This is probably the standard question asked by atheists/agnostics. Interestingly, those who ask this question don't seem at all concerned with the existence of other concepts and ideas that they, and their respective societies, live according to. For example, can someone prove to me that Freedom exists? Can someone provide me with evidence that Communism exists? What about Secular Humanism? No, you can't prove to me that all these different concepts exist. Yet, that doesn't stop people from submitting to them, in the sense that it doesn't stop them from basing their moral and social philosophies on said ideas. Cling to Freedom to death and they'll call you a principled martyr. Fight for God and they'll call you a deluded wacko. So, why is God particular scrutinized? I think it's because atheists deliberately equate God to a being, and a being alone. They need to belittle God in order to not take Him seriously. Thus, God is just like Bigfoot or the Toothfairy. He is simply a "creature" that there is no evidence of. Surely, God is greater than that.
It's an interesting wording. For instance, one could say that freedom is most important when it doesn't exist. There certainly are those who argue freedom doesn't exist at all (but freedom can mean different things, so don't read too much into it). We've got plenty of evidence of freedom. We've all had various freedoms removed, be it by our parents, by the state prison, by a particularly limiting piece of clothing, and so on. Other times we have increased freedoms (which most often in the western sense means having restrictions removed), like being given a car or being let out of a bathroom that our sibling locked us in. We have observed other things with and without freedom, like a bird in and outside of a cage, or a turbine spinning freely or be locked in place. Freedom can mean many things, and is often just a blanket term. If you want to look at some particular kind of freedom, we can do that specifically.
God is greater than that because god can be anything and do anything and knows everything, at least according to your concept of god the creator. No empirical evidence to the positive required. Wait, that's just like Big Foot, isn't it?
I've heard endless stories about how all-powerful, all-knowing, all-everything God is. If any of that was true, God's existence would be evident to all. There'd be no agnostics or atheists, and only one religion, or none if that's what God wanted. Therefore, ...
No, God is greater in the sense that He isn't just a mere being, but a concept that which people throughout history have based their mode of living on. Where is the evidence for Secular Humanism? - - - Updated - - - So if A, then B? I don't think so.
Perhaps not to your satisfaction. The above ideologies are subjective at best thus interpretations will be relative to the individual. I think for many it is easier to accept man made rules as we know humans exists as opposed to unprovable deity. IMO all rules allegedly imposed upon us by a deity are more likely than not man made rules in the guise of God. From my perspective it is subjective and contextual. No matter if the fight is in the name of freedom, God, or freedom and God, there are lines that if crossed will change how many perceive the fight. It has been my anecdotal observation that many if not most atheists are respecting of the faith of theists.
Wouldn't you, yourself, state that 99%of gods worshipped throughout history were either created by humans or are false idols. Why does it surprise you so much to find your god is on that list? Humans create gods. That is what we do. What we have always done. They explain the unknown and give comfort. But statistically speaking, the odds do not favor the "gods", if believers themselves do not believe in 99% of them. Given that history, why WOULD anyone should be surprised that there are people who do not give god A or god b credit for the universe.
Even then it means wildly different things. The words libertarian and liberal both mean for freedom, but do it in wildly different ways, and the "they hate us for our freedom" crowd is another one altogether. Almost everyone stands for freedom in one interpretation or another, but people disagree on which freedoms take precedence.
You sure make a lot of unsubstantiated assertions in your original post. I'll break it down to the basics. The concept of "god" boils down to an evolutionary biological component of the human brain. How or why it developed is yet unknown, but can be theorized as pertaining to the development of speech and social behaviour, of which 3/4 of our brain's size is dedicated. Whether or not it still serves a purpose is at the core of the debate.
The human development of the concept of a GOD is specific to our very limited human perception. Humans see things having a past, present and future but in reality Time is Space-Time and it is NON-LINEAR. Because of this limited perception people developed in their mind the concept of a CREATOR as people could not understand that Space-Time runs CONCURRENT. AA
The argument is that He isn't just another deity. Strawman. Point was that atheists think they can disregard God by equating Him to a mere deity.
