Atheism is a Fringe Kook Theory Cult

[PratchettFan]

Another claim of pure belief. A statement of faith, if you will. There is absolutely no evidence faith was "invented". It is far more probable faith is inherent in humans. You certainly don't lack it.

What earns the Atheist scorn is that their expression of belief, and it is belief regardless of the definitions, is not in keeping with the majority. All minorities are scorned. This too is human nature. We always attack the outsider.[/QUOTE]

I should have said the term faith, and the usage of the term was invented.

The faith based belief that there is some path to eternal life is probably an outgrowth of the survival instinct coupled with the awareness of mortality.[/QUOTE]

I would agree it is an outgrowth of awareness. We don't simply react, we look into the future and imagine what is going to happen. Belief is a manifestation of imagination. This makes it entirely normal human behavior. We all have it. The trick is to recognize the difference between belief and knowledge.

I don't think belief is a conscious thing. Certainly we can consider what we believe, rationalize it and examine it. But I doubt any of us has any actual control over it. Most of the people in this country are Christian and I truly can't understand why. I went to Sunday school and sang "Jesus Loves Me", but the minute Christianity was explained to me at a point I was able to understand the explanation I was amazed that anyone could believe it. That was not a conscious choice. The first time I read a book on Buddhism I realized that is what I believed. I was not converted, I just finally had a name to put on what I already believed to be true.

 

[Derideo_Te]

What a shame you learned nothing from those who sought to help you.

I think debates like these are important... although, ultimately, they do nothing to advance science or educate fundies. However, they do expose the lack of science in creationism, the dishonest tactics of fundie zealots, and they do demonstrate to the public that real science has nothing to hide.

I have never received a sincere offer of "help" from an atheist. I sincerely doubt anyone in the history of mankind has.

Christian Org. Declines Atheists 8217 Help in Feeding the Poor for Thanksgiving Video TheBlaze.com

Christian Org. Declines Atheists’ Help in Feeding the Poor for Thanksgiving
Nov. 12, 2013 1:11pm Billy Hallowell

A Missouri Christian organization has turned down a local atheist group’s offer to help distribute Thanksgiving meals to the poor because the faith group says the two wouldn’t be a “good fit.”

Volunteers with the Kansas City Atheist Coalition have worked with the Kansas City Rescue Mission over the holidays for two years, but this year the Christian group has decided to include religious materials with each of the 500 meals that will be delivered, The Kansas City Star reported.

The Kansas City Atheist Coalition stated on its website: “Kansas City Rescue Mission has decided to use the meals they deliver as a chance to proselytize to its recipients by inserting religious literature into the meals. They informed us that we ‘would not be a good fit’ (emphasis theirs) for volunteering with them, and declined to respond to any further inquiries.”

Atheist blogger JT Eberhard said he has volunteered with the Kansas City Atheist Coalition in the past and they have “provided the Kansas City Rescue Mission with, by far, its largest group of volunteers every Thanksgiving.”

Kansas City Atheist Coalition President Josh Hyde said his group is disappointed by the decision not to allow them to participate.

“We want to bridge the theological divide and get atheists and theists together for the common good,” he told KSHB-TV. ”It’s unfortunate when religious organizations refuse the help of atheist organizations simply on the basis of lack of belief that they can’t come together with atheists for the greater good.”

A soup kitchen in South Carolina caused similar controversy last year after it turned atheists awaywho had offered to help feed the poor.

Atheists Giving Aid We Are Atheism

 

[PostmodernProph]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

 

[Hollie]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

 

[sealybobo]

Conspiracy Theory Poll Results - Public Policy Polling
I am am Atheist. You are brainwashed.beyond all belief. The tragic thing is that is peobably the way you like to be. It's such a dirty rotten shame. If you are ever willing to consider burning your religious "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. First, there is a documentary that you need to watch. I don't know the price of it. But it would be worth every penny. It's called "Religious." For an even greater example of how sick, filthy and evil the bible is, you need to go into your browser and enter, "our holy hell: the causes, the solutiions." If nothing else, that should wake you up.



25% of Brits think the lunar landings were a hoax, though only 6 to 7%% of Americans do.
Could moon landings have been faked? Some still think so - CNN.com

But LESS THAN 3% of Americans are atheist!
5 facts about atheists | Pew Research Center

That is right, more people believe that Elvis is still alive, that the world is ruled by lizard people, that Big Foot stalks our Rocky Mountains and that the US government caused 9-11 than believe that there is no God.

Atheists are simply kook-burgers like the 9-11 Truthers or the lunar landing denialists.

