Which is your basic premise. Since we can not know everything, that leaves room for a god. Notice how you injected a god, while I did not invent a god? That my world model does accommodate no god. If my world model does not include a god, why does yours?
1 Like
Then youâre an atheist. Perhaps. Depending on the quality of evidence you need. Thereâs heresy and gossip and exaggerated stories and then thereâs court level evidence. Many a story doesnât pass even small claims court requirements for âbeliefâ. AND thereâs consistency- a reasonable amount for evidence to âbelieveâ anything - from a telephone scam, second-hand car salesmanâs, politics and religions. Let alone astrology, aliens, Bigfoot, channeling, OBE etc.
I am an atheist. I have no good reason to believe in god. Yes, it is possible it exists. It is also possible I am a program running from a future civilization studying the past (and most people are just NPCs)âŚ. I donât have any good reason to believe that either.
2 Likes
Very interesting point David. I suppose my mistake is feeling the need to find out if there is any truth to it. This is actually an important revelation for me, and I donât mean this to sound condescending.
Two perspectives between us.
You (correct me if Iâm wrong) assume there is no god and live your life as if no claim was ever made.
I assume there might actually be a god because others have suggested it.
Thereâs actually a big difference there. Logically, am I in the wrong? I suppose the reason I feel the need to explore it is because I admit there are people that are more knowledgeable on the subject. You, David, will not entertain (for arguments sake) the idea of whether he exists or not until evidence is shown. I, on the other hand, feel the simple fact that someone believes it is enough to make me feel I need to either agree or disagree on my own terms. Ignoring it is not an option for me. And even though there may not be any scientific evidence in favor of it, the simple fact that so many people do believe suggests there might be something to it. ( Iâm sure youâll tell me this is some sort of fallacy lol)
Hereâs what Iâm thinking.
I tell you I saw an alien, but donât have any evidence. You say you know aliens donât exist and to come back when I have evidence.
You tell me you saw an alien but donât any evidence. Iâd say hmm. That seems unlikely based on what I know, but then again, it wouldnât be impossible. Maybe Iâll start looking for some evidence too.
Yes yes! Agreed. Doesnât that exact possiblity make you want to find out more???
But he didnât assume it. There was no evidence and he was already unconvinced.
So if everyone suggested, without evidence, that you were immortal. Would you like to go jump off of a cliff and assume theyâre all correct? 
1 Like
Plenty of room? âŚNo, no, no⌠you silly sod. What âWE KNOWâ about the universe leaves pretty much no room at all for a god, magic, spirits, or other silly ideas that enter the minds of irrational dweebs without evidence. What you meant to say is, âWhat we donât know about the universe leaves plenty of room for a god.â On this we all agree. It is called, âThe God of the gaps fallacy.â Itâs one of the pillars supporting theistic belief.
Absence of evidence is in fact evidence of absence when and if such evidence would be expected. If you tell me there is a dead body in your kitchen and then we go to the kitchen and look for it, and I see nothing there, that is evidence that you are wrong. If I see no trace of a dead body, no blood, no marks on the floor, no bile, no nothing. That is further evidence you are wrong. If you change your story and tell me it was the Livingroom, and then I check there an end up with the same results, that too is evidence against your assertion. How many places have we looked for the Christian (for any) god? The actual evidence has piled up against the god hypothesis in billions of failed assertions. And still the theists keep making the assertions and then, once the assertions have been debunked, they lightly waft them away as if they never carried any weight in the first place. Well, they do carry weight. They are, in fact, evidence against the non-existence of a dead body in the kitchen. We have looked for it, and it is not there. God is not in the KNOWN universe.
1 Like
If I knew aliens didnât exist: I would tell you to not come back. Asking you to comeback with evidence is a way of giving you the benefit of doubt. I would think that would be obvious from our setting up and maintaining a system where people we donât agree with can post their thoughts on this matter to all the atheists here (and I guess the whole world). 
1 Like
Yes. I have an active imaginative mind. Because of this, Iâve had to counter it with a bull-shit detector. I was raised without a bull-shit detector, in a high-control Christian religion. My current lack of belief only came about because of setting a standard for evidence.
The standard for evidence rises the more that something is required of me. Money, time,
physical or emotional demands, etc. This is my standard.
Sitting and imagining a 50% (off the top of my head quoting Musk) chance 
of being a program 
⌠no harm. I still like the taste 
f turkey (thanks Matrix) and my life is still my life and the science still works to end my program (poison, gravity, guns, disease)âŚ. BUT is IF there was a âspend hundredsâ to learn the secret âout of this Matrixâ hahahahaha that fucking money is real (real use - real purpose) so the Matrix has to be just as real via evidence for me to pursue it.
Same with religions or faiths or politicsâŚ. Want my time and money? My emotional energy? Hahahaha - better evidence it BAAABBBBEEEE.
