What are the best arguments in favor of theism and against atheism?

[Willamena]

To lay the credit on a mythological concept seems to me a way of hiding the fact that you don't know or are unwilling to lay the credit on the surgeon who used great skill to heal you,
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/1a/b9/04/1ab9046f92ba55e5eeaaceeb5900f0d5.jpg
or the driver who woke up just in time to avoid you, or air currents that shifted the falling rock just enough to miss you.

That seems backwards: a myth doesn't occur until after an experience is delivered into context.

 

[ChristineM]

That seems backwards: a myth doesn't occur until after an experience is delivered into context.

What context? A myth is a story, nothing more, no experience involved

 

[Ben Dhyan]

That is not known, the laws of thermodynamics did not exist until after the big bang, they did not begin to resolve until 10e-34 of a second after the event so conservation of energy is not relevant to the beginning of the universe.

Are you implying that Cosmic existence had a beginning, where is your evidence?

 

[ChristineM]

Are you implying that Cosmic existence had a beginning, where is your evidence?

I am implying nothing, i am stating the known universe came into existence around 13.8 billion light years ago, the laws that govern this universe did not begin to coalesce until 10e-34 of a second after the event and were not resolved until the end of the grand unification epoch.

It is discussed lightly here The early universe | CERN

And in more detail in the cosmology pages of Perimeter Institute

And for more general interest at wikipedia Chronology of the universe - Wikipedia

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I am implying nothing, i am stating the known universe came into existence around 13.8 billion light years ago, the laws that govern this universe did not begin to coalesce until 10e-34 of a second after the event and were not resolved until the end of the grand unification epoch.

It is discussed lightly here The early universe | CERN

And in more detail in the cosmology pages of Perimeter Institute

And for more general interest at wikipedia Chronology of the universe - Wikipedia

Point is though Christine, none of that proves that Cosmic existence is not eternal, and thus the so called laws of physics are merely contemporary (cosmically speaking) conceptual theories and laws meant to explain dualistic local (cosmically speaking) observations of the physical universe. So these so called laws pertain to a reality that transcends these laws, which reality is eternal without beginning or end, it is only the manifested forms of the universe that have beginnings and endings..

 

[Cephus]

Point is though Christine, none of that proves that Cosmic existence is not eternal, and thus the so called laws of physics are merely contemporary (cosmically speaking) conceptual theories and laws meant to explain dualistic local (cosmically speaking) observations of the physical universe. So these so called laws pertain to a reality that transcends these laws, which reality is eternal without beginning or end, it is only the manifested forms of the universe that have beginnings and endings..

We can only speak about our particular universe, we do not know what, if anything, lies outside of it, or what might have happened before our particular Big Bang. What else is out there, if anything, is unknown. That includes any gods that might live beyond the boundaries of our universe.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

We can only speak about our particular universe, we do not know what, if anything, lies outside of it, or what might have happened before our particular Big Bang. What else is out there, if anything, is unknown. That includes any gods that might live beyond the boundaries of our universe.

To take the limited observed (human) extent of the universe accessible from planet earth as a solitary unit is ok for physical science, as they can only work with that which is accessible, but religion is not confined to merely dualistic physical observations, and thus there are no such constraints. Cosmic existence can not be circumscribed by any spatial limits, nor can it be limited by any time, for it is eternal and infinite without beginning or end. The prefix UNI means one, and the limited observed extent of the universe by relatively primitive evolved humanity on this planet nowhere near comes close to being the actual universe.

 

[Willamena]

What context? A myth is a story, nothing more, no experience involved

Myths don't spring out for no reason, though, otherwise we'd just call them storytellings.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Myths don't spring out for no reason, though, otherwise we'd just call them storytellings.

Their origins are mostly lost in the myths of time....I speak with a lisp..

 

[Cephus]

To take the limited observed (human) extent of the universe accessible from planet earth as a solitary unit is ok for physical science, as they can only work with that which is accessible, but religion is not confined to merely dualistic physical observations, and thus there are no such constraints. Cosmic existence can not be circumscribed by any spatial limits, nor can it be limited by any time, for it is eternal and infinite without beginning or end. The prefix UNI means one, and the limited observed extent of the universe by relatively primitive evolved humanity on this planet nowhere near comes close to being the actual universe.

Religion isn't "constrained" by anything including reality. It just makes up whatever it feels like making up because it feels good to believe things for which there isn't a shred of evidence period. There's no reason to think that there is any such thing as "cosmic existence". When in doubt, just make something up that makes you feel good. Who cares if it's actually true.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Religion isn't "constrained" by anything including reality. It just makes up whatever it feels like making up because it feels good to believe things for which there isn't a shred of evidence period. There's no reason to think that there is any such thing as "cosmic existence". When in doubt, just make something up that makes you feel good. Who cares if it's actually true.

Haha.....so you think there is not a shred of evidence that indicates there is cosmic existence?

Ok Cephus.....talk about making things up....I hope it at least made you feel good...but back to the real universe, where is your evidence that the universe in fact is non-existent....

