Teen Forums - Teen Chat, Teen Help, Teen Advice & Support

Okay, since this argument get's stringed around over a variety of different threads, lets just make this one and keep it in here.

Basically, here are my reason's for being an Atheist

• God is a way of explaining things we were not intelligent enough to understand
• It causes war
• Teaches abstinence from enjoyable things, rather than to enjoy life.
• It's dreadfully hypocritical

I mean, people used to believe God controlled the weather, why? because people didn't know how the weather worked prior to all of the scientific research. We now know that God doesn't control the weather.

It was also taught that God was in the sky, however, when we reached the skies, he was not, so people said he was in space, and when he reached space, again, he was not.

Now, I'm going to disprove anything you say with the following;

Let's assume you're a Christian. You're a Christian because you were born in a Christian country or community. But, if you were born in Pakistan, would you be arguing the existence of God, or Allah?. If you were born in Ancient Greece, would you be arguing the existence of God, or Zeus and Hera?

Stating that your god exists because you were born in a Christian country or community is utter crap. So, my religious friends, with those examples you can see that before we had the sciences we had today, the idea of a divine creator was simply a way of explaining things we didn't understand.

And, because you think God loves you all so much, you shove your faith down the throat of everyone who isn't being touched by the love of Jesus.

I... rest... my... case.

He's right here mate, talk to him yourself.

http://www.titane.ca/concordia/dfar251/igod/main.html

...and if that's not proof enough for you then i can't help you I'm afraid

xD

hum... well, i am not the god you're looking for but since i am wiccan, i worship nature itself and the moon. i pray to the god, (the moon) so that the cycle of nature re-start for the next season.. something like this.

Oh, hi.

I'm going to ask you to be a little open-minded before you start reading this. I'm not asking for a leap of faith; I'm simply asking you to think about what you're about to read. After all, you did ask for a proof of God right? After reading this, if you aren't convinced, then there's nothing I can do and I'll respect that.

There are generally two ways by which we prove things: mathematically and through the scientific method. In order to prove something mathematically, or logically, we need some a priori information. In other words, we need some truth, or prior knowledge, to start us off. However, when trying to argue for the existence of God, we have no definite a priori information. God, by definition, is supposed to be the beginning of everything, right? By definition, then, it is clear that, if God exists, then there can be no truth or existence that supersedes him. So, instead, we must work with assumptions, which is what we do in Math, Economics, Statistics, and other academic fields. We assume something to be true and then build up models and prove other "weaker" truths according to it.

So, in our case, what can we assume? Well, for the famous philosopher Descartes, the assumption was that we exist. Using this as his starting point, Descartes managed to give a logic-based proof on why God must surely exist. Since then, of course, many other philosophers and logicians have come forth to denounce and disprove his argument. And that's generally the way things work; it's impossible to give proof that God exists, or doesn't exist, using logic or math. If our a priori assumptions are imperfect, then how are we to build a definitive proof upon them?

It's the same thing with proving things through the scientific method. It's like Bertrand Russell's teapot; if we do not have the capacity to disprove something, then we cannot prove it. Obviously, scientifically, we do not have any tangible or phenomenal way of proving, or disproving, that God exists. This is the general consensus of basically everyone who is a respected academic or thinker. This includes Pascal, Dawkins, and many many many other brilliant thinkers throughout the past few centuries. Of course, that hasn't stopped people from trying. Nonetheless, both you and I can be rest assured that there is, and never will be, a way by which we can say definitively that God exists or does not exist.

It is, and will always be, a matter of faith. Again, there is no way I can prove God exists and there is no way you can prove that God does not exist. Furthermore, you seem to be only referring to the Christian God. What about a God that doesn't interfere in human lives and is simply a creator? A creator perhaps not even conscience of his creation? People like good ol' Thomas Jefferson and Napoleon Bonaparte, and maybe even Steven Hawkings, believe in those sort of God.

But, since the object of your scorn seems to the Abrahamic God of the Bible, I guess we'll focus on him.

