Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

My question for Bill or igm still is: How do you come to your assertion that the existence of gods is close to zero?

Personally I thought that they answered you very well.
Igm said,
One imagined thing is equal to another i.e. gods and also all absurd imagined things. You have moved the goal posts if this is what I think it is:
Your position in order to avoid this is to defend why imaginary gods are superior to other imagined things? This is the simple question you asked for. I await your reply knowing that you’re not one to avoid a simple question.

I said,
Igm is saying you can only imagine a God the same way you can imagine a tooth fairy You never seen a God and you never seen a tooth fairy and you never seen evidence to support one more than the other but do you give a possibility for either one to exist? if so what is the reason for giving a possibility that one of them could exist and not the other?

We have asked questions but did not get them answered, was there a reason why?

Do you think that the existence for the tooth fairy is close to zero? and if so why would you think that a God is not close to zero? Do you have some sort of evidence or logic that supports the possibility of a God but does not support the possibility of a tooth fairy being they are both only imaginary?

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

RL...

...if igm (or you for that matter) want to consider me a hypocrite...or illogical...that is fine with me. I honestly do not think I am either of those things, but I can understand someone coming to that conclusion nonetheless.

But if I were the most hypocritical individual ever to walk the planet Earth...how would that impact on evidence that the likelihood of gods is close to zero?????

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Tell me Frank how is all the gods mankind had come up with any more likely to exist then the tooth fairy?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
Have the courtesy not to assume that all atheists assert that are not, or even care if there are any gods.

But I do, Set.

Even if only in deference to you.

f.

In fact, my anecdotal experience is that this describes the majority of atheists (although it's rare for this type of atheist to bring the subject up at all). I suspect the so-called "strong" atheists just make enough noise that people assume they are representative. You know, the squeaky wheel principle.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

...if igm (or you for that matter) want to consider me a hypocrite...or illogical...that is fine with me.

I do not think that you are a hypocrite nor illogical but you seem to be logically inconsistent when you seem to defend that gods cant be proven nor disproved but do not give the tooth fairy the same respect. lol

2 Replies

Never understood why people get so worked up over my right to be an atheist. I only drop in here on occasion to reassert this right. The discussions no longer interest me, as there is nothing new to offer and in the end there is still no god and no persuasion that can alter the fact.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Quote:

there is still no god and no persuasion that can alter the fact.

Do you have evidence to support that fact?

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

...if igm (or you for that matter) want to consider me a hypocrite...or illogical...that is fine with me.

Would vain be a better word? excessively proud of or concerned about one's own appearance, qualities, achievements, etc.; conceited: a vain dandy.

0 Replies

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

I do not think that you are a hypocrite nor illogical but you seem to be logically inconsistent when you seem to defend that gods cant be proven nor disproved but do not give the tooth fairy the same respect. lol

Well, RL, I am primarily interested in POSSIBLE explanations for existence. "Existence" is a very, very strange thing..and humans speculate on it all the time. One of the POSSIBLE explanations offered for existence is that of an eternal thing...a thing that created (whether physically or by dint of mind) all the rest of what we perceive to be the universe.

So I speak mostly to the question of "Is there a GOD?" "Are there gods?" and "Are there no gods?"

I do not know the answer to any of those questions...and I personally do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to make a meaningful guess. Some people think there is plenty of evidence upon which to assert there has to be a GOD; some people think there is plenty of evidence upon which to assert there are no gods; and some people think there are varying degrees of evidence to tend toward one side or the other.

I do not.

When I get into discussions with atheists, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, Flying Spaghetti Monsters, and CPA’s working on a moon of Saturn come into play.

None of them are proposed as possible explanations for existence…although even if they were, I would doubt the suggestion is serious.

I do take seriously the suggestion that there are forces we humans may not know about. If one of them turns out to be a Tooth Fairy, I am going to be astonished. If one of them turns out to be a god like the one supposedly described in the Bible…I will be even more astonished.

So in a real sense, I am not treating them significantly differently. But I am not especially interested in discussing Tooth Fairies or Easter Bunnies…and I am interested in discussing the differences between the philosophical takes of theist, atheists, and other non-theists and non-atheits.

