3 questions for Atheists

[koopa184]

This is from an avid Christian who would like to know something from any atheists out there. 1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? Thanks! -Koopa

[isthisit]

hi there 1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? I'm pretty confident. Because there is no proof to show there is any gods - and lots of proof to show there probably isn't. 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? See above, 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? If they did, and people wanted to worship them, then sure why not! People worship rockstars and bimbos in the movies so why not a god.

[Original Poster]

1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? I believe everything is ultimately uncertain, and I cannot state anything one way or another with 100% certainty. That being said the concepts surrounding the Abrahamic God are so utterly preposterous and counter-productive that it seems most beneficial to both me and society if I act as though he does not exist. Or at the very least, that he either doesn't care to be worshiped or doesn't deserve to be. My worship is of the precious moment which will never, ever again repeat itself. By clinging to the idea that I am going to live for ever in an afterlife, I am forsaking what truly deserves my praise and attention. 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? Honestly when you get to the real source of things the two words lose their meaning. Of course a natural path for the newly disillusioned theist is to simply widen their definition of God until their definition is indistinguishable from an atheists view of the universe, aside from the tenuous word Consciousness which we haven't even properly defined. I do believe that the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, but I believe both the falsification and validation are claims and are both required to be backed up. This does not mean a proper explanation for God is that you cannot prove it doesn't exist. That's not reason to believe in something. However, just because you cannot prove it does exist that's no reason to dismiss theories about it and limit yourself from the vast array of deep thoughts you can have in regard to concepts like God. 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? As I answered in the first question, no. Not unless you define God as the present moment. Worshiping something out of fear they'll smite you for not worshiping them is the same as admitting to being a witch out of fear that you'll be executed unless you admit it. I believe very strongly in innocence until proven guilty, and the fact is the only reason the Salem Witch Trials ever ended was because so many people ended up put to death simply for refusing to admit guilt. So we say God is a nice dude and deserves to be worshiped because I mean, come on dude, praise nice people like God. But why do we think he's the absolute good in the universe? If he were truly the one creator, wouldn't that make him both? Wouldn't that make him something beyond our own naive views on morality? I do nothing out of fear, if I can help it. I do nothing because I'm threatened to, if I can help it. Because of that, I believe if God truly deserved to be worshiped, he wouldn't care either way, but if he required himself to be worshiped, he certainly doesn't deserve to be. And like I said before, I believe there is something that does deserve our absolute, unconditional love and respect. There is something absolutely sacred. But you won't find it in a book.

[dutchraptor]

1) The term "god" was created for people who cant decide things for themselves or want to use religion to justify something bad they are doing. If the bible is evidence that god eists then comics are the evidence that spiderman exists. 2) why would some higher being create the unniverse, wait 14 billion years for humans just to watch them kill themselves in 10000 years. Here's another question "Why would hell or heaven be infinite?" If god assesses all the bad things you've done in life and chooses to send you to hell for infinty how will you learn from your mistake.A punishment only makes sense if its temporary. Maybe if I were told I would go to hell a 1000 years each time I screwed up a life I would believe in god. Same goes for heaven.

[Photolysis]

1) Very confident, but I won't claim to know for certain. I have never seen any good reason to believe religious claims, in light of researching how the various religions came to be, mutually contradictory claims about the supposed one truth, evidence actually disproving certain assertions made, observing the reasons why others believe as they do which often involve bad or fallacious reasoning, translation errors showing how certain religious claims came to be, evidence that it was created and edited by man rather than being of divine origin, etc. On the subject of a god without involving any religious claims whatsoever, I haven't seen any evidence to convince me one exists. 2) Because weak agnostic atheism does not to claim to know for certain that no god exists and because it merely involves not accepting a claim made by others, so there is no burden of proof. Note: some forms of atheism I consider illogical and unjustified. That said, this usually doesn't come along with some of the other religious claims which are equally as absurd, illogical, and unjustified. 3) Worship? No, and I find such behaviour very distasteful. I might admire certain aspects of the god depending on their nature, characteristics, and behaviour. Many religious gods deserve the complete opposite.

