The existence - or lack of - a God is one of humanity's fundamental questions. Since the first birth, the first sunrise, the first death, humans have sought to explain the world around them. The whole of human existence, in the end, comes down to this: Is there a God?
Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Abstractions Aren’t Answers
- From American Humanist Association
By American Humanist Association - Values for Today
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Not mutually exclusive
The fundamental failure of this argument is that it is not an argument at all. The theist can accept that there are natural laws by which God functions that transcend him without being self-contradictory; it all depends on your definition. Atheism cannot be proved until every view of God is disproved, whereas the theist only has to disprove only one atheistic view- that no higher power exists.
- jdefriez August 6, 2008 2:43PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
disprove
"the theist only has to disprove only one atheistic view- that no higher power exists."
Disproving that there were no higher powers would mean that the existence of a higher power was proven... which has yet to be done.
An atheist does not need to disprove the existence of a deity... anymore then they have to disprove the existence of gnomes living under their bed.
- MrBook
November 6, 2009 8:24PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Exist! Good! God! Evil! where is the question here?
Given the number of items we have given names, I suggest we name things, we itemize, analize and pontificate on a metiphysical that cannot be proven to exist. Thought gives substance an anagram of sorts to wrap this enigma in. Wheather a word exists or it does not is dependent totally on how we hear what someone els sais.
Taking a stand as to wheather existance is relative to knowledge has yet to be proven it seems this is the progression in this conversation.
I will say this if I am wrong I know how to admit I made a mistake,
- ABNER
September 28, 2008 9:40PM
Reply to this Recommend (0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.