Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
In 500 words or less what is your number one single best argument, reasoning, or evidence for your diety?
The people who taught me about it were really convincing.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
In 500 words or less what is your number one single best argument, reasoning, or evidence for your diety?
The only argument that has any merit for the existence of a supernatural entity, but one that I don't hold to, is there in no universal existence w/o consciouness, i.e. there must be a universal consciousness for existence.
For those who don't believe, no evidence will suffice..
Are you joking? For those who don't believe, the fact there isn't a single shred of evidence is the problem. We cannot believe something simply because we wish it were true.
Are you joking? For those who don't believe, the fact there isn't a single shred of evidence is the problem. We cannot believe something simply because we wish it were true.
Well although in general im an atheist who lacks official adherence, I'd say an argument for an intelligent force throughout the universe or behind the universe, would be the universe itself. rather than arguing for a specific deity with anthropomorphic attributes who is concerned about sexual orientation, I would argue for a force which is behind the birth of stars and supernovas, behind the nature of life in our planet in all its diversity and its hundreds of millions of years in history. it would be of course hard to claim im talking about a force which is beyond this universe, or a force which is not the universe itself. I think we need to start from somewhere, and an infinite universe will last for aeons of explorations before we try to give absolute evidence for supreme concepts such 'God'. however the sometimes painful beauty that can be found in the universe, the sensations that we may experience in uplifting moments are things that make people feel connected to a force which is perhaps the sum of all there is.In 500 words or less what is your number one single best argument, reasoning, or evidence for your diety?
NaNo NaNoo.
Live long and prosper.
Be careful how you throw the word "evidence" around, it's an awfully tricky word. For example, if a religion claims that God created the world, then the fact that the world exists would be evidence of that God... not good evidence and certainly not substantial evidence, but it is still evidence none the less.
"Proof" is a much better word... but having said that, how much can we really prove anyway?
In 500 words or less what is your number one single best argument, reasoning, or evidence for your diety?
the fact that the world exists would not be evidence that god created it. it's evidence of earth existence and that is all.
In 500 words or less what is your number one single best argument, reasoning, or evidence for your diety?
Be careful how you throw the word "evidence" around, it's an awfully tricky word. For example, if a religion claims that God created the world, then the fact that the world exists would be evidence of that God... not good evidence and certainly not substantial evidence, but it is still evidence none the less.
"Proof" is a much better word... but having said that, how much can we really prove anyway?
Hey, don't shoot the messenger! It's just a saying, calm down.
I hear you... the definition of the word evidence to someone with a natural worldview is very different than the definition of the word to someone with a supernatural worldview.
There aren't any good arguments for traditional theism, so I'm not surprised.Only few have actually done what I've asked, I wished for your number one best arguments.
Only few have actually done what I've asked, I wished for your number one best arguments.
A statement such as this, which has no evidence in what was said, and is simply something you created to have been said. A statement such as you made then reveals that you are not actually trying to logically argue anything, but instead simply are trying to advanced your belief. It is not a way to argue, but is instead a way to discredit yourself from the beginning.
It seems as if you are trying to argue something that simply is not there. The idea of something being deep was something you stated. It existed not before you brought it up as an argument. So if there is something you disagree with, why not actually deal with it, instead of making other things up?
The thing is though, there is no evidence. The only type of "evidence" that exists simply exists only in the minds of those who believe. However, again, that is not actual evidence.
One can not prove of disprove a deity, as there is no actual evidence either way. With that understanding, I believe the quote is quite right in this case. It was not dishonesty as you would like to claim.
It implies no such thing. Maybe if one were to take the statement out of context, and really try to add something, it could imply what you are saying. However, logically, one has to look at it in context, compared to what else was said. If one were to apply logic, it would state that they did not actually believe there was any evidence out there. You simply created a meaning that did not exist.
I believe in this case, you are one who is being dishonest. You can not claim some one is implying something when it is clear that they are not.