Once again, if that makes me a hypocrite…so be it. If instead it makes me logically inconsistent…so be it. My being a hypocrite or being logically inconsistent does not impact on my request for a reasonable defense of the assertion that the chance of the existence of gods is near to zero.

3 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

In fact, my anecdotal experience is that this describes the majority of atheists (although it's rare for this type of atheist to bring the subject up at all). I suspect the so-called "strong" atheists just make enough noise that people assume they are representative. You know, the squeaky wheel principle.

Yup, I do indeed. Thanks, Set.

I'm looking forward to the true meaning of Easter this Sunday--cream of asparagus soup, baked ham, marshmallowed sweet potatoes, and a special coconut custard pie that my sister-in-law makes for me each holiday.

Oh...and the Easter Bunny. I get a basket of Peeps every Easter, so Nancy must have an in with him!

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

So I speak mostly to the question of "Is there a GOD?" "Are there gods?" and "Are there no gods?"

I see nothing wrong whatsoever asking such questions but I do compare it to a question like,

example. What would be simpler for all the power and knowledge to have always existed in one thing an intelligent "God" or many intelligent things "Gods" and then this one God or many Gods intelligently design every thing. or would it be simpler for every thing to just exist in an infinite chaotic way and just by random chance you end up with life on a planet out of billions of galaxies.

I do not know the answer to how we came about but it seems simpler to me for all of this to come together and be scattered chaotically than for all of it to come together by chance in the hand of one or many gods.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I'm looking forward to the true meaning of Easter this Sunday--cream of asparagus soup, baked ham, marshmallowed sweet potatoes, and a special coconut custard pie that my sister-in-law makes for me each holiday.

Aaaah!!! How respectable. What a laudable way of looking at these things.

The movers and shakers here are talking on Sky News about lying in bed, scoffing chocolate and having contraceptivised sex which is a contradickshun in terms.

I bet Frank does shoe polish and unisex hair salons.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

My being a hypocrite or being logically inconsistent does not impact on my request for a reasonable defense of the assertion that the chance of the existence of gods is near to zero.

It does really because your position demands that it is timelessly true and I very much doubt you would present your position if the Inquisition was showing you the white hot poker. An intellectual position is not a flavour of the century.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Have you been celebrating Good Friday all day long Spendius?

1 Reply

Theism is the faith to believe that God exists even though there is no evidence for that.

Atheism is evidence based, and therefore is without faith. As there is no evidence for God or gods, the notion of gods is ignored and life is lived ‘without gods’.

Agnosticism is therefore completely unnecessary because there is no middle ground as there is no evidence for gods.

When there is no evidence you have to have faith alone. If you must have some evidence then you must ignore faith based belief. This gives rise to theism and atheism there is no need for any other category in the absence of evidence. There is no evidence so Agnosticism is not a relevant term.

Agnostics can only show they are relevant if they can show that there is some evidence for a God or gods and there is none, so the term they use to describe their position is irrelevant.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Religion is so little a part of my life that i was surprised at the beginning of the week when The Girl told me the stores would not be open Friday or Sunday. I asked her why and it was her turn to be surprised, and then she told me Good Friday and Easter. I don't get out much, religiously speaking.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I am primarily interested in POSSIBLE explanations for existence. "Existence" is a very, very strange thing..and humans speculate on it all the time. One of the POSSIBLE explanations offered for existence is that of an eternal thing...a thing that created (whether physically or by dint of mind) all the rest of what we perceive to be the universe.

Existence is something very strange but I would think that things can just exist without a creator "God", because if there is a God he is able to exist without a creator.
I think that there will always be things that we do not fully understand and existence will always be one of those things.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

Have you been celebrating Good Friday all day long Spendius?

One does Not celebrate Good Friday, one observes it. I dont recall any Good Friday Parades or picnics

2 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

One does Not celebrate Good Friday, one observes it. I dont recall any Good Friday Parades or picnics

Maybe if you hung out at the pub with spendius on a Good Friday that would change.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

. . . celebrate Good Friday . . .

Hehehehehehe . . .

They executed the son of a bitch--let's PARTY ! ! !

0 Replies

Question to those who do or do not doubt Christianity

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know