How can you logically disagree with this statement?

Question

If it is to be established that there is a God, then we have to have good grounds for believing that this is indeed so. Until and unless some such grounds are produced we have literally no reason at all for believing; and in that situation the only reasonable posture must be that of either the negative atheist or the agnostic. So the onus of proof has to rest on the proposition [of theism].

Answer 1

See here is where you go astray. There is plenty of proof for the divine you choose not to see it. So since the proof is there and you refuse to see it, who is actually being illogical?

Answer 2

Is time without beginning? How can that be? It is a paradox, yet it is true!

Can space be infinite? It is!

Why did the big bang happen after an infinity of time of not happening? It did!

How can natural creation occur, where tremendously complex genetic code is created that leads to consciousness? I can not take a step of faith and believe that. It seems much more likely that we are created.

If natural creation were provable, it would be done so and the scientific establishment would show it and it would be a fact. But they cannot. I think the onus of proof for natural creation is just as great as what you say.

However, I also believe in immutable facts, like time w/o beginning, etc., which cannot be proven. Try to prove 2+2=4. If you try to, you diminish the factual basis of 2+2=4. Thus, 2+2=4 is a fact.

Since it can be shown natural creation is impossible, then, we are forced to conclude we are created beings. That is the proof.

How can it be shown? Not enough room or time to show, but if you do your research as a skeptic, you might be able to figure it out.

Answer 3

I don't logically disagree with this statement, but how does one define "good grounds" for believing that there is a God? Would the continuing existence of the Bible count? How about the writings of Roman and Jewish historians that confirm the life of Jesus Christ, which number more than all the documentary proof of the voyages of Christopher Columbus? Is that enough? How about the wreck on Mount Ararat, which meets the size requirements of Noah's Ark to a T and has been found to have animal hairs in it? Or maybe the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, which have been excavated on the Dead Sea, and were found to be riddled with chunks of blackened sulfur (brimstone)? The Dead Sea scrolls? The Shroud of Turin? I could go on, but the point is there are some people who won't believe in God even if He performed a miracle that could be seen by every human being on the planet.

Answer 4

All religions of the world are not based on PROOF. They are based on FAITH.

I know it is crazy. But it is true........Faith is the reason that most 'religious' people's faith, belief & prayer work!! This is true for ANY religion.

Just ask a Christian, if their prayers get answered. Just ask a witch or pagan if magick is real. Or ask a Buddist if transendence is real.

They all will tell you YES. So it all has to do to with each individuals FAITH.

For Christians: Jesus said in (Matt 9:22) "Your FAITH has healed you". It is faith that did the trick.

Jesus also compliments a PAGAN for his FAITH & RIGHTOUSNESS:

Jesus Christ, having noted the faith and righteousness of a Roman centurion, a Pagan, proclaimed:

"Assuredly I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel! And I say to you that many will come from east and west, and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 8:10-12)

And it was done according to his FAITH, not what God the pagan believed in!!!!!


So in truth it is the MIND where faith begins, that controls the out-come.

MIND POWER.........

This is probably the only evidence & PROOF that you will ever get. Cause there is no scientific evidence that has been proven, other than the 'Mind over Matter'...........

Answer 5

Gee, that's real purdy talk. I wish I could talk like that!

The talk is 'purdy,' but the logic is faulty.

Your statement presupposes that God is a man and therefore subject to Man’s whims. For this reason your logic assumes that if God wants us to believe in Him, He should just show Himself. Logical? Of course not. The logic is flawed because God is not a man that he should submit to clinical analysis or critical review. He is the Great I Am apart from Whom nothing is.

You say there is no proof of God’s existence? That is not true, but before we venture down that avenue, consider the following:

Man is the only creature on God’s green earth who can gaze at the Heavens and ask himself, “Where did I come from;” and “Is there a God?” Angels and demons don’t have to wonder. They have walked with God and know He exists. Which brings us back to Man, who is also the only creature arrogant enough to believe that he has no superior.

You say there is no proof of God’s existence and so the only viable belief options are atheism or agnostics? You say this because you are too smart to accept the ancient writings that speak of a Creator as true? You are too urbane to lend credence to the Apostles (whose reputation is beyond reproach) and who authored the four Gospels?

