I think the burden of proof lies with the theists and not the atheists.
When atheists make their claim they are stating a clearly falsifiable hypothesis. They are willing to state a number of conditions under which their claim can be falsified. For example, if someone fitting the description of God makes an appearance, or some event can only be explained by invoking a supernatural being. But these condtions have never been fulfilled and their hypothesis has never been falsified.
OTOH, theists have never made their claim as a falsifiable hypothesis. I have never heard of any theist describe a condition that if falsified would disprove their hypothesis.
Second: Athiests are not running around trying to conver anyone. To the contrary, they are asking people not to shove their beliefs down their throat.
Third, absence of proof is proof of absence.
I disagree sir. Before we knew that matter was composed of atoms or that atom was made of electrons, protons and neutrons, could we have said none of these things existed?
In fact, it is not proper to apply the concept of 'existence' to God and leads to paradoxes like above.
Try to define 'existence' . It always means something within time and space and limited by finitude. God is infinite and transends existence.
So, to say that "God exists" is somewhat blasphemous. We are either reducing God to fit the category of existence ,or worse, mistaking some finite existing concept with the Infinite God.
In this sense, I think atheists are one step closer to the truth than the simple theists who believe that God is actually 'a being' that exists.
A man went to a barbershop to have his hair cut and his beard trimmed.
As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation.
They talked about so many things and various subjects.
When they eventually touched on the subject of God, the barber said: "I don't believe that God exists."
"Why do you say that?" asked the customer. "Well, you just have to go out in the street to realize that God doesn't exist.
Tell me, if God exists, would there be so many sick people?
Would there be abandoned children?
If God existed, there would be neither suffering nor pain. I can't imagine a loving God who would allow all of these things."
The customer thought for a moment, but didn't respond because he didn't want to start an argument.
The barber finished his job and the customer left the shop.
Just after he left the barbershop, he saw a man in the street with long, stringy, dirty hair and an untrimmed beard. He looked dirty and unkempt.
The customer turned back and entered the barber shop again and he said to the barber: "You know what? Barbers do not exist."
"How can you say that?" asked the surprised barber.
"I am here, and I am a barber. And I just worked on you!"
"No!" the customer exclaimed. "Barbers don't exist because if they did, there would be no people with dirty long hair and untrimmed beards, like that man outside." Ah, but barbers DO exist! That's what happens when people do not come to me. "Exactly!" affirmed the customer.
"That's the point! God, too, DOES exist! That's what happens when people do not go to Him and don't look to Him for help.
so ur trying to say that the relation between a god and human is purely materialistic just like this world . give and take policy u scratch my back i'll scratch yours i though God was mercyful , there was no compasasion between the kindness of god and human. thanks for clearing up things good day
When atheists make their claim they are stating a clearly falsifiable hypothesis. They are willing to state a number of conditions under which their claim can be falsified. For example, if someone fitting the description of God makes an appearance, or some event can only be explained by invoking a supernatural being. But these condtions have never been fulfilled and their hypothesis has never been falsified.
OTOH, theists have never made their claim as a falsifiable hypothesis. I have never heard of any theist describe a condition that if falsified would disprove their hypothesis.
i agree with your reasoning but i dont agree with your conclusion. i think its interesting that the claim of the atheists can be falsified, as in the example you stated above. all it takes is one miracle.
however, the claim of the theist can never be unequivocably falsified. there is always a 'maybe'. atheists may be able to eliminate all hypotheses that exist today, but can they do the same for hypotheses that arise in the future or for the miracles that have occurred in the past? maybe.....maybe not. the theist position can never be completely eliminated, but the atheist position can be eliminated.
if atheists exist only because all theist positions have been rejected, i would like to see the reasoning of those rejections. i want to see from A to Z, why is buddhism wrong, why is hinduism wrong, why is taoism, islam, christianity, judaism, sikhism, austrailian aboriginal theology, native american spirituality, amazon indian philosophy, african spirituality......why are they all wrong. why has mankind, from the beginning of its existence up till now, been wrong in believing in the existence of higher powers/spirits/gods/God that have direct influence on their lives.
why is it that atheism, a modern innovation for the modern age, supercedes all of these. as i said in post #1: what is the evidence for your belief?
i'd also like to add that there are people who believe in god but do not believe in any of the world's religions. simply discrediting religions is not enough to prove that god does not exist.
the burden of proof falls both on theists and atheists....both cases of believing and denying the existence of God are extreme and can not be proved....human knowledge is limited to the natural world and it's impossible to conclude anything with this much knowledge.
however, the claim of the theist can never be unequivocably falsified. there is always a 'maybe'. atheists may be able to eliminate all hypotheses that exist today, but can they do the same for hypotheses that arise in the future or for the miracles that have occurred in the past? maybe.....maybe not.
