The burden of proof is on believers to prove God exists (according to atheist philosphers)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Sinner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
STT said:
I am not convinced with the opposite either. 😉
Click to expand...
What arguments have you considered for God’s existence? Which one do you find to be the best?

Now, it is acknowledged that you find none of them convincing, but out of all of the arguments for God’s existence you’ve studied, which one has the best possibility?
 
Charlemagne_III said:
Yes, in your mind that is possible, that God is evil.

If you entertain that possibility, all the reason not to offend God by denying that He even exists. 🤷
Click to expand...
How could we be ever sure? Good and evil exist so we cannot go anywhere by striving to them.
 
STT said:
Do you have an actual argument for existence of God?
Click to expand...
I have many arguments for the existence of God, too many to list and discuss in this forum.

Some of the arguments are stronger than others. None of them is ironclad from a strictly logical point of view. That’s where faith enter in and takes over.

Without God nothing makes sense.

With God lots of things make sense, though some things are still problems to be solved either in this life or in the next when all the important questions will be answered … either to our satisfaction or to our chagrin.
 
PRmerger said:
What arguments have you considered for God’s existence? Which one do you find to be the best?

Now, it is acknowledged that you find none of them convincing, but out of all of the arguments for God’s existence you’ve studied, which one has the best possibility?
Click to expand...
All of them has the basic problem. The basic problem is that they always assume that something exists. This could be subject of doubt because the only certainty that we have is that we experience.
 
STT said:
All of them has the basic problem. The basic problem is that they always assume that something exists. This could be subject of doubt because the only certainty that we have is that we experience.
Click to expand...
How can something have experience that doesn’t exist?

That’s just gaga, lala nonsense.
 
PRmerger said:
How can something have experience that doesn’t exist?

That’s just gaga, lala nonsense.
Click to expand...
Experience just can happen as an event. There is no proof for existence of experiencer. I have a thread on this topic in here.
 
STT said:
God could be evil.
Click to expand...
If God was evil, the good people of the earth would be punished for being good, and the evil people would be rewarded for being evil.

So how would that make sense? :confused:
 
PRmerger said:
Experience, event = existence.

One cannot have experience, one cannot have an event, without existence.
Click to expand...
Well, this is a little hard to explain and comprehend. Think of this way: Lets assume that brain activity produce conscious states. The brain activity cannot produce an experiencer. So what is left at the end is mere experience. You can of course believe on an experiencer, soul, but at the end one cannot prove or disprove the existence of the experiener. Now, one cannot prove the existence of God considering the fact that the experience is the mere thing that we are sure about it. In simple word there is a gap to prove that anything exists hence one cannot proceed in proving God unless s/he fill this gap first.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
If God was evil, the good people of the earth would be punished for being good, and the evil people would be rewarded for being evil.

So how would that make sense? :confused:
Click to expand...
Good and evil exist. Think of Nazi system which rewarded evil persons for acting evils. We have potential to do evil and be evil as well as we have potential to do good and be good. Everything depends on your system of belief which unfortunately we might get trapped within.
 
STT said:
Well, this is a little hard to explain and comprehend. Think of this way: Lets assume that brain activity produce conscious states. The brain activity cannot produce an experiencer. So what is left at the end is mere experience. You can of course believe on an experiencer, soul, but at the end one cannot prove or disprove the existence of the experiener. Now, one cannot prove the existence of God considering the fact that the experience is the mere thing that we are sure about it. In simple word there is a gap to prove that anything exists hence one cannot proceed in proving God unless s/he fill this gap first.
Click to expand...
So one needs…matter…a brain…to have an experience?
 
STT said:
All of them has the basic problem. The basic problem is that they always assume that something exists. This could be subject of doubt because the only certainty that we have is that we experience.
Click to expand...
So experience exists?

Been reading Hume again?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top