Poll

What are the most convincing or strongest arguments for God's non-existence?

Argument from evil
Argument from divine hiddenness
Dystelelogical arguments against God's existence
Ontological Disproofs/Incompatible attributes arguments
All of the above
Both 1 (argument from evil) and 2 (argument from divine hiddenness)
Other
Other: I'll explain below

Author Topic: POLL: In your opinion, what are the strongest arguments against God's existence?  (Read 2206 times)

searcherman

  • Posts: 2616
  • Science is methodology, not religion
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.
Atheism, in the sense now generally admitted to be alone appropriate, may be of three species,- namely, denial of the existence of the Divine, denial the Divine has been shown to exist, and denial that it can be known that the Divine exists. - Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1901 Edition

Sanoy

  • Posts: 980
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. In that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2017, 11:27:04 AM by Sanoy »

AnimatedDirt

  • Posts: 6240
  • Alwys a sinner, Alwys penitent, Alwys right w/ God
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

...because no one in the future could ever say the video footage has been doctored or created since there is such a thing called, "Movie Magic" back in the early 21st Century...

It's called skepticism.
People are amusing.

Soren

  • Posts: 4107
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. It that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
Which is partly why a God who truly wanted relationships with people wouldn't demonstrate his existence and then go into hiding for a few millennia. You would expect such a God to be present in the world unambiguously on a fairly regular basis.

Sanoy

  • Posts: 980
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. It that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
Which is partly why a God who truly wanted relationships with people wouldn't demonstrate his existence and then go into hiding for a few millennia. You would expect such a God to be present in the world unambiguously on a fairly regular basis.

I can only repeat what I said at the end of Reply 56. There is no relationship to be had with those of hardened hearts. Miracles do nothing but condemn them more. What exists is sufficient for hearts of flesh.

Soren

  • Posts: 4107
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. It that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
Which is partly why a God who truly wanted relationships with people wouldn't demonstrate his existence and then go into hiding for a few millennia. You would expect such a God to be present in the world unambiguously on a fairly regular basis.

I can only repeat what I said at the end of Reply 56. There is no relationship to be had with those of hardened hearts. Miracles do nothing but condemn them more. What exists is sufficient for hearts of flesh.
So anyone who does not believe has a hardened heart? What an arrogant, ignorant thing to say.

Sanoy

  • Posts: 980
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. It that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
Which is partly why a God who truly wanted relationships with people wouldn't demonstrate his existence and then go into hiding for a few millennia. You would expect such a God to be present in the world unambiguously on a fairly regular basis.

I can only repeat what I said at the end of Reply 56. There is no relationship to be had with those of hardened hearts. Miracles do nothing but condemn them more. What exists is sufficient for hearts of flesh.
So anyone who does not believe has a hardened heart? What an arrogant, ignorant thing to say.

I agree, I didn't say what you claim.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2017, 02:31:41 PM by Sanoy »

AnimatedDirt

  • Posts: 6240
  • Alwys a sinner, Alwys penitent, Alwys right w/ God
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. It that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
Which is partly why a God who truly wanted relationships with people wouldn't demonstrate his existence and then go into hiding for a few millennia. You would expect such a God to be present in the world unambiguously on a fairly regular basis.

I can only repeat what I said at the end of Reply 56. There is no relationship to be had with those of hardened hearts. Miracles do nothing but condemn them more. What exists is sufficient for hearts of flesh.
So anyone who does not believe has a hardened heart? What an arrogant, ignorant thing to say.

Hardened in the sense that one claims that God has gone into hiding.

God hasn't gone into any more "hiding" than the "truth of evolution" yet you take IT on faith with the same sporadic evidence...and evidence that is fluid in nature.

Add to this the fact that you are on a forum that discusses "God".  So He isn't so hidden...at least no more than a bone fragment that your god, science, will speculate on and paint a picture of for you...and you believe.
People are amusing.

