You have not seen evidence for most of the things that are happening in the universe.

Again, we don’t really understand the nature of the universe. We barely understand some of its rules, probably in a very incomplete or scoped way. Whatever you choose to believe in this matter is just a guess.

One day we’ll probably understand the inner workings, we’ll probably be able to simulate the actual origin, we’ll be able to figure out all the interactions. Until that day arrives, if it ever does, we should just stop playing this guessing game and accept we just don’t know.

Is it really hard to just say “I don’t really know, believing anything about matters I don’t really understand isn’t productive, let’s focus on actually gathering knowledge instead of fighting about who’s got the best guess”?

It seemed to me like you “concluded” there is no god. You even asked if it was unreasonable to conclude that. Maybe it’s semantics but concluding something seems like there’s a degree of certainty. Anyways, I have no issue if you decide to clarify that you don’t really believe there isn’t a god.

If you read where people said that not all atheists believe there is no god, you probably also read that I said “OK, I didn’t know there were different types of atheists, I’m only talking about the ones that believe there is no god”. Then, I’m not sure why you’d point that out now. My position is clear, I’m only talking about people who really believe there are no creators. For me, that’s just that, a belief. I think we shouldn’t believe matters we can’t grasp, one way or the other.

An analogy is an analogy, it doesn’t have to be a perfect analogy, the idea can be understood. In that analogy all of humanity is the blind person. We may be able to see the colors in the future once we gain more knowledge and understanding… Until then, we’re just guessing. I’d prefer if people didn’t guess, I’d prefer if people had no issue accepting their ignorance and their relevance in the universe.

“I don’t believe there is a God because humans haven’t gathered the evidence of it”. That just seems too egocentric to me, as if humans had the universe figured out.

“I believe there is no god” and “I believe there is a god” seem just as likely to me based on what humans understand.

Yes, it is unreasonable to conclude anything when the subject is so out of our reach.

My point is that human perception, intelligence and understanding of the universe is comparable to a blind person and colors. Just because a blind person doesn’t perceive colors or has evidence of its existence, doesn’t mean that colors don’t exist. Just because humans aren’t intellectually capable of understanding the origin of the universe and the existence of a creator, doesn’t mean a creator doesn’t exist.

This whole “there’s no evidence” isn’t an absolute statement, it’s more like “humans haven’t gathered the evidence”. Humans haven’t gathered evidence for most of the things that are actually happening in the universe, and they are happening. We’re miniscule. We’re so small that we’re trapped in the observable universe, which is probably miniscule itself.

Yet, we stand tall and say aloud “I firmly believe this doesn’t exist because we, humans, haven’t experienced it”.

I hope you see my point now. An ant has no evidence of black holes, yet, they are. Yes, we have no evidence. No, we shouldn’t BELIEVE something based on lack of evidence.

The thing I love about science is that it is a tool, it isn’t concerned with questions such as “does God exist”. Atheists use science as the basis for a belief that not even scientists are concerned with. Science is a practical tool to increase our knowledge, it doesn’t take a stand on matters outside of it’s reach. Science doesn’t say “there are probably no gods because there’s no evidence”. That belief is not a direct result of the evidence we have gathered, that’s just atheism thinking science and evidence have more power than they do.

So again, yes, it is unreasonable to conclude something besides “I don’t know”.

“There is no precedence for the existence of deities”

What makes you think humans have the capacity to perceive or understand deities?

It feels like you guys are really not understanding my point. Please put human existence into perspective and tell me how much we really know. Now, how much is there to know?

It’s like a blind person saying color doesn’t exist because he can’t experience it. You see? Humans will live and die in the relative blink of an eye. Chances are we won’t really get to know what’s actually going on. Right now we don’t really know, so having any opinion about what’s happening based on lack of evidence is really pointless. We have no evidence for most things that are actually happening in the universe.

Based on our understanding of human history, we KNOW that toasters were created on earth and that it is unlikely one is in orbit on the sun… This is based on knowledge. Even if based on knowledge, I could be wrong.

Now, what do you KNOW about the creation of the universe or the nature of reality?

This is my whole point. I’m not saying it is wrong to have solid opinions about some things. I’m saying it is wrong having solid opinions about things we really don’t understand.

OK, it still seems like taking sides to me when there’s no evidence one way or the other. I’d just say “I don’t know” and move on. No need to take sides on something that I’m clueless about, like what’s reality or its origins.

A human believing that God’s don’t exist based on reason is totally irrelevant, considering how limited human knowledge and reason is in these matters.