Necessity is not evidence

[Kitan Etos]

Something I have noticed with the regular theists who post here is that their main concern of evidence for god's existence is that he is necessary.

That is not evidence, because god is absolutely not necessary.

If god was a veritable necessity, people would be unable to live normal lives without god.

Considering that atheists are quite capable of living perfectly normal lives without god, the necessity of god is negated.

Necessity, after all, is the oxygen we breath. Without it, we would die. We are perfectly capable of not dying without god.

God is merely the crutch to which theists cling because they have deluded (yes, there is that apt word again) themselves into thinking life is meaningless without the ruling delusion.

[Esquilax]

Well, I think the idea is more that god is necessary for existence, but the trouble there is that theists really don't have any interest in doing more than asserting that. Like, say, demonstrating it, which their usual stops like Kalam don't pull off.

It's yet another in a long line of attempts to define god into existence by pretending reality is set up in a way that it isn't. They assert necessity, and then that's the end of the conversation: "Haven't you been listening, I said god was necessary!"

Presuppositionalists pull that trick all the time.

[jesus_wept]

Typical theist special pleading - god is necessary for existence but god doesnt need one to exist because I say so.

[RobbyPants]

[Minimalist]

Necessity is the mother of fuckers.

[downbeatplumb]

They try to argue god into existence in lieu of evidence.
At the end of the day arguments is all they have.

[Anomalocaris]

They try to argue god into existence in lieu of evidence.
At the end of the day arguments claims is all they have.

Fixed it for you.

They may be argumentative, but that doesn't mean they have arguments.

[MindForgedManacle]

I don't think any of you are understanding what theists (who understand the relevant concepts) mean when they say God is necessary. What they mean is that God cannot fail to exist for some logical reason, they are not saying something like "God has to exist because I need him too!"

[Esquilax]

I don't think any of you are understanding what theists (who understand the relevant concepts) mean when they say God is necessary. What they mean is that God cannot fail to exist for some logical reason, they are not saying something like "God has to exist because I need him too!"

The latter is the subtext though, as the logical reasons they state ultimately fail, and yet are never retracted. As I've said many times, you can't logic something into existence, and if your whole position attempts to do an end run around demonstrability by just arguing why it's impossible for something to not exist, well then you're probably hiding a more personal reason for why you think this thing should exist.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I don't think any of you are understanding what theists (who understand the relevant concepts) mean when they say God is necessary. What they mean is that God cannot fail to exist for some logical reason, they are not saying something like "God has to exist because I need him too!"

The latter is the subtext though, as the logical reasons they state ultimately fail, and yet are never retracted. As I've said many times, you can't logic something into existence, and if your whole position attempts to do an end run around demonstrability by just arguing why it's impossible for something to not exist, well then you're probably hiding a more personal reason for why you think this thing should exist.

But you can prove something true about existence by applying reason to experience independent of what one hopes to find.

Your psychological speculations about believers do not apply to all. I was an atheist but reluctantly accepted the reality of God when confronted with specific philosophical problems. Just because someone reaches a different conclusion than you does not always mean they must be delutional, weak, or stupid. Maybe they're merely wrong. And just maybe you are wrong.