This reasoning can be used to justify belief in any kind of superstition. Would you belive in flying pigs now because in future somebody might prove them. True belief means you know the truth NOW. It doesn't mean that you believe that someday, somebody will come up with a proof.
theist position can never be completely eliminated, but the atheist position can be eliminated
That is the strength of the atheist position. It can be falsified, but it has never been. It has withstood the test of time. The fact that theist position is not falsifiable means that the hypothesis has not been properly formulated and is invalid.
if atheists exist only because all theist positions have been rejected, i would like to see the reasoning of those rejections. i want to see from A to Z, why is buddhism wrong, why is hinduism wrong, why is taoism, islam, christianity, judaism, sikhism, austrailian aboriginal theology, native american spirituality, amazon indian philosophy, african spirituality......why are they all wrong. why has mankind, from the beginning of its existence up till now, been wrong in believing in the existence of higher powers/spirits/gods/God that have direct influence on their lives.
If you want such a detailed answer please go to your local library and read some books on atheism by atheists.
why is it that atheism, a modern innovation for the modern age, supercedes all of these.
atheism is as old as religion. Besides, there are a lot of things that people believed for centuries that modern science has disproven.
as i said in post #1: what is the evidence for your belief?
Well, it is not my belief. But atheist make a very strong case when they point to the following evidence. Every single phenomenon in the natural world can be explained without the need for existence of God. Is this not powerful evidence?
can we explain newton's third law...'every action has equal and opposite reaction'..can we explain newton's law of gravity?.
why should everything in this world has to follow these laws of science?. who made those laws of science?.cant these laws be surpassed?
what's the motivation behind all the laws of physics or mathematics?...
My physics teacher said this to me before teaching physics in the very first class "nobody can question the laws of nature"...."they are what they are". what's the motivation behind these unquestionable laws?
"I really wonder whether god had any choice while creating this universe"....albert einstein. (just felt like saying this)
I hope you guys are getting what i am saying.
By the way i am still open to a concept of atheism.
You are a creature that came from nothing, from a state of non-existence to a state of existence. You found yourself on earth, surrounded by many astonishing creations. How did you get here? Who brought you here? Who made these astonishing creations around you known as the universe? Ever wondered?
You are an amazing creation among countless astonishing creations. But you are a complex body, you are a human being. But why are you so special? Why are you different?
One of these creations are the animals. There are many animals that are complex such as the bat ! The bat sees 1 hour before sunset and 1 hour before sunrise! Bats have teeth like humans and they fly like birds but they don’t have any feathers, they have fur! They laugh like human beings! The females, amongst the bats, menstruates just as human females do!! The bat drinks blood and uses the proteins in it to survive. Now that’s amazing right?
You as a human being are even more amazing!
You have an intellect! You have a heart that beats every second and sends information to your brain that tells you what to do, what’s right and what’s not, what’s good and what’s evil. Your status is much higher than an animal.
So, you are this amazing creature with super talents and skills. You are not the same as the animal because the animal has certain talents and strengths, you as a human being are better. You are intelligent. Who made you like that? And how did things become what they are? And how are they all amazing and different? There’s a power, a super power, a supreme Creator to this, it is God. He’s the One Who formed all of this. He is the One Who Created the creations from nothing, without a previous example to it. If we were to use our sound mind, it would be impossible, intellectually, to deny the existence of the Creator.
God is the One Who Created the creations, the large and the small, the soft bodies and thick bodies. How could one deny this? How could a small seed turn into a large tree? And how could that tree, from one source (water), bring fruits with different tastes? Sweet, bitter, sour, red, green, white, etc. There is a supreme power that managed this system to keep it ongoing, it is God.
Why are you here?
So you are a human being, God brought you along with the other creations to life, to live it. But you as a human are to live it wisely.
This life has both, good and evil things. In your mind there are basic good and evil things that you believe in. Killing unjustly, is evil. Helping others is among the good things. But how did we come to know which is evil and which is good? We learned from the Prophets.
God sent the Prophets, human beings with a special status of being more intelligent and obedient to God, to teach the people.
They were sent to show the people the way of life, the proper way of living. Among the Prophets are Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. The Prophets, starting with Adam and ending with Jesus then Muhammad. They all taught what’s right, warned from evil and built healthy societies. This is how we came to know some of the things that are good and some that are evil. We were not born with our knowledge. We needed to be taught.
We learned about life from knowledgeable people. These knowledgeable people showed us how to live, showed us what’s right from wrong. These knowledgeable people were the Prophets.