You present them with evidence like the Big Bang and you get things like 'Oh, I don't believe in the Big Bang.' You tell them how the infinite regression fallacy demonstrates that time had to have a starting point and they duh into silence. Show them alternative explanations that present Christianity in a better light than the Zinn bullshit people are fed these days and they simply repeat the propaganda and insist that it is all true no matter how Christians try to 'spin it'. Lol, now these morons cant distinguish between Russell and quackery or tell a good argument from a pile of nonsense.

Why do we theists give them the time of day?

They really cant be taken seriously any more. The Bertrand Russells are long gone, just the jack asses remain among atheism today; why bother?

Whatever grampa. You don't see the writing on the wall here?

Americans ages 18 to 29 are considerably less religious than older Americans. Fewer young adults belong to any particular faith than older people do today. They also are less likely to be affiliated than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations were when they were young. Fully one-in-four members of the Millennial generation are unaffiliated with any particular faith. Indeed, Millennials are significantly more unaffiliated than members of Generation X were at a comparable point in their life cycle (20% in the late 1990s) and twice as unaffiliated as Baby Boomers were as young adults (13% in the late 1970s). Young adults also attend religious services less often than older Americans today. And compared with their elders today, fewer young people say that religion is very important in their lives.

Maybe you live in the bible belt. Because consider that here up north in the big city there are a lot more atheists than there will be down in the deep dirty hick red neck bible belt south where people are poor and stupid.

Yesterday I asked a friend if he believed in god. He said yes. After maybe 2 or 3 questions he cracked a smile and said no he doesn't believe or "hasn't given it much thought"

So just consider that a lot of the people who say they do believe are just giving a knee jerk response. What exactly do they believe? They don't even really know. Or maybe they were told as kids if they don't believe they will go to hell so of course they are brainwashed to say yes without even questioning.

He told me he told his religious sister that he had his doubt and she had a stern hard long talk with him. LOL. Do you think she's thinking objectively when she believes not believing will send her and/or her brother to HELL? LOL. Dumb as lady. Poor thing.

 

[sealybobo]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

I can't help but believe that the same way slave masters used religion to control their slaves, the rich use it today to control the masses.

What are the wedge issues the rich use to divide us? God, gays, guns and racism.

And just like I don't trust the CEO of Shell Oil, I don't trust the heads of the Catholic or any other church. Not the Mormons, Jews, Muslims. Yes some of them may actually believe but look at how the PTL swindled money from people back in the 80's. Look at those slick black ministers who are just con artists. Look at Tom Cruz' religion scientology. Any question that's a scam?

 

[PratchettFan]

Conspiracy Theory Poll Results - Public Policy Polling
I am am Atheist. You are brainwashed.beyond all belief. The tragic thing is that is peobably the way you like to be. It's such a dirty rotten shame. If you are ever willing to consider burning your religious "Get Out Of Jail Free" card. First, there is a documentary that you need to watch. I don't know the price of it. But it would be worth every penny. It's called "Religious." For an even greater example of how sick, filthy and evil the bible is, you need to go into your browser and enter, "our holy hell: the causes, the solutiions." If nothing else, that should wake you up.



25% of Brits think the lunar landings were a hoax, though only 6 to 7%% of Americans do.
Could moon landings have been faked? Some still think so - CNN.com

But LESS THAN 3% of Americans are atheist!
5 facts about atheists | Pew Research Center

That is right, more people believe that Elvis is still alive, that the world is ruled by lizard people, that Big Foot stalks our Rocky Mountains and that the US government caused 9-11 than believe that there is no God.

Atheists are simply kook-burgers like the 9-11 Truthers or the lunar landing denialists.

You present them with evidence like the Big Bang and you get things like 'Oh, I don't believe in the Big Bang.' You tell them how the infinite regression fallacy demonstrates that time had to have a starting point and they duh into silence. Show them alternative explanations that present Christianity in a better light than the Zinn bullshit people are fed these days and they simply repeat the propaganda and insist that it is all true no matter how Christians try to 'spin it'. Lol, now these morons cant distinguish between Russell and quackery or tell a good argument from a pile of nonsense.

Why do we theists give them the time of day?

They really cant be taken seriously any more. The Bertrand Russells are long gone, just the jack asses remain among atheism today; why bother?

Whatever grampa. You don't see the writing on the wall here?

