Why There is Probably No God

[InChrist]

LOL -- fair enough.
It's full of inconsistencies, contradictions, outright errors, historical errors and and copy errors.
It's cherry picked from a much larger library of ancient texts. It's content was chosen by vote, by men with an agenda.
It provides no evidence for many of its assertions, many of which would never pass journalistic muster today.

In short, it's an anthology of fantastic folklore, like the religious literature of many other religions.

Okay, thanks for expressing your view. Obviously we have different perspectives on the subject. I don't really have time to give much response at the moment, but I am just wondering if you have done your own in depth research to arrive at your conclusions or are you just parroting the typical views of other skeptics? I am not insinuating you are, but wondering because so many people seem to do that. Have you ever sincerely asked God whether the Bible is true and trustworthy?

Have a goodnight.

 

[Valjean]

Okay, thanks for expressing your view. Obviously we have different perspectives on the subject. I don't really have time to give much response at the moment, but I am just wondering if you have done your own in depth research to arrive at your conclusions or are you just parroting the typical views of other skeptics? I am not insinuating you are, but wondering because so many people seem to do that. Have you ever sincerely asked God whether the Bible is true and trustworthy?

Have a goodnight.

I've read the Bible, and also read numerous commentaries by biblical historians and skeptics. You've probably seen some of the long lists of contradictions, inaccuracies &c on the net.

As for asking God, what facts should I expect to be clarified, and in what medium?

 

[Dell]

There is no such thing as miracles or the physically impossible, therefore the idea of a deity that is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent is false. An intelligence that evolved over billions of years that can do amazing "physically possible" things could exist or could have existed.

 

[Ellen Brown]

I don't need to be told if there is a God or not. It is my business, stay out of it. I do believe in a Creator.

In the Christianity that I came from, followers do most to show there is no God.

 

[loverofhumanity]

That's like saying the painting just is, without an artist or the epic novel has no author. Doesn't seem simpler or correct to me.

I believe this is an irrefutable argument. I see the ‘signs’ of God everywhere as clear as the sun at midday.

Wasn’t it Jesus who said ‘the pure in heart shall see God’?

 

[loverofhumanity]

There are many arguments for the existence of god, but nearly all of them are something along the lines of "God is necessary to account for X." "X" could be any or all of a number of things or concepts, either physical or nonphysical, like the universe, or something more specific like the complexity of life, or even "transcendental" concepts like mathematics, logic, love, or beauty. Most theists believe (for whatever reason) these entities or concepts cannot exist without a cause, so they posit a "God" to account for them. But, apparently without realizing it, they have just re-created their own "problem" in an attempt to solve it since "God" is defined to be without cause, and simply taken as a given. It is much simpler to just accept the existence of the universe (along with all of its properties/laws/non-physical concepts) and leave it at that. The simpler explanation is usually correct.

I personally see the ‘signs’ of God everywhere. To me it’s just so obvious that I cannnot understand how people can not see that there is a God. Maybe I think His light is blinding.

I think there are human methods of learning like logic and reason then there is tradition and the senses but I think all these are faulty and do not lead to perfect knowledge.

But I believe if one comes into contact with the Source of all knowledge then perfect knowledge or certitude or knowing can be attained.

Just like gravity and physics are invisible to the naked eye but exist, I believe so do invisible enormous spiritual powers emanate from the Great Beings and Their Word is invested with a Hidden Gift which is bestowed upon the true and sincere seeker of truth the requirement being a pure heart and humility.

But I do not believe we can obtain perfect knowledge from other human beings. Those who have attained however can point us to the path but then it is up to us whether we walk it or not.

Just as darkness presupposes that there is light and ignorance means there is knowledge so too I believe that imperfection proves and presupposes that there is perfection.

And once we can connect with that perfection, we too can receive perfect knowledge.

 

[viole]

But a painting is artificial, there are no natural mechanisms that could produce it.
.

Do you think Leonardo da Vinci or Picasso were supernatural beings?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Sanzbir]

Your title is a misnomer.

You are presenting reasons why a certain argument for the existence of a God are flawed.

You are not presenting reasons "why there is probably no God".

 

[Sanzbir]

But a painting is artificial, there are no natural mechanisms that could produce it.

Why is a painting "artificial"??

Why do you say there are "no natural mechanisms that could produce it"??

It is the result of the actions of a naturally occurring animal adapting naturally occurring materials, is it not??

 

[Willamena]

Do you think Leonardo da Vinci or Picasso were supernatural beings?

Ciao

- viole

No less than each of us.

 

[Willamena]

The world of sensation that our brain 'shows' us is as artificial as a painting (artifice = made by man). We, each, are artists--our bodies compose sufficient information to take us from the last step to the next*; our capacity to combine information takes us to the step beyond^; and our penchant to store information keeps the past close, often as near as the present.


*a metaphor for living
^same for imagation

 

[idea]

What does everyone think about believing in spirits, without believing in God? I think there is something unique within life forms -call it self-awareness, conscience, - more than energy, but an intelligence or spirit within us that makes us alive. I do not think it is too far-fetched to imagine this life-giving substance continuing on in some form after our physical body stops working.

