Atheism people have a belief "God does not exist "

[Altfish]

It is based on the observation of holes in theory you mean?

There is no reason to believe in things that are not positively proven to exist. That is unscientific. But there is a tendency among theoretical physicists to confuse theory with reality. Rather then seeing our present mathematics as one of the descriptive languages they regard it as the framework of the Universe. A similar mistake as theologians make

Fairies are the better explanations, they have been observed in the past, Many can testify to their mischief. But no one has ever claimed to have observed dark matter and dark energy, not even indirectly. It is the purest make-belief.

Do you understand what a theory (In scientific terms} is?
Do you understand what a hypothesis is?
I did not say I believed in Dark Matter and Dark Energy, I just said that they were currently the best explanation.
Theoretical scientists put suggestions forward as explanations, these may prove bad ideas and fall away or be good ideas and go on to become accepted science. The Higgs Bosun is a good example.

Fairies have NOT been observed in the past.

 

[ChristineM]

That is a false statement. I listed the evidence. It is completely independent to my opinion.

Unlike some i do not make false statements

You listed your opinion and the opinion of a man who claims to be gods messenger (???). You did not provide evidence. Even when the definition was offered you choose a different wording to alter the meaning to suite yourself

 

[Jumi]

Atheism people have a belief "God does not exist "

Some of them.

 

[paarsurrey]

I wonder if you realize how confused this sounds.

I also wonder what it would be like to some day meet an atheist as you conceive those. It would probably be a bit scary and rather unforgettable.

I meet them in a very friendly manner, as human beings I love them. I give my reasons and arguments only related to the ideology of Atheism not intended against any person.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Useful analogy, maybe!

Let's say then, than Theism = +1, Agnostic Atheism = 0 and Gnostic Atheism = -1. Does that help you understand?

Whatever they are their position is in relation to God, that is a way of expression.
I don't intend any disrespect against them.
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

I meet them in a very friendly manner, as human beings I love them. I give my reasons and arguments only related to the ideology of Atheism not intended against any person.
Regards

What I am telling you is that I very much doubt atheist people as you describe them actually exist in this world.

They sound like otherworldly aliens out of some daring sci-fi piece of fiction, without any exageration. Atheists that are worried about whether they hold a belief in the non-existence of some deity? That wonder if they are being scientific in their atheism? That actually have an "atheist ideology"?

That is just not natural. But could make for some form of parable, a social comentary about the dangers of letting peer pressure about beliefs run unleashed. It might well make an intriguing episode of "Black Mirror", the tv series.

 

[paarsurrey]

What I am telling you is that I very much doubt atheist people as you describe them actually exist in this world.

They sound like otherworldly aliens out of some daring sci-fi piece of fiction, without any exageration. Atheists that are worried about whether they hold a belief in the non-existence of some deity? That wonder if they are being scientific in their atheism? That actually have an "atheist ideology"?

That is just not natural. But could make for some form of parable, a social comentary about the dangers of letting peer pressure about beliefs run unleashed. It might well make an intriguing episode of "Black Mirror", the tv series.

Sorry, I could not exactly understand one's comments.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

What I am telling you is that I very much doubt atheist people as you describe them actually exist in this world.

They sound like otherworldly aliens out of some daring sci-fi piece of fiction, without any exageration. Atheists that are worried about whether they hold a belief in the non-existence of some deity? That wonder if they are being scientific in their atheism? That actually have an "atheist ideology"?

That is just not natural. But could make for some form of parable, a social comentary about the dangers of letting peer pressure about beliefs run unleashed. It might well make an intriguing episode of "Black Mirror", the tv series.

Sorry, I could not exactly understand one's comments.
Regards

 

[Kirran]

Whatever they are their position is in relation to God, that is a way of expression.
I don't intend any disrespect against them.
Regards

I don't know what you meant by this, paar. Or how it related to what I said.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sorry, I could not exactly understand one's comments.
Regards

I think you are trying way too hard to find an actual ideology of atheism where there is no structure to sustain any.

Atheism is far simpler than you seem to believe it to be. And it has nearly no consequence, as well.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

You are correct, Atheist is a BELIEF because a God or Gods have not been proven to NOT exist, however they have NOT been proven to exist and have had no reliable evidence to match it's claim, so yes Atheism is a belief. Just not one that accepts religion and mythology.

If atheism is a belief then not playing golf is a sport.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Yes they are "explanations", but are they scientific? You have a hole between what your theory predicts and what you observe and you stuff the hole by giving it a name. We need more matter to explain this, a never observed kind of matter, so let us say it is invisible. Lets call it "dark matter". O blast, we still have big hole, we need more energy to explain this, never observed invisible energy. Lets call it dark energy.

Dark matter is seen in the spin rate of galaxies and by the bending of light due to dark matter's gravity. Dark energy is seen in the accelerated expansion of the universe. Both are based on observations. Both are place holder names, in a way. Dark matter is the non-luminous matter that gives galaxies their extra mass. Dark energy is the energy that is causing the accelerated expansion of the universe.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

But no one has ever claimed to have observed dark matter and dark energy, not even indirectly.

