RogerTheAtheist
A born-again freethinker
I'm new here but would like to debate non-atheists about the existence of god. If you feel that any meaningful definition of god exists, feel free to share your reasons why.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Open debate: does God exist?
- Thread starter RogerTheAtheist
- Start date
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
What would you describe as a meaningful definition of God?
RogerTheAtheist
A born-again freethinker
Pretty much anything other than:
God is this box of tissues. This box of tissues exists, therefore god exists.
God is this box of tissues. This box of tissues exists, therefore god exists.
Man of Faith
Well-Known Member
In the wake of the Newtown, CT crime, I think it is a good time to talk about objective moral values and duties. I don’t think that there is a person on this earth that could say that what was done to those people and children could be in anyway be construed as moral, which is evidence that there are objective morals in the world. The only question left is where did objective values and morals come from? Did they come from light, or matter, or from evolution? Do we charge immorality to a lion that kills a deer, or a dog that steals a bone? The crime that was committed would be wrong and immoral in any community in the world.
Well then. Seems to me that eliminates virtually every single concept (godly or otherwise) in existence. All classifications or observations of substances rely on definitional presuppositions. Since we're not allowed to do that, I guess the game is already over. Oh, darn. 
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
No, it's evidence that everyone agrees on something. Either way, the shooter apparently didn't think it was immoral, so that would be evidence against objective morality of murdering children.
Furthermore, it doesn't make sense to say something objective came from something. If morality came from something, it isn't objective, what it came from may or may not be objective, but morality itself would not be objective.
Last edited:
Just like to point out that we cannot assume what the shooter's morality was from that. People behave in ways that conflict with their ideologies on a fairly regular basis.
Man of Faith
Well-Known Member
We just can't know that. in the circumstances that we observed, it is always immoral to go into a school and shoot innocent children to death, objectively wrong and immoral. There can be no subjectivity about that. That one single crime validates objective moral values and duties in the world and here is the conclusion.
A) If God did not exist, objective moral values and duties would not exist.
B) Objective moral values and duties do exist.
C) Therefore, God exists.
From the combination of the capability for influencing the emotional and health status of ourselves and others with the capabilities for understanding relationships of cause and effect and likely outcomes of future actions.
Perhaps surprisingly, I find myself mostly agreeing. There is abuse of the notion that "morality is relative". At least a few (yet very important) moral directives are in fact quite absolute, even if we may not have delineated them at all clearly yet.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
Well in that case, we can't know that everyone, everywhere in the universe would agree that the shooting was immoral neither.
RogerTheAtheist
A born-again freethinker
Would you describe the act of killing as objectively immoral? I can think of a few instances where it might be preferred:
1. Suppose every teacher in the school had a gun available (safely locked away but kept for situations like this) and knew how to use it. A teacher was able to get a gun in time after seeing someone walk in with a weapon. She could shoot and potentially kill the shooter before he has a chance to unload in a classroom. Should she?
2. A person has severe chronic pain and wishes to die. There's no known cure, and the person is otherwise mentally healthy. There are no children or dependents that would be negatively affected. However, this person wants assisted suicide for whatever reason. Should someone be allowed to help her if it's legal?
Well then. Seems to me that eliminates virtually every single concept (godly or otherwise) in existence. All classifications or observations of substances rely on definitional presuppositions. Since we're not allowed to do that, I guess the game is already over. Oh, darn.
Lol, fine, any gods allowed.
I must disagree. If objective morality exists, then a certain act would be immoral regardless of what any individual's stance on it is.
Orias
Left Hand Path
A meaningful definition (of God) to me is simply invocation or the imploring of a higher thought process in a way. Like when you take a test, or are trying to focus on something. "God" is this state of awareness, and when many people achieve these states they are capable of influencing a lot of people and sometimes in an oppressive way (like trying to oppress people's interpretation of God or by limiting God to the nature of well...nature).
Beyond that, there is always an idea behind another idea. And all interpretations are subject to what one experiences and wills.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
No, that's not really what "objective" means. If it isn't the same everywhere, all the time, it isn't objective.
RogerTheAtheist
A born-again freethinker
I don't accept premise A because certain actions can be agreed upon in almost all cultures based on logic, reasoning, and values such as well-being. The well-being of the children outweighs the shooter's right to pull the trigger.
If you define god as thinking, are you implying a supernatural force behind it?
Bingo.
Man of Faith
Well-Known Member
Objectivity means that something is wrong, no matter if we think it is wrong or not. If someone in the universe didn't think that it was wrong, it would still be wrong and it is.
freethinker44
Well-Known Member
If something can be perceived differently from one person to the next, it is subjective.
I'm not sure a concept or idea can even be considered objective anyways.
chinu
chinu
Sir Doom
Cooler than most of you
Existence is a given, definition is the only question. All things exist first as concepts. God is no different. It is most definitely a concept. And concepts exist. God is actually a bit more than that, as it is a very popular concept, so it has been translated into reality in the written word, illustration, sculpture, etc. Thus, god exists as these things as well. If there is a god in the universe beyond that I can't be sure, but I certainly believe it does.