Atheists...

[Didymos Thomas]

I do not believe god ever existed... Why would I go out of my way to believe in it?

Are these statements related? To answer the second one first: you should not go out of your way to believe in god. As to the first statement, what is it for god to exist? What sufficient conditions are to be met in order for us to agree that god exists? Perhaps we cannot meet these conditions, but writing off the whole notion as obviously silly seems, well, silly. Stranger notions have been offered and embraced in philosophy.

Sometimes God had under oath to save humanity from all types of disasters or trails but He did not help,apparently He is indolent.People spend their time praying for remedy but He did not help,was He ignoring or no probity is inside His heart?

He cited that people whom had faith in Him would not suffer so much but is this genuine?It is unfeasible to everyone.He might even not exist,and some have hitherto been duped by His existence and praying with resolution.

Perhaps these people do not understand the role of prayer. Are they praying for God to swoop down upon the earth and change something?
In crisis, everyone prays for this to happen, but most of us know that this is futile.

As for faith - what is it? Do I have faith because I say "I have faith"? Are these some magic words that take away all of the pain? Or is faith something that must be cultivated, something to work at everyday, a struggle? Jesus certainly struggled with his faith, several times in the Bible.

[AtheistDeity]

When exactly did I "write off the whole notion as silly"? Did it not occur to you that you are not the only one who understands what it is to believe in god, and thoroughly considered the "evidence" supporting such an existence?

What sufficient conditions are to be met in order for us to agree that god exists?

Proof, perhaps?

[Didymos Thomas]

When exactly did I "write off the whole notion as silly"? Did it not occur to you that you are not the only one who understands what it is to believe in god, and thoroughly considered the "evidence" supporting such an existence?

I never said you did write off the notion of God. I used the word "we". That means both of us. The idea is that a conversation is taking place, and the two of us are involved. That we are both interested in the subject, and that both of us have given the subject some consideration.

Proof, perhaps?

And what would this proof amount to? What sort of "proof" would be proof of God?

[AtheistDeity]

Proof that he exists? Something that has clearly not yet been offered.

[Didymos Thomas]

You are still haven't answered the question, though.

This is an important issue, too. How will we know proof of god should we stumble upon it if we cannot say what that proof would look like? How can we say that we do not have proof of god if we cannot even say what sort of proof that might be?

To say that proof of god has clearly not been offered musn't we first know what proof of god would be?

[AtheistDeity]

... a physical presence. If people could actually see "god", and scientifically prove his existance-and of couse visual proof of him performing a miracle, or other act only "he" could do.
Have you honestly never thought of this on your oun?

[Didymos Thomas]

... a physical presence. If people could actually see "god", and scientifically prove his existance-and of couse visual proof of him performing a miracle, or other act only "he" could do.
Have you honestly never thought of this on your oun?

Yes, I have given the subject consideration. Again, that is why we are having the conversation - because we are people interested in the same topic.

You say "a physical presence". What is a physical presence? For example, if I think about god, there are physical occurrences in my brain - a physical presence of god. We could witness these physical occurrences on certain machinery that modern science has developed.

The sort of evidence that would give proof of god's existence depends on the particular notion of god we are referring to. What is to be said of the pantheist? We certainly cannot deny that the universe does not exist, and for the pantheist, if the universe exists, god exists.

[Ennui]

Originally Posted by Didymos Thomas

Yes, I have given the subject consideration. Again, that is why we are having the conversation - because we are people interested in the same topic.

You say "a physical presence". What is a physical presence? For example, if I think about god, there are physical occurrences in my brain - a physical presence of god. We could witness these physical occurrences on certain machinery that modern science has developed.

The sort of evidence that would give proof of god's existence depends on the particular notion of god we are referring to. What is to be said of the pantheist? We certainly cannot deny that the universe does not exist, and for the pantheist, if the universe exists, god exists.

Indeed,your answer is genuine and intuitive,practical.

[Pangloss]

Originally Posted by AtheistDeity

Proof that he exists? Something that has clearly not yet been offered.

I am just wondering...

You say that you are an atheist, which means that you believe that god does not exist. But then how did you prove to yourself that there is no god? Simply because the concept is not yet proven by science, or visible to your eyes, or what? Because there are many phenomena, acknowledged by science, that are neither visible nor "proven" by science, yet they do exist in some form.

I fail to see how someone can at one time say that others' proof of god is insufficient (I would agree), but then at the same time claim that his own proof of no god IS sufficient. When both "proofs" have not withstood the test of reason.

[AtheistDeity]

I never claimed to disprove god existed. The theory of "god" is something born purely of the imagination of man-not a theory born of evidences itself, but something stated as fact in the lack of. To believe in "god" one would have to go out of their way from believing that which has been proven, and believing pure imagination, whether because it gave them a certain feeling, or they simply thought it a convenient blanket explanation to assume of the universe, life, and any other relating issues they might be concerned with. Often that which they have come across in a book, or from another’s word, and not their own logical assessment.
You cannot scientifically prove, disprove nor interact scientifically in any way with a scientifically incompatible existence, or idea.