 

[Cephus]

Haha.....so you think there is not a shred of evidence that indicates there is cosmic existence?

Assuming you're talking about a god, no there isn't. If you meant something else, that might be different.

 

[ChristineM]

Point is though Christine, none of that proves that Cosmic existence is not eternal, and thus the so called laws of physics are merely contemporary (cosmically speaking) conceptual theories and laws meant to explain dualistic local (cosmically speaking) observations of the physical universe. So these so called laws pertain to a reality that transcends these laws, which reality is eternal without beginning or end, it is only the manifested forms of the universe that have beginnings and endings..

It shows some of what is known about our universe. As to the rest, conjecture. I don't do conjecture, i leave that to the "faithful" to make up whatever they feel most comfortable with when faced with reality. I work with facts, when you have some actual evidence of " eternity" then perhaps we can discuss a subject in reality.

 

[ChristineM]

Myths don't spring out for no reason, though, otherwise we'd just call them storytellings.

Yes stories, methinks you have it.

Or are you saying odin, minerva, zeus etc sprung out because they were not stories?

 

[Fire_Monkey]

What arguments do you believe point to there being a God or gods and why do you think this makes more sense than the idea that there are no gods? I am personally a non-believer but I would greatly like to hear arguments against this position and possibly find a religion that at least makes sense.

I would like to hear actual arguments though. Lets keep off saying "ATheism is just dumb!" and the reverse. People come to their own beliefs for a large variety of reasons and you shouldn't just call them dumb for having said beliefs. Even if you think the beliefs themselves are pretty dumb.

Last thing, if you favor monotheism or polytheism or pantheism or non theism please be sure to include specifics of why you favor one version over another.

There of course is no God. Not one that is, as is depicted in the Bible. Not a personal god, who cares about how you act or whom you wish to have sex with or if you attend church, or if you lust over that hit little neighbor girl washing her car in her flimsy little summer dress. LOL
After all these eons..not one speck of evidence for this god. Nothing. It's all in the heads of the believers. The godist argument for their silly adult imaginary friend has been so thoroughly and totally dismantled by science that the only rejoinder they have left is......"Well, you can't prove he DOESN'T exist!"

LOL

Weak.

Just like you cannot prove I don't have an invisible Fire breathing Dragon in my garage. The great Carl Sagan once mocked theists with this example, which you can Google if you like.

So the only reason to believe in god is if you need some sort of emotional placebo. A crutch. Like I said before, an imaginary friend whom you can talk to when you are unable to deal with life on its own terms.

The advantage of course to be an atheist is that you know the real truth; you're not deluded; you have the freedom to live your life as you wish; you do not squander it praying to somebody or worshiping somebody who doesn't exist. You can go bang that neighbor girl. LOL Also I have always found it ironic that us atheists really get more out of the bible than the literalists do. We know how to read it and enjoy it and how it was meant to be read: as a book of literature and poetry and metaphor. Allegory. Not a rule book written by a tyrannical jealous bully god who kills anybody he feels does not kiss his butt. LOL

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Assuming you're talking about a god, no there isn't. If you meant something else, that might be different.

Sadly....the problem with ill considered beliefs like yours' is that there is a whole glorious universe for you to be discovered but you presently are unable to think outside the circle of your narrow circumscribed belief system.

 

[Cephus]

Sadly....the problem with ill considered beliefs like yours' is that there is a whole glorious universe for you to be discovered but you presently are unable to think outside the circle of your narrow circumscribed belief system.

In other words, you've got nothing, as expected. So you'd rather go play in your emotionally-comforting fantasy land, believing in your imaginary friend, than actually go with what the objective evidence has to say.

Sadly, that's no surprise.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It shows some of what is known about our universe. As to the rest, conjecture. I don't do conjecture, i leave that to the "faithful" to make up whatever they feel most comfortable with when faced with reality. I work with facts, when you have some actual evidence of " eternity" then perhaps we can discuss a subject in reality.

But it is not conjecture Christine, that the universe is eternal without beginning or end and that it is infinite can be known from logic, for nothing does not and can not exist, that's a scientific fact! And if nothing has never existed, the sum total of the mass of the known universe has always existed.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

In other words, you've got nothing, as expected. So you'd rather go play in your emotionally-comforting fantasy land, believing in your imaginary friend, than actually go with what the objective evidence has to say.

Sadly, that's no surprise.

Nothing? You are back to calling the universe non-existent, the universe in which you live, move, and have your being?

 

[ChristineM]

But it is not conjecture Christine, that the universe is eternal without beginning or end and that it is infinite can be known from logic, for nothing does not and can not exist, that's a scientific fact! And if nothing has never existed, the sum total of the mass of the known universe has always existed.

Yes it is, or perhaps you have some evidence to back up your claim

That of course depends on your definition of nothing, there is absolutely nothing in science to say that our universe did not comer from nothing, so perhaps you could educate me and point me at the "scientific fact" you claim