[Alric]

1. I am extremely confident god doesn't exist. The reason is because we can trace the origins of the gods to places where they were first written about by man. Each god that exists today in a religion has a origin you can trace back in history, and our history is well enough that we have a pretty good idea of when and where all the major religions were first written about. They are all clearly man made. 2. Its more logical because we can prove it. We can't say that no god can exist, but we can prove all modern gods and all modern religions are man made. You can prove it that. You can trace back all the pieces of religion and see where the ideas came from, who came up with the ideas, why they did and everything. Anthropology is the study of humans, and a lot of it deals with humans of the ancient past and if you study anthropology you can really dig into this subject in great detail, and the proof is there. Though you don't have to go into that much detail to see that god was created by humans. 3. I see no reason why you would ever worship a god. Either its a very powerful being and so it doesn't care if you worship it or not. Or it cares and its not that powerful and there is no reason to worship it. There is no logical reason for an extremely powerful being to want to be worshiped by inferior creatures. When humans try to get each other to worship them, its because humans are on a fairly level playing field. People want praise from people above or equal to them. People don't want praise from people far below them.

[Xei]

1) Most atheists wouldn't say they're certain that God doesn't exist. They just don't have strong belief in the concept in general, and certainly no faith in any God in particular. I don't have much of an opinion on whether God exists. What I can say is that there is no evidence, empirical or rational, for the concept of deity. However, there is lots of empirical and rational evidence against various specific strains of God. For example, there is physical evidence against benevolent omniscient creator Gods (namely the existence of pointless, horrid viruses, and the like). 2) Because all of the arguments for religion are fatuous. Scepticism is clearly the only intellectually honest approach to knowledge. Aside from the aforementioned lack of any evidence and the problem of evil, there are other problems like the fact that there are many contradictory religions, which are rather bemusingly (if you think they represent the truth), strongly geographically delineated (if you were born in India you would not be a Christian), and none has any more evidence than any other. Ancient religions like Christianity are particularly silly in themselves. If you've read the Bible you'll know how absurd and frequently evil most of it is. There are reams of stupid, archaic rules, it frequently contradicts itself, it is factually wrong, and God frequently does stupid and nonsensical (for instance getting angry at Adam and Eve for eating from the tree which grants knowledge of good and evil when he hadn't given them the knowledge of good and evil in the first place so they couldn't have known to obey him, or creating man with a foreskin and then commanding him to cut it off because it's dirty) or evil (committing genocide is always a no-no) things. 3) Worship sounds like a very primitive and human thing for a divine being to wish for. And the idea of trying to flatter somebody who can read your mind seems ridiculous. If God is worthy of being honoured then he would know it and you would know it. If he wasn't, again, you'd both know it, and God would know you're just trying to curry favour. I don't care much about it, but the whole concept seems pretty stupid.

[Descensus]

This is from an avid Christian who would like to know something from any atheists out there. 1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? Thanks! -Koopa 1) Pretty confident. I see no reason to assume there is one, nor is it very important to my well-being. 2) Strictly speaking, it saves you from making obvious logical errors, mostly on scientific or philosophical matters. We can't chalk up every unanswered question to "God's plan" or things like that. 3) No, unless they were prime examples of being a decent person. But even then I wouldn't say a person should worship them. Admire, revere, or even merely look up to, but never worship.

[Replicon]

This is from an avid Christian who would like to know something from any atheists out there. Sure thing! 1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? First things first: Atheism isn't "confidence that no gods exist" - it's the lack of belief in any gods. It is NOT necessarily "I believe there is no god" but more like, "I don't believe there is a god" (i.e. "I am not accepting your claim.") SOME atheists DO believe there is no god, and I'd say, for all practical purposes, I live my life the same way I would live my life if I knew for sure there is no god. 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? The "God claim" has simply not met its burden of proof. It really is that simple. A lot of people will say things like "the existence of life is proof of god" and stuff like that. But really, all they're doing is taking all the "I don't know" situations in life and labeling them God. I could use that exact same argument, and replace god with the pink unicorn or anything else. 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? I don't think they should be worshipped. If you created a world, would you really want to be worshipped? It's such a petty, insecure thing to do, and if there is a god, I sure hope he isn't the one in the bible *shudder*

[koopa184]

Thanks for all of your answers. Now, for those of you who came here to debate at all, would you like me to formulate answers to your answers? Or just stay silent?

