Who's more intelligent? Atheists or God believers? Let's find out?

Question

God believers, How do you know that God exist?

Atheists, How do you know that God doesn't exist?

Which group will have the most intelligent answers?

CHRISTIANS, PLEASE DONT PRETEND YOU'RE ATHEISTS JUST TO TRY AND MAKE US LOOK BAD. I KNOW THAT TRICK

christians, PLAY FAIR

Answer 1

As an agnostic, I'm getting popcorn and a beer.
this may be fun to watch

Answer 2

I guess there could be a few things. Take a book, written over 2000 years ago, that gave the numerical equations necessary to establish the year that World War One would begin, and a world wide plague would start. The person who noted this, did so in 1885. No prophesy, just added up the numbers.

I see it in the increase in natural disasters in the last 92 years, at a much higher rate, than in recorded history. Not including those caused by humans, but those related to changes in the structure of the planet, itself.

I see it in 5+ million individuals, speaking 256 different languages, working together as one unit for the betterment of all humans.

I see it in the beauty of the high deserts, the tall mountains, the ocean blue, and the wonder of a new born child. All examples of what the Earth was once, and will be again.

Answer 3

I know that God exists for a couple reasons. First, because I am here. There is no way that I could have come from nothing, that this universe came from nothing without a Creator. Secondly, I see nature and I know that the beauty and wonder of it is a sign that it was created. The intricate parts of the eye or a plant could not have come from random evolution, this just makes no sense. Lastly, I know that there is a God because of testimonies. People who have floated over their bodies while they are technically dead (such as in surgery), people try to say this is just random neural firings, again, this makes no sense. A guest at my church talked about how while he was in A mulsim country (I forget which one) he was with a muslim leader who had a paralyzed and a family who were really sick. After a long talk, the Muslims said they would follow Christ if a reason could be shown. The speaker from my church said in the name of Jesus Christ heal these people, and the Muslim leader got up and walked. It sounds like a Bible story, doesn't it, and yes, it still happens today.

Answer 4

Why ask atheists? it truly is like asking a convict what non violent issues he's going to do while he gets out of penal complex. they're perverse transgressors and little extra effective than rebels. As for theists - maximum have taken the atheist bait and grew to become hardline. the main suitable words i've got controlled to locate are sixteen:164 Invite all to the way of thy lord with understanding and alluring preaching; and argue with them in tactics that are maximum suitable and maximum gracious. So if somebody's first rate be first rate if their a cretin then don't be as undesirable as them.

Answer 5

I know that God exist by experiencing Him as a real person. After the Lord was resurrected He became the Life Giving Spirit so now He can enter into man. As a teen everything needed to be pr oven to me. I lost my mom at 16 and my father at 21 truly I should be a very angry person but the saying is definitely true that when one door shuts another one opens because the very day I lost my mother my best friend came into my life and it was through her I met my husband, the love of my life and together had 3 beautiful children. You see most people want the huge miracle to happen in front of them in order for them to believe (Satan will do this that is why some people will seek after him ) but the Lord doesn't work like that He is very subtle. You have to go through life then turn around to see how He has helped you through those difficult times.
Another point I want to make is that after my second child my husband had a vasectomy which by science should of ended all possibility of having another child but 5 months after wards I got pregnant again... When my husband got back on the table to redo his operation they discovered that the tubes reconnected can somebody please explain that? Scientifically this should have been impossible .... the bottom line is my daughter was totally meant to be.

Answer 6

First, you have to define the term "God." The problem with most theists is that this term is a moving target.

In addition, because there is no evidence either for or against the existence of God, you cannot use deductive logic (a+b=c; therefore c-b=a). You can only reach a conclusion by inductive reasoning using the balance of evidence (90% of A is also B; C is B, so the chances are 90% that C is also A).

I will assert (and others may shoot this down) that the only RELEVANT definition of God states that he intervenes to circumvent natural laws.

If God circumvents natural laws, then it is impossible to understand natural laws. All scientific findings would have to include the stipulation, "it is also possible that these results are an act of God, a miracle, thereby making our research meaningless."

However, since we have been able to expand our knowledge of natural laws (evidenced by every appliance in your kitchen), the scientific method works in this discovery. And the likely conclusion is that God, at least the intervening kind, does not exist.

Additionally, if God is defined as all loving, all powerful, and all knowing, then it is impossible to explain suffering. Either God is not all loving (he acts sadistically), not all powerful (he cannot prevent suffering), or not all knowing (he created suffering by mistake because he didn't know the consequences of his actions).

If God is less than these and/or does not intervene in our existence, then he is either non-existent or irrelevant. The classic argument is that I cannot prove that a china teapot is orbiting the sun directly across from the earth's orbit. But while I cannot prove this is not true, the evidence against it is compelling.

The evidence against God is equally compelling, and while it is not possible to prove beyond any doubt, it makes more sense to live your life as if there were not God.

It is more compelling to me that humans have invented God to reflect the thoughts of the culture or subculture in a particular time and context. Because humans are always looking for reasons, when none are found, it was the natural inclination to declare the cause to be "God" (or gods). As the faith grew, miracles and laws have been ascribed to this Divinity, and an orthodoxy grows up around it.

Successful religions over the long run also are accompanied by some level of economic well-being to the populace. Unsuccessful ones are seen as false because they don't lead to improved lives.

Now it seems unhelpful to believe in such superstition. The only matters that aid in our ongoing well being are work, location, health, sustenance, and pure, blind luck.

Answer 7

You are unlikely to get any response that can be trusted here... on both sides of the issue, belief must be taken by faith.

