Atheism or No Intelligence Allowed

[firedragon]

I'm saying there is not sufficient proof.

1. Science can only examine things that are within the realm of the natural. Things which can be seen, smelled, heard, felt, tasted, and otherwise measured. God is outside the realm of scientific inquiry.

2. With regards to reason, each argument (no matter how good) has a counter argument, until you end up with nothing. Trust me, I explored this avenue to the fullest, hoping I could find some shred to hold onto. In the end, there is not argument that either finally proves nor disproves God.

For example, I look at the incredible beauty and complexity in nature, and my intuition screams "God." Such implicit design must have a designer. Right?

This is a common, common argument. But it has its flaws. Intuition is a strong way of thinking, but it is not infallible. It has certain weaknesses, and one of its greatest weaknesses is seeing agency where none exists. What do I mean by that? I mean that if we hear a rustle in the bushes, it is to our evolutionary advantage to think it is scary and a possible predator and to get away, even though the odds are far from it. IOW from an evolutionary standpoint, it is better for our survival to make an error and assign agency when there is none, than to make the opposite error and get eaten by a tiger.

Who is to say that when I assign agency to the design of the universe I am not making this fundamental error of intuition?

I spent a lot of time when I was younger following each of the many "proofs" of God's existence, and all of them can be explained away. On the flip side, it is impossible to prove something does not exist. And it may very well be that it is a tiger in the bushes.

My inclination is as follows: since science and reason are insufficient to reach a conclusion, I will go with my intuition. It may turn out to be wrong, but it is probably to my advantage. And at any rate, I think the religious life is the most meaningful life -- if it turned out there were no God, I would still live my life as though God existed.

Its like this. You have to ask for someones proof. Then they will present the proof. That is proof. Maybe that proof is not good enough of course. That is completely your prerogative.

 

[firedragon]

2. With regards to reason, each argument (no matter how good) has a counter argument, until you end up with nothing. Trust me, I explored this avenue to the fullest, hoping I could find some shred to hold onto. In the end, there is not argument that either finally proves nor disproves God.

Can you explain what proof you have explored?

 

[osgart]

Can the universe explain itself, or come from total nothingness? I never thought it could.

Something more fundamental must exist eternally.

One option is that the universe is an ever-changing eternal entity. Only it's form changes. But I don't think there is anything out there stopping one from believing that the entirety of knowable existence came from a more fundamental reality and didn't always exist.

One objection to God is that all animal creations live very desperate, savage lives. But for humanity conditions would be far worse. Life itself is not primary and far from self sufficient in existence. To posit a God you would need an existence that is completely harmonious to life. And we do not have such a reality.

As for something that is self existing, non contingent, outside of time and space, has intelligence, and is immaterial that's all very plausible to me.

Why not embrace existence as a mystery though, and just admit that there is an overwhelming ton of things that humanity does not know?

That would be the most honest course, and the least delusional thing to do.

 

[rational experiences]

If humans thinking give names by describing to any condition then a human said God.

The defined condition I know became a superior chosen human status via God told me.

Animals don't talk.
Trees don't talk. Pre existing life. Life says a human is conscious.

So if a human says I know because I was told yet the human thinks and talks and reasons then a human is claiming I am a God.

Unless they hear voice separate from their selves.

Separate voice other humans.

So then you study asking how a separate voice existed speaking.

A scientist medical states brain chemical change causes voice to be heard.

Psychics loving as a humane life hear voice. Of deceased.

Humans living brain harmed hear voice also.

Proven.

Other voices can be heard.

We all live within creation.

To hear voice it is heard by conditions creation.

With no argument.

Machines once never existed.

A designer human scientist thought described reasoned machine. Machine needs a human to operate control machine. Conscious thinker.

Machine to machine using heavens transmits recorded human voices and images.

The heavens is in creation.

We live inside heavens.

We are not the machine condition to hear voice recorded.

The answer the designer human attacked their life and removed a portion of its lived experience to cause recording as a status.

Psychics hear deceased human voice.
Machine conditions owns transmitting human voice. To machines. Yet uses the atmosphere.

To hear a man adult voice first. Man adult first was designer of science.

So we hear a voice that discusses the sciences. It discussed life as science human inferred discussed all ideas.

Science however was not loving. As the thoughts design building reacting is to take convert attack destroy react.

Evil thoughts.

Spirituality living the natural self human.

Claim I know where humans came from.

A spirit place.
A spirit being.
And own one spirit after we die. Not known discussed the term spirit Idealises as it is not in creation.

Call that spirit state whatever you want. As it is in named and not in creation science will never own the place where creation was first released from.

We know creation was released and burnt evolved and cooled.

We know separation was space caused by removal of pre existing form.

We know parents came into atmosphere only because the planet put the atmosphere back into space.

We knew we came from a holy spirit place. As space no longer owned separation from where creation was released.

Makes no difference what you name it. We know that the place of spirit is real.

Why science cannot disprove spirit.

They disproved earth remaining constant as they reacted form and made sink space holes.

So they know spirit as it's term was never in creation.

As we live the human experience conscious in creation.

If the status spirit that never spoke owned the human presence that did speak then it can use speaking itself as a large bodied heard voice.

Not design.
Not science.
Not machine to machine.

Used by the spirit that owned caused creation who communicates to us proven by humans in human experiences multi times.

Not really a name owner as humans define naming.

 

[We Never Know]

How many here are virgins so might chase and catch one. Very few if any I suspect.

In s sense unicorns do exist.

22 Astonishing Narwhal Facts - Fact Animal

 

[Irate State]

His vision and who we are are intertwined, it's impossible for who we are to have an accurate existence other then in his vision.

This means nothing, sorry. It's akin to techno babble, but with gods.

 

[rational experiences]

Status science proves God is not there by logic.

Human says God cannot be proven.

Eternal the form from a state of God always existed that never changed.

God in creation burst burnt changed.

God in creation science says is proved. Creation.

The eternal form not named will never be proven as it is not in creation.

What science agreed with as a human who knew a form creator always had existed owning no thesis. To reason consciousness.....as a human is also created form.

No man is God stated scientific appraisal. To think. The theist.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Yes, a reminder is a proof if it points to something you know for certain about yourself that proves God. The reminder is that you and God's vision are intertwined, that you can't be who you are without his vision defining you and hence, by remembering this about yourself, you remember his vision and know he exists.

Please demonstrate this.

 

[SkepticThinker]

A god cannot be proven or disproven with belief, science, want, need, thought, etc.
Anyone seeking prove or disproof of a god just as well be chasing unicorns

Okay, so why do people believe in things they can't demonstrate to be true?