My reasoning and evidence for believing in God

85 posts / 0 new
Last post
Tin-Man's picture


Hey! Fievel!.... *waving away billowing clouds of white smoke*... *cough-cough-cough*.... Fievelllllll.... Where the hell are you? I can't see a damn thing in here with all this smoke... *cough-cough*... FIEVEL!!!... *tripping over outstretched legs*.... Oh, there you are. Dammit, boy! Didn't you get the memo? Jo is gone, and we are celebrating. Now put that thing out and get the tunes going already. Cog is starting to pole dance without music, and that NEVER ends well.

FievelJ's picture


Should I pass you some? LOL.

I guess I could play some tunes. xD

Can not say I am sorry to see Jo go.

Tin-Man's picture
@Fievel Re: "Should I pass

@Fievel Re: "Should I pass you some? LOL."

...*cough-cough*... Uh, no, thanks. I think I'm doing pretty good with just the contact high I've got going right now... *headed back to breakroom*... *yelling down hallway*... Hey! Where's the snack table?!?...

ilovechloe's picture
@ Alchemy

@ Alchemy

What is the logic & rationality of a 'god' creating a massively huge universe, with billions of galaxies & trillions of stars & planets, & then making it habitable on only one tiny planet in one galaxy? And then this planet was created in such a way that it is always trying to kill us, with tectonic plates that shift causing earthquakes & tsunamis, volcanos that erupt & bury people with ash or poison the air, & weather events that cause hurricanes & tornadoes. Not to mention the occasional meteorite or comet that hits the planet causing large extinction events every few million years.

And then your so called 'god' filled the planet with nature that is ALSO constantly trying to kill us, such as wild animals, insects, parasites, germs & viruses.

I just love it when christians talk about how they know there is a god when they see the beauty of nature such as the flowers & tree's, as they look out their window from the safety of their house, which they live in to protect them from the nature that would most likely kill them if they actually had to live in nature without the protection of their house!

Whitefire13's picture


A little humor you may appreciate...”the food chain”

Cognostic's picture
If only it were true. We,

If only it were true. We, unfortunately, are right smack dab in the middle of the food chain. Right between the chickens and the bacteria.

Mutorc S'yriah's picture
@Jo: {If God exists, there

@Jo: {If God exists, there would be something rather than nothing}.

But not necessarily the reverse . . . something rather than nothing does not mean that a god necessarily exists.
It is tautologically true that we are part of something, so something exists. 'NOTHING' seems to be an abstract construct of the mind ~ impossible as a reality.

@Jo: {If God exists, the universe would have laws}.

But not necessarily the reverse . . . universal laws do not necessarily mean that a god must exist.
A universe without laws could be the result of a god, or it could merely exist as a possibility ~ yes, it'd be impossible to understand, but so is the supposed god anyway, (if it's the Christian version of all the gods proposed). But a universe WITH laws doesn't tell us where those laws ultimately come from, (not yet).

@Jo: {If God exists, the universe would be testable}.

But not necessarily the reverse . . . universal testability does not mean that a god necessarily exists.
A god could make an untestable universe, and apparently the god itself is untestable anyway.

@Jo: {If God exists, the universe would allow for or cause life to exist}.

But not necessarily the reverse . . . allowance for or cause for life, does not necessarily mean that a god must exist.

@Jo: {If God exists, intelligent life would arise that could contemplate him}.

But not necessarily the reverse . . . that intelligent life has arisen that can contemplate a god does not necessarily mean that a god exists.
Humans can contemplate lots of non-existent things, and some can believe in them as real. Some people believe in the power of astrology, but is it based on a reality that actually exists? I doubt it, as do many religious people.

@Jo: {If God exists, we would be able to do science - That the universe would be knowable, understandable, testable, definable, and explainable}.

But not necessarily the reverse . . . an ability to do science does not necessarily mean that a god exists.
A supposed ability to do astrology, for example, bears no connection to whether or not it has any truth to it. We need to be able to test the god claim, just as we need to test astrology etc.

All of the above so-called reasoning and evidence amounts to putting the cart-before-the-horse. It seems to rely on DEFINING this god as the necessary and sufficient root cause for the ideas posted. But it's only by DEFINITION of the god that way in the first place ~ cart-before-horse??? But the god may NOT be necessary, and it's only sufficient by definition. To assume that the god exists because of the factors posted, are big fat god-of-the gaps propositions, or arguments from incredulity, (I can't understand 'it', so therefore god). At least each one is preceded by a significant "IF". However, what about the reverse, ie. what "IF NOT"?


Tin-Man's picture
@Mutorc Re: Jo

@Mutorc Re: Jo

Psssst... Hey, Mutorc, you're talking to a ghost. Jo is no longer with us. Plus, you are missing the celebration party in the breakroom.

Grinseed's picture
Good post Mutorc, have an

Good post Mutorc, have an agree, then we can drop in on Fievel the Smoke before dipping our heads in the eggnog barrel.

Whitefire13's picture
...our little mouse hasn’t ..

...our little mouse hasn’t ...oh fuck, I inhaled... wait.. have you guys been talk in’ about me?!?! I know you guys have been talk in’ about me... ugh my throat’s on fire!!! ...

Whitefire13's picture
***TIN!!!*** get your ass

***TIN!!!*** get your ass back in here! Cogs doing some weird motion with his hip at the pole ....

Tin-Man's picture
@Whitefire Re: "***TIN!!!***

@Whitefire Re: "***TIN!!!*** get your ass back in here! Cogs doing some weird motion with his hip at the pole ...."

