Ravi's Argument for God (The Atheists Nightmare)

[linwood]

.... and then there's arguments that are actually substantial with some real reasoning behind them made by philosophically inclined Theists.

.

So, now I STILL have never seen a substantial rational argument for the existence of god.

Oh well.

 

[search the scriptures]

like a mouse that lived on the inside of a piano all of it's life, when the music play's the mouse figures out that these "bar's" strike the line, then the line, perfectly sized for the right note vibrates creating this musical noise. but the mouse never seems to think of the man outside playing the music.

 

[Tathagata]

So, now I STILL have never seen a substantial rational argument for the existence of god.

Oh well.

Have you heard of William Lane Craig or Alvin Plantinga? They're both professors of philosophy and usually put up good arguments.


.

 

[blueman]

You are saying that Atheists have the burden of proof. This is false because the Atheist isn't making the assertion. The Theist is the one who is asserting a God and therefore has the burden to prove it.

.

So what is an atheist?

 

[PolyHedral]

If you do not believe that an all-powerful entity and anyone who could create the universe is pretty powerful, could not intervene or connect with it's creation, we're being naive.

I do not question it could. I question why it would care. We're a small subset of the organisms on a fairly small planet in a medium-sized star system. Why should a creator pay attention to us more than the other 200,000,000,000 star systems, most of which will have their own planets? This is assuming it's looking in the right galaxy, but it could also pick any one out of the same volume again to scrutinize. It seems the height of arrogance to suggest that are more than trivialities when compared to the entire universe.

 

[LuisDantas]

So what is an atheist?

Someone who doesn't claim to believe in God.

Some go all the way and claim that there is no God, those are named Strong Atheists.

Others simply don't claim to know, and are called Weak Atheists.

 

[blueman]

I just asked two questions in the post you replied to. Please tell me why they are not rational.

Just because my existence does not serve your god does not mean that I am without life or purpose. You must be really sad if you are trying to justify your life on the whims of your imaginary friend.

How can you have purpose or hope when many atheist have a naturalistic bend on the material world? This was all just a random thing, right?

 

[blueman]

:cold:

Someone who doesn't claim to believe in God.

Some go all the way and claim that there is no God, those are named Strong Atheists.

Others simply don't claim to know, and are called Weak Atheists.

I thought if you don't know, you're considered agnostic.

 

[McBell]

How can you have purpose or hope when many atheist have a naturalistic bend on the material world? This was all just a random thing, right?

"If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed."
~Albert Einstein

 

[blueman]

It is your claim that god exists. Therefore the burden of proof is upon you.
If I claimed that pink unicorns exist, it is I who must prove them to you and not the other way around.

No, I believe it falls on you my friend. There is a compelling case, as Dr. Ravi Z., Dr. William Lane Craig and others have made regarding the origin of the earth and universe. God has intervened throughout history in time and space and provided a blueprint in what our purpose and hope rest in. Your hypothesis of the earth and universe's origin do not provide a rationale base for hope and purpose to exist. God's existence is the most rationale conclusion when you weigh these issues in totality.

 

[LuisDantas]

:cold:

I thought if you don't know, you're considered agnostic.

There is some controversy on the matter. Consensus seems to be that those who claim that it is not possible to know are Agnostics, while those who simply don't have believe in God are Atheists.

Then there are more detailed classifications, which are not mutually exclusive (as aren't those of agnostic and atheist, btw). For instance, I am an Atheist AND an Agnostic AND an Apatheist (meaning that I don't much care whether there is a God or not). I'm sure there are a couple more labels I could use as well, if I only had the opportunity to talk with someone who knew what I was talking about.

If this matter interests you, take a look at this thread:

http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...tes/98419-religious-perspectives-atheism.html

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

How can you have purpose or hope when many atheist have a naturalistic bend on the material world? This was all just a random thing, right?

