Talk:Existence of God
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Existence of God article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 2 October 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to Existence of deities. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Responses to Arguments?
[edit]a while ago i added bunch of arguments in the section 'Arguments against the existence of God or gods', however i added them with responses from opponants and counter-arguments. should i remove the responses and counter-arguments presented? if not, should i add counter-arguments and responses to arguments in the section 'Arguments for the existence of God or gods'? Adrianxastron (talk) 07:57, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
Remove God(s) or deities
[edit]Focus in only on the Christian God of the Bible put the other ‘God’s’ separately these arguments are for the Christian God of the universe there’s a problem of requiring a trans philosophy of theocratic theology as if conjoined with other mono theisms, this creates a false argument when connected with non Judeo Christian epistemologies and metaphysics. Christianity especially Catholicism teaches of a mono theistic religious teaching one God consubstantial in the Trinitarian teaching and eschatology of Man’s purpose and anthropology therefore uniquely distinct. Please consider these as a set of different teachings. 92.234.203.209 (talk) 21:29, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
- I agree, but not for the same reason. "God" is used in a general sense to refer to a supreme being. Wikipedia already shows that different religious and philosophical belief systems have different names for God and conceptions of God. The term "deities" is irrelevant and should be removed from this article. Bezora (talk) 05:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Questionable argument
[edit]About "the shift from hostility towards theism in Paul Edwards's Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1967) to sympathy towards theism in the more recent Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy": since philosophy essentially means "you can posit anything as long as you devise seemingly rational arguments for it", I don't think the shift inside philosophy is telling for a shift inside the mainstream academia. tgeorgescu (talk) 01:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
Worldwide view
[edit]The article doesn't seem to "deal primarily with Christianity". The editor who tagged this may have conflated classical theism with Christianity. The classical theist conception of God has historically been the topic of interest in the philosophy of religion, so not much can be done about this. Bezora (talk) 12:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
What about Sisyphus?
[edit]For the Ancients, myths were stories worth reflecting thereupon, but not dogmas. So, it would be fallacious to infer a metaphysical belief from the myth of Sisyphus. Greek-Roman religions had some metaphysical beliefs, but broadly speaking they did not have Scripture. So, the myth of Sisyphus wasn't Scripture and need not reflect Ancient metaphysical beliefs. Religion was the worship of the gods, rather than stories about the gods. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Section on Argument from ancient ignorance?
[edit]I was looking for info on "Argument from ancient ignorance" (i.e. the lack of knowledge about the vastness of the universe, scientific concepts, or other phenomena in ancient religious texts indicates that these texts are not divinely inspired. The argument posits that a truly omniscient being would not have omitted such fundamental knowledge if the texts were meant to be a comprehensive guide to reality.) Is it somewhere but I haven't found it? Or should I write it myself? (I'm not an expert) Or is it not worthy of a page or section? Thanks Talk to SageGreenRider 21:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- B-Class vital articles in Philosophy and religion
- B-Class Philosophy articles
- Mid-importance Philosophy articles
- B-Class logic articles
- Mid-importance logic articles
- Logic task force articles
- B-Class philosophy of religion articles
- Mid-importance philosophy of religion articles
- Philosophy of religion task force articles
- B-Class Spirituality articles
- Top-importance Spirituality articles
- B-Class Religion articles
- Top-importance Religion articles
- WikiProject Religion articles
- B-Class Atheism articles
- Top-importance Atheism articles
- B-Class Theology articles
- Mid-importance Theology articles
- WikiProject Theology articles