In fact, the onus is not on anyone else but those who believe in God's existence. Consider Bertrand Russell's parable of the celestial teapot, wherein he claims, for the sake of argument, that between Earth and Mars there is a teapot revolving around the sun and that this teapot is too small for even the most powerful telescope to capture. He then claims, for the sake of argument, that since you cannot disprove it, then it must be so. Obviously, you can see the nonsensical nature of his argument. However, if the existence of this teapot was written about in ancient books and taught at Sunday schools, would it be any more believable? Apparently so, eh? All kidding aside, you really should read Dawkins' The God Delusion. I'm not suggesting that you become an atheist. Rather, I ask that you place your various assumptions under a bit of scrutiny unlike what you have ever considered before. The book is extremely well-written and, although Dawkins is clearly an atheist and makes no attempt to hide that fact, he also presents the theist arguments in the theists' own words and then does a far better assessment than anything you have seen here in these monotonous threads. Read it and disagree. Just read it. Please.
Interesting that you believe et is possible but don't believe it is possible that some form of higher power put this whole piece of art together. To say God does not exist is not a strong argument considering science has not looked everywhere in the universe for proof of his existence.
The possibility of life forms in a universe so vast does not necessarily depend on any supernatural being or power. A belief in a supernatural God does. There is a difference. Please, volente, I'm not kidding. Read Dawkins' book. At the very least, I personally promise it will serve as a useful mental exercise irrespective of where your beliefs lie. (In fact, if you can get through the book and remain a theist, then you will probably be a better theist for it. Consider it a friendly challenge. ) It was named book of the year by several noteworthy publications, and with good reason. Itâs marvelously compiled and a heck of a good read. Please be sure to get the paperback version, because he includes a preface that addresses some theists' criticism of the original hard cover.
I'm not here to convince you of anything. You have just as much onus to prove your argument as I do mine. I'm not here to prove God's existence. I'm here to share my experience and listen to others. Those that believe have all the proof they need. Those that don't have whatever they think they need to know. My response was to the irony of the poster telling me "you can't prove a negative" when his very stance is one. So either he is wrong about not proving a negative with logic or he is wrong on his position. I eagerly await a reply to better understand his error.
With due respect, you are not being clever, merely evasive. Only you know whether you fail to see the argument or merely pretend to. Either way, I have nothing to add. Have a good evening.
So, if we all evolved from simpler things, why do those same simple things still exist ? If we evolved from monkeys, why do monkeys still exist ? Interesting that darwin was agnostic when he died. Even more interesting is he believed in some type of God up until his daughter died at a young age. Seems to be a common theme that those that do not believe have that opinion due to either forced participation in religion by their parents and / or experiencing something tragic that changed their minds.
Evasive about what ? If you can 100% show me that God does not exist I will join your side tonight. If you can't offer evidence to your very strong statement then how is your argument any different from mine? If you are close minded and don't think mind and belief are powerful concepts then explain the scienctific evidence shown in a placebo effect.
Not when these people seek to affect changes to public policy based on their mass hallucination. Not when a child is denied the treatment that might have saved her life because sickeningly cruel faithmongers like volente and the rest deem the research necessary to develop the treatment 'a sin'. Not when so many murders are committed in the name of religion, like the young woman who was buried up to her neck in sand and then stoned to death by these fanatics, for the crime of flirting with a young man in a marketplace. We'll be here to shout down those whose perverted logic leads to so much suffering and misery.