The Great Debate: "The Existence of God" Faith? Fact? or Fiction?

"If you say Faith, you are saying that you don't believe that God exists, but you are not certain whether God exists or not."

I don't believe that god exists purely out of reason and logic, what does faith have to do with it? You're setting up two propositions that are completely disparate from one another, namely "Do you believe God exists?" and in the question format, "Do you believe God doesn't exist?", in extension you're falsely "dichotomizing" for a lack of a properly defined word that misses out on the consideration of particular degrees of certainty. Skepticism is where it is.

"You say that there are contradictions in God and in the Bible? What are the contradictions? Where are they? And can you actually prove the contradictions based on actual authoritative analysis using authoritative references and not your own interpretation of what you think are contradictions?"

I could provide samples, but it would be swept away by mere apologetics in order to rationalise a very explicit contradiction. For example, god is said to be restricted from dishonesty, whereas in 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12, he explicitly sends delusions and falsehoods or lies to those who either ignored or rejected whatever offer of an alleged salvation. There are aplenty of time differences that don't really sound consistent, including Judas' death, whether his insides exploded to his death or whether he hung himself to death. Bart Ehrman does a well rounded job attacking these set of questions. Pretty much the entire beginning of Genesis comes in conflict with scientific investigation and research based on real world observations. The geography of the Earth says there was no such global flood and that Egyptians never coincided with said ten plagues, plagues which are too ridiculous, and even so were realistically explained by natural disasters.

EDIT: "Reread the question and that quote in context of the question"

I did the former with much displeasure with the implications you have written below. I very much understand your questioned proposition, but the explanations you gave for the former decision is inconsistent. You are capable of saying "God doesn't exist" as a "Faith" statement and still uphold the title as a mere theist. Your proposition to the theists isn't worded well either. This is why it's a much better discourse if the SAME proposition is thrown at both the proponents of their position.

EDIT: "As for your answer of what you said that your Atheism is based on logic, what is the logic?"

In general, my atheism or lack of belief is collectively condensed by many refutations of general deities, but if I were propounded by a specific god, I turn to an explicit atheism, namely which rejects the belief that which is not substantiated to begin with and whether or not in spite must be dismissed in the same manner. This is the imperative essential of the burden of proof, rather the burden of evidential justification, in which someone propounds a belief or a concept. Many ways it is logical to reject the belief is because the concept is NOT provable, hence meaningless and without substance. Many atheists have heard of the phrase "God is a failed hypothesis" and justly so that it does not even remotely satisfy the requirements to be a hypothesis, since hypotheses MUST be falsifiable to have at least a logical groundwork. If it can't be disproven, it's no surprise that it can't be proven.

EDIT: The warning to theists is that defining your god with specific characteristics is a bad idea, which can be investigated if it is an amenable and plausible investigation. If the characteristics are NOT extant or existent, let alone logical for this physical reality that has laws, then we are free in claiming that your specific god is nonexistent and in extension a part of your imagination.

EDIT: "If you understood the meaning of the text you would understand that "strong delusion" is actually an evil spirit that God will send upon those who rejected Christ and accepted the antichrist "The Lie" (or that they might believe "a lie") - which is the equivalent of the unpardonable sin (that when committed, God will not forgive)."

What gall you present, my apologetic friend, I hardly pressed on to emphasis "strong delusion", I clearly made an argument that god presents his character as dishonest. Yes, that "strong delusion" is an evil spirit or specifically a lying spirit, this does not scapegoat or misplace the reality of the disingenuous commitment of god's doing.

EDIT: Y!A is a very unreliable format to discuss or debate, it's been experiencing difficulties daily.

Atheist = no belief in a god or gods

Almost all atheists are agnostic, meaning they don't think the existence or non-existence of gods can ever be proven conclusively. Though many have gnostic tendencies towards certain gods.

For instance I hold a position that the Christian version of a god is impossible as commonly described (the "omni-" stuff is logically contradictionary).

Variations in definitions still have other hurdles such as a timeless god outside the universe somehow having it's own time frame to form thoughts and cause things or an unchanging god that apparently can be persuaded to change his thoughts or even change personality looking at the old and new testaments.

There are also the underpinnings of Christianity that are quite warped and only through serious distortions of logic and reality can it even hold together.. loosely. Examples of this are for instance Adam and Eve sinning in Eden being the basis for Jesus' appearance and sacrifice, where A&E are basically proven to have never existed in the first place, nullifying the need for a Jesus. Or how a supposedly loving and powerful god can't fix even basic problems such as people dieing of hunger or through other tragedies.

