The actual question

36 posts / 0 new
Last post
Kwahu Jakquai's picture
So ones belief in god relies

So ones belief in god relies upon their creativity and imagination in how god can make things reality? I just need to be more creative? Not realistic? Forget about what's real and rely on the imagination for what is real?

Wow!!!! What if a doctor did that for their patients? Or a Fireman did that for those that needed rescuing? Or a solder that needed to support their squad?? Think bud

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Science requires creativity

Science requires creativity and imagination, there's no debate here. But you wanting strictly what is "real" when reality is the very subject of a study, is nonsense. Pick your poising, everything from electromagnetism to atoms weren't realistic things until someone was creative enough to look.

Have you ever had to make a research proposal? Figure out how to answer a question you don't even know will be answerable? The fact that you think turning on your brain, and actually using creativity and imagination is illogical, tells me you haven't.

mykcob4's picture
@ John Breezy

@ John Breezy
No, Proof is proof. An apple isn't proof of a god. So saying that that is all it takes as proof for a believer to know a god isn't saying much for the believer. No evidence is NOT subjective, and that is the point. The only ambiguity about evidence is the purposeful misuse and misinterpretation of evidence.
Observation isn't conclusive evidence, it is only one part of it.
In every proof attempt of a god, there is a huge gap a disconnect of the line of evidence.

Randomhero1982's picture
John Breezy - I think the

John Breezy - I think the difficulty an atheist may have here is that in order to think of an apple as being at the very least influenced by god through man, would require the presupposition that a god actually exists... and then the arguement becomes quite circular.

But I could be wrong, and I would not like to speak for all atheists... I would perhaps say this may be the view point of an atheist who hasn't converted from theism possibly...

Flamenca's picture
I converted from theism, and

I converted from theism, and I agree with you.

And btw, I'm not a scientist, but as far as I'm concerned, neither Darwin (nor other current evolutionists), claimed that evolution by natural selection is the only way in which living beings evolve. So even if Mendel was right, it wouldn't refute Darwin, but complement his theory.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.