In the beginning of your post, you give the "God of the Gaps" argument. It's a good argument, and a good way to answer many conservative literalists. However, it is by no means an end-all to all arguments. Oftentimes, people attribute "supernatural" or unexplainable events to God. Explaining such events through science and reason does not disprove the existence of the Christian God; it merely shows that these events are not attributed to God. You give the example of the weather. What if I say that the weather is decided by God? How are you going to disprove that statement? It is outside the realm of our senses. We can describe how weather manifests itself here on Earth, but we can never grasp WHY weather occurs in the first place. Do you get what I'm saying? To give another example, we can explain how the Earth orbits around the Sun, and the Moon around the Earth. Yet, we can never explain why it does so. We cannot understand why the laws of the Gravitation are the way they are or why the universe was the shaped and ordered in this manner. We can provide models on how things came to be this way, but we cannot truly grasp why. "God of the Gaps" is by no means sufficient in disproving the existence of the Christan God.

You state that religion has caused War. You're on the mark. Men have used religion to justify disgusting and abominable things. But, how is this different from anything else? During World War Two, Japanese scientists tortured and mutilated Chinese subjects in the name of science. Same with Nazi scientists, in the name of enlightenment and nationalism. The US? No different. Men have used every excuse imaginable to justify horrible acts, including war. By your logic then, you should swear off all those justifications as well.

However, you mention also that it's hypocritical (also like everything else). And I agree. You claim religion is both hypocritical and the cause of much suffering, and I agree with you. However, let's say that religious people decide to be "unhypocritical" and instead embrace the ethics and tenets of their religion. Would it still be the cause of suffering? Or would it be the cause of delight, joy, love and peace? It is difficult for even the most ardent atheist to deny that the Christian message of love is genuinely something beautiful. You know, feeding the poor, leaving your greed, loving your neighbor, turning the other cheek. So on and so forth. It's good stuff, isn't it? Makes your heart warm, haha.

Finally, you claim that religion promotes abstinence from enjoyable activities. Isn't that rather subjective? The activities considered enjoyable to a deeply religious person may be very different from the activities considered enjoyable to a more secular person. Hence, to the deeply religious, religion would not be promoting an unhappy lifestyle, but rather a enjoyable and fulfilling life.

So, to summarize, I don't have a proof of God. Straight up, there's no way to prove it: even the Bible says so. For those of you are interested, post a reply, and I'll show it to you.

It's all a matter of faith, my friends. And, trust me, "God of Gaps", Evolution and Richard Dawkins are only the tip of the iceberg. As you delve into the Christian religion, there are so many other things that can break a lesser man's faith. But, as St. Augustine said, we should embrace faith and seek understanding, rather than embrace understanding and seek faith. Of course, I'm paraphrasing.

To end my argument, I'm going use an appeal to authority. Over the course of history, there have been countless men and women smarter than me and you. Many of them have embraced religion, while others have shunned it.

What I'm trying to say is that intelligence doesn't make a difference when it comes to belief. It doesn't make a difference whether you've seen a dead man walk or you've experienced nothing supernatural at all. At the end of the day, it comes down to faith. That's all there is.

Good day, God Bless.

Look, One desire, let me just applaud the effort you put into that response.

However, I can disprove God's existence.


Science has disproved the bible on so many occasions. Like the examples I gave you.


I just, pity those like you, it saddens me to think that people who have the potential to live life to the full, aren't.

i do agree with you here... it's kinda sad that people indeed don't do some things just because god told them not to...please!!!!!!!!!!!!

surely a religious person could just turn it round and say- prove to me that god does not exist? hopefully one day us atheists will have results from the Large Hadron Collider to clerify.

ah, it's easy to answer that, Ryalldiss!!!

"Have you seen him?"

i believe in what i see/feel

Well, the Bible was written by men. We are discussing here if the existance of god is true, not if what men say about god is true.

But that's just a statement, because I myself am an atheist, for the same reasons you are.

I simply only believe what I see. I am very tolerant and open-minded on this subject though.

A lover knows only humility; he has no choice...
He steals into your alley at night; he has no choice...
He longs to kiss every lock of your hair; don't fret, he has no choice...
In his frenzy of love for you, he longs to break the chains of his imprisonment; he has no choice...