You're viewing a single thread.
This feels more like an anti-atheist meme, since it implies that we might find evidence of God in the future even if we don't have it now. Also implies that visual proof is the only kind of evidence which just isn't the case.
I disagree. As science goes, we must always remain open-minded, yet, the confirmation of a data point will only reinforce an assertion. An assertion such as, “There, still, is no evidence of the supernatural, such as a god or gods.”
And even if we found “something” we’d have to define it. Perhaps it’s just some very advanced, powerful alien like a Q that appears god-like? That doesn’t make it magic. That just makes it advanced beyond our current understanding, and that’s not the same thing.
I mean I agree but the meme is still dumb.
Fair
It is not what op was talking about and this do feel anti-atheist
in what way?
In the way that the proof may come out at any minute like the rest of them.
Anti-theism is more about the opposition to organized religion, not opposition to the belief in god/gods.
What do you think we are talking about ? god of course.
Atheism is the lack of a belief in god/gods. Anti-theism is the opposition to organized religions and the problems/threats they present to individuals and societies.
Bruh we were talking about this meme and this meme is what a theist argument will look like, that the proof could be discovered any day .
You’re assuming a much higher probability for an outcome in your favor than is likely given the available data. While I find your enthusiasm for your hypothesis adorable, I do not share it. “An invisible, omnipotent sky wizard did it!” has never been the answer to any of the great mysteries of science.
WTF ?? I am sayung there is no sky wizard and this meme is what a guy who believes in sky wizard would say. Are you alright ? Are you having a stroke or something ? Maybe go to the doctor as you are really not understandibg what i have written .
I am an atheist and would be fine if we found evidence of literally any kinda god. I am making a determination based on what I have to work with, if I have more to work with I will make a new determination.
You do have to admit, from the theist pov, it is a bit disturbing that everything you can say about God is pretty much what you could say a 100 years ago. Everything we have learned hasn't added to that body of knowledge. Why is that?
You do have to admit, from the theist pov, it is a bit disturbing that everything you can say about God is pretty much what you could say a 100 years ago. Everything we have learned hasn't added to that body of knowledge. Why is that?
And take that logic one step further. How much has been discovered and learned in the last century that was previously attributable to God by theists because we didn't understand it? Doesnt the shrinking list of cosmic unknowns imply a diminish role for a god in our "organized" existence?
The tri-omni has been phoning it in the past century.
Colloquially known as "the god of the gaps". If you put your faith in god's power based on the unknowable, then god's power continually decreases as the unknowable becomes known.
Because God wills it to be that way.
Well, there's Brahma orbiting Pluto right in this picture, what other evidence do you need?