Religion is stupid and there is still a God in heaven

Debate Room
81

Hell if I know. I lost track of everything while I was trying to get all that bird seed out of my teeth… (breaking floss off between my incisors)… Dammit, Skrit…

Oh, my bad. I figured with your name you would be pretty good with measurements. Just wanted to get a rough idea so I could figure out what I should take along for the trip. Would hate to go all day without snacks and a good book to read. In all fairness, though, I can see where it would be complicated to make that calculation. With god always hiding and quite possibly moving around from place to place to avoid detection, heaven might be pretty hard to pin down.

Well, hell! You could have at least warned me when you passed that Raisinets box to me.

1 Like
82

Well, in my defense I thought it was a box of Good and Plenty…

83

If God has taken such extreme and thorough measures to hide Himself . . . then it seems reasonable to assume that He doesn’t want us to believe in Him.

So . . . is being an atheist godly?

84

Well… not exactly. You are correct that if you don’t tell anyone you will not have to defend your position. So, in this special instance when you believe a god does not exist and you do not share that opinion openly, no one is going to ask you to demonstrate your position, which you would not be able to do anyway. So, you are safe within your illusions of the world around you. You certainly do not need to test all you profess to know.

However, one must ask one’s self (if they want to be honest in their beliefs) what actual evidence they have for such a position. Does one want to believe what is true? If you care about what is true, then of course you must justify your belief to yourself. An extension of that is sharing your beliefs with others and getting external opinions. It is easy to fool ourselves.

I may be one of the more opinionated people on the site, but that is largely because I have no fear of just saying what I think. When people have an issue with it, I get feedback. In doing so, I alter or defend my position. I have had interactions that have gone both ways., Sometimes it is useful to get feedback and be challenged. Then again, if you just want to sit on your ass in a banana tree and pretend you know something about the world, no one can stop you.

So, if anyone merely does not believe or claim a god exists there is no burden of proof. I am telling you that I do not believe the claim. I am reporting my internal state. Will you argue that I actually do believe the claim? The claim I am making is about me. “I” don’t believe your claim. You can certainly ask why I don’t believe the claim. But the reply, "It has not met its burden of proof,’ is sufficient. It is also correct to ask for more evidence. What evidence do you have? “Sheldon is great at doing this. Over and over and over.” Perhaps if you gave me some more information. (Do you not understand the null hypothesis? The null hypothesis can be described as the hypothesis in which no relationship exists between two sets of data or variables being analyzed, this relationship can not be demonstrated to exist. The goal is to reject the null hypothesis and show a connection.)

There is no connection between god and existence until it can be demonstrated. This means no good reason to believe the claim that a god exists. It is not evidence for the opposite claim (Well actually it is in specific circumstances. I don’t want to explain those now.) So if you make the opposite claim you have the same burden of proof. You must demonstrate that the God thing does not exist or admit that there is no connection between non-existence and the god thing you speak of.

This runs into some problems. You can simply define a god thing that does not exist and assert you are correct. However, you have not taken into consideration all god things ever conceived or those to be conceived. Making the assertion that ‘no god exists’ is folly. There is just no reason to make that claim.

Now, with that said, very specific gods can be demonstrated not to exist. But not all. Some gods as in the deist gods who create the world and then go away, are the very same things as a missing god, or not god at all. That does not mean they do not exist. It means we ask for evidence and when none is forthcoming, the null hypothesis can not be rejected. There is no connection between gods and existence until a connection can be demonstrated.

So, do you care about what is true or not?

2 Likes
85

Now does that mean there is no such thing as God? If we can’t prove the existence of a god in physical or actual form, whatever that may be, does that mean a god does not or cannot exist?

There are no celestial gods in this solar system but all humans have god-like powers. We can create things that don’t exist and destroy just about everything that does exist on our world.

86

Okay, now the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. Have at it…

87

Okay, now the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. Have at it…

What did Jesus’ brothers say to him?

John 7:15 (NKJV) = “7 After these things Jesus walked in Galilee; for He did not want to walk in Judea, because the [a]Jews sought to kill Him. 2 Now the Jews’ Feast of Tabernacles was at hand. 3 His brothers therefore said to Him, “Depart from here and go into Judea, that Your disciples also may see the works that You are doing. 4 For no one does anything in secret while he himself seeks to be known openly. If You do these things, show Yourself to the world.” 5 For even His brothers did not believe in Him.”

So, if the God character exists then why is he hiding? He used to chat face-to face with all kinds of people and even go on picnics with them. It should be very easy for God to realign all of the stars and galaxies into an imagine of himself or take all of humanity on a sight-seeing tour of the universe.

Or just take all of us to the moon for a picnic.

Humanity has worshiped over 33,000,000 deities and not one of them has ever been real. The question is why do you believe in the ancient Middle Eastern ethnocentric Jewish version and ignore the other 33,000,000?

88

Are you asking me that?

1 Like
89

Could you demonstrate some objective evidence to support this assertion please, only while I don’t believe any deities exist, that claim seems like an unfalsifiable idea to me, if so no one can know whether it is true or not.

I don’t think you understand your burden of proof, or even why you incurred it. However your bible quote doesn’t objectively support your claim here:

I am also dubious that this claim can be properly evidenced, as it seems to be unfalsifiable.

You are using an a rgumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy to try and reverse the burden of proof your claim incurred, by appealing to others to offer contrary or alternative evidence or explanation, this is irrational.

I think I know the answer here, but can you demonstrate any objective evidence that any deity ever chatted to anyone, face to face or otherwise? If the answer is no, then how is this at all relevant to your claim?

Relevance to your claim?

