What would it take for you to NOT believe in God?

[TagliatelliMonster]

But that does not mean that none of us are right.

But since you all make the same type of claims and at best only one of you is correct, the more likely option is that you are all incorrect.

I'll operate on that most likely assumption until one of you can actually support their claims. But seeing how the religious have been trying to do exactly that for millenia while having nothing but failure to show for it, it seems an exercise in futility by now.

 

[Spirit of Light]

The very definition of closed-minded is that your mind is closed to any potential evidence or data that might be brought up in the future which might require you to rethink the things you believe today.

So saying upfront that "nothing will ever ever ever" make you change your mind, is textbook closed-mindedness.

When it comes to believing that there are countless Gods and Buddhas is something I realized through the spiritual practice, that is not something that can be undone. It's normal for me to understand Gods and Buddhas exist.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

When it comes to believing that there are countless Gods and Buddhas is something I realized through the spiritual practice, that is not something that can be undone. It's normal for me to understand Gods and Buddhas exist.

If history has shown us anything at all, it most certainly is that beliefs can be undone - no matter how strongly they were held.

However, I do agree that this is not necessarily the case for individual believers. Sadly, it indeed seems to be the case that people can be so radically/psychologically entrenched in their beliefs that nothing can ever make them think otherwise.

In essence, the hole they've been digging has become so deep that they simply can't get out anymore.

 

[Spirit of Light]

If history has shown us anything at all, it most certainly is that beliefs can be undone - no matter how strongly they were held.

However, I do agree that this is not necessarily the case for individual believers. Sadly, it indeed seems to be the case that people can be so radically/psychologically entrenched in their beliefs that nothing can ever make them think otherwise.

In essence, the hole they've been digging has become so deep that they simply can't get out anymore.

You never going to understand spiritual lifestyle. So I see no point in discussing further.

 

[PureX]

Do you think all atheists think they are hopeless?

The question was not to all atheists. It was to me, personally (I assume). I cannot answer for any atheists, as I am not one.

 

[Trailblazer]

Do you think all atheists think they are hopeless?

Well, I'm an atheist, and that certainly isn't a word that I'ld use to describe myself or my state of mind.

Not right now.
But this too might pass.

 

[Trailblazer]

But my life seems better served by living in, and accepting, reality as it is.

What if you are wrong about reality?
Reality might be more than you know.

 

[Trailblazer]

But since you all make the same type of claims and at best only one of you is correct, the more likely option is that you are all incorrect.

No that is highly unlikely since 84 percent of the world population has a faith
It makes more sense that they are all right about some things even if they are not all right about everything.

It makes no sense that atheists are right, given they are only 7% of the world population.

According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population), with China having the most atheists in the world (200 million convinced atheists). Demographics of atheism - Wikipedia​

I'll operate on that most likely assumption until one of you can actually support their claims. But seeing how the religious have been trying to do exactly that for millenia while having nothing but failure to show for it, it seems an exercise in futility by now.

I do not know what you mean by "support your claims."
If you mean objective verifiable evidence of God's existence there is no such evidence and never will be.
But that does not mean we cannot support our claims.
Just because atheists do not LIKE what we have that does not mean we do not have anything.

 

[Soapy]

I'm sorry Soapy, tired of the merry-go-round.

Have a great day.

Sore loser.... it NEVER was going to go your way... I did say before for you to give in gracefully!!!

You dug as deep as you could and hit bedrock. Thanks for the discussion.

Now if you just understand that the word, “God” is a title and not a person then you will see what John 1:1-3 means without a problem:

• “In the beginning was the word of God that spoke the world into existence and spoke of many things including the salvation of mankind. And that word was a MIGHTY WORD - it was HIS WORD... it was with him IN THE BEGINNING ...
• And in the fullness of time HIS WORD concerning the salvation of mankind PUT ON FLESH (became true... came to fruition...: ‘TO PUT FLESH ON THE BONES OF A THOUGHT AND WORD’
• Yes, the PROMISED SAVIOUR came into being...: Isaiah 42:1: “Behold my servant whom I have chosen.. I will put my spirit on him... “
• The SERVANT was the child born through the Holy Spirit OF THE MIGHT ONE... NOT of the SEED OF MAN but of that of a WOMAN (inert egg of Mary) just as Adam was born not of a man but of the DUST OF THE EARTH (inert chemical material).
• The servant was TAUGHT the testimony concerning yhwh by YHWH MIGHTY ONE and perfectly delivered it as he was commanded - thus this servant was the perfect WORD of the mighty one (perfect word of ...the GOD of the Jews)

 

[Kenny]

Sore loser.... it NEVER was going to go your way... I did say before for you to give in gracefully!!!