[Xei]

I didn't come to debate but if you came with an open mind then I'm happy to talk.

[koopa184]

To Xei: 1) Most atheists wouldn't say they're certain that God doesn't exist. They just don't have strong belief in the concept in general, and certainly no faith in any God in particular. I don't have much of an opinion on whether God exists. What I can say is that there is no evidence, empirical or rational, for the concept of deity. However, there is lots of empirical and rational evidence against various specific strains of God. For example, there is physical evidence against benevolent omniscient creator Gods (namely the existence of pointless, horrid viruses, and the like). 2) Because all of the arguments for religion are fatuous. Scepticism is clearly the only intellectually honest approach to knowledge. Aside from the aforementioned lack of any evidence and the problem of evil, there are other problems like the fact that there are many contradictory religions, which are rather bemusingly (if you think they represent the truth), strongly geographically delineated (if you were born in India you would not be a Christian), and none has any more evidence than any other. Ancient religions like Christianity are particularly silly in themselves. If you've read the Bible you'll know how absurd and frequently evil most of it is. There are reams of stupid, archaic rules, it frequently contradicts itself, it is factually wrong, and God frequently does stupid and nonsensical (for instance getting angry at Adam and Eve for eating from the tree which grants knowledge of good and evil when he hadn't given them the knowledge of good and evil in the first place so they couldn't have known to obey him, or creating man with a foreskin and then commanding him to cut it off because it's dirty) or evil (committing genocide is always a no-no) things. 3) Worship sounds like a very primitive and human thing for a divine being to wish for. And the idea of trying to flatter somebody who can read your mind seems ridiculous. If God is worthy of being honoured then he would know it and you would know it. If he wasn't, again, you'd both know it, and God would know you're just trying to curry favour. I don't care much about it, but the whole concept seems pretty stupid. 1) Various strains of viruses and diseases in no way disprove the Christian God. In fact, they're to be expected, according to Christian theology, as Christians believe we live in a fallen world that, when corrupted by sin, then had things such as disease and famine enter into it. 2) Some are fatuous. But to say all are isn't really an intelligent assertion. To say that the ones that you've seen have been fatuous is more intelligent. 3) The fact that there are contradictory religions means nothing, nothing except that only one can be right, or all of them are wrong. 4) There are some verses in the Christian Scriptures that indicate that those who have never heard of Christ will be judged based on what they've done with the knowledge they have. I.E., babies who die go to heaven, those who have never heard of Christ and don't completely violate their God-given conscience also go to heaven, etc. 5) Could you cite parts of the bible that contradict & the parts that are factually wrong? Often I hear people make these claims and fail to bring specific examples to the table. 6) Circumcision is a doctrine that later served an example in the New Testament to the Pharisees, who were described as having "uncircumcised hearts." God accomplished a spiritual purpose through the original command. And, interestingly enough, I think the passage containing the covenant of circumcision is all the more reason to believe in the Abrahamic God, and this is why: the blood-clotting chemical, prothrombin, is highest on the eighth day after birth, which is when God commanded the newborn males to be circumcised [Genesis 17]. How could Moses or Abraham possibly know that the eighth day would be the safest day to circumcise a baby? 7) Not sure how to answer the whole Adam and Eve thing. Haven't done much research on that subject. Thanks for the idea! 8) The whole genocide thing is most atheists' favorite argument. Please provide specific examples for justification, or we waste our time. 9) Worship, if you believe in the version of divine providence which allows free will, is the one thing God is unable to have without us giving it to Him. He already has everything; the entire universe, unlimited power, no needs whatsoever. But, regardless of the fact that He has no needs, He still apparently wants our worship. Also, explain your logic. People choose to deny God all the time, and therefore withhold worship. It wouldn't change the fact that, if He created the universe and gave us all the blessings we have, we OWE him thanks already.

