Why "God does not exist" is a positive claim

[McBell]

Yeah, if you have in effect a belief system that works for you, good for you. If you can meet the burden of proof in the strong sense of in effect valid and true, then unpack how you do it. Otherwise you are like the rest of us and can't do that.

The whole burden of proof whine fest is typically from those who want to shove their bold empty claims down everyone else's throats.

What I have observed is that theists are the ones typically most vocal about it.
A great many of them do not like that there are now atheists doing it to them.

Funny how quickly "do unto others as you would have done to you" gets ditched once the others start doing unto to you what you have done unto others.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Outside the wishful thinking of those claiming a deity exists, there is no evidence that a deity exists.
Let alone convincing evidence.

Perhaps it has something to do with not being a choir member?

there we go.
Defended better than any defense in support of a deity existing.

Your turn.

Ah, but there is. And it's all around you, you just choose not to see it.

"The world that science describes seems to me, with it's order, intelligibility, potentiality, and tightly knit character, to be one that is consonant with the idea that it is the expression of the will of a creator."
- Rev John Polkinghorne, professor of mathematical physics, University of Cambridge

"As we look out into the Universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the Universe must in some sense have known we were coming."
- Freeman Dyson, theoretical physicist and mathematician

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

The whole burden of proof whine fest is typically from those who want to shove their bold empty claims down everyone else's throats.

What I have observed is that theists are the ones typically most vocal about it.
A great many of them do not like that there are now atheists doing it to them.

Funny how quickly "do unto others as you would have done to you" gets ditched once the others start doing unto to you what you have done unto others.

Well, yes. But I am none of those. I am an atheists, non-religious and a skeptic.
Now I want to live in a democracy where it is so boring that it is in effect run as a compromise.
So if anybody cliams in effect objective knowledge then I ask for in effect evidence. And that is not limited to theists, as they are not the only one who claims objective knowledge.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Ah, but there is. And it's all around you, you just choose not to see it.

"The world that science describes seems to me, with it's order, intelligibility, potentiality, and tightly knit character, to be one that is consonant with the idea that it is the expression of the will of a creator."
- Rev John Polkinghorne, professor of mathematical physics, University of Cambridge

"As we look out into the Universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the Universe must in some sense have known we were coming."
- Freeman Dyson, theoretical physicist and mathematician

The more indirect one is that all versions of in effect physicalism and related varaints are in effect based on a non-physical principle. Thus in other words relality has in effect an element of ontological idealism even for physicalism.

 

[RestlessSoul]

The more indirect one is that all versions of in effect physicalism and related varaints are in effect based on a non-physical principle. Thus in other words relality has in effect an element of ontological idealism even for physicalism.

Absolutely. Physics needs a metaphysics, if it is to tell the story of the universe. And of course, any narrative we construct to help us understand the world, is a tool of us, the observer.

 

[McBell]

And that is not limited to theists, as they are not the only one who claims objective knowledge.

Which is exactly why I did not limit it to theists...

I actually agree with the OP in that "God Does Not Exist" is a claim that has a burden of proof attached to it.
JUST LIKE the claim "God Exists".

 

[IsraelMoses]

Can the people with, it appears, all knowledge and all wisdom of the ages, are they able to prove that the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus and the Holy Spirit, does not exist ? When I was a kid, I wondered, if He exists, then He has a mouth, because He is made in our image, still wondering, how can He be everywhere, at the same time ? He is Spirit. A lady, pastor's wife, said He has been calling me for a long time, so I realized about the small, still, voice and started documenting, the best I could, my dreams, the words that came of which I thought that it was my thoughts. How can anybody tell another person, especially a person that lives 1ooo's of miles away, what they didn't see or hear ??? Logic, is useless, dealing with something, that you have no knowledge of. If man relied on his educated guesses, we would still be lingering in the Dark Ages, a closed book, not believing in UFO's, UAP's, Sasquatch, because you didn't see it, so it
doesn't exist ???

 

[McBell]

Ah, but there is. And it's all around you, you just choose not to see it.

"The world that science describes seems to me, with it's order, intelligibility, potentiality, and tightly knit character, to be one that is consonant with the idea that it is the expression of the will of a creator."
- Rev John Polkinghorne, professor of mathematical physics, University of Cambridge

"As we look out into the Universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the Universe must in some sense have known we were coming."
- Freeman Dyson, theoretical physicist and mathematician

Appeals to authority only work for the choir.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Which is exactly why I did not limit it to theists...

I actually agree with the OP in that "God Does Not Exist" is a claim that has a burden of proof attached to it.
JUST LIKE the claim "God Exists".

So as per your link it should be settled in a court of law?

Unfortunately for you, the term "burden of proof" is a well defined term that you are trying in vain to ignore.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Appeals to authority only work for the choir.

Are you one of those humans, who in effect claim evidence for all your beliefs?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Appeals to authority only work for the choir.

And insights are wasted on the wilfully blind.

 

[McBell]

So as per your link it should be settled in a court of law?

If you want to limit it to law, be my guess.
It appears that no one else in the thread has problem.

 

[McBell]

Are you one of those humans, who in effect claim evidence for all your beliefs?

I am one of those humans who claim that no one believes something with out evidence.

 

[McBell]

And insights are wasted on the wilfully blind.

No worries about tripping with you, right?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

If you want to limit it to law, be my guess.
It appears that no one else in the thread has problem.

That was your link. How come you used a link to a tern in law?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I am one of those humans who claim that no one believes something with out evidence.

Well, I have no beliefs with evidence. In effect I only have beliefs without evidence and in effect non-religious faith.

 

[McBell]

That was your link. How come you used a link to a tern in law?

I linked to the well defined definition of the term.
You know, in support of my claim that the term is well defined...

 

[McBell]

Well, I have no beliefs with evidence.

um...
Congratulations?

In effect I only have beliefs without evidence and in effect non-religious faith.

Um...
Congratulations?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I linked to the well defined definition of the term.
You know, in support of my claim that the term is well defined...

Yes. That was a link to a term of law.

 

[McBell]

Yes. That was a link to a term of law.

Is there some point you wish to present or are you merely padding your post count?