Evidence God Exists

[tavarish]

Re: Dogma...http://www.the-reality-check.com/Dogma.html
Ok, some of it is nonsensical and inaccurate(hitler). But there's enough here to convince me you are just as dogmatic as me.

What the hell?

That site presupposes that all atheists somehow default to science. Atheism has no say in scientific matters, it does not presuppose a common set of beliefs. We have people who are scientific, as well as people who are unscientific on here, and made their atheism as a product of purely emotional responses.

Here's what it says:

Here is the short list:

*

The universe is self-existing and self created.
*

The Earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old.
*

Life began as a result of spontaneous generation.
*

Mankind is a result of organic evolution.
*

Morality is an artificial construct of humans-there is no transcendent moral standard
*

Religion and religious belief/dogma is harmful to human development
*

Religion is antithetical to reason

There are two others that are not universally accepted by atheists/agnostics, but a misunderstanding of them will taint the later topics, so I want to deal with them first.

*

Science is an authority
*

You can only rationally believe in that which can be scientifically proven.


And where exactly are they getting this information?

They refer throughout the entire article to SCIENTISTS, then somehow try to make that the necessary case for atheism. They also say things like :"Abiogenesis (the theory that life can arise spontaneously from non-life molecules under the right conditions) is foundational to atheism. "

That's just asinine. Abiogenesis has its own issues, and although is a viable theory, is nowhere near the "foundation" atheism apparently needs. Show me any definition of atheist, in any legitimate dictionary, anywhere, that says anything about abiogenesis, the world being billions of years old, or that it defaults to science.

It takes the opinions of a few and makes it into some kind of atheist manifesto, which all atheists must adhere to. This article could not be more wrong.

---

Methinks you doth protest too much...I've read plenty of postings on this forum doing just that, using science, evolution etc to disprove the existence of God, and would not have made the reference had I not.

Provide references to those posts which try to disprove God.

''Atheism deals in only one thing, not believing in deities. End of. It is up to every atheist individually to sort out what they do and do not accept as true or false or withhold judgment on.''
Belief in God deals in only one thing, believing in God. End of. It is up to every believer individually to sort out what they do or do not accept as true or false or withhold judgement on.
We are the same. I can at least admit it.

Here's where you're losing grip.

Atheism is the lack of belief in a God or Gods. That's it. It says absolutely nothing about anything else. No presuppositions, no dogma.

Theism, particularly monotheism, on the other hand, DOES:

Definition:
Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theism

The Oxford dictionary also adds:

Theism, in this specific sense, conceives of a god as personal, present and active in the governance and organization of the world and the universe.

This brings about many questions, such as how does the ruler wish for us to live? How did he create us? Why did he create us? What should I do to worship/please such a deity? Does it require worship? ...You know, reasons to back up your belief.

Subscribing to a particular God, such as the ones described in various Judeo-Christian holy books, bring on a whole new list of traits and doctrines.

This establishes dogma and is the crux of a cohesive worldview.