There will be no forthcoming data as that is the way of these things. The theist requires proof while denying the need for it from them. Unless you prove the negative their God gets to exist.
Science, as you know, works on the basis of evidence. The evidence that man created gods is obvious. Gods look like the people who created them. Creation stories were written by men who could not possibly have any real knowledge of creation. This includes the Christian Genesis story and the Cherokee creation story and the African Bushmen Creation Myth. Not off the point at all. It is the point. Sure it would. Every night some kids put their tooth under a pillow. Every morning these kids find money under their pillow. Even if every parent confessed to swapping out the tooth for the money, would you believe that maybe, somewhere, it might be the doings of a tooth fairy?
One doesn't need to know for sure, only using the available evidence or lack thereof that one doesn't believe the deity hypothesis has merit. Certainty is unnecessary. However when we oppose faith and religion its usually due to it being a huge societal factor we in some cases consider dangerous and in general ,as I see it, historically very divisive and very wasteful of human and real resources our species could have been and currently can be best used elsewhere. And I would deem religious belief that defies major known knowledge of reason and science as a mental illness and children in this country need their own fundamental rights including safety from dangerous religious practices such as denying them regular and proper medical care and the harm of being indoctrinated in a faith and access to a proper education this means home schools and private schools shouldn't deny meaningful education and this decided by State processes. But if one on their own believes in some religion or faith and its not harming anyone or causing societal issues then I don't have an issue.
Wouldn't it have been easier for you to write, "I cannot prove it. But it is my guess?" It is NOT the point. It is off topic, in fact. The fact that primitive humans dealt with mysteries in primitive ways...has nothing to do with whether or not gods exist. They could be wrong about everything...and still gods could exist. Columbus thought he arrived in India...never during his lifetime realized he had discovered a New World. That does not mean there was no New World...that does not mean he did not make landfall in Asia. No, it would not. And if the atheists who constantly pat themselves on the back about how logical and scientific they are would finally realize that...they'd stop being the laughing stock they have become. I do not do "believing." Do you ever do logic? That is a more important question.
Not sure what that has to do with what I said, T, but thank you for sharing it. I do agree, though, that there are elements of "theism" that are childish and perhaps evidence of mental illness...just as I consider elements of "atheism" to have those same faults.
I has everything do with whether or not gods exist. It explains the origins of gods - man's ignorance created them. You pointedly skipped over this question... Every night some kids put their tooth under a pillow. Every morning these kids find money under their pillow. Even if every parent confessed to swapping out the tooth for the money, would you believe that maybe, somewhere, it might be the doings of a tooth fairy?
What elements of atheism do you consider to be childish and evidence of mental illness? Why did you put atheism in quotes?
No...IT DOES NOT. Primitive humans invented gods to explain things they found mysterious. That does not mean that gods do not exist. It merely means that primitive humans were not knowledgeable enough to explain things in a more knowledgeable way. Fact is, humans in their current state of development STILL MAY BE TOO PRIMITIVE to understand the true of nature of the REALITY of existence. If you want to discuss the Tooth Fairy...do it with a toddler...or a fellow atheist. Both love to discuss the Tooth Fairy...toddlers because they are toddlers...and atheists because they apparently think it excused the blind guesses they are making that no gods exist in the REALITY. BOTTOM LINE: We do not know the true nature of the REALITY of existence...and it may very well contain things a lot stranger than gods. People who blindly guess there ARE gods...are allowed to make those blind guesses. People who blindly guess there ARE NO gods...are allowed to make those blind guesses. For me...it makes better sense not to guess...and to simply acknowledge there is not enough unambiguous evidence to even suggest it is more likely one way or the other. But for one of those groups making blind guesses (atheists) to suggest they are using logic, reason, math or science...while disparaging the other group... ...IS LUDICROUS.
I think the rationalizations both theists and atheists use to justify their positions can be considered "childish" and "mentally aberrant." Personally, I prefer not to use either of those terms (or variations on those terms) in conversations about either discipline, but I was responding to words used by someone else. In particular, the protestation by so many atheists that their position is derived from logic, reason, or science...to me is laughable. Logic, reason, and science would lead any intelligent person to: I do not know if gods exist or not...and there is not enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess. For the same reason I put theism in quotes in that sentence...because I thought it made the sentence easier to read.
