Does God exist? (William Lane Craig vs Peter Atkins debate) (35 Viewers)

[king Ale]

Then forget about being a theist or atheist, and become an I-don't-know-ist.

Best idea if it doesn't make you give up on thinking only because you are an I-don't-knowist.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Trequartista]

being a theist,I will say that once Science provide a good theory about the creation of univers and how the first living organism was created before evolution,I will become an athiest,so far about 55% in me beleive in god and thats not because I am convinced he exists but just waiting for something to convince me from atheist,I need to read more,think more and even mature more to reach the level of 80-90% of beleiving or disbeleiving,No atheist or a theist can claim he beleives 100% in what he says in that issue,including Hawking,Dawkings,william craig and even priests and sheikhs I may argue
maybe we will know oneday,maybe we will never know,just hope I can decide on something to strat to enjoy my life,the god debate is ruining my life and I cant help but to think about it,sometimes I even wish to die to see what will happen

On a scale of being sure, I'd say that I am about 95% positive that gods don't exist.

I understand your position and I respect it.

For sure, science can't explain everything and we would all like to know more about the big bang. However, there's one particular argument that is pretty convincing to me:

Is there more evidence for the existence of a deity than for the Loch Ness monster, leprechauns, the big foot, fairies, etc.?

No there isn't.

 

[Linebreak]

No one can ever come up with a 100% no doubt convincing argument either way.

In the end that is why it's called belief, and not rational black and white clear cut proof.

 

[Linebreak]

On a scale of being sure, I'd say that I am about 95% positive that gods don't exist.

I understand your position and I respect it.

For sure, science can't explain everything and we would all like to know more about the big bang. However, there's one particular argument that is pretty convincing to me:

Is there more evidence for the existence of a deity than for the Loch Ness monster, leprechauns, the big foot, fairies, etc.?

No there isn't.

I'd argue that believing not believing in those things provides no purpose, meaning or benefit to anyone or anything. But belief in God does for the poor, the needy, for people who lose loved ones, for people wanting to be thankful for their faculties, for high moral standards (of course an Atheist can have high morals too), but most of all, it provides meaning to our very existence. Believing in or not believing in God is important and plays a major role in peoples lives and the world as a whole. The loch-ness monster... well not so much.

 

[X Æ A-12]

On a scale of being sure, I'd say that I am about 95% positive that gods don't exist.

I understand your position and I respect it.

For sure, science can't explain everything and we would all like to know more about the big bang. However, there's one particular argument that is pretty convincing to me:

Is there more evidence for the existence of a deity than for the Loch Ness monster, leprechauns, the big foot, fairies, etc.?

No there isn't.

Hey Big Foot is real. The rest is all bs.

 

[Trequartista]

I'd argue that believing not believing in those things provides no purpose, meaning or benefit to anyone or anything. But belief in God does for the poor, the needy, for people who lose loved ones, for people wanting to be thankful for their faculties, for high moral standards (of course an Atheist can have high morals too), but most of all, it provides meaning to our very existence. Believing in or not believing in God is important and plays a major role in peoples lives and the world as a whole. The loch-ness monster... well not so much.

Like I said several times, it's not about what a belief brings to the individual that is important. The important thing is whether a belief is true or not.

A lie can be comforting to some but it's still a lie.

Therefore, there is no difference between God, fairies, leprechauns, etc.

 

[Linebreak]

Like I said several times, it's not about what a belief brings to the individual that is important. The important thing is whether a belief is true or not.

A lie can be comforting to some but it's still a lie.

Therefore, there is no difference between God, fairies, leprechauns, etc.

Yes I see, however, fairies and leprechauns bring nothing to the lives of the people (no one does) that believe in them. God does.

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

That doesn't make it any more or less plausible.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Yes I see, however, fairies and leprechauns bring nothing to the lives of the people (no one does) that believe in them. God does.

You cannot prove any of that.

 

[Linebreak]

You cannot prove any of that.

I don't see anyone debating over leprechauns or big foot passionately all over the globe as they do with God. That tells you something.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Sure, that there are more insane people in the Middle East than in Ireland or the Pacific Northwest.

 

[Zé Tahir]

I wonder why that is.

 

[Linebreak]

Sure, that there are more insane people in the Middle East than in Ireland or the Pacific Northwest.

That's an unsubstantiated assertion.

Just because more people discuss God it doesn't add any weight to proving his existence, though it definitely means that God is important for masses of people around the world.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

well in arab countries you might be murdered if you say you dont beleive in god
anyway I am still far from being even close to being athiest,I would say I am agnostic theist but I just wanted to say that everyone is skeptical about the idea of prescence of god or not,starting with priests and ending with fanatic athiests
some members here talk as if they are 100% sure of what they say,they are not

Well, that is a sad country to live in.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

That's an unsubstantiated assertion.

Just because more people discuss God it doesn't add any weight to proving his existence, though it definitely means that God is important for masses of people around the world.

And god isn't an unsubstantiated assertion? :wth:

 

[Linebreak]

And god isn't an unsubstantiated assertion? :wth:

Certainly not. The fact that many are so passionate about asserting that God doesn't exist means this question lingers on their hearts and minds as well.

 

[Buck Fuddy]

And god isn't an unsubstantiated assertion? :wth:

Certainly not.

And we're back at square 1

 

[Linebreak]

And we're back at square 1

No problem with that

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Certainly not. The fact that many are so passionate about asserting that God doesn't exist means this question lingers on their hearts and minds as well.

But that's because there is an unsubstantiated assertion that a god exists, thus my assertion that a god does not exist. If there was no concept of a god, there we be no atheists.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

That's an unsubstantiated assertion.

Just because more people discuss God it doesn't add any weight to proving his existence, though it definitely means that God is important for masses of people around the world.

Yes, because they are poor, scared people.

Most religious people are the bottom of the class system, they have nothing, so they look to the Heavens and say "there must be a reason" when there really is not.