[Xei]

1) They contradict the concept of a good God. If you believe the Christian God is a good God, they contradict the Christian God. 3) It serves an an illustration of the fact that you need positive evidence for your claims. If there were only one religion then maybe things would be less clear but the fact that there are loads of these primitive old stories (whose evolution can often be traced historically) raises the question, 'what justification do you have for believing story X and not story Y'? 4) What is this relevant to? 5) Well just choosing something off the top of my head... the exodus of the Jews is quite a large error. There are many events in the Bible which never occurred. Or Noah's ark; that would have left physical evidence but there is none. Scientific errors include the idea that the Earth is stationary. Internal contradictions... all you have to do is read the bloody thing dude, there are frequent contradictions between sections. Sometimes there are even contradictions within a few paragraphs of each other. In the sermon on the mount Jesus says that every law of the Old Testament will stand forever and he has not come to change anything, and then a couple of moments later says that the teaching of 'an eye for an eye' is wrong. 6) Because it's a load of rubbish you have picked up from some apologist website. If it were true, the obvious answer is trial and error, or of course natural selection. But it isn't; provide a medical citation. 7) You shouldn't have to research anything, you should be able to think for yourself and provide an answer. But of course there isn't an answer, it is a priori a logical inconsistency. Why did this obvious question not automatically occur to you in the first place when you originally read the story? 8) No it isn't, the atheist's favourite argument is that you have no evidence that they should believe your religion over any other religion, and thus any religion at all. You asked me why I don't believe in God and this was the point I emphasised in my answer, and yet in your response you have not tried to address the fundamental issue at all. To address what you did say... again, are you for real? Have you not read the Bible? Do you not even have a working pop culture knowledge of it? There is frequent divinely commanded or committed genocide in the Bible. Just one example: God ordering the Jews to kill all the Canaanites, including babies. 9) I don't know what you're trying to say or how it's a logical response. What don't you understand about my 'logic'?

[OutlawPig]