Huh?... *looking over at Cog*... Oh, yeah. He does that sometimes. Just cover the eyes of the children, then squirt Cog with water using your spray bottle. It distracts him and makes him stop to lick off the water. (Just be careful WHERE you spray him, though.) If you don't have your own spray bottle yet, just borrow somebody else's real quick. We all carry one at all times for that very reason.

Cognostic's picture
@Wasn't there supposed to be

@Wasn't there supposed to be some reasoning and evidence in this thread? Did I miss something?

Whitefire13's picture
...I checked the wall behind

...I checked the wall behind you and didn’t see anything- so, “no”...”no Cog, this time nothing flew over your head”...

Cognostic's picture
Whew!!! I'm so happy. You

Whew!!! I'm so happy. You know, some people think I'm stupid. I'd like to see them climb a tree while eating a banana and carrying an extra up their butt!

Nyarlathotep's picture
Apollo - I often encounter

Apollo - I often encounter the word "objective" in posts here and elswhere, but I have long believed objectivity does not exist...I suspect that anyone who uses the term "objective" is using it as a smoke screen to cover their assumptions, beliefs, and faith.


A̶p̶o̶l̶l̶o̶ Alchemy - We both believe the ultimate objective explanatory principle I would assume...I believe that every religious person is literally worshiping god, because what they are worshiping is literally an objective object of thought, and a being which is literally space-less and timeless.

Apollo's picture
I didn't write that second

I didn't write that second one. Must have been a quote from someone else. Show me where you got it from.

Sheldon's picture
Apollo - I often encounter

Apollo - I often encounter the word "objective" in posts here and elswhere, but I have long believed objectivity does not exist

So you're saying that it can't be an objective fact that the world is not flat? Your bizarre rationale is now implying the world might just as easily be flat as round, and all so you can delude yourself an unevidenced deity from a bronze age superstition is real.

Apollo's picture
Well there are degrees of


Well there are degrees of confidence as I explained here years ago. If you want to confine yourself to items such as the earth is a sphere, go a head.
But folks like you invariably give examples were the confidence level is high, hoping that the reader will assume that all observations are that simple.
Compare, however, "the earth is a sphere" with the atheist claim "The universe came from nothing".

Go ahead and collect a bunch of observations where the confidence is high and then draw your conclusions from that. They won't among to a hill of beans. The earth is a sphere, grass is green, trees grow, on and on. Then conclude, based on that mundane stuff you call objective, "Disbelief in God is valid and reliable". Huh? There is no connection between observations where the confidence level is high and your conclusion.

In science Classical Mechanics is the area where confidence in observations is fairly high so usually positivists/empiricists use examples from that area. However, other areas are not so clear. Atheist claims as to the origin of the universe are far from the confidence level of Classical mechanics and can hardly be called objective.

Besides, the central belief that 'in order for a statement to be meaningful it must be empirically verified' was never itself empirically verified. That means that atheists can believe the universe came from nothing if they want to. The don't have to empirically verify it for it to be meaningful (to themselves.) The failure of positivism/empiricism means atheists can believe what they want to.

dogalmighty's picture
Really, the earth came from

Really, the earth came from nothing? Lawrence and myself are laughing at you...ROTFLMAO. You are not only behind on the times, but ignorant of the origin of our universe. Please learn about cosmology and astro particle physics...that may help you, if you are honest. But then again, all apologists are taken with a grain of salt. Apologists use dishonest debate tactics as a norm, and often get caught out by their own dishonesty, just like you have. Good apologists verify there base premises first, before posting...LOL. Just a heads up.

Apollo's picture
1. the universe from nothing

1. the universe from nothing comes from a living atheist scientist endorsed by Dawkins himself. So when you say Lawrence, are you talking about Lawrence Krauss? Which Lawrence?
2. I'm ignorant of the origin of the universe. So enlighten us instead of babbling; babbling about particle physics for instance. What nonsense. Krauss himself says science has noting to say about the pre-big bang era.
3. so far the evidence is you are a babbling.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Apollo - the universe from

Apollo - the universe from nothing comes from a living atheist scientist endorsed by Dawkins himself.

The idea is much older than that; goes back at least to Pascual Jordan and George Gamow (1930's and 40's).

dogalmighty's picture
I am not the purveyor of

I am not the purveyor of babble between us...that is self evident. Nor am I bound with the burden of educating you. I am quite happy with your ability to maintain your ignorance. Misquoting Dr. Krauss is not only fallacious babble, but because of its present relevance, goonbabble...congratulations. Using a misquote as a basis for your previous premise, is either ignorant or dishonest...I was being kind by pointing it, at least I know your arguments intent...not that reason hasn't already brought me to the same conclusion. Here is an immutable law of our universe, validated July 4th, 2012, and found in the standard model of particle states..."for something to exist in reality, it has to demonstrably have, or interact with, matter" Maybe this can fill some time for you, to wrestle with the credulity of your belief system...I mean between the time spent researching pre-inflation era, particularly singularity detonation. Hint: no god or contingency needed.

Sheldon's picture
Apollo "If you want to

Apollo "If you want to confine yourself to items such as the earth is a sphere, go a head."

Are you saying it might be flat?

FYI, acknowledging something is an objective fact when the weight of objective evidence demands it, does not mean that fact can't remain tentative and open to revision in the light of new evidence, which is exactly how science now works.

I shan't be addressing anymore of your straw man fallacies, either directed at me or falsely at atheism, as life's too short.

There's an awful lot of verbiage in your post, but in your overly verbose excitement you didn't answer my question.

Is it an objective fact that the earth is not flat?

This is salient because you are already on record as claiming objective facts don't exist. So you can desist from the goal post moving red herrings...


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.