How sure are you of your belief/non-belief in a god?

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I voted 4. I'm 99% certain there isn't but i'd be willing to put my hands up and admit i was wrong if i was to be proven otherwise.

Something which i very much doubt people who are certain of gods existence would do.

[Sie]

The response that pisses me of is people who claim they're agnostic when asked if they believe in a God or not.

Agnosticism isn't some kind of 3rd option; a happy middle ground between theism and the rejection of theism (aka atheism). An agnostic position only deals with claims of knowledge of a God, not a belief in one. In other words "I claim no knowledge supporting the existence of a God but I still consider the possibility of one existing based upon the lack of absolute certainty that he doesn't" is still atheism. You either believe or you don't (the conviction of the belief with regards to the former is a none factor)

------------

But err, yeah, the poll. For me, based on what we currently know of our observable shared reality, I would say I'm 99.9% that there is no God. I have yet to see anything that is anywhere close to good enough to convince me otherwise. In fact, I've seen plenty absurd "evidence" that does more harm than good for the case of the existence of God (every biblical text ever written for example).

In case your wondering, the 0.01% in favour of there being a God is a courtesy for theists to continue submitting their case to me. But if there is a God and he wants me to believe in him, he knows where I live and is free to pop in any time he likes for a chat. That may not be sufficient evidence for someone else but it would be for me. Pray for this to happen theists as I'm sure you want me to be saved.

[Sie]

That doesn't change what I'm saying though.

Forget religion. If someone tomorrow said "Ben, there is a massive dog in space about to eat the sun" I'd tell them to **** right off.

However, if they showed me that millions, or even billions of people believed that to be true, then I'd think "Shit, maybe they're right, as unlikely as it sounds"

I wouldn't be sure until I'd seen some evidence for myself. But if a massive chunk of the Earth's population believed it, could you blame me for thinking they MIGHT (I emphasise MIGHT) be right?

No, I couldn't but Brum's points still supersede your own with regards to an argument dealing with existence. How many people believe something has no relevance to truth. That is the merit of the teapot argument.

[Brumerican]

IMO we should be genetically modifying monkeys until their brains are the size of a modest bathroom. Then we can just shove a pile of paperwork containing ever unanswered question mankind may have, in front of them. Tell them to work it out and get back to us. We can all just get back to being nice to each other and basing our lives on social empathy for all humans. Only one rule...All belief systems are banned on earth until the monkeys have come to a decision on the truth regarding the nature of reality. As long as the Einsteinafied Monkeys don't cook up some genius escape plan which is likely, then the plan is foolproof.

[Stevo985]

That doesn't change what I'm saying though.

Forget religion. If someone tomorrow said "Ben, there is a massive dog in space about to eat the sun" I'd tell them to **** right off.

However, if they showed me that millions, or even billions of people believed that to be true, then I'd think "Shit, maybe they're right, as unlikely as it sounds"

I wouldn't be sure until I'd seen some evidence for myself. But if a massive chunk of the Earth's population believed it, could you blame me for thinking they MIGHT (I emphasise MIGHT) be right?

No, I couldn't but Brum's points still supersede your own with regards to an argument dealing with existence. How many people belief something has no relevance to truth. That is the crux of the teapot argument.

Yes. but the amount of people believeing something would affect how acceptable the theory was, as I tried to outline with my dog scenario.

All I was saying was you can't compare the existence of a teapot with the existence of God. Doesn't matter if the two things are as unlikely or as likely as each other. The fact that millions of people believe one and not the other surely would explain why some people may be willing to accept that God MIGHT exist, but not a giant teapot.

[El Zen]

Option 3.

I am as agnostic about the existance of a god as I am agnostic about the existance of fairies, leprecauns or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Call it arrogance or say I have a closed mind if you like, but I can't see any reason to give the existance of deity even a theoretical chance.

[Brumerican]

That doesn't change what I'm saying though.

Forget religion. If someone tomorrow said "Ben, there is a massive dog in space about to eat the sun" I'd tell them to **** right off.

However, if they showed me that millions, or even billions of people believed that to be true, then I'd think "Shit, maybe they're right, as unlikely as it sounds"

I wouldn't be sure until I'd seen some evidence for myself. But if a massive chunk of the Earth's population believed it, could you blame me for thinking they MIGHT (I emphasise MIGHT) be right?

No, I couldn't but Brum's points still supersede your own with regards to an argument dealing with existence. How many people belief something has no relevance to truth. That is the crux of the teapot argument.

Yes. but the amount of people believeing something would affect how acceptable the theory was, as I tried to outline with my dog scenario.

All I was saying was you can't compare the existence of a teapot with the existence of God. Doesn't matter if the two things are as unlikely or as likely as each other. The fact that millions of people believe one and not the other surely would explain why some people may be willing to accept that God MIGHT exist, but not a giant teapot.

