Why do theists and atheists insist that if there is a God that it created the universe?

[thedoc]

I am more moral than your God.

I bow to no "omnipotence" that stands by idly.

Those are both statements made by Atheists.

[Immanuel Can]

If I don't die he can't Judge me.

Good luck with that.

[Logik]

All the more reason to live forever!

If I don't die he can't Judge me.

You don't know that, your only speculating.

You don't know that there is a god either - and yet people base their entire life on that speculation.

[Logik]

I am more moral than your God.

I bow to no "omnipotence" that stands by idly.

Those are both statements made by Atheists.

No. They are statements made by an agnostic. Me.

As far as I can tell I am a closer to a Christian (to the image of Jesus - who actually helps people) than either of you two.

[Arising_uk]

... "It is appointed unto men once to die, and after this, the Judgment."

Now, there's an inescapable fact.

Well this bit might be "It is appointed unto men once to die..." although I doubt the "appointed" but this bit "and after this, the Judgment" is just wishful thinking. It also causes a contradiction in your thoughts as if I'm going to be around to be judged then I pretty much can't of died?

[thedoc]

All the more reason to live forever!

If I don't die he can't Judge me.

You don't know that, your only speculating.

You don't know that there is a god either - and yet people base their entire life on that speculation.

No I don't and yes they do. So what is wrong with that, more wrong than what others do?

[Immanuel Can]

You don't know that there is a god either - and yet people base their entire life on that speculation.

No I don't and yes they do. So what is wrong with that, more wrong than what others do?

I'm always amazed at Atheists...they think there's no God, and they also think that they're God.

After all, how else could they tell you what you do or don't, and even what can or cannot know? But they seem so sure...

It sure does take a lot of faith to be an Atheist.

[uwot]

You don't know that there is a god either - and yet people base their entire life on that speculation.

No I don't and yes they do. So what is wrong with that, more wrong than what others do?

I'm always amazed at Atheists...they think there's no God, and they also think that they're God.

After all, how else could they tell you what you do or don't, and even what can or cannot know? But they seem so sure...

It sure does take a lot of faith to be an Atheist.

It really doesn't, Mr Can. The statement 'I believe there is no god', if anything is less tenable than 'I believe there is a god'. The reason being that the latter at least has the possibility of being supported by evidence, whereas none is available to show that there is no god. However, as someone who clearly has some appreciable intellect should be able to understand, the qualifying position of atheism is the statement 'I don't believe there is a god'. Doc's admission that he doesn't know there is a god', but chooses to believe it deserves respect, and for all anyone knows, he's right, as perhaps are you, but your claim to know that your god exists is as much a declaration of faith as anyone who claims to know that no god exists.

[surreptitious57]

I am always amazed at Atheists ... they think there is no God

Most atheists are agnostic which means that while they think there is no God they cannot be absolutely certain about this
I am an agnostic atheist as most online atheists are and the reason is because God as a concept simply cannot be falsified

[Immanuel Can]

I am always amazed at Atheists ... they think there is no God

Most atheists are agnostic...

Two different terms. The first means "no gods," and the second, "[I} don't know." Those are not the same position at all, even with regard to the fundamental question they purport to address.

Dawkins says there's seven gradations between them, and the one Dawkins himself declares he is not, is "Hard Atheist," the extreme position. In other words, it amounts to this: there are no absolute Atheists, certainly no rational ones, because that position is impossible to affirm rationally. There are just degrees of agnosticism.

God as a concept simply cannot be falsified

You're right: it cannot be falsified. But it can do more: it can be verified. And Atheism can be falsified.

Let us speak only epistemologically, only theoretically here. If God exists, verification would be very simple.

How many Gods would it take to falsify Atheism? Right: just one.

How many verified incidents manifesting God would it take to verify the existence of God? That is, how many genuine miracles, actual revelations, true spiritual experiences, or actual incarnations of God would it take to both falsify Atheism forever and confirm Theism forever?

Yep: just one. If you've got one bona fide one, then Atheism's cooked.