Soren

  • Posts: 4107
    • View Profile
I'm not talking about a personal revelation, visitation, or vision. I'm talking about manna from heaven, part the seas, sticks into snakes kinds of miracles. Somebody like me who witnesses this is pulling out his phone.

So would such footage taken on your phone stand as proof for a few thousand years?

If kept on multiple servers and protected from EM erasure.

It's called science.

Age won't be it's greatest threat, it's greatest threat will be perception because of its age. A thousand years from now we will be looked on as the primitives we see our ancestors to be. It that manner it is no different than the tattered scroll. Neither content, of scroll or of disc, can survive the doubt of the author.
Which is partly why a God who truly wanted relationships with people wouldn't demonstrate his existence and then go into hiding for a few millennia. You would expect such a God to be present in the world unambiguously on a fairly regular basis.

I can only repeat what I said at the end of Reply 56. There is no relationship to be had with those of hardened hearts. Miracles do nothing but condemn them more. What exists is sufficient for hearts of flesh.
So anyone who does not believe has a hardened heart? What an arrogant, ignorant thing to say.

Hardened in the sense that one claims that God has gone into hiding.

God hasn't gone into any more "hiding" than the "truth of evolution" yet you take IT on faith with the same sporadic evidence...and evidence that is fluid in nature.
Please stop making cracks about evolution. Number one, it's irrelevant to the topic. And number two, you simply don't know what you are talking about. There are reams of evidence supporting evolution -- genetic, fossils, and many other kinds. We have even observed evolution in action. There is nothing remotely similar in terms of evidence for the existence of God. So until you actually study evolution, you are just spouting off on something you know nothing about and wasting all of our time.

AnimatedDirt

  • Posts: 6240
  • Alwys a sinner, Alwys penitent, Alwys right w/ God
    • View Profile
Please stop making cracks about evolution. Number one, it's irrelevant to the topic. And number two, you simply don't know what you are talking about. There are reams of evidence supporting evolution -- genetic, fossils, and many other kinds. We have even observed evolution in action. There is nothing remotely similar in terms of evidence for the existence of God. So until you actually study evolution, you are just spouting off on something you know nothing about and wasting all of our time.

I agree.  There's lots of evidence for your faith in the conclusion...but while there may be evidence, you were not present at the time of these fossils and so you take it on faith and conclude "evolution".

Again, you're faith is based on your "god"...that science is right.  But as we both know, science isn't in the business of being right, but rather in finding truth and so far the truth eludes science as the search continues and "truth" is relative to that which we "know" now and what we will find later.

So, yes, you have the same faith in a different god which has NO proof.
People are amusing.

Soren

  • Posts: 4107
    • View Profile
Please stop making cracks about evolution. Number one, it's irrelevant to the topic. And number two, you simply don't know what you are talking about. There are reams of evidence supporting evolution -- genetic, fossils, and many other kinds. We have even observed evolution in action. There is nothing remotely similar in terms of evidence for the existence of God. So until you actually study evolution, you are just spouting off on something you know nothing about and wasting all of our time.

I agree.  There's lots of evidence for your faith in the conclusion...but while there may be evidence, you were not present at the time of these fossils and so you take it on faith and conclude "evolution".

Again, you're faith is based on your "god"...that science is right.  But as we both know, science isn't in the business of being right, but rather in finding truth and so far the truth eludes science as the search continues and "truth" is relative to that which we "know" now and what we will find later.

So, yes, you have the same faith in a different god which has NO proof.
Fine. Have a nice day.

AnimatedDirt

  • Posts: 6240
  • Alwys a sinner, Alwys penitent, Alwys right w/ God
    • View Profile
Please stop making cracks about evolution. Number one, it's irrelevant to the topic. And number two, you simply don't know what you are talking about. There are reams of evidence supporting evolution -- genetic, fossils, and many other kinds. We have even observed evolution in action. There is nothing remotely similar in terms of evidence for the existence of God. So until you actually study evolution, you are just spouting off on something you know nothing about and wasting all of our time.