God Created the Angels. He Created the Angels so that they could perform certain tasks that God ordered them to do. Some Angels were to deliver the orders from God to the Prophets and the Prophets delivered these orders to the people.
Some people followed these teachings from the Prophets and some neglected them. Those who followed the Prophets and obeyed the orders of God, were promised with the reward of Paradise. Those who disobeyed theses orders of God and committed the evil acts, such as unjust killing, rape, theft and the like, that type of people are threatened with the punishment of Hellfire.
This is what every accountable person should believe in. Everyone must submit to this belief otherwise he is not a believer and would not be admitted to the reward and promise of God, Paradise.
Believing in this is believing in the religion of Islam. Because Islam means submission, to submit to this creator with supreme powers. Believing in Him and in his powers and all his perfect attributes, and believing with all the prophets that he sent starting with Adam and ending with Muhammad. Using your sound mind will lead you to Islam. Becoming a Muslim is very simple.
One becomes a Muslim by saying and believing that:
No one deserves to be worshiped except Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.
How one Becomes a Muslim
One becomes a Muslim by believing in the Two Testifications of Faith and uttering (saying) them with the intention of leaving out blasphemy. The Two Testifications of Faith In English are:
The non-Muslim embraces Islam by believing in the Two Testifications of Faith and uttering them with the intention of leaving out blasphemy. The first Testification means that no one or thing deserves to be worshipped except God Who is the Creator of everything.
The second Testification states that Muhammad the son of ^Abdillah who was born in Makkah about 1400 years ago is a messenger of God. He was sent to convey what God revealed to him so that the humans believe in and work with the Laws he received and brought. He is truthful in all what he conveyed. The Two Testifications reject the Godhood of anyone or anything other than God. They confirm the Godhood of God (Allah) only with the acknowledgment of the message of prophet Muhammad.
But there was empirical evidence for atoms and sub-atomic particles. There is no empirical evidence for divinity. There is no reproducable test that can be performed to come to the same conclusion every time.
They belong to a calss of problems known as 'paradoxes'.
Consider for example the following:
There exists a set of all sets.
This set contains the set of all sets that are not self-contained (it is, after all, the set of all sets).
The latter is problematic because such a set seems to be a member of itself ONLY if it is not a member of itself. (yikes!).
This calls into the question the existence of the universal set.
Yet, there are formulations of set theory in which this universal set does indeed exist.
Generally, when you have self-reference going on, things fall apart.
This is a common argument that believers make. Man is incapable of understanding god. That's not an argument, its a cop out.
Here, for example, you take two very different things, set theory (which is mathematical, unambiguous, testable, definitive, and reproducable) and a matter of faith (which does not have any of the attributes of of set theory) and you present them as equals. Simply, they are not. However, to someone who does not know about set theory, this sounds logical.
Didn't say that. I said it's impossible to reason formally on matters like omnipotence.
There are diffent levels of udnerstanding, and quite frankly the rhetoric of proof should not even be used in this particular discussion. It helps neither side.
The set theoretic example is good, since it is simply a reformulation of the very same paradox that was presented with regards to God and the stone.
Also, keep in mind that math is not science. Math begins with a set of axioms that define a mathematical structure, and further properties of this structure are deduced from it logically. They don't conduct tests in math, they do formal proofs.
What the paradox illustrates is that there are limitations to what can be "proven" formally.
Also, keep in mind that math is not science. Math begins with a set of axioms that define a mathematical structure, and further properties of this structure are deduced from it logically. They don't conduct tests in math, they do formal proofs.
What the paradox illustrates is that there are limitations to what can be "proven" formally.
picoico, another good point. Axioms in math are suppositions. That is, they are definied to prove a particular conclusion. Similarly, the divinity is supposition. However, there is no test for this particular supposition. The conclusions are suppositions as well, which do nothing but reinforce the thesis. It is circular.
A circular argument is not a paradox.
Paradox:
A man from Crete says all Cretans are liars.
Circular argument:
Man cannot comprehend or conceive omnipotence. It can only come from an omnipotent being. Therefore God exists, the omnipotent being, and gave to us the knowledge of this attribute.
The circular argument must make one very impotant supposition, that is man is incapable of conceiving of onmipotence.
Tree falls in a forest...
I have yet to see any evidence of an alien race, but that doesn't mean they don't exist.
Again, absence of proof/evidence is not proof of absence.
This, again, is not a good argument. You present someone that existed but no one knew about. Then want to know if his existence can be empirically deduced after his death. Did he live in a house? Did he eat? Did he leave behind finger prints? Did he leave behing clothes?
But as for divinity, we can not deduce from anything. There is no evidence. It is faith. Nothing else.