Do you really think shouting in BOLDED CAPS lends credence to your argument? Thank you for admitting that man created gods. Since you agree that man created gods, why do you cling to the notion that maybe, possibly, hopefully there are gods that man did not create? It's interesting that this analogy gets you so angry. Try putting your anger aside and carefully consider the implications of the analogy. Then answer the question.
And yet, you wrote... ...which is clearly a "position ... derived from logic, reason, or science" Given the above, it is childish to believe that maybe, somehow, real gods really exist. --- Daddy, I know that you and mommy give me presents and I know that all the Santa Clauses I see are not the real Santa Clause, but there could be a real Santa Clause, couldn't there?
No...but it helps me find my posts. I have an eye sight problem as the result of a minor stroke and I often use bold or color to help me when I an scrolling. (I'll not do it here, since it seems to bother you.) I did not "admit" it...I acknowledge it...and have dozens upon dozens of times in the past. Mostly because it is POSSIBLE. I acknowledge that all the aliens created by all the science fiction writers are human created. Does that mean I am supposed to give up hope about the possibility of living beings elsewhere in the universe??? What are you thinking about...and why do you think it is being thought about logically? Angry??? If you heard me laughing each time I see that Easter Bunny/Tooth Fairy nonsense...I doubt you would call it anger. But...if you must...go for it. Matters not to me. I have responded. If you want to discuss Tooth Faries or Easter Bunnies...seek out a toddler or a fellow atheist. You'll get all the talk you want.
Yes I did. That is absurd, Ecco. As I said above...all of the aliens of science fiction are the invention of humans. Why would that mean that "aliens" are impossible to exist? The fact that humans invented some gods...does not mean that gods cannot exist. Gods are POSSIBLE. If you say so.
Correction Frank, some definitions of gods are possible but they are not gods in any sense that a religious person would accept as a full definition of their god.
That's something they have to live with. I imagine most religious people have difficulty accepting ANY definition except their own as a "full definition" of "a" deity. My position is that gods are possible. And I have been very specific (with you, in particular) about what I mean when I talk about a god.
Specifically vague is the best description of it Frank. Basically, when you talk about gods, it has no real meaning whatsoever since you are arguing a definition that no one else uses but, if it makes you feel clever then who am I to rob you of your delusion.
Nothing vague about it at all. Actually, I am using a definition that is included in the definition of almost every god ever conceived of by humans. Have you been asleep? You're learning...but you have a long way to go. I'll be here to help you with your progress, though!
I highlighted the important word for you there Frank. Your reply tells me that you clearly understood the implications, do you have the integrity to acknowledge it?
You said that I am using a definition that no one else uses. I am telling you that I use a definition that just about EVERYONE else uses. And you are pretending to correct me because I acknowledge that it is "included." EACH facet of every god is something included in the definition, William. C'mon. Keep up. A suggestion by you of a possible lack of integrity in me...is about equal to a suggestion by Rush Limbaugh of a possible lack of a reasonable diet in me. But...you may have included that as part of the fun we talked about earlier...and if so...I gotta tell ya it worked. I actually laughed out loud when I read it. I'm chuckling as I type right now.
Like I said..."a suggestion by you of a possible lack of integrity in me...is about equal to a suggestion by Rush Limbaugh of a possible lack of a reasonable diet in me." When I am wrong...I acknowledge I am wrong...and apologize if appropriate. I've done it many times. I wonder if you've ever done that in an Internet forum???
Like I said, I didn't think you were up to it and I was right. It's fine, it's cool, it's not like other people are not reading this and drawing conclusions every time you bolt down a hole when the problems with your dogma are exposed. It's your delusion and if you are happy living it, go for it and stay happy, I am happy to bust you every time you repeat the same mistakes over and over and do not realise that you are doing it.
I'm right here. You are attempting to get me to say that I am wrong about something I am spot on about. And pretending it is some great reveal of yours. Hey, no problem. I understand your need to project your logic deficiencies on to me. I get a kick out of it.
Oh it's fun, like whackamole, I just wait for you to pop up with it and bust you again, and again, and again. It's great that you don't learn from what other people say because it means your are destined to forever repeat your mistakes. Did you notice that I didn't say that you were wrong Frank however, defining yourself into being right is for intellectual minnows and therein lies your problem. You prefer to be right and considered a genius in your own world rather than step outside into the real world and argue what people actually believe and the consequences of that.