Believers (as we already know) have no reasonable amount of hard evidence to support their choice and therefore must take it on faith that God exists. For non-believers the task is almost the same. One must believe on faith that "things" not found do not exist and therefore this stance must be taken on faith: that it is correct to believe that lack of evidence points to non-existence.

Both belief and non-belief in God are eventually made by assumption - i.e., acts of faith... However, non-belief has the greater preponderance of reason by sound logic and probability strongly on it's side.

[][][] r u randy? [][][]
.

To Shardf (and others): Why do you believe that there was nothing in the beginning but then immediately turn about and believe that God was there to start things?

If you can believe that God always was and always will be, why not believe that the stuff of the universe - matter and energy and space - always were and always will be.? Perhaps you'll think about this, eh, (they do exist, after all) and then, you can keep your promise to drop out of goofy-land forever and join the world of thoughtful, verifiable, intelligent truth that is found through the hard work of science and regarded almost as if it was a God by atheism? You're invited - bring a few friends.
.

Answer 8

Either way, your arguments will have to rely on circumstantial evidence.

If there was so much proof that God did NOT exist, then why are only less that 2 percent of the world's population atheists? Maybe you are not intelligent enough to see what is so blatantly obvious to everyone else.

---------------------------------------------
...First, even if the theist could not muster good arguments for God’s existence, atheism still would not be shown to be true. The outspoken atheist Kai Nielsen recognizes this: "To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false....All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists."

Second, the "presumption of atheism" demonstrates a rigging of the rules of philosophical debate in order to play into the hands of the atheist, who himself makes a truth claim. Alvin Plantinga correctly argues that the atheist does not treat the statements "God exists" and "God does not exist" in the same manner. The atheist assumes that if one has no evidence for God’s existence, then one is obligated to believe that God does not exist — whether or not one has evidence against God’s existence. What the atheist fails to see is that atheism is just as much a claim to know something ("God does not exist") as theism ("God exists"). Therefore, the atheist’s denial of God’s existence needs just as much substantiation as does the theist’s claim; the atheist must give plausible reasons for rejecting God’s existence.

Third, in the absence of evidence for God’s existence, agnosticism, not atheism, is the logical presumption. Even if arguments for God’s existence do not persuade, atheism should not be presumed because atheism is not neutral; pure agnosticism is. Atheism is justified only if there is sufficient evidence against God’s existence.

Fourth, to place belief in Santa Claus or mermaids and belief in God on the same level is mistaken. The issue is not that we have no good evidence for these mythical entities; rather, we have strong evidence that they do not exist. Absence of evidence is not at all the same as evidence of absence, which some atheists fail to see.

Moreover, the theist can muster credible reasons for belief in God. For example, one can argue that the contingency of the universe — in light of Big Bang cosmology, the expanding universe, and the second law of thermodynamics (which implies that the universe has been "wound up" and will eventually die a heat death) — demonstrates that the cosmos has not always been here. It could not have popped into existence uncaused, out of absolutely nothing, because we know that whatever begins to exist has a cause. A powerful First Cause like the God of theism plausibly answers the question of the universe’s origin. Also, the fine-tunedness of the universe — with complexly balanced conditions that seem tailored for life — points to the existence of an intelligent Designer.

The existence of objective morality provides further evidence for belief in God. If widow-burning or genocide is really wrong and not just cultural, then it is difficult to account for this universally binding morality, with its sense of "oughtness," on strictly naturalistic terms. (Most people can be convinced that the difference between Adolf Hitler and Mother Teresa is not simply cultural.) These and other reasons demonstrate that the believer is being quite rational — not presumptuous — in embracing belief in God.

----------------------
...Frank Morrison, a British lawyer of the 1930s, undertook an expedition to collect circumstantial evidence to disprove the resurrection. Such evidence, of course, is admissible in all courts of law in civilized countries to prove or disprove events of which there are no living eyewitnesses. When he analyzed the evidence, he reached a stunning conclusion: The resurrection had actually taken place! Morrison presented his case in his book, "Who Moved the Stone?"

Another factor worth considering is the character of the disciples. They were eleven cowardly men who shut themselves in a room after the crucifixion because they were afraid. Yet what galvanized them into action so that within their own lifetime, much of the then known world could hear the message of Christ? Some of them paid for this message with their lives. Would they have done so if the resurrection were a hoax?...

Answer 9

Okay...Atheist here. God does not exsist. I believe this because i find it hard to believe that there is this great "man" making miracles all around this world when this world is a mess. if God was real then my dad would still be able to kiss me good night. If god was real then my life would be cake. But he's not. Now Jesus on the other hand..... Sure...I believe in a jesus. Yup. There's a kid named jesus in my social studies class. And he's as real as my right pinky.

This may not be the most intelligent answer but it's my opinion.

Answer 10

Simple. Throughout human history, man has tried to explain his creation, existence, and purpose. For some reason, man simply cannot accept that we came to be (spontaneous genesis), and don't have a purpose. We're here, no good reason. The logical excuse in absence of facts is to turn to the supernatural. Romans believed in their gods (Jupiter, Neptune, Apollo, etc), the Greeks believed in theirs (Zeus, Aphrodite, Helios, etc.), all of which we now know were simply myths, false gods. Now we've simplified, we only believe in one "God", but just like thousands of years ago, there is still no proof. What we are seeing today is what mankind will consider to be American mythology 5000 years from now. Imagine what kind of magical omnipotent superbeing we'll believe in then.

Answer 11

Nobody absolutely knows if God exists or not, for that is not possible. It is simply a matter of faith or no faith. All we can do is choose one or the other. Freedom of choice has nothing to do with intelligence, in my opinion, but unfortunately in some cultures their is no freedom of choice so you are forced to believe.