1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? I am of the very strong conviction that a god or gods, as defined by the various conceptions of such hypothetical entities by humans, do not exist and very likely have never existed. I am a strong advocate of the sciences, and as such, try very hard to keep my own personal bias and emotions detached from what I actually know to be true. Shedding any preconceptions about spirits and gods, and looking at the facts as they are and at the data that we continue to attain, the notion of a god does not even arise from it. No divine entities emerge from the evidence. To quote Carl Sagan, "I don't want to believe. I want to know." I wish to remain unbiased in my pursuit of knowledge, and I have noted that others who view evidence as a proof of divine entities, already possess preconceptions on the nature of these entities and view the world through this lens. The idea of a god does not arise unless you already have the preconception of a god. To sum up, I am confident because the origin of faiths in such entities is illegitimate -- not based on evidence attained in the modern age with the tools that we have developed. It is an old idea for an older people, before our time. 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? Well, naturally, because I am of an atheist persuasion. As stated above, I strive(and sometimes fail) to view the facts while controlling and separating as much personal bias as I can. I think of atheism as a more logical way to process information. Remember that atheism simply means "no god", or "no gods"-- it is far from an organized belief system, and does not have the dogma of religion. It is a simple statement of "I do not believe there is a god or gods." Naturally, disbelief in concepts like heaven and hell follow, but they are not addressed by the term atheist. If a question is posed to myself(and many other atheists, though we are not all the same because the only thing that we must have in common to be called atheist is disbelief in a god), then my thought process is "do I believe in this?", and then I evaluate myself and give the answer. It is not, "would an atheist like me believe in this?", followed by checking what atheists are allowed to believe in and disbelieve in before giving an answer. I find that in some cases, not all, that the religious must consult their church officials before answering questions concerning ethics, morals, matters of faith, etc. I got off track, but yes, it is a more logical "operating system", if you will. 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? Human concepts of god vary so vastly, but for the majority of them, I should bloody well think not. I have a bible in my room, I like to flip through passages first as a "believer", then as a "skeptic", and then evaluate the reasoning behind my opinions from both perspectives. Often, I find, that it is easy for the faithful to dismiss the great god-given injustices of the Bible, because it's so foreign sounding and old in those dark parts, and it's easy to get stuck on the newer ideas of love and compassion. Strictly old testament speaking; no. I read through, I believe the book of Joshua, and counted somewhere around ten extinctions of entire cities of people, condoned by the almighty. I take comfort that there is no historical accuracy to these pieces; they come from a time when history was not so much an accurate recording, and more a competition for who could write the best stories about how much larger their god's penis was than the god of the people one city over. The implications of the ten commandments are startling; not only are the first three devoted to inflating the creator's ego, but the last control what you are allowed to think in your mind. I am of the opinion that it is very wrong to tell people what they may and may not think. As for other religious figures, I come from a culture that is largely christian so I am of a lesser education on other concepts of gods. However, if the creator or creators, which we would call gods, are just, wise, and humble-- then I don't think they would care much whether they were worshiped or not. I picture myself as a god figure, and find embarrassment in the attention that the world gives me. Were I a god, I would found my creation on mathematics and scientific principles, and then step back and observe as it played out. To watch life blossom in isolated pockets, to see the rise and fall of countless civilizations dotted throughout the cosmos, to feel the passions and convictions of my creation swell and die only to be reborn in others. To watch them learn, to grow, to mature. They do not need my hand to change the nature that I have so lovingly made; that is not why I am here. I would be proud of them as they ventured out in awe of what I had made, and as they used their burgeoning intelligence to map out the laws and principles that I had founded. I would feel their sorrows as their civilizations dwindled and died, and they felt the weight of all their history coming to an end. This would be respectable in a god. And none of us would ever know they existed. If they would, for some reason, make their existence known, then I would laugh with them, and cry with them, and I would love them; but I would be a friend to them, and not a servant. I would not worship them. I do not see these qualities in human 'gods'. Human gods want to be worshiped, and that is conceited. I cannot justify inflating the ego of such creatures through prayer, worship, and my ultimate surrender to them.

[acatalephobic]

Im kind of excluded from this question, i just wanted to mention how good it makes me feel to read these responses. :} They are strong and articulate, without being...mean, i guess. My experience with such questions is that they too often result in...communication breakdowns as opposed to breakthroughs. So I am just gonna vote +1 for the latter.

[Original Poster]

Thanks for all of your answers. Now, for those of you who came here to debate at all, would you like me to formulate answers to your answers? Or just stay silent? If you're moved to respond to my post, go for it.

[Replicon]

Yeah I'm cool with a response, no need to ask permission.

[isthisit]

As you so kindly asked, feel free to! We've had our opinions, it's only fair to say yours.

[dutchraptor]

Hay koopa answer this one If god assesses all the bad things you've done in life and chooses to send you to hell for infinty how will you learn from your mistake.A punishment only makes sense if its temporary. Maybe if I were told I would go to hell a 1000 years each time I screwed up a life I would believe in god. Same goes for heaven.

[koopa184]

Sorry, I've been on a camping trip. Give me a second.