Then there are the problems with the so called Holy Book, the Bible, which is half fraudulent history of the Jews and half made up propaganda. From an unbiased view the entire book has as much value as the Odyssey or the Vedas, a bunch of myths of long dead people. Nowhere is there any reason to take any of it seriously if there weren't so many people around today who insist one of those books with myths is actually true. Anyone with a brain who tries to verify that particular book of myths is true is met with an overwhelming lack of any evidence, despite numerous attempts to get anything worthwhile.

All in all I consider the Christian God as an impossibility.

Also considering the progress of science which has shown a universe without any outside interference has made me conclude that no god is having a hand in anything.

The only possible gods left are deistic (started it all, then basically poofed) and pantheistic (the universe *is* the god) types. And both of those are irrelevant for mankind if they existed.

Fact stands front your eye. Fath stands rear your eye.

Sometimes I say, newton's apple is more clever than newton.

People can make an answer but there is no a reason. (This is your so-called free will.)

God can make a reason but there is no an answer. (This is your so-called destiny & chance.)

Let's go!

Time has two properties.

Progress(related to evolution) and Event(related to Creation) by turns.

and Probability exist between two properties.

Mobius strip explains it very well. (one progress, one event, one probability)

Look at this!

Chicken (event) Egg (progress) & Egg (event) Chicken (progress)

Schrodinger's cat was placed between one properties, just event. So, probability can not exist.

The reason, Wave-particle duality of light. I think so...

Progress / Event / Probability is a time. This is my trinity.

--------------------------------------…

Does time have the shape? Does soul have the shape?

Everything has the shape but these two in the world.

So, I made a great assumption "Time is soul(thinking, knowledge, memory, etc.)".

It was the beginning of my UNIONTERA.

We know...

To our great discouragement, these doesn't have one way by us.

Time walked to the way of science. Soul walked to the way of religion.

Now, I propose a great reconciliation.

Light up candle for a second. A second of light exist permanently or not?

--------------------------------------…

Einstein deceive our world. Where is our common sense?

I mean, why he didn't tell us this so easy common sense.

The only base which can be the cause of Einstein's assumption...

[Assumption] "principle of constancy of light velocity".

[The only base] "Time of light is different from the starting point time."

This base is not an assumption but a common sense. Can you see?

In my opinion, he already knew this base.

This common sense is a certain evidence for me.

This is my uniontera.

Existence is the time expressed by light itself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AN1jTwHUC7E

- Key Point -

1. Arrow A is the laser work. (Same time work)

2. Arrow B is the reason of gravity. (also, Higgs boson individually / Different time work)

3. The rose line is the beginning light. (result from Bible)

4. The existence of different time. (result from relativity of light)

5. 2 dimension is not a space. (result from 2-axis, math)

6. Universe came from nothing. (result from No.5 / cf. Playing with bubbles)

6-1. A barrier[posititon] exist between the inner and outer bubbles. But universe do not have that barrier. (Cause of Inertia)

6-2. Nothing is not a no existence. No existence is a zero dimension. There is two zero dimension. One has a position. The other doesn't have a position. These different positions were connected by something. That "something" is not a what but a way. (Cause of Light)

7. Progress / Event / Probability is a time. (This is my trinity.)

8. Wave-particle duality of light, creation & evolution, uncertainty principle, etc (result from No.7)

9. Coalescing of different time (Cause of Rotation)

10. Your so-called black hole is a wholly condensed time. (cf. Kerr spacetime, math)

11. The reason of "your so-called magnetic field" (result from step3 and 4)

12. The reason of "your so-called electric field" (result from the crack of time / Same time's crack is a different time's coalescing. / Cause of Static electricity)

13. Your so-called "space" is a crack of time. (result from No.12 / Cause of Lightning)

14. Boundary is a crack of space. (result from No.13 / Same space's crack is a different time's contact. / cf. Fractal)

15. Boundary is nothing. Your so-called hole is a boundary itself. Also, nothing is K=0 temperature. (result from No.14 / cf. Calabi-Yau Space, math)

16. This is a wall of your so-called fire. (result from No.15) - copyright ⓒ uniontera

Our nonsense have come from one time. Uniontera is a key.

English is not my first language, sorry!

If it is difficult to understand, just remember & enjoy "Hand touching everything is a time". This is the only one result of uniontera.