Arguments against existence of God.

[Cherub786]

This quote from Richard Dawkins is from his Fixed-Point debate with John Lennox at the University of Alabama in 2007

And your point in quoting it? To inform us that even atheists experience the numinous? Well, no shit! We know that. They also remain atheists and don't happen to believe in your holy book.

Again, your point?

The point can be found in the context from the post in which I originally cited Dawkins

[Crossless2.0]

And your point in quoting it? To inform us that even atheists experience the numinous? Well, no shit! We know that. They also remain atheists and don't happen to believe in your holy book.

Again, your point?

The point can be found in the context from the post in which I originally cited Dawkins

Right, so my point stands. Atheists can also have a sense of the numinous without buying the whole theist package.

But you guys think that talking to figments of your imagination is a deeper response. It's laughable.

[Angrboda]

[Deesse23]

[T0 Th3 M4X]

What is existence?

I'm not an atheist because I choose not to form that opinion. When you say "arguments against the existence of God (or gods)" they're pretty much irrelevant, because none of them can ever be both exhaustive and conclusive to disprove any god whatsoever. You can't ever prove any "god" or "gods" doesn't exist, you can't obtain the knowledge necessary to rule out any "god" existing anywhere, and if one god is found anywhere at any point, it instantly negates all arguments for atheism. So I can't be "atheist" because it's an investment that can never be fully supported, and has no return in that investment. That doesn't mean atheists can't be scientific, productive, moral in behavioral choices, or geniuses who can change the world for the better, but it doesn't require the said opinion.

There is no value for atheism. You must prove a value of 0 and the theist must prove a value of at least 1. If there's nothing, it can't be relative to anything because there is nothing else to be relative to.

I don't have a problem with people being atheists, theists, or whatever they choose to claim to be. It's their choice, just the same as it is for anybody else.

[Angrboda]

I can't prove there's not a tiny teapot in orbit around the sun, somewhere, either. I suppose you find believing in mysterious teapots a worthy investment as well.

[The Grand Nudger]

  You must prove a value of 0

Wrong.

and the theist must prove a value of  at least 1.

Yup.

 It's their choice, just the same as it is for anybody else.

Wrong again. 

In this case..two out of three is pretty bad.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

  You must prove a value of 0

Wrong.

and the theist must prove a value of  at least 1.

Yup.

 It's their choice, just the same as it is for anybody else.

Wrong again. 

In this case..two out of three is pretty bad.

Uh huh. Wrong because you "said so" doesn't make me wrong.   If so, then you are 1 of 3 for saying I'm right once, and wrong twice.  See, I can do that too.  E-Z Peazy.

[Angrboda]

Wrong.

Yup.

Wrong again. 

In this case..two out of three is pretty bad.

Uh huh. Wrong because you "said so" doesn't make me wrong.   If so, then you are 1 of 3 for saying I'm right once, and wrong twice.  See, I can do that too.  E-Z Peazy.

I don't believe he said you were wrong just because he said so. I guess that makes you wrong again.

You've got quite the habit there. Do you get the DTs if you're not wrong for an extended period of time?

[Cherub786]

A common argument from atheists against the existence of God, specifically directed against monotheistic religions, is that why does the cosmological argument point to your specific God and not the gods of pagan religions like Hinduism, Norse mythology, Greek mythology, etc.

Firstly, most of those "gods" as conceived by those pagan religions are not believed to be the creator of the universe, but demigods that are not eternal, not omnipotent, not omniscient, and not possessing creative abilities to create something from nothing. In Hindu philosophy for example, it is believe the cosmos is eternal and that matter is eternal, which is perpetually reorganized and reshaped but never creatio ex nihilo. None of their gods has the ability to create ex nihilo.

Other religions like Mormonism hold the doctrine of "exaltation" that all the "gods" were once mortal and they became divine.

Furthermore, our monotheistic belief is that God has no physical limited form or image. It is reasonable to believe that if there is a God Who created the universe ex nihilo is a God that transcends anthropomorphic qualities and limited forms. The images of the pagan gods as conceived by their respective pagan religions are derived from human imagination. It is an example of man creating god in his image.

So if you look at Thor, Ram, Zeus, Krisna, Siva, Ganesh, and even Jesus, these are example of pagan "gods" that have human forms, bodies, and limitations which rule them out as being the One God that created the universe ex nihilo, and Who is unlimited, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.