[koopa184]

1) They contradict the concept of a good God. If you believe the Christian God is a good God, they contradict the Christian God. 3) It serves an an illustration of the fact that you need positive evidence for your claims. If there were only one religion then maybe things would be less clear but the fact that there are loads of these primitive old stories (whose evolution can often be traced historically) raises the question, 'what justification do you have for believing story X and not story Y'? 4) What is this relevant to? 5) Well just choosing something off the top of my head... the exodus of the Jews is quite a large error. There are many events in the Bible which never occurred. Or Noah's ark; that would have left physical evidence but there is none. Scientific errors include the idea that the Earth is stationary. Internal contradictions... all you have to do is read the bloody thing dude, there are frequent contradictions between sections. Sometimes there are even contradictions within a few paragraphs of each other. In the sermon on the mount Jesus says that every law of the Old Testament will stand forever and he has not come to change anything, and then a couple of moments later says that the teaching of 'an eye for an eye' is wrong. 6) Because it's a load of rubbish you have picked up from some apologist website. If it were true, the obvious answer is trial and error, or of course natural selection. But it isn't; provide a medical citation. 7) You shouldn't have to research anything, you should be able to think for yourself and provide an answer. But of course there isn't an answer, it is a priori a logical inconsistency. Why did this obvious question not automatically occur to you in the first place when you originally read the story? 8) No it isn't, the atheist's favourite argument is that you have no evidence that they should believe your religion over any other religion, and thus any religion at all. You asked me why I don't believe in God and this was the point I emphasised in my answer, and yet in your response you have not tried to address the fundamental issue at all. To address what you did say... again, are you for real? Have you not read the Bible? Do you not even have a working pop culture knowledge of it? There is frequent divinely commanded or committed genocide in the Bible. Just one example: God ordering the Jews to kill all the Canaanites, including babies. 9) I don't know what you're trying to say or how it's a logical response. What don't you understand about my 'logic'? I'll start a bit out of sorts and go backwards. 9) Actually, nevermind about that. 8) It's not that I haven't read the Bible, it's just that I wanted to eliminate ambiguosity. I figured. It's the genocide case most cite. The Canaanites were child-sacrificers, who had violated their God-given consciences (this is according to Christian theology). Perhaps you'd like to still have them around so you could sacrifice your own potential children? 7) By research, I mean I'd like to check out the Bible story in more detail again. 6) Check out the book None of These Diseases by McMillen. He could be considered a biased party, though. I'll admit, trial and error is possible. However, you commit a logical fallacy if you a priori reject every possible supernatural explanation. What's your basis for rejecting everything supernatural? 5) Cite your sources. Has it been archaeologically and categorically denied that the Jewish exodus ever occurred? Also, Noah's ark really isn't a good example. Expeditions to Mount Ararat, where the boat is recorded to have landed, have been denied by the local government. But satellites have indeed caught pictures of what could be a boat on top of the mountain. And again, with regard to a stationary earth, cite your sources/verses. 4) It was more to talk about the "strongly geographically delineated" thing, in case you were saying "How is it fair to send those in India who are Hindu and don't hear of Christ to hell?" Though I think I might have misunderstood you there, sorry! 3) I do indeed believe I have positive evidence for my claims. Would you like me to present some? 1) Please, provide logical proof for this. I have just presented evidence that the likelihood of evil and suffering increases under Christian theological understandings. Define "omnipotent, benevolent god" please.

[koopa184]