Americans ages 18 to 29 are considerably less religious than older Americans. Fewer young adults belong to any particular faith than older people do today. They also are less likely to be affiliated than their parents’ and grandparents’ generations were when they were young. Fully one-in-four members of the Millennial generation are unaffiliated with any particular faith. Indeed, Millennials are significantly more unaffiliated than members of Generation X were at a comparable point in their life cycle (20% in the late 1990s) and twice as unaffiliated as Baby Boomers were as young adults (13% in the late 1970s). Young adults also attend religious services less often than older Americans today. And compared with their elders today, fewer young people say that religion is very important in their lives.

Maybe you live in the bible belt. Because consider that here up north in the big city there are a lot more atheists than there will be down in the deep dirty hick red neck bible belt south where people are poor and stupid.

Yesterday I asked a friend if he believed in god. He said yes. After maybe 2 or 3 questions he cracked a smile and said no he doesn't believe or "hasn't given it much thought"

So just consider that a lot of the people who say they do believe are just giving a knee jerk response. What exactly do they believe? They don't even really know. Or maybe they were told as kids if they don't believe they will go to hell so of course they are brainwashed to say yes without even questioning.

He told me he told his religious sister that he had his doubt and she had a stern hard long talk with him. LOL. Do you think she's thinking objectively when she believes not believing will send her and/or her brother to HELL? LOL. Dumb as lady. Poor thing.

Ahh.... the beliefs of the young. You did know the hard nosed, bible thumping, old fogeys you so love today were the hippies of the 60's, don't you. Every generation says they are the ones who will change things, and then become their parents. I'd say talk to me in 40 years, but luckily I will be long dead by then. I won't have to see the incredible mess you all will be making of things. Seeing the mess my generation made was quite enough for one lifetime. But by all means, you enjoy the show.

 

[PostmodernProph]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

sorry, Hollie...I couldn't help but laugh.....you have this habit of declaring yourself the winner of arguments when you haven't actually gotten close to the central issue......

 

[PostmodernProph]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

I can't help but believe that the same way slave masters used religion to control their slaves, the rich use it today to control the masses.

What are the wedge issues the rich use to divide us? God, gays, guns and racism.

And just like I don't trust the CEO of Shell Oil, I don't trust the heads of the Catholic or any other church. Not the Mormons, Jews, Muslims. Yes some of them may actually believe but look at how the PTL swindled money from people back in the 80's. Look at those slick black ministers who are just con artists. Look at Tom Cruz' religion scientology. Any question that's a scam?

judging by who's in office, its obvious the way to control the masses isn't religion.....its offering them all sorts of free stuff......

 

[BillyP]

So not believing in an invisible superbeing who punishes people for not following a book is considered kooky? If you also don't believe in Santa Claus is that a double penalty?

 

[Hollie]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

sorry, Hollie...I couldn't help but laugh.....you have this habit of declaring yourself the winner of arguments when you haven't actually gotten close to the central issue......

I never declared myself the winner. You're reactionary and defensive because you're unable to present a single defense to the challenges directed at your beliefs.

 

[PostmodernProph]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

sorry, Hollie...I couldn't help but laugh.....you have this habit of declaring yourself the winner of arguments when you haven't actually gotten close to the central issue......

I never declared myself the winner. You're reactionary and defensive because you're unable to present a single defense to the challenges directed at your beliefs.

/shrugs....once I made the challenge and you couldn't meet it, all I had to do was sit back and wait until you did.....I'm still waiting.....

 

[Hollie]

If you're a "christian", then take your beliefs and enjoy them. Stop trying to persuade everyone you're way is the only way.

Its not.

no one is keeping you from digging your own path.....we just think its kinda silly when there's a free and easy one already made.....and there's no guarantee you're digging in the right direction......

You're like an annoying used car salesman, only you're selling fear and superstition. When did this thread become a vehicle for fundies to proselytize?

the only thing I have proselytized is that you should learn something about science.....

I've given you references to supportable, verifiable scientific principles that only fundie zealots can ignore, but not challenge.

I had no reason to challenge the principles.....that's why I only challenged your understanding of them....

You didn't challenge anything. You recoiled in shocked surprise when your false assumptions, bad analogies and religious dogma were met with verifiable scientific principles.

lol....

Your pointless, ineffectual attempts and fails at offering a coherent comment is why you should avoid threads where you're unable to participate.

You really typify why faith, (the science-hating, literalist view embracing, “gawds did it” screaming), kind of faith is nothing more or less than an excuse to assert belief in something without having to go through the tiresome effort of supporting what you claim to believe. There's absolutely no need for faith. It doesn't offer you any knowledge -- we already have a word for what offers you knowledge, and that's reason. Faith doesn't "explain" anything -- it doesn't describe any details about anything that gives you more information before you employed faith than you did after you employed it, and in fact, faith stops you from pursuing evidence of reality since you have already concluded to believe in something without there being any standards of support necessary.

sorry, Hollie...I couldn't help but laugh.....you have this habit of declaring yourself the winner of arguments when you haven't actually gotten close to the central issue......