When the teapots autobiography lands in book stores just watch him blow up big style. God hired Max Clifford (on Satans advice) a long time ago! God has had a major advantage in getting the news out in comparison to poor old teapot! Thanks to a recent lottery grant awarded to the teapot, things are about to change I feel. Teapotology is gonna be bigger than the Beatles.

[Stevo985]

To be honest I'm already coming around to this teapot idea.

I drink a lot of tea, every day. Surely that counts as some sort of worship?

[Brumerican]

To be honest I'm already coming around to this teapot idea.

I drink a lot of tea, every day. Surely that counts as some sort of worship?

And it begins...

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

[Mr_Dogg]

That doesn't change what I'm saying though.

Forget religion. If someone tomorrow said "Ben, there is a massive dog in space about to eat the sun" I'd tell them to **** right off.

However, if they showed me that millions, or even billions of people believed that to be true, then I'd think "Shit, maybe they're right, as unlikely as it sounds"

I wouldn't be sure until I'd seen some evidence for myself. But if a massive chunk of the Earth's population believed it, could you blame me for thinking they MIGHT (I emphasise MIGHT) be right?

No, I couldn't but Brum's points still supersede your own with regards to an argument dealing with existence. How many people belief something has no relevance to truth. That is the crux of the teapot argument.

Yes. but the amount of people believeing something would affect how acceptable the theory was, as I tried to outline with my dog scenario.

All I was saying was you can't compare the existence of a teapot with the existence of God. Doesn't matter if the two things are as unlikely or as likely as each other. The fact that millions of people believe one and not the other surely would explain why some people may be willing to accept that God MIGHT exist, but not a giant teapot.

This is a very strange argument. Is the moral of the story that people are gullible and it's not their fault?

[Sie]

Teapotology is gonna be bigger than the Beatles.

Sign me the **** up. Right now.

Imagine that though. Would the different brands of tea become like saints? Or would they be more like battling Gods - which is the one true brew?

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

God isn't real. He told me.

[Benno-Levin]

surely no one can vote 2. If you have faith then no amount of evidence, however conclusive, can change your mind...it will just be seen as a divine test of some sort. As for me, I think the whole idea of God is an extension of human arrogance (the 'we are the centre of the universe' bit)...'he made us in His image' - if He can do whatever He wants then why not look like a lion, or a dragon, or a wagon wheel?!

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

I have seen none of the religions provide any compelling evidence that "God" exists but on the other hand I have not seen any atheist provide any compelling evidence that "God" does not exist. Therefore, the only sensible option to me is to stay an agnostic until someone can provide some evidence either way.

I could claim that there is a giant blue tea pot balanced on the edge of a black hole hidden behind a star 60 billion light years away...No one can prove it does not exist yet I doubt many people are agnostic towards giant blue galactic tea pots ! The burden of proof lies with those making the assertion otherwise you could get away with making any fanciful claim.

But no-one believes in that giant teapot. If there were millions and millions of people who did believe in that giant teapot, wouldn't you think "Hmmm, maybe there's something in that"

Not saying I'm atheist or religious, just that argument has always pissed me off because it's rubbish.

Yeah but people ages ago even thought if you kept walking one way, you'd fall of the earth. We're talking about religions starting way, way back, un-educated people, no technology when something said could to be fair, easily or forced to be believed.

That doesn't change what I'm saying though.

Forget religion. If someone tomorrow said "Ben, there is a massive dog in space about to eat the sun" I'd tell them to **** right off.

However, if they showed me that millions, or even billions of people believed that to be true, then I'd think "Shit, maybe they're right, as unlikely as it sounds"

I wouldn't be sure until I'd seen some evidence for myself. But if a massive chunk of the Earth's population believed it, could you blame me for thinking they MIGHT (I emphasise MIGHT) be right?

Yeah but the reason so many believe it is because of the attitude your taking, if so many have believed it, it must be true sorta thing.

People still believe it now because so many people believed it before them or it runs in family and it can't be dis-proved (it can't be proved either but that doesn't stop people who believe thinking that)

[LondonLax]

A dragon god would be way cool!

[TheWalletInspector]

Not as cool as a teapot god.

[sparey16]

option A for me. Brought up a christian, still believe now and although have had doubts in past, my faith is as strong as ever. Ive said before in various religon-hating threads that im not the type to convert, i believe what i do, others believe what they believe. Its non-of-my business, unless they ask about God, faith and all that.

[limpid]

I find your depiction of my new god offensive and will start a holy war against you and all your fellow heretics who believe god's eye shadow is purple.

[bickster]

option 3 and how did this topic get this far before I answered ?