1)How confident are you that no gods exist? Why? I believe everything is ultimately uncertain, and I cannot state anything one way or another with 100% certainty. That being said the concepts surrounding the Abrahamic God are so utterly preposterous and counter-productive that it seems most beneficial to both me and society if I act as though he does not exist. Or at the very least, that he either doesn't care to be worshiped or doesn't deserve to be. My worship is of the precious moment which will never, ever again repeat itself. By clinging to the idea that I am going to live for ever in an afterlife, I am forsaking what truly deserves my praise and attention. 2)Why do you believe atheism is more logically respectable than theism? Honestly when you get to the real source of things the two words lose their meaning. Of course a natural path for the newly disillusioned theist is to simply widen their definition of God until their definition is indistinguishable from an atheists view of the universe, aside from the tenuous word Consciousness which we haven't even properly defined. I do believe that the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim, but I believe both the falsification and validation are claims and are both required to be backed up. This does not mean a proper explanation for God is that you cannot prove it doesn't exist. That's not reason to believe in something. However, just because you cannot prove it does exist that's no reason to dismiss theories about it and limit yourself from the vast array of deep thoughts you can have in regard to concepts like God. 3)If a God/gods exist, should they be worshipped, why or why not? As I answered in the first question, no. Not unless you define God as the present moment. Worshiping something out of fear they'll smite you for not worshiping them is the same as admitting to being a witch out of fear that you'll be executed unless you admit it. I believe very strongly in innocence until proven guilty, and the fact is the only reason the Salem Witch Trials ever ended was because so many people ended up put to death simply for refusing to admit guilt. So we say God is a nice dude and deserves to be worshiped because I mean, come on dude, praise nice people like God. But why do we think he's the absolute good in the universe? If he were truly the one creator, wouldn't that make him both? Wouldn't that make him something beyond our own naive views on morality? I do nothing out of fear, if I can help it. I do nothing because I'm threatened to, if I can help it. Because of that, I believe if God truly deserved to be worshiped, he wouldn't care either way, but if he required himself to be worshiped, he certainly doesn't deserve to be. And like I said before, I believe there is something that does deserve our absolute, unconditional love and respect. There is something absolutely sacred. But you won't find it in a book. Well, I applaud you for staying consistent with your worldview on the whole certainty thing. And that also means that we do not accept the concept of God on complete certainty, but rather probability. Also, are you saying that Christianity encourages ignoring the present moment? 2) I'd agree on the whole "He can't be disproven, so He exists!" thing. That's a really stupid argument, considering you can't disprove flying unicorns, Santa Claus, etc. Not that I'm comparing my God to those things, as some choose to do (it annoys me when they do that, honestly). But the argument isn't one that really works. 3) I would disagree on your conclusion of whether they deserve to be worshipped. You determine whether they should be worshipped based on your own arbitrary morality (as you must believe your morality is subjective if you're being consistent with your worldview), but if a God or gods exist, THEY set the moral code of conduct. And, if they say they deserve to be worshipped or that they should be worshipped, then it is a statement that is now objectively true, and regardless of how much you might disagree, they do. Also, why do you think the present moment should be worshipped above all else?

[koopa184]

Also Omnis, I'm afraid I don't really get your claim that any God worth worshipping doesn't ask for worship. Could you elaborate?

[koopa184]

1) The term "god" was created for people who cant decide things for themselves or want to use religion to justify something bad they are doing. If the bible is evidence that god eists then comics are the evidence that spiderman exists. 2) why would some higher being create the unniverse, wait 14 billion years for humans just to watch them kill themselves in 10000 years. Here's another question "Why would hell or heaven be infinite?" If god assesses all the bad things you've done in life and chooses to send you to hell for infinty how will you learn from your mistake.A punishment only makes sense if its temporary. Maybe if I were told I would go to hell a 1000 years each time I screwed up a life I would believe in god. Same goes for heaven. 1) Some people tend to use religion as a political tool or justification. I don't agree with those people's actions. As far as internal evidence from the Bible itself, I don't think the Spiderman analogy carries over. Spiderman doesn't have countless fulfilled prophecies that were predicted hundreds of years in advance, nor does it speak of scientific principles long before science discovered them. 2) I don't believe that's described in the Bible, just letting his creation eventually die out. More of a "judgement day" sorta thing happens eventually 3) I don't know. I'll think on that one, and then post a response!

[Arra]

I haven't read any of the other responses. 1) I am as confident that God doesn't exist as I am that unicorns don't exist. I'm pretty sure that everyone is about as confident as everyone else that unicorns don't exist, so I think you'll know what I mean. 2) I believe that atheism is more logically respectable than theism for the same reason that a theist will believe that believing no unicorns exist is more logically respectable than believing they exist. I've seen no reason to believe in it, so why should I? 3) It depends on the type of god. Assuming you're talking about the Christian God, then I really don't know, because I haven't read the entirety of the Bible. I've read Genesis though, and based on that, he should definitely not be worshiped, since he is surely evil.