Question for the Atheists.

[_Buffalo]

I do know for a fact that the messy Yahweh/El/Jeshua/Father/Son/HG/God syndicate doesn't exist, though.

But you are willing to accept that there may be a creator responsible for human beings here on earth?

Regards,
MG

I'm willing to accept that it's technically possible, to extremely unlikely and not supported by any evidence.

If there was such a creator, though, it wasn't Yahweh.

[_Buffalo]

I'd really be interested in a thoughtful answer or two. So far, I'm seeing some evasiveness. C'mon, there's got to be some simple, straightforward reasons for lack of belief in a creator/God responsible for human beings on earth.

Regards,
MG

Here is the simple, straightforward reason for lack of belief in this creator god - we have absolutely no evidence that such a being exists.

I don't know about you, but I typically don't believe in anything without some evidence. It's technically possible that any number of mythical figures are real, from Zeus to the Headless Horsemen, but again, where's the evidence?

Belief should scale with the evidence.

[_Themis]

How do you go from admitting that if there is a god, it deliberately keeps itself hidden, to asserting “It seems as though there are enough reasons to believe in a creator to make the belief default reasonable.”

I am not aware of any reasons to believe, but he has already brought up another supposed sense atheist either are not using or do not understand how it works, but MG does and may think it represents the reasons for believing. I have asked him about it here, and even on other threads, but never given any good explanations of why his understanding is correct and not others including those who do not attribute the experience to supernatural sources.

[_Scottie]

I would also like to challenge your idea that we only have 5 senses.

Using our natural 5 senses, we can't see into deep space or view the IR/UV light emitted from galaxies, see microscopic organisms, etc.

We have developed technology that VASTLY enhances our 5 senses. Using technology, we have expanded our 5 senses into innumerable ways to look at data, then convert that data to something we can experience with our 5 senses.

As technology allows us to "see" further and further into space, the evidences for god diminish.

[_Mad Viking]

I would also like to challenge your idea that we only have 5 senses.

Using our natural 5 senses, we can't see into deep space or view the IR/UV light emitted from galaxies, see microscopic organisms, etc.

We have developed technology that VASTLY enhances our 5 senses. Using technology, we have expanded our 5 senses into innumerable ways to look at data, then convert that data to something we can experience with our 5 senses.

As technology allows us to "see" further and further into space, the evidences for god diminish.

The only input mechanisms we have are our 5 senses. Sure, we can see further into space because we've developed better technology. However, the input through that technology is still input into our system through sight.

[_Buffalo]

I would also like to challenge your idea that we only have 5 senses.

Using our natural 5 senses, we can't see into deep space or view the IR/UV light emitted from galaxies, see microscopic organisms, etc.

We have developed technology that VASTLY enhances our 5 senses. Using technology, we have expanded our 5 senses into innumerable ways to look at data, then convert that data to something we can experience with our 5 senses.

As technology allows us to "see" further and further into space, the evidences for god diminish.

The only input mechanisms we have are our 5 senses. Sure, we can see further into space because we've developed better technology. However, the input through that technology is still input into our system through sight.

Yes, but our senses are able to interface with artificial senses that go far beyond the 5. Example: scanning for microwave background radiation. The mechanism for doing that is nothing like any of our senses, though we've designed the equipment so that we can see interpret the results.

[_Scottie]

The only input mechanisms we have are our 5 senses. Sure, we can see further into space because we've developed better technology. However, the input through that technology is still input into our system through sight.

We have developed technology that VASTLY enhances our 5 senses. Using technology, we have expanded our 5 senses into innumerable ways to look at data, then convert that data to something we can experience with our 5 senses.

[_Mad Viking]

Yes, but our senses are able to interface with artificial senses that go far beyond the 5. Example: scanning for microwave background radiation. The mechanism for doing that is nothing like any of our senses, though we've designed the equipment so that we can see interpret the results.

We just need to develop technology that can sense deified matter.

;)

[_Buffalo]

Yes, but our senses are able to interface with artificial senses that go far beyond the 5. Example: scanning for microwave background radiation. The mechanism for doing that is nothing like any of our senses, though we've designed the equipment so that we can see interpret the results.

We just need to develop technology that can sense deified matter.

;)

Joseph Smith perfected that one long ago - it's called a divining rod, a.k.a. the Rod of Aaron! :D

[_Sophocles]

I suppose that it would come down to a basic gut feeling/hope that the universe is not simply a cold place with no ongoing/eternal purpose for sentient beings/entities. It's a sense of the ineffable, the sublime, the LOVE that has meaning beyond the here and now. Yep, it's wishful thinking. But as I've already asked, why not default to this position rather than the opposite position of disbelief in a god/creator? It seems to me that this is a position that opens up opportunities rather than closing doors.

Maybe it would help you see why we aren't inclined to engage in such wishful thinking if we turn our focus from the outer reaches of the universe, to our own planet.

Because we can't perceive it with our own five senses, in some sense we really don't know what's in the center of the earth. Everything we think we know about it we have deduced from observations made at the surface. We have reason to think that there is a solid inner core surrounded by a liquid outer core, surrounded by a viscous mantle. But we could be magnificently wrong. It could be that there is a god down there.

Despite all our research, there is much we don't know. For example, we don't know why the planet seems to reverse magnetic polarity every few million years or so, and at irregular intervals. If there is a god down there, then that would explain it. The polarity reverses whenever the god at the center of the earth wills it.

Perhaps this earth god appears to us as a solid inner core surrounded by a liquid metal outer core because it suits his purposes to do so. Shall we default to believing that there is a god down there, because of all the opportunities such a belief might create, rather than choosing disbelief?