Atheism-Vs-Theism-Debate

Which camp is more analytically defensible?

  • Atheism

    Votes: 2 16.7%

  • Theism

    Votes: 9 75.0%

  • None

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Total voters
    12

einstein newton

JF-Expert Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Posts
1,969
Reaction score
2,685


For centenaries,inquiries concern Godhead existence have been debated by philosophers,theologians,and even scientists

In debate between atheists and theists,accusation of bias,

Contemptuousness and bloody mindedness often oscillate between two camps

Atheists view arguments for existence of God as exceedingly feeble,self evidently flawed and unsatisfactory

Whereas theists consider atheists as sinners,despite the fact that unpondered life isn't worth

So this thread is destined to examine and analyze both philosophical and scientific arguments for and against God existence

Each camp
[theists and atheists]
is required to convince the readers that,
Their worldview is more analytically defensible than that of their opponents

Rule

1.Proofs that emerge from researches must be sourced,otherwise we'll presume them to be false

Definition

Atheism is simply disbelief in otherworldly realm,the contra of it is theism
 
Ontological argument,

“There is, therefore, or there can be conceived, a subject of all perfections, or most perfect Being. Whence it follows also that He exists, for existence is among the number of his perfections.”

Second, Internal Truth argument which states that
The gist of the argument is that truths are part of the contents of minds, and that an eternal truth must be part of an eternal mind… There must be a reason for the whole contingent world, and this reason cannot itself be contingent, but must be sought among eternal truths.”

This leads to claim, “But a reason for what exists must itself exist; therefore eternal truths must in some sense, exist, and they can only exist as thoughts in the mind of God.”
 
There is this argument referred to as argument from locality firstly presented by Adam lee,author of Daylight atheism

The key question of this argument is,

Why does every religion currently being practiced as well as fairly past religion which no longer has a followers had definite origin in both space and time?

Christianity for instance,was founded by Jewish rabbi,Jesus almost 20 centuries ago in middle east

And that christian faith makes ludicrous claim that no man can go to heaven without redemptive power or name of Jesus

If that is the case then,what is fate of those people who existed and died before Jesus or christianity without even heard of christ and miracles he made?

Did they all go to hell?

Is that fair?

Why should an omnibenevolent God destine a specific ethnicity and dispense his revelation only to them

Instead of dispensing that revelation to all people from all cultures and all nations so as to ensure wide distributions of followers?

Is God racist?
 
Defending my position, the argument you offered isn't really refuting the existence of God rather challenge the doctrines of different religions. In other words, the argument is mere a critique of religious beliefs, it does not challenge the existence of necessary Being who is God.
 
Yaani bure kabisa,unataka tukupinge au kukuunga mkono kwa tafiti zilizofanyika au?? Mambo ya sayansi (tafiti) na Mambo tofauti,Mungu hatafitiki na hata hao wanasayansi wenu hawawezi kutafiri beyond sayansi,sayansi inapoishia ndipo Mungu anapoanzia ,I mean vitu tunavyoshindwa kuvitafiti kwa akili zetu na kuvielezea ndo Mungu mwenyewe,CHA MSINGI TUSISUMBUANE,AMINI UNACHOAMINI NA KILA MTU ASHIKE LAKE
 
uitaji kuogopa academic challenge, The question of God can be defended philosophically, hamna mtu mwenye prove kwamba God doesn't exist. Nipo hapa ku affirm the existence of God
 
You're mistaken

Argument from locality solely questions the validity of God's mechanism of salvation

If God was good and just,then he would reveal himself to all people and races throughout the history and not just single tribe or ethnicity

All humans are actually the same when it comes to fundamentals,that is,they possess exactly same genes and cognitive capacity

God,who is supposed to be just would not destine a single race to be his chosen but he would provide his revelation to all of humanity

And even prophets would emerge from all races

But that is not what we observe when we examine religions

This adds plausibility to the claim that all religions are merely human fabrication
 
In my reply to your objections. the first argument.

"Argument from locality solely questions the validity of God's mechanism of salvation
If God was good and just,then he would reveal himself to all people and races throughout the history and not just single tribe or ethnicity? This critique does not refute God's Existence rather a challenge to Judaism as a religion. I am not defending any religion because to me Religion is merely a human institution just like a government. Also, I do not hold the view that God ever chose any group on this Earth. My argument which affirm the existence of God is based on philosophical point of views. As as matter of fact, if God had no reason to reveal himself to a certain group of people as the you claim,It wouldn't follow necessarily that God does not exist.
In addition, you must make a distinction between Existence of God and different teaching of different Religions. Existence of God does not depend on the religious doctrines rather on ontology as the necessary being.
Therefore, your claims are only refuting the established religious doctrines and not the existence of most perfect Being.
 
Hivi unaposema kuwa sayansi ilipoishia ndio Mungu alipoanzia una maana gani?? Sayansi inaisha vipi wakati tafiti bado zinaendelea kila siku??
 
Jimena said:
Hivi unaposema kuwa sayansi ilipoishia ndio Mungu alipoanzia una maana gani?? Sayansi inaisha vipi wakati tafiti bado zinaendelea kila siku??
Click to expand...
Hiyo ni 'God of gap'

Wagiriki wa zamani walikuwa hawajui hata chanzo cha radi nini

Kwao,"kwanini radi inatoke"? lilikuwa swali gumu kujibika

Jambo ambalo wao hawakuweza kulielezea walikuwa wanasema ni kazi ya Mungu

Walikuwa wanaamini kuwa sauti ya radi huwa inatokea pindi Mungu anapokasirika

Leo hii tunajua radi ni umeme

Sasa ni kituko kwa mtu wa karne ya 21 kuamini pale uelewa wake unapoishia basi Mungu ndio anapoanzia

Huyo anatofauti gani na mijitu ya zamani?
 
Hakuna tofauti kabisa

Mtu anajua kabisa kuwa tupo 2016 lakini kwa makusudi anaishi maisha walioishi watu miaka 2000 iliyopita
 
Swadaktaa..hawa watu akili zao ni hovyo kabisa..wanalazimisha kuamini kile wanachokiamini.
 
You and your arguments does not make any sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…