You are wrong on that account.

Dark matter was indirectly observed in the Bullet Cluster:

The Bullet Cluster – A Smoking Gun for Dark Matter!

 

[QuestioningMind]

I would not believe in God based upon the Hindu Vedas, the Bible or the Qur’an either, but I do believe based upon the Revelation of Baha’u’llah. I think the Baha’i Faith is much better evidence than any of the older religions because all the facts surrounding the Revelation of Baha’u’llah are recent history so they are verifiable.

I read everything that was in print before I became a Baha’i in 1970 but I never really thought much about God back then because I was so young. It was only later in 2014 that I read one of those books called Gleanings again that I realized that it alone was enough evidence for me to believe that Baha’u’llah was speaking for God. At that time I started a new journey, because I was certain that God exists. We are all so different though, in what we consider evidence.

Logically speaking, there can be no verifiable evidence for God since an immaterial Being cannot be verified by objective means. God is a mystery for the most part, so if people cannot accept that they will never believe in God. But once we believe/know with certitude that God exists, the mystery is actually no problem at all. The reason that God remains a mystery is explained in the Writings of Baha’u’llah and it makes sense to me so I am perfectly satisfied with it.

First you said that god does not owe you verifiable evidence that he exists, then you said that if this god wants you to believe that he exists then he had better be prepared to provide some verifiable evidence for that reality. Do you see the contradiction? If God does not owe you that, why should God provide it? Why would god owe anyone verifiable evidence, which is in effect proof that he exists?

The problem is that you want verifiable evidence of something that cannot be verified. If magical fairies are not real, they cannot be verified. If God is immaterial, God cannot be verified. The solution is that we have to verify that God exists for ourselves, by looking at the only evidence that God has ever provided, the messengers God sends to represent Him. Once we have verified in our own mind that that the messenger spoke for God then we know for certain that God exists.

"I would not believe in God based upon the Hindu Vedas, the Bible or the Qur’an either, but I do believe based upon the Revelation of Baha’u’llah."

Okay, so you agree with me. What others consider to be sufficient evidence to believe in Christianity, Hinduism, or the Muslim faith, is NOT sufficient evidence for you. And what you consider to be sufficient evidence for the Baha’i Faith is NOT sufficient evidence for me.

"First you said that god does not owe you verifiable evidence that he exists, then you said that if this god wants you to believe that he exists then he had better be prepared to provide some verifiable evidence for that reality. Do you see the contradiction?"

There is no contradiction. IF god wants to be mysterious and incapable of being verified that's perfectly fine. HOWEVER, if God WANTS me to believe that God exists, THEN God should know that I will require verifiable evidence in order to do so. Any creator being would KNOW that it created me with a logical rational thinking brain and that I am not capable of just turning off my logical rational thinking brain in order to 'believe, in something without verifiable evidence.

"The problem is that you want verifiable evidence of something that cannot be verified."

I don't see that as a problem. I see that as the only rational way to live one's life. If something cannot be verified it's ludicrous to go ahead and believe in it anyway. In Fact, I'd say that the true 'problem' is when people decide that they can 'verify that God exists for themselves'. I have absolutely no doubt that the moronic terrorists who flew airplanes into buildings back on 9/11 convinced themselves that they had 'verified that God wanted from them' for themselves, instead of using actual verifiable evidence. They were SO convinced that they'd discovered God's desires 'for themselves' that they were willing to sacrifice their lives for it.

Wouldn't it have been FAR better if instead of verifying 'for themselves' what God wanted that the terrorists had decided that it was better not to believe in anything without verifiable evidence that it was actually true?

So unless you think that God actually DID want them to fly airplanes into buildings, then you have to concede that people can delude themselves into believing that they've verified in their own mind that a God is real when in reality it is not.

 

[sealchan]

The truthful revealed religion people have the belief "God exists" and
Atheism people have a belief "God does not exist ", nevertheless both have a belief. Right, please?

Regards

In the simplest sense, you are correct. But the atheists have nothing to prove...

 

[sealchan]

If atheism is a belief then not playing golf is a sport.

For golfists though everything is a form of golf so your mere existence "on the field" implies you are playing "not-golf".

Fore!

 

[Subduction Zone]

If atheism is a belief then not playing golf is a sport.

Wait a second. I think that you would have to prove that golf is a sport to begin with.

 

[paarsurrey]

In the simplest sense, you are correct. But the atheists have nothing to prove...

Because they don't have any reasons and arguments to give. Right, please?
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Because they don't have any reasons and arguments to give. Right, please?
Regards

Atheists are people. We have plenty of reasons and arguments to give.

They just do not include a belief in a deity.

More often than not we would happilly ignore theism if given the choice.

 

[Trailblazer]

You clearly only believe. Knowledge is demonstrable.

Knowledge that God exist cannot be demonstrated to others. It has to come from within a person after they have looked at the evidence. People have to demonstrate it to themselves. It would not mean anything if someone else demonstrated it to them because everyone is unique in what they need for evidence and how they evaluate it. Evidence is like a shoe that has to fit perfectly.