of a god or gods.The lack of evidence is probably the most common argument that atheists use, but I think it's missing the point, because it leads us to a debate where from the very beginning, the final conclusion is known and evident: there's no evidence that supports God' existence or existence of any other metaphysical being.
In other words, the claim that a god exists put forth from theists has not met its burden of proof.
Not just that such evidence doesnt' exist, but it is impossible to exist. Claim that states something like "God exists" is not scientifically tested, becaue you can not use hypothetico-deductive method upon that claim.
It's not just lack of evidence, I also included that there is no valid or sound logic that supports the existence of a god.
So, let me say for arguments sake, I accept your premises.
Since we both agree that evidence does not exist for the existence of a god, what should be my justification to believe the claim that the Christian god exists? Why should I believe the Christian god exists, but dismiss the existence of all those other gods, that also lack evidence for their existence?
What heuristic should I employ to determine that the Christian god exists, that will also dismiss the existence of all the other gods?
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.