If it makes you feel better, in addition to not believing in gods that are deities, I also don't believe in gods that are not deities.
I totally agree that god is a human concept and construct. I do not deny the enormous influence religious institutions have played in the evolution of human civilization. An influence both good and bad just like us humans. However, we no longer live in the ancient and medieval worlds that those religious institutions represent. Our fundamental knowledge of the universe is several orders of magnitude greater than at the creation of any of the modern established religions. We can no longer simply accept on faith what today can clearly be seen to be nothing more than ancient mythology as proof of god's existence not to mention the fact that those same scriptures being the principle source for god's motivations and commands. No evidence is required for somebody to not believe in god. No evidence is required for humans to affirm that this life is the only one we definitely know we get to live. No evidence is required to observe the earth in all its naturalistic glory and not think it a paradise - conversely its easy to recognize the evidence of what we as a species are doing to it. No evidence is required to believe that morality has no need of religion since all human morality can be defined by three conditions "do unto others as you would have done onto you", "live and let live" and "do no harm (unless forced)". No fear of god required. No evidence is necessary to believe that all humans are created equal REGARDLESS of their race or creed. Nice thing about human constructs is that we can "re=engineer" them from time to time, and things like scriptural literalism are badly in need of such.
Those are different questions. If you want proof secular humanism exists, you can look at all of us who are secular humanists. We exist, and we can present uncontradicting accounts of us being secular humanists. As for why it would be true, secular humanism does not postulate any truths about divinity or similar. The secular simply means it is how we would have to act if we have no information about God, not if God does not exist.
They already have been evidenced. Your analogy doesn't quite cut it, but it makes for worthwhile discussion. The anthropomorphic/religious God-concept does not rate so well with people who rely entirely on a mundane relationship with and understanding of physical reality. In other words, that form of God seems to be irrelevant to their lives. Some are more tolerant, while others may be less tolerant and have an agenda against what they see is philosphically and scientifically fallacious. They can't find justification for so much focus on God. God is greater than that, but He is far distant yet right under our noses. A long, long time ago, the Unlimited Spirit separated us from Itself and gave us awareness of our individual existence. Subdivision allowed parts to interact but also allowed for polarization, dualities, and conflict. The environment imposes concern on the self for its security. Thus fear and ego were born out of necessity (survival of the fittest), but have drawbacks in tending to thwart cooperation and regard for group welfare. However, the creative process is one of outflow and return. The return involves progressive evolution. Consciousness must prevail from being overwhelmed by low-quality dense matter and energy. It must strive for quality consciousness by overcoming fear and self-preoccupation (material obsession, greed, etc.) When fear and ego are eliminated, all that remains is Love. The experts used to claim that the universe must be winding down because it has expanded to the point where everything is too far apart. The laws of thermodynamics insist that the energy must wane as temperatures become uniform, entropy reaches maximum, and the universe must stagnate in the great heat death or worse, collapse entirely. So they thought. Then they discovered that the universe is not a closed system. It is still expanding. It's not winding down. It's still winding up. Energy is coming in from somewhere else. If so, then that means there has to be a somewhere else! Saved by the multiverse. So here we are, stuck in this dense physical matter existence. Why? Because we are cosmic infants who learn best if immersed in a logically consistent surrounding, a custom-made virtual reality, lots of black and white, not all that much grey issues. It ain't like this in the next beyond, where contradictions overlap to make the grey stuff plentiful.
It is not possible to disregard that which one does not know to exist. To disregard a thing that thing must be known to exsist. What atheists disregard are the baseless arguments of God's exsistance by us theists.
Can't the same be said for those who believe in God? But it nevertheless postulates truth, like other systems that have their own truths.
You know the Egyptian's worshiped their GODS for over 4000 years which is twice the length of Christianity. All religions eventually become Mythology. AA