I do not see evidence for anything that is all-powerful, all-knowing etc.

On earth as it is in heaven? or is it: In heaven as it is on earth? I rather think the latter, if spirits exist - then heaven is filled with just a bunch of people - spirits with different opinions and beliefs in heaven just as there are on earth, with no real ultimate authority figure for any of it.

 

[idea]

As for asking God, what facts should I expect to be clarified, and in what medium?

The questions and clarifications I have asked,

- the problem of evil (no, the free-will argument does not solve this to me)
- existence of diverse systems of religious beliefs (we all agree that g=9.81m/s^2, we all agree on self-evident truths)
- lack of guidance, and communication
- Hell. For those who believe in both hell and a loving powerful God, sorry, those are two opposing things.

 

[InChrist]

I've read the Bible, and also read numerous commentaries by biblical historians and skeptics. You've probably seen some of the long lists of contradictions, inaccuracies &c on the net.

Yes, I have seen the lists of alleged contradictions and inaccuracies. I have never taken them lightly, nor ignored them. Instead I have started with what is easy and plain enough to understand and trust in the scriptures and moved on to the more obscure or complicated parts, asking God for wisdom and clarification. I have found this always gives insight and reasonable answers. There is much I still may not fully understand, but I am confident that there are no contradictions in the scriptures and that those things which on the surface may appear to be are due to my limited human ability to understand.

As for asking God, what facts should I expect to be clarified, and in what medium?

That is between you and God and what facts you would like clarified. I'd say the appropriate medium is sincere questions or talking to God.

 

[Ponder This]

There are many arguments for the existence of god, but nearly all of them are something along the lines of "God is necessary to account for X." "X" could be any or all of a number of things or concepts, either physical or nonphysical, like the universe, or something more specific like the complexity of life, or even "transcendental" concepts like mathematics, logic, love, or beauty. Most theists believe (for whatever reason) these entities or concepts cannot exist without a cause, so they posit a "God" to account for them. But, apparently without realizing it, they have just re-created their own "problem" in an attempt to solve it since "God" is defined to be without cause, and simply taken as a given. It is much simpler to just accept the existence of the universe (along with all of its properties/laws/non-physical concepts) and leave it at that. The simpler explanation is usually correct.

Allow me to paraphrase your post:

1. God is not necessary to explain reality.
2. Therefore, God probably isn't real.​

 

[Jos]

the problem of evil (no, the free-will argument does not solve this to me)

Why doesn't the free will argument solve the problem of evil for you?

 

[idea]

Why doesn't the free will argument solve the problem of evil for you?

That will be another thread - many evils are not created by free will (disease, natural disasters, etc. etc.) - does free will exist in heaven and hell? Can you choose to sin in heaven, or choose to be good in hell? if it does not really exist in heaven or hell then.... evil does not always generate appreciation of what is good, it leads to defensiveness, lack of faith and trust (you do not learn to trust others by being abused). Evil does not refine - it makes some insane, and in the end kills us all.

The existence of a loving all-powerful God and the existence of evil are not compatible.

 

[Etritonakin]

There is no such thing as miracles or the physically impossible, therefore the idea of a deity that is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent is false. An intelligence that evolved over billions of years that can do amazing "physically possible" things could exist or could have existed.

Technically, a miracle need not be physically impossible.
We tend to view things as possible or impossible based on our abilities.
Our position -subject to certain physical laws -and our interface/physical body limit those abilities.

 

[Etritonakin]

There are many arguments for the existence of god, but nearly all of them are something along the lines of "God is necessary to account for X." "X" could be any or all of a number of things or concepts, either physical or nonphysical, like the universe, or something more specific like the complexity of life, or even "transcendental" concepts like mathematics, logic, love, or beauty. Most theists believe (for whatever reason) these entities or concepts cannot exist without a cause, so they posit a "God" to account for them. But, apparently without realizing it, they have just re-created their own "problem" in an attempt to solve it since "God" is defined to be without cause, and simply taken as a given. It is much simpler to just accept the existence of the universe (along with all of its properties/laws/non-physical concepts) and leave it at that. The simpler explanation is usually correct.

The same problem exists whether thinking of God or not. The simple answer is that whatever it was which led to the present situation simply was. Accepting that is the real problem. A creator being necessary because that which exists is indicative of such would not be the problem.

"Everything" is logically without first cause. It seems logical to me that the real issue is what necessarily developed first. If "God" is everything, it doesn't mean God could not have developed from a less complex state.

 

[Valjean]

I believe this is an irrefutable argument. I see the ‘signs’ of God everywhere as clear as the sun at midday.

The watchmaker argument? This has been debunked a thousand times over the years.

Technically, a miracle need not be physically impossible.

But if an action occurs through the unfoldment of normal physical laws, how is it a miracle? Isn't a miracle, by definition, magic?