Now, the question is, has anybody, since the dawn of time, ever had one genuine experience of God? The Atheist has to say "no," though how he can say that he cannot say. He's making it up. And if he's wrong...if God is genuinely manifest in various ways in the world, from Creation, to logic, to miracles, to objective morality, to the actuality of evil, to special revelation, to existential experience, or to the Incarnation...then Atheism is forever defeated.

[surreptitious57]

I am an atheist because I see no evidence for God but it doesnt actually matter to me whether or not he exists
And so if I discovered evidence that he did actually exist then I would accept it but currently I have found none

[Immanuel Can]

I am an atheist because I see no evidence for God

So far so good. But you can't be an Atheist if you think it's possible there is a God. You're one of Dawkins's "firmer" agnostics. That's as far as it can possibly go.

but it doesnt actually matter to me whether or not he exists

Well, I have to say that's a fairly untenable position. But perhaps you suspect I'm biased in that, so please don't listen just to me.

I think it's really obvious that a lot of Atheists would argue it matters...it really, really, really matters...that you DON''T believe He exists. But why would they feel that way, if nothing important is at stake? So whether you listen to them or me, it's pretty clear it does matter.

And so if I discovered evidence that he did actually exist then I would accept it

That just means you're a rational and fair-minded agnostic. Well done: I commend your good sense.

...but currently I have found none

I believe you. But looking at it objectively, we have to admit that it's not a fact with any implications for anyone other than yourself.

I have never been to Eritrea. But Eritrea exists, and I'm rational to believe it does, though I have not seen it myself. Lots of folks have been there. Just so, if other people have "been there" in terms of encounters with God, you're rational to remain open to that happening for you. In fact, you'd be irrational to close your mind about it.

That's why Atheism just isn't a real option. At least, not for rational people like yourself.

[Arising_uk]

I'm always amazed at Atheists...they think there's no God, ...

Not really, we don't think about 'God' at all unless there's a theist in the house and when there is it's 'I don't believe in your 'God''.

and they also think that they're God.

Nah, we don't think about 'it' unless there's a theist in the house. Those 'Atheists' that do are generally disabused ex-theists but they'll grow out of it.

After all, how else could they tell you what you do or don't, and even what can or cannot know? But they seem so sure...

Nah! That'll be priests, theist proselytisers and born-againers.

It sure does take a lot of faith to be an Atheist.

Takes a bit of thought and then no thought about a 'God' again.

[Logik]

No I don't and yes they do. So what is wrong with that, more wrong than what others do?

It depends on how it guides your actions.

In the case of IC - he uses for justifying his own behavior.

Judgmental against free will (abortion).
Not judgmental against his own free will (choosing NOT to contribute to humanity).

He seems to subscribe to deontology, not consequentialism.

Deontology is just an erudite name for "wishful thinking".

[Logik]

The reason being that the latter at least has the possibility of being supported by evidence, whereas none is available to show that there is no god.

This appears to be a misunderstanding of Bayesian inference. a.k.a evidence-based reasoning. a.k.a plausible reasoning.

Belief and disbelief are on a relativistic continuum.

Engineers measure it using the decibel scale
Statisticians measure it using the probability scale

Given the two hypotheses:
A: God exists.
B: God does not exist.

"I don't know" translates to 1:1 odds, 0.5 probability e.g 0 dB belief.

In English: As far as I can tell both answers are equally likely/unlikely.

In this framework "dogmatism" means "infinite belief OR disbelief".

Infinite belief means "no amount of disconfirmation can get me to disbelieve"
Infinite disbelief means "no amount of confirmation can get me to belief".

https://unvarnishedveritas.wordpress.co ... inference/

In English nomenclature and given the hypothesis above.

Atheist: Probability(B) > Probability(A); belief < 0 decibels
Theist: Probability(A) > Probability(B); belief > 0 decibels.
Agnostic: Probability(A) = Probability(B); belief = 0 decibels

This leaves open questions to theists and atheists,
To theists: What evidence would convince you that God doesn't exist
To atheists: What evidence would convince you that God exists?

I can answer for myself (an agnostic). I haven't heard of a testable definition of "God", so I can't speak of falsifiability yet, and if you were to provide me with a testable definition it has to be falsifiable.

The notion of God (absolute truth) is incompatible with the agnostic epistemology (relativistic truth).