I agree.  There's lots of evidence for your faith in the conclusion...but while there may be evidence, you were not present at the time of these fossils and so you take it on faith and conclude "evolution".

Again, you're faith is based on your "god"...that science is right.  But as we both know, science isn't in the business of being right, but rather in finding truth and so far the truth eludes science as the search continues and "truth" is relative to that which we "know" now and what we will find later.

So, yes, you have the same faith in a different god which has NO proof.
Fine. Have a nice day.

I'm glad you agree.
People are amusing.

searcherman

  • Posts: 2616
  • Science is methodology, not religion
    • View Profile
Please stop making cracks about evolution. Number one, it's irrelevant to the topic. And number two, you simply don't know what you are talking about. There are reams of evidence supporting evolution -- genetic, fossils, and many other kinds. We have even observed evolution in action. There is nothing remotely similar in terms of evidence for the existence of God. So until you actually study evolution, you are just spouting off on something you know nothing about and wasting all of our time.

I agree.  There's lots of evidence for your faith in the conclusion...but while there may be evidence, you were not present at the time of these fossils and so you take it on faith and conclude "evolution".

Again, you're faith is based on your "god"...that science is right.  But as we both know, science isn't in the business of being right, but rather in finding truth and so far the truth eludes science as the search continues and "truth" is relative to that which we "know" now and what we will find later.

So, yes, you have the same faith in a different god which has NO proof.

There was sufficient proof in 1859 when Darwin published his conclusions, since strengthened every day, unlike your version of "Christianity".

BTW, typing again and again, "no proof for evolution", is not science. Imagine if a cancer doctor treated folks by typing, again and again, "bad cancer, go away!", and called that cancer treatment.

That's how you sound.
Atheism, in the sense now generally admitted to be alone appropriate, may be of three species,- namely, denial of the existence of the Divine, denial the Divine has been shown to exist, and denial that it can be known that the Divine exists. - Encyclopedia Brittanica, 1901 Edition

AnimatedDirt

  • Posts: 6240
  • Alwys a sinner, Alwys penitent, Alwys right w/ God
    • View Profile
Please stop making cracks about evolution. Number one, it's irrelevant to the topic. And number two, you simply don't know what you are talking about. There are reams of evidence supporting evolution -- genetic, fossils, and many other kinds. We have even observed evolution in action. There is nothing remotely similar in terms of evidence for the existence of God. So until you actually study evolution, you are just spouting off on something you know nothing about and wasting all of our time.

I agree.  There's lots of evidence for your faith in the conclusion...but while there may be evidence, you were not present at the time of these fossils and so you take it on faith and conclude "evolution".

Again, you're faith is based on your "god"...that science is right.  But as we both know, science isn't in the business of being right, but rather in finding truth and so far the truth eludes science as the search continues and "truth" is relative to that which we "know" now and what we will find later.

So, yes, you have the same faith in a different god which has NO proof.

There was sufficient proof in 1859 when Darwin published his conclusions, since strengthened every day, unlike your version of "Christianity".

BTW, typing again and again, "no proof for evolution", is not science. Imagine if a cancer doctor treated folks by typing, again and again, "bad cancer, go away!", and called that cancer treatment.

That's how you sound.

Problem here is you cannot provide the PROOF of evolution...only evidence that suggests and you conclude "evolution".

If evolution was PROVEN, everything came from nothing, then you'd be a rich man with all the book deals etc.  But evolution remains a theory that science accepts ( for the moment ) as truth.  If it was THE truth, science would stop investigating "evolution".
People are amusing.

phidiasv

  • Posts: 879
    • View Profile
I voted "other". I find the strongest arguments to be evidential ones which use observations that don't usually make their way into the standard arguments. The fact that I (and many people) don't care for many kinds of vegetables is a good one, I think.