Does your science not now say that evidence exists of a great flood, such as the one spoken of in the Old Testament? Faith speaks of a Created Adam and Eve. Your science speaks of evolution for which proof is still lacking—where is the fabled Missing Link? Look at the Heavens and marvel at its synchronicity. Can you still believe there is no Intelligent Design?

If you disbelieve the evidence that surrounds you, then nothing I can say will make you a believer and I can only wish you luck.

H

Answer 6

Without faith, it is impossible to reach Him to ever understand Him.

Newton studied metaphysics because he became tired of logic. Logic makes for an exhausted, often jaded ability to understanding anything.

It takes away possibility, it stifles creativity, it kills the soul.


We can't prove there is not a God and we can't prove there is.
Science and scientific principals are things observed in nature by man and the concept of God is also a concept observed by man.

Personally, I would rather believe in a God as a higher intelligent, force that surrounds us, I would rather call God "Everything." than limit the possibilities of His existence to none at all. It is not very scientific in nature to disprove as a whole in totality, what has yet to be proven or even observed.

In science. Time, incriments, observations, expirements, all components of finding and seeking out the truth.

I believe the concept of God is so beyond the human understanding... no aeithist is intelligent enough or scientifically tenacious enough to bother with the whole process to find out for themselves.

You can't say there is not god... You can't say there is a God

The believers believe by faith in possibility and trust in history.

The atheists... are going against the scientific curosity required to find Him. and going about it to disprove it before it ever has a chance to become a proven fact. God could be hiding in the quark, sitting in a string... or swinging on a star.

If you earnestly seek Him... He comes. He has to... "His word will not return void unto Him. He will watch over it to perform it."

So logically... I can't disagree with that statement. But I am not a completely logical creation. Nature is, in itself, one of the most illogical forces in existence.

God is found in everything... God is the energy that permiates existence and is the unseen creative force, the catalyst, the romance, the illogical means, to a logical end result, the beauty, the sensory, the reason... that cannot be measured by the physical, the mysteries, the nuances, the slight inflections.

You can't remove these from the equation and still wake up feeling human... Dissect a frog and it is just an expirement, void of the soul force that once enabled it to live and thrive and exist.

You cannot dissect the will, the breath, the unseen.

autopsy a man... and there you have... the atheist.

* (Sorry for all the typo's the dictionary is too slow, and this spell checker sux!)

Answer 7

It's been established that the burden of proof in the god debate rests on the Theists. The simple fact that they often refuse and shift the burden (prove there ISN'T a god) demonstrates that no evidence to support the claim. Faith is not evidence... in fact faith is believing something without evidence. Therefore i would have to agree that the only reasonable position is that of atheism.

You've stated above that agnosticism is a negative position... this is not true. Agnosticism is simply an admission of insufficient knowledge or evidence... at best it is neutral.

Answer 8

I can logically disagree with your statement thusly:

1) if it is to be established that there is a God, we need no good grounds for believing anything specifically
2) Should the situation arise that we have no reason for believing, there are many different postures that we may adopt
3) You have not described a proposition

I suggest reading some Descartes

Answer 9

Though one could not logically disagree with that statement as is, faith (and truly all emotion) lies outside the boundary of logic. The whole concept of faith is that it is whole and complete WITHOUT proof. If you had proof, it would no longer be faith, it would be trust. It is not necessarily that people BELIEVE that there is a God so much as that they HAVE FAITH that there is a God. Eventually faith works its way through the system and becomes the basis of belief.

Not arguing, just a perspective.

Excellent answer Clayboy!

Answer 10

From your point of view, agnostic can be the only answer. You cannot be a religious believer because you have seen no proof. By the same logic, you cannot be an atheist. i personally have seen proof so I am a spiritualist, but that's me. As long as you keep thinking logically you will be also. It is not our requirement to prove anything, pro or con. Just as it is not a requirement of atheists to prove their point of view. It is your requirement because it is you and you alone that will be affected by your decisions.
Vaya con DIOS

Answer 11

The problem with that line of thinking is that different people have different ideas of what constitutes proof. I have seen many examples of what I consider to be proof that God exists - you may not agree with me. I have heard it described as 'Jewish' thinking compared to 'Greek' thinking. The Jews believe more on faith, and the Greeks need the physical proof that they can measure or put in a box.