The only two reasonable positions on the existence of God?

[ThePainefulTruth]

Atheism and Deism? From our standpoint, those two philosophies are indistinguishable. All others can be dismissed on the basis of reason/science since other theologies inevitably have to resort to faith (blind faith) to justify ignoring reason and logic.

[Ooberman]

Atheism and Deism? From our standpoint, those two philosophies are indistinguishable. All others can be dismissed on the basis of reason/science since other theologies inevitably have to resort to faith (blind faith) to justify ignoring reason and logic.

I agree with this. I think it's patently obvious that not one theist knows what they are talking about when it comes to defining or describing the Being they assert exists. It would be blind luck if one of them is right, and they probably differ from their Church's view of the God it worships.

Ask any theist about what they believe about God and they will inevitably disagree with some key doctrines of their Faith.

Churches are made up of hypocrites and heretics, but as long as they sing along and say "Lord, Lord" they are welcome to put money in the plate.

Very few theists think about their beliefs, and fewer still have coherent views.

None of them have any method to verify one attribute of God over another. They are all wrong.

The minute someone says "prove it", I'll simply say they need to give me their definition, I'll provide a slightly different one and ask them to prove their view is correct.

Since they can't distinguish between 2 (in other words, have a 50/50 chance of being right), then when we compare their God to 5 billion other options, there isn't a Bayesian chance in Hell of them being right.

[cnorman18]

Please explain why agnosticism is not "reasonable."

[Ooberman]

Please explain why agnosticism is not "reasonable."

Probably an omission, but it's also not a position on God, per se, but the refusal of having a position.

Either you believe or you don't.

[cnorman18]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

[McCulloch]

Atheism and Deism? From our standpoint, those two philosophies are indistinguishable.

Atheism = "I don't believe in a god."
Deism = "There is a god, but it does not involve itself in our doings and we cannot know anything about it."

Yes, for all practical purposes indistinguishable. No wonder many of the Founding Fathers of the USA were Deists. Atheism was still anathema, while Deism still had some kind of pseudo-religious sheen.

Agnosticism can be argued to be a form of atheism. Agnostics also do not believe in a god. Similarly Ignosticism.

[Jashwell]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

Agnosticism: The lack of belief in the potential of knowing a certain thing
e.g.
"I do not believe it is possible to know whether or not a God exists"

Atheism: The lack of belief in a god
e.g.
"I do not believe in God"

You can be an agnostic theist, an agnostic atheist, a gnostic theist or a gnostic atheist.

There is no other position. Atheism does not mean "I believe God does not exist".
Atheism is literally defined to be the logical negation of theism. Ergo, Atheism and Theism is all encompassing set.

[Ooberman]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

Consider:

"I don't know" seems as if one might be entertaining the idea, but why? Based on what rational?

What is it that they don't know? That a poorly formed concept of a disembodied Mind that lives "out there" might exist?

Seems irrational to say "I don't know" - as if anytime someone offers an opinion, one must consider it.


"Is there undetectable pink unicorn the size of the Sun in my bedroom?"

Wouldn't the proper answer be: "don't be silly"?


Of course, my position is that the God concept is this silly and it's irrational we keep hanging on to it as a credible option for how the universe operates.

Question: Does a God exist?
Answer: Don't be silly.


But, I'm sure someone will point out that you can't prove a negative and thus the "God Concept" stays alive....

[cnorman18]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

Consider:

"I don't know" seems as if one might be entertaining the idea...

I would think it more likely that "I don't know" just means "I don't know."

...but why? Based on what rational?

What is it that they don't know?

Speaking for myself -- oh, a very great many things. Why some insist on limiting debate to stereotypical, oversimplified and calculatedly childish concepts as if there were no others available, for one example; or insist that others must use the same strictly, concretely objective and materialistic standards as they for ALL matters of thought and understanding, for another.

That a poorly formed concept of a disembodied Mind that lives "out there" might exist?

Again; that is only one concept among many. Some "theists" don't even consider the matters of "belief" or "the nature of God" to hold much importance.

Seems irrational to say "I don't know" - as if anytime someone offers an opinion, one must consider it.

Again: I would think it more likely that "I don't know" just means "I don't know" -- and sometimes it even holds the subtext of "...and I don't much care, either."

"Is there undetectable pink unicorn the size of the Sun in my bedroom?"

Wouldn't the proper answer be: "don't be silly"?

Of course; but that is a rather more detailed and definite proposition.

Of course, my position is that the God concept is this silly and it's irrational we keep hanging on to it as a credible option for how the universe operates.

Question: Does a God exist?
Answer: Don't be silly.

Doesn't that depend on what "god-concept" you are proposing? If you mean the stereotypical "old-man-in-the-sky-with-a-beard-and-super-powers" god -- well, you're quite right. Don't be silly.

But that's not the only "god-concept" around, and as I say, some don't even consider the matter worth one's time. Why should I beat myself up trying to define the indefinable or prove the unprovable? If "belief in God" were all there were to "religion," I wouldn't waste my time on it, either.

But, I'm sure someone will point out that you can't prove a negative and thus the "God Concept" stays alive....

Well, you can't -- but that's hardly relevant when one hasn't even stated a positive. Me, I wouldn't know what "positive" to state, and I don't think it particularly matters.

Honestly, we've discussed this before, and my thoughts haven't changed. I see your arguments as basically a false dichotomy; one MUST be either a simpleminded supernaturalist/fundamentalist/literalist, or a hard atheist. ALL other positions boil down to ONLY those two, is the way I read your posts.

Sorry, I don't find that point of view to be rational -- in that it is not objectively accurate as a matter of FACT, given the actual spectrum of the real approaches of real people in these matters. My own thoughts, and those of most of the Jews I know, simply don't fit into that narrow, artificial little "either/or" conundrum that you and others have concocted.

The ways that a human can think, and are free to think, simply aren't that limited.

[Goat]

I disagree. "Yes," "No," and "I don't know," are all perfectly rational positions on God. How can you demand that people claim to know things that they simply don't? Doesn't sound reasonable to me...

I think that "I don't know what you mean when you say God" also is a reasonable position... since there are so many contradictory and mutually exclusive views.