Let me help you out, your claim was a sweeping absolute, and thus all these types of deity and evidence you are listing as hypotheticals are irrelevant to your claim, all one need do is posit an unfalsifiable deity to counter your own unfalsifiable claim. This is why I disbelieve all unfalsifiable claims, but keep an open mind, and remain agnostic about them.

Great, now demonstrate some objective evidence to show how you know this to be true. I don’t believe any deity or deities exist, because I have never seen any objective evidence to support this, or that a deity is even possible, but your are not just disbelieving in any extant deity or deities, you are making a sweeping claim they don’t exist, is it possible you don’t understand the difference, and the epistemological consequences?

Who is that aimed at, you need to quote them making that claim, or use the post reply function, as we have no idea who you’re responding to. Also this is still irrelevant to your claim, just because someone can’t disprove your claim does not mean it is true, this is called an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.

90

File Cabinet reminds me a lot of Metrologist (I think) who used the same tactic of trying to control the narrative by inviting one to argue for a god. Similar results.

91

Well, maybe he’s just anti-social? I mean, we already know he’s insecure, homophobic, and not very popular with the ladies. Stands to reason he’s not too thrilled with the thought of trying to “fit in” with most of modern society. However, if I were a betting man, I would say God stays hidden because he owes me money. (For a being that is supposedly omniscient, he is a lousy gambler.)

1 Like
92

.

In the context of @FILECABINET’s claim it wouldn’t matter why, a hiding deity would disprove his sweeping assertion. He may be an atheist, but like so many theists he is using the same type of absolute claims. I suspect he doesn’t understand when and why an epistemological burden of proof is incurred, or how to satisfy it, as his posts read like simple bias. He has also used two logical fallacies, an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, which ironically is bread and butter in much of religious apologetics, and an argumentum ad populum fallacy.

Either one bases belief (irrationally) on the fact that belief can’t be disproved, or contrary evidence or explanation offered, or one accepts that not knowing either way is a sufficient and rational reason to withhold belief from all unfalsifiable claims. If a claim is unfalsifiable then the contrary claim must also be unfalsifiable, so @FILECABINET’s claim is just as irrational as when theists and apologists make the contrary claim.

NB though it is important to note, that while both claims carry an epistemological “burden of proof”, I don’t think they carry an equal burden of proof, since the claim a deity exists is demonstrably the primary and larger claim.

2 Likes
93

HOLY SHIT! I just now figured out why god is still hiding! We are ALL so stupid. The reason is so damn simple and obvious! It’s been right under our noses all this time, but it was in such plain sight that it was easily overlooked. Even so, I can’t believe nobody ever figured this out long ago. Just think about how much child support back-pay would be for over two thousand years. Hell, I would stay hidden somewhere beyond space and time, too, if I was able.

1 Like
94

@Tin-Man It wouldn’t cost anything if he paid in mythical dollars.

1 Like
95

I believe you need to really research and look for answers, they come when you invest in God. Not all that glitters is gold, Religion is stupid because it is religion, but christian spirituality works to develop the mind and heart not just offer practical objectives.

96

Define 'spirituality: First, you asserted that spirituality does work of some sort. “It works.” Whatever the hell that means. First, define spirituality, and then demonstrate some work it has done. What is it and how does it, (separate from the mind) develop the mind?

What exactly is this spirituality you speak of?

How exactly does spirituality work?

Give evidence of something accomplished by spiritual means that could not be done or explained by other means.

97

that’s risible sorry, why would anyone need to search for answers if like you, they assume their core conclusion of an extant deity from the start? That’s a circular reasoning fallacy if ever there was one.

Start by accurately defining the deity you believe exists, then demonstrate why you believe it exists. Until then you’re just reeling off unevidenced platitudes.

Vapid platitude.

Circular reasoning fallacy.

What is it, and why do you believe it is real?

98

Several million peer reviewed scientific papers, documenting in exquisite detail the evidence that testable natural processes are SUFFICIENT to explain the vast body of observational data obtained over the past centuries, isn’t enough “research” for you?

Scientists have alighted upon vast classes of entities and interactions, that the authors of your sad little Bronze Age mythology were incapable of even fantasising about. Those same scientists have placed said classes of entities and interactions into usefully predictive quantitative frameworks of knowledge, that the authors of your mythology would have regarded as magic.

Poppycock. Oh wait, in another post dealing with your gibberish, I dismantled Genesis 1 wholesale. Made up mythological shit does NOT equal “answers”.

Anyone who has seen certain species of scarab beetle knows this. But we’re used to seeing pointless aphorisms from your ilk.

In other words, the business of treating unsupported and frequently wrong mythological assertions uncritically as fact .

Your religion is just as fatally flawed in this regard.

The observational data tells those of us who paid attention in class, that your mythical “Christian spirituality” is nothing more than the business of pretending that tinselly holograms in the broken television in one’s head dictate how reality behaves. Reality says something entirely different.

99

Ah thank you for that…

100

Preaching is not debating.

You’re religious. You’re a Christian who worships a deity.

No it doesn’t. Much of the church system constantly works to create a lot of ignorant and hateful people. It’s given misinformation on what atheism is, it promotes Atheophobia, it encourages it’s followers to be extremely judgmental of anyone who isn’t a Christian, encourages people to be homophobic, encourages men to make their wives submissive to them (just look at the Baptists who are fine with woman beaters and domestic violence) , works against women’s rights, Is pro life when the bible and your god does not care about the unborn, and abuses the tithe system so they can have tax deductions from all of the poor people that they take advantage of. Just look at preachers like Joel Osteen.

2 Likes