You lay claims to superiority based on a "higher" purpose than yourself. What is this higher purpose? As far as I am concerned, I hope I can spread as much enlightenment and joy as I can before I pass on. That is my purpose. What is yours? Do you live in fear of eternal punishment and therefore HAVE to act good? I don't have these forcible chains to make me do good things, making my purpose purer than yours.

 

[PolyHedral]

Your hypothesis of the earth and universe's origin do not provide a rationale base for hope and purpose to exist.

Hope and purpose derive fairly directly from the mind's ability to imagine alternate scenarios. :sarcastic No external entity required, let alone a supernatural one.

 

[blueman]

You lay claims to superiority based on a "higher" purpose than yourself. What is this higher purpose? As far as I am concerned, I hope I can spread as much enlightenment and joy as I can before I pass on. That is my purpose. What is yours? Do you live in fear of eternal punishment and therefore HAVE to act good? I don't have these forcible chains to make me do good things, making my purpose purer than yours.

No I don't live in fear of punishment. I chose to accept God's love through Jesus Christ. I don't lay claims to superiority at all. I'm imperfect and that is all the more reason that I'm in need of a righteous God. The question I asked and that you never answered is If you believe this earth and unverse evolved through some random chance or accident, where does the element of hope, purpose, love, beauty and morality originate from?

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

No, I believe it falls on you my friend. There is a compelling case, as Dr. Ravi Z., Dr. William Lane Craig and others have made regarding the origin of the earth and universe. God has intervened throughout history in time and space and provided a blueprint in what our purpose and hope rest in. Your hypothesis of the earth and universe's origin do not provide a rationale base for hope and purpose to exist. God's existence is the most rationale conclusion when you weigh these issues in totality.

Let me put it this way. I believe that invisible pink unicorns made all of the universe and everything within it. Now it is on you to disprove my claim.

As to your other argument, we are a part of the universe, not the center of it. The universe did not form just to accommodate us. Again, I must ask you, what is your hope and purpose?

 

[McBell]

No, I believe it falls on you my friend. There is a compelling case, as Dr. Ravi Z., Dr. William Lane Craig and others have made regarding the origin of the earth and universe.

It is only "compelling" if you are already inclined to believe in god.

God has intervened throughout history in time and space and provided a blueprint in what our purpose and hope rest in.

Really?
When?
And no circular reasoning arguments by quoting the Bible.
When has god intervened that is not perpetuated by his propaganda?

Your hypothesis of the earth and universe's origin do not provide a rationale base for hope and purpose to exist.

This is because you assume that there is a purpose.
This is a failing on your part, not the universes.

God's existence is the most rationale conclusion when you weigh these issues in totality.

 

[Smoke]

Because in the true sense of being an atheist, you emphatically believe there is no God. Anything short of that and your agnostic.

I believe there's no Santa Claus, too, but the burden of proof falls on the person who says I should dedicate my life to Santa Claus.

You believe in an existence without hope or purpose. The burden of proof falls on you.

If you believe hope and purpose are found only in gods, that's very sad.

 

[Smoke]

Oh come on! Quit playing dumb.

I'm not at all certain he's playing.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

No I don't live in fear of punishment. I chose to accept God's love through Jesus Christ. I don't lay claims to superiority at all. I'm imperfect and that is all the more reason that I'm in need of a righteous God. The question I asked and that you never answered is If you believe this earth and unverse evolved through some random chance or accident, where does the element of hope, purpose, love, beauty and morality originate from?

Again, the universe did not evolve with man in mind. Humans evolved. What is this element of hope and purpose you are talking about?

 

[McBell]

No I don't live in fear of punishment. I chose to accept God's love through Jesus Christ. I don't lay claims to superiority at all. I'm imperfect and that is all the more reason that I'm in need of a righteous God. The question I asked and that you never answered is If you believe this earth and unverse evolved through some random chance or accident, where does the element of hope, purpose, love, beauty and morality originate from?

OK, you need a crutch to help with deal with life.
That is fine by me.

But why do you assume that because you need said crutch, that every needs said crutch?