Question for athiests

The best argument for the existence of God is as powerful as the best argument for the existence of invisible pixies that dance in my backyard at dawn every morning.

I have no time for philosophical wanking that attempts to prove that God just might exist in the cracks of the universe that we don't yet fully understand. While I have some sympathy for those who believe in God because that gives them comfort and their life meaning, I despise those who assert that their version of God is the only correct one, and therefore everyone should comply with the rules of behaviour that they deem correct.

Mr. Rogers.

That as humans, we only think we’re smart because we don’t have another race to compare ourselves to. In the grand scheme of things, humans have not been around for very long. We’ve accomplished a lot but this is just the birth of our existence. Just 200 years ago, scientists believed that the earth was the center of the entire universe. Today, scientists feel like there cannot be a god because of what we currently know. Will this belief change in 200 years from now? How about 2,000,000 years from now? The point is, it’s just as ignorant to say there isn’t a god because you cannot prove the absence of one. There may not be a god in the traditional sense of a man sitting on a throne behind pearly gates. However, it’s extremely likely that there’s something bigger than all of us that is so far beyond our comprehension. Take the ancient civilizations for instance. If you traveled back in time and tried teaching neuroscience to the mayans, they wouldn’t possibly be able to comprehend it. The same principle could be likely for a “god”

i ,, honestly don't know how to answer this, i'm pagan :P

Kinda interesting that the atheist will dig deep in order to believe in anything but God including space aliens.

If you see writing on a wall you naturally assume it was put there by an intelligent human being.

DNA is clearly writing. Who wrote it? Space Aliens?

The best argument I can come up with is if we're very loose with our definition of what we consider to be a god. Like if there was an alien from another universe that was so advanced that it would seem like a god to us. If it turned out that it created our universe (but using advanced science rather than magic), then deists could claim that that's proof that they were right in their beliefs. That this was the alien they had believed in all along. I don't think we should count aliens as gods though, no matter how godlike they seem. All their powers would be explainable, a god's powers wouldn't be.

No doubt if this origin of our universe were to be proven, then all different religious figures would try to claim that this alien is the god of their religion, and that it sent its son to save us or that it communicated with Mohammad, etc. But that'd be ridiculous, this alien would have no interest in us. It might study us, but to believe that it would care about the desires of such basic creatures is laughable, we'd be like microbes to it.

So this would still only be a good argument for deism, I can't think of any good arguments for any one religion though.

The best argument I heard is how can you look at the universe and not see a creator

But for my beliefs, I think it's much more likely that there's like a core energy to the totality of physicality, and the big bang basically spread the energy around as a by product of the explosion, like how a bomb will leave a residue of gun powder and stuff

I also think there are built in fail safes, like how black holes absorb all matter, thus returning all matter back to the original source as energy, kinda like how in pool the game is over once all the balls are potted

This outlook doesn't really have any presuppositions, it's based on a lot of verified scientific research, but the person who posited what I said the best argument is for theism basically looked at that like it's retarded, even though I granted him the benefit of the doubt in believing in a purposeful creation

One of his other points is like life is so complex it just has to be by design, my response to that was well of course life had to develop complexly, biology *is* complex

And the funny thing is we're both saying very similar things, you know like that mass collection of energy (which btw there's recent research into basically all particles and waves having a foundation of energy) that could be like a god, like the aggregate of all the energy in the universe that could very well be conscious like we are but most likely on a more advanced level, that would rather basically dissipate itself repeatedly as big bangs than spend ad infinitum by itself, which could definitely be the same god he's talking about just using different words, but I think the spiritual connotations made him toxically sceptical, but that's okay because I now see him as an opportunistic hypocrite so his opinions don't really mean that much to me anyway, it just sucks in his mind and those he has influence over will see me in a similar light because it's like, I started out with the golden rule and he's just whatever about different view points. Like it's great you think Jesus is more like an ideal than a non fictional man portrayed to the letter in the bible, but how about you act like you really believe that before you try to dismiss what I'm saying. Like part of me just thinks he wants to be the only cognitively advanced person around and I guess I just made him realize his shortcomings

But my biggest problem with that outlook is just that it's very similar to assigning human emotions to an animal, except they're assigning them to something incomprehensible to humans, so same thing just going the other way, which therein lies the dogma of religion and believing in a straight up god that created existence solely for us or mutual benefits or whatever

Really my beliefs are more about developing as a person, being a positive source of energy. Which is almost what religion tries to accomplish, but without trying to tell people there's a god and heaven and how we have all this information based solely on the words of a few, so it's like, my beliefs are very similar to other religions, but again without the dogma.

I'm actually not an atheist, I'm an agnostic, but I hope you don't mind me answering.

It's ultimately an argument against the notion of the existence of god requiring proof. So, ultimately one of the biggest grievances against religious theory is that you can't prove that a god exists. If god was real jesus could've jumped off the cross & then god could've floated down on a unicorn & shot lazer beams out his god face.

The notion of god proving he/she is real, however, violates the tenant of free will, which is a major belief in all religions. If god was indisputably true & a provable notion, then human choices would have no consequence & the notion of faith wouldn't glorify your god. Basically free will wouldn't exist; people would be robots, so the entire notion of humans being made in god's image would be nullified.

Anyways, I don't believe it, but it's an interesting idea.

soviets