Atheists: does God exist?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I don't know. Can you just answer the question posed by the title of the thread?

FYI: your threadjacking isn't answering the question either.

 

[McBell]

FYI: your threadjacking isn't answering the question either.

Seems they have no interest in actually addressing the thread topic them selves.

Far to busy telling everyone else how their posts are wrong.

 

[PureX]

FYI: your threadjacking isn't answering the question either.

I'm not an atheist, so the OP wasn't addressing me. But it IS an open thread. Created because the other thread asking this question was a DIR.

And anyway, my answer is I don't know.

See, it's really an easy answer to give, and one that doesn't require any gibberish about what I do or don't believe about what someone else does or doesn't believe about God or gods existing. It's just a simple statement about where I stand on the question of God existing. That is, after all, the whole point of this thread ... to ask where you atheists stand on the whole God existing thing. It doesn't seem like this should require any dissertations on what other people believe and why you don't believe them. I mean, it's a very simple question that only you can answer for yourself. It doesn't require anyone else's believing anything at all. Do you accept that God exists? Do you accept God doesn't exist? Or are you undecided? That's really all this thread was asking.

 

[McBell]

I'm not an atheist, so the OP wasn't addressing me. But it IS an open thread. Created because the other thread asking this question was a DIR.

And anyway, my answer is I don't know.

See, it's really an easy answer to give, and one that doesn't require any gibberish about what I do or don't believe about what someone else does or doesn't believe aout God or gods existing. It's just a simple statement about where I stand on the question of God existing. That is, after all, the whole point of this thread ... to ask where you atheists stand on the whole God existing thing. It doesn't seem like this should require any dissertations on what other people believe and why you don't believe them. I mean, it's a very simple question that only you can answer for yourself. It doesn't require anyone else's believing anything at all.

And yet you were completely unable to answer without a sermon....

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Since the question has been posed to theists, I figured another thread for everyone else might be illuminating.

So... what do you think, atheists? Does God exist?

No, Virginia, there is no God! (Santa, of course, is quite another matter.)

 

[PureX]

What some call God does exist; what others call God does not.

But what do YOU call God, and does that exist?

 

[Nakosis]

What some call God does exist; what others call God does not.

Was going to say about the same thing. God exists for other people but not for me. An individual can generally define God as they see fit. So if they want to call a tree God and worship it, well there's the tree.

Since I haven't created a God for myself, one doesn't exist, for me.

 

[Yerda]

I don't know. Can you just answer the question posed by the title of the thread?

I have

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm not an atheist, so the OP wasn't addressing me.

Yet here you are.

But it IS an open thread.

And it was a thread that managed to get to page 2 without being focused on you, which was apparently a problem you felt couldn't go unaddressed.

 

[Curious George]

Anything on which we can agree is a god exists only as concept not as an entity. That is to say, no god exists.

 

[Kfox]

Note to atheists ... no one is asking you what you don't believe. No one cares what you don't believe. The OP is asking you what you think/believe ... what your position is on the existence of God. "Yes", "no", or "I don't know" would be sufficient, and simple enough.

The problem with asking about the existence of God, is the term God means different things to different people; sorta like asking what type of tool is a widget, or a thing-a-ma-gig. If you want to know if I believe in the existence of whatever you might call God, you need to describe this being you call God first, then I can tell you if I believe it exists or not.

 

[F1fan]

God does exist, and all humans are created in His image - spiritual beings.
The utter oblivion of the atheist is appalling.

Well that settles it once and for all.

Except for the evidence. And the reasoning. And a sound conclusion.

 

[F1fan]

The potential of intelligence is extremely high

And reasoning skills and education is how to attain this potential. Of course intelligence is largely a natural phenomenon, and varies among humans.

despite the fact that many people fall below the average.

It's the lottery of life.

The contents of consciousness have the appearance of being put together with memory, and all other capacities, especially identity self. Everything human is for to do something in the environment. I have not heard of anything that demonstrates that brain function can carry all our capacities. How does brain translate into all of that?

You're throwing a lot of spaghetti at the wall here. Dogs and cats have consciousness too, so if you are going to refer to human brain processes (that aren't mentally defective) then you need to clarify the details.

I think the peculiar nature of consciousness is undersold as being nothing special. Passed off as a byproduct of chemistry. The mind is a construct that serves purposes we make. I think that's intentional. Intention is intentional. Why would existence progress into anything at all beyond complex, mindless blawbr. As meagher as consciousness can be intellect is geared at achieving goals.

And I think quite the opposite. Consciousness includes many animals, not just humans. So this specialness needs to apply to other conscious animals, not just humans. For the religiously inclined I see a lot of emphasis on human consciousness but not about other animals, and it is a serious flaw.

Even if brain function is all there is consciousness still needs further explanation. If it's all physical that means consciousness is a special arrangement and special composition and nothing more. I think that misses.

Can you cite any consciousness that exists outside of a living brain?

All the properties of consciousness are conceived of without reference to physical properties.

It's still a process of material brains.

 

[Kfox]

But what do YOU call God, and does that exist?

There is nothing that I call God, but I do hear other people calling various things God.

 

[osgart]

And reasoning skills and education is how to attain this potential.

No doubt there!