You dug as deep as you could and hit bedrock. Thanks for the discussion.

LOL if that makes you happy More like I hit a stony heart

 

[ppp]

No that is highly unlikely since 84 percent of the world population has a faith
It makes more sense that they are all right about some things even if they are not all right about everything.

It makes no sense that atheists are right, given they are only 7% of the world population.

What does the percentage of the population have to do with the correctness of the position?

 

[Trailblazer]

What does the percentage of the population have to do with the correctness of the position?

I did not say that the percentage proves the position is correct. I said it is highly unlikely that the 84 percent of people who have a religion are all wrong about there being a God and that the 7% of atheists are right about there being no God. It is possible, but highly unlikely that so many people would believe in God if God does not exist.

And then you have to ask why so many be people believe in God and come to realize that most people believe in God because of a religion....... It is at that point that any logical person who wanted to believe in God would take a long hard look at religion as the evidence for God.

 

[ppp]

I did not say that the percentage proves the position is correct.

I did not ask you if it proves it, now did I?

I said it is highly unlikely that the 84 percent of people who have a religion are all wrong about there being a God and that the 7% of atheists are right about there being no God. It is possible, but highly unlikely that so many people would believe in God if God does not exist.

This simply days that a lot of people believe in various gods, and a small percentage do not believe in any. So I asked, What does the percentage of the population have to do with the correctness of the position?

 

[Trailblazer]

So I asked, What does the percentage of the population have to do with the correctness of the position?

Nothing.

In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so." Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

The converse of this is that if many or most people do not believe it, it cannot be so, and that is fallacious. For example, there was a time in history when most people did not believe we could ever fly in the air, but most people were wrong, as we found out later.

 

[ppp]

It is possible, but highly unlikely that so many people would believe in God if God does not exist.

Nothing.

<-- confused face.
Those two statements seem to contradict one another.

 

[Trailblazer]

Those two statements seem to contradict one another.

What is the contradiction?

 

[ppp]

What is the contradiction?

In one post you tied the percentage of people who believe to the probability that God exists. In the other you say that percentage of people have 'nothing' to do with the probability that God exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

In one post you tied the percentage of people who believe to the probability that God exists. In the other you say that percentage of people have 'nothing' to do with the probability that God exists.

Okay, I see. Good catch...

I should not have said "nothing" because Imo the number of people who believe in God is an indicator that God most likely exists, but that does not prove that God exists. As I said, it would be a fallacious argument to say that just because many or most people believe in God, God exists.

In other words, the number of people who believe in God does not prove that God exists, it is only am indicator. It is an indicator because one would have to ask why that many people would believe in a nonexistent entity. How many people believe that the flying spaghetti monster exists?

To carry that a step further, there must be evidence for God's existence given that most people believe in God. The reason that nobody believes in the flying spaghetti monster is because there is is no evidence for him.

To carry that a step further, atheists say they do not believe in God because there is no evidence, so why so all the believers see the evidence for God whereas the atheists don't see it?

 

[ppp]

Okay, I see. Good catch...

Thanks.

To carry that a step further, atheists say they do not believe in God because there is no evidence, so why so all the believers see the evidence for God whereas the atheists don't see it?

Because people are fallacious thinkers. We didn't codify the logical fallacies just to get them labeled. We codified because we are inundated with fallacious thinking everyday from all directions. Both from our fellow humans and from our own traitor brains. Fallacious thinking is something to which we are all susceptible, and must exercise vigilance to avoid.

It really sucks.

 

[Trailblazer]

I said: To carry that a step further, atheists say they do not believe in God because there is no evidence, so why so all the believers see the evidence for God whereas the atheists don't see it?

You said: Because people are fallacious thinkers.

What is fallacious about believing in God based upon the evidence believers have?