3 Likes
And here is where that train of thought fully FAILS, in my humble human opinion: HUMANS are NOT all-powerful, all-knowing beings. Sure, I grew up being told the parent/child analogy as it relates to god. Bought in to it and even used it myself a few times during my adult years to try to âexplain the ways of Godâ to others (and maybe even to attempt to convince MYSELF to keep believing). Never fully worked on myself, however, because there is ONE THING that never made sense about it. As I was taught with so many millions of others, God KNOWS EVERYTHING and God can DO ANYTHING. Therefore, it stands to reason that god could EASILY make any and all humans understand EXACTLY what he wants them to know with (as Nyar said) a simple snap of his fingers. No confusion. No guesswork. No need for translations or interpretations. We would simply KNOW. And if god cannot do that, then he/she/it is NOT the all-powerful being as portrayed. If god CAN do that, but chooses not to, then god is an ass. For example, my grandson is 18 months old and has to be CONSTANTLY watched to keep him from getting hurt now that he has started walking. Sure, we can tell him, âNo, that will hurt you,â but he doesnât fully understand yet. But if I had the ability to make him fully understand danger to keep him from harm, you damn well better believe I would give him that knowledge. Unfortunately, Iâm not god, therefore I must continue to keep watch over him until he learns. God, on the other hand, knows all the dangers we face AND knows EVERYTHING we could do to make our lives safer and happier. Yet, he/she/it refuses to pass this knowledge along to his âbeloved childrenâ? Sounds like a pretty big douche to me. Basically, one cannot label a being as all-powerful/all-knowing, but then later claim that same being is unable to make the very humans IT CREATED clearly understand what it wants them to know/do. But - hey - thatâs just my opinion.
1 Like
Thatâs a fair point.
I really like your example you gave here about the 18 month old getting hurt. It demonstrates well the point I was trying to make, only you seem to be better with words than myself.
Help me understand a bit better though, please. Where our analogies seem to fall apart is when we say god, being omnipotent, could make us understand. You said in your analogy if you could make the child understand, you would. The problem is you CANT because the child is a child. It is not a reflection on you as the adult, but itâs due to the limitations in the child. God is not limited in his ability to make us understand, but we are limited in our capacity to understand. So he does so in a way we can relate too. Then the child can listen or not.
As I write this, I find myself circling back to free will. Sorry I canât explain this better. This is where I always find myself. Mostly gut feelings that I canât write down fast enough or coherent enough. I typically do much better in person.
Thanks for the correction, Iâll agree. I should have said What we donât know leaves plenty of room for god. And for the record, thatâs like 99.9% of knowledge. So my denotation was inaccurate but my connotation still stands.
I disagree though, that my statement is in any way god of gaps fallacy. I never stated the lack of evidence means god exists. Only that the possibility is still there.
Youâre bullshitting. Youâre not actually agreeing.
So youâre going to continue with bullshit that youâve been called out on. Great. Thanks.
Yes it was. Every fucking bit of it was âgod of gapsâ.
1 Like
What does this mean? I did agree that I should have stated it another way.
I disagreed though that itâs god of gaps. And itâs not. In any way.
But youâre still using this statement. You just fucking used it. That is God of Gaps. When science doesnât explain something, you think therefor a deity did it.
1 Like
Nice try, but no dice. Sorry. Wiggle all you want, but you are not getting away that easilyâŚ
Correct, I am NOT all-knowing, and I am certainly NOT all-powerful. The god of the bible IS BOTH OF THOSE, though. Therefore, child or otherwise, that god CAN EASILY make the humans IT CREATED understand whatever it wants them to understand. And if that god CANNOT do that, then that god is NOT all-powerful/all-knowing as advertised. Itâs just that simple.
1 Like
Humans are not all powerful. Humans have human babies 
. Any loving parent if they could have âall powerfulâ abilities would ensure that their children are fed, healthily, happy, communicating even more fully âŚ. THE parent is the key 
the ONLY real person that keeps the child alive and the quality of that life is reliant (during childhood) on that parent.
This âomnipotentâ deity hasnât even bonded, let alone âloveâ (yet to be defined) us (addressing claim that itâs a creator directly responsible).
Had it just created and took off - it would explain a fuck lot more - BUT for me to accept that itâs blantant disregard, envy and hatred for humans both inside and outside the womb - both those that worship it and non worshippers is silly. It gaslights, manipulates, and controls humanity.
So yes. It doesnât âuseâ itâs omnipotence AND it is not on âusâ for its choices (if it is using it in the most harmful way towards humans).
Hmm. I must be misunderstanding it, cause I donât see how what youâre saying contradicts what I am saying. Ill read a little bit more on this though, cause you bring up some pretty good points.
I didnât say this Mrdawn. You are so quick to shout down any other possibility that you miss the point entirely. Let me say it one more time.
What we donât know about the universe scientifically leaves plenty of room for god to exist.
Thatâs it man. Thatâs all I said. I never claimed he does exist, or that he doesnât, or that I know anything, or that Iâm sleeping with your mother. God of gaps only applies to a position that assumes an act of God as the explanation for an unknown phenomenon.
Again, I see where you made the mistake, and itâs an easy one to make I admit. But you need to pay closer attention.
Youâre putting out a sentence that makes it sound as though that you do. Youâre not getting that at all. You even admitted that you mis-state things or should have stated them in another way.
So now youâre acting like a hypocrite. You use âgod of gapsâ, then deny using it, and lastly you just move the goal posts. I donât buy it.
One other member just told you were using it.
How cute. Youâve made a lot of them in this thread alone.
@Curiosity You obviously didnât read what Cog said. Itâs not my fault you didnât get the punch line.
And he called you out on it and youâre still spouting bullshit and deflecting.