Of course intelligence is largely a natural phenomenon, and varies among humans.

Of course it is natural, but natural may include a whole lot more then the senses can perceive.

It's the lottery of life.

I believe intelligence can be learned, but as time goes by the quality of information and experience one lacks, or has can severely handicap one from learning intelligence in the span of a lifetime.

You're throwing a lot of spaghetti at the wall here. Dogs and cats have consciousness too, so if you are going to refer to human brain processes (that aren't mentally defective) then you need to clarify the details.

I know other animals have consciousness and I don't see that being a problem.

And I think quite the opposite. Consciousness includes many animals, not just humans. So this specialness needs to apply to other conscious animals, not just humans. For the religiously inclined I see a lot of emphasis on human consciousness but not about other animals, and it is a serious flaw.

The fact is that even though there are varying degrees of intellect in all animals, one animal managed to gain vast potential.

Can you cite any consciousness that exists outside of a living brain?

I infer it based on the non physical properties. I think you are overly confident that everything is physical in the most mundane way; only by looking at life through the senses. There really should be a science of introspection. Third person observation won't reveal everything there is to know. Third person can't reveal first person properties of inner experience.

It's still a process of material brains.

That's a sense perception that is your unproven assumption. The self exists beyond just being conscious. Humanity does not have the whole of physics and my hunch is that existence is grander than the senses reveal. I know that GR, and QM cannot currently be reconciled together as well.

Love is a constancy of being that doesn't depend on fleeting emotions that come and go. Emotions are responses to love, and other qualities of being. Emotions don't explain love. Besides also qualia doesn't model well with brain processes.

 

[PureX]

The problem with asking about the existence of God, is the term God means different things to different people; sorta like asking what type of tool is a widget, or a thing-a-ma-gig. If you want to know if I believe in the existence of whatever you might call God, you need to describe this being you call God first, then I can tell you if I believe it exists or not.

The question is very simple, yet for some reason some atheists just cannot seem to grasp it.

No one is asking what you think or believe about anyone else’s idea of God. And no one cares. The question is asking what you think or believe about YOUR idea of God. And if you have no idea or definition of God in your mind (which is highly unlikely), then you can’t answer the question.

The problem here is that a lot of atheists are so intent on negating everyone else’s idea of God that they have never actually considered and developed the idea of God for themselves. What does the term “God” mean to them? So that when they are asked this question, they are unable to answer it. They can only tell us what they think and believe about everyone else’s idea of God. Which means nothing to anyone.

I find this a very curious phenomena, this need to attack everyone else’s idea of God while never actually considering or developing the idea for themselves. I mean, imagine we were discussing music, and the person we’re talking to tells us constantly why they hate whatever music we like, and yet doesn’t seem to like or listen to any kind of music, themselves.

Weird, right?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The question is very simple, yet for some reason some atheists just cannot seem to grasp it.

No one is asking what you think or believe about anyone else’s idea of God. And no one cares. The question is asking what you think or believe about YOUR idea of God. And if you have no idea or definition of God in your mind (which is highly unlikely), then you can’t answer the question.

The problem here is that a lot of atheists are so intent on negating everyone else’s idea of God that they have never actually considered and developed the idea of God for themselves. What does the term “God” mean to them? So that when they are asked this question, they are unable to answer it. They can only tell us what they think and believe about everyone else’s idea of God. Which means nothing to anyone.

I find this a very curious phenomena, this need to attack everyone else’s idea of God while never actually considering or developing the idea for themselves. I mean, imagine we were discussing music, and the person we’re talking to tells us constantly why they hate whatever music we like, and yet doesn’t seem to like or listen to any kind of music, themselves.

Weird, right?

Your insecurity is noted.

Anyway, my answer to the question is "nah, probably not".

 

[Mock Turtle]

The question is very simple, yet for some reason some atheists just cannot seem to grasp it.

No one is asking what you think or believe about anyone else’s idea of God. And no one cares. The question is asking what you think or believe about YOUR idea of God. And if you have no idea or definition of God in your mind (which is highly unlikely), then you can’t answer the question.

The problem here is that a lot of atheists are so intent on negating everyone else’s idea of God that they have never actually considered and developed the idea of God for themselves. What does the term “God” mean to them? So that when they are asked this question, they are unable to answer it. They can only tell us what they think and believe about everyone else’s idea of God. Which means nothing to anyone.

I find this a very curious phenomena, this need to attack everyone else’s idea of God while never actually considering or developing the idea for themselves. I mean, imagine we were discussing music, and the person we’re talking to tells us constantly why they hate whatever music we like, and yet doesn’t seem to like or listen to any kind of music, themselves.

Weird, right?

Weird, no. Why would we want to invent gods for ourselves when such has been done to death by so many others? With hardly a gap to fill in.

 

[PureX]

Weird, no. Why would we want to invent gods for ourselves when such has been done to death by so many others? With hardly a gap to fill in.

Seems to me that having your own mind would imply using it to generate your own ideas about a question this significant to humanity. What conception of "God" (deity, higher power, existential source, etc.) WOULD YOU consider possible, and/or acceptable? And then if you're still rejecting it, why?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The question is asking what you think or believe about YOUR idea of God.

No it isn't.