I never declared myself the winner. You're reactionary and defensive because you're unable to present a single defense to the challenges directed at your beliefs.

/shrugs....once I made the challenge and you couldn't meet it, all I had to do was sit back and wait until you did.....I'm still waiting.....

It's a bit disingenuous (and childish), to dodge, sidestep and retreat from challenges to you specious opinions and then claim others haven't responded to your goofy one-liners.

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. If you or any I.D.er's/YEC'ists have evidence that something shows signs of being designed (something that could not have arisen naturally) please come forward with it. To date, you have not and you have scurried away in every instance when you have been directed to support your religious dogma.

You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Intelligent Design advocates (supernaturalists), are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims.

So here it is again for you: make a case for your partisan gawds, a 6,000 year old earth vs. evolutionary processes over billions of years.

 

[amrchaos]

I think some of you are misstating the atheists argument for proof.

The argument is:
If there is no evidence/proof for the existance of something, then there is no reason to believe it does exists.

Another way of saying this is:

If there is reason to believe something exist, then there is evidence for it.
(Is the above true? )

If there is no evidence for something, then there is no reason to believe it exist.(the Atheist argument concerning god)


Note that we can't cut the word believe out. Why? Because we could have evidence of something that no longer exist. Also we could lack evidence for something that currently/previously did exist.




The mis-statement that some of you are making is
"If there is no evidence, then it does not exist"
Which is not the atheist argument. The argument is based on the belief on whether something exist or not. Not if it actually exists or not.

(I guess this is where some believers try to claim that atheism is a religion.)

There could be a god. But I don't believe in the God of Abraham because the only evidence I have for it is circumstantial and hearsay--some of it including obvious elaborations that makes me doubt the sources of these claims even more.

By the way, once you can't believe in the God of Judaism, Western religion is no longer viable for you.

 

[PratchettFan]

I think some of you are misstating the atheists argument for proof.

The argument is:
If there is no evidence/proof for the existance of something, then there is no reason to believe it does exists.

Another way of saying this is:

If there is reason to believe something exist, then there is evidence for it.
(Is the above true? )

If there is no evidence for something, then there is no reason to believe it exist.(the Atheist argument concerning god)


Note that we can't cut the word believe out. Why? Because we could have evidence of something that no longer exist. Also we could lack evidence for something that currently/previously did exist.




The mis-statement that some of you are making is
"If there is no evidence, then it does not exist"
Which is not the atheist argument. The argument is based on the belief on whether something exist or not. Not if it actually exists or not.

(I guess this is where some believers try to claim that atheism is a religion.)

There could be a god. But I don't believe in the God of Abraham because the only evidence I have for it is circumstantial and hearsay--some of it including obvious elaborations that makes me doubt the sources of these claims even more.

By the way, once you can't believe in the God of Judaism, Western religion is no longer viable for you.

I fully understand the argument. However, just because that is the claim does not make it so. I go based upon the statements made, not what I am told is the argument.

When the claim is made that anyone who does believe in a God is stupid, and that claim has been made many times, that is more than just not believing. When the claim is made that theism is a mental illness, also made many times, that is more than just not believing. In point of fact, the argument that a lack of evidence is the evidence for non-existence has been made to me directly. It has also been said to me, quite emphatically, that I am to accept that Atheists lack beliefs based upon nothing more than that is how the word is defined, which is nothing but dogma. And when all of these claims have been made I have yet to see a single objection made by another Atheist that their position is being wrongly stated. Quite the opposite.

If the argument is as you describe, then the sole response would be "I don't believe that". However, that has not been the sole response by long shot. Instead there has been claim after claim made, none of which with anything even remotely akin to objective evidence in support, and then I am to simply accept that is it just a lack of belief. I think not.

 

[PostmodernProph]

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature.

interestingly, that was never what you were requested to do.....you were requested to provide evidence that a single celled organism evolved into a multicellular organism.....rather, you continue to believe that falsely claiming I am a young earther will cause sufficient diversion that you can once again avoid meeting the burden of proof for that which you DO claim.....

 

[Hollie]

It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature.

interestingly, that was never what you were requested to do.....you were requested to provide evidence that a single celled organism evolved into a multicellular organism.....rather, you continue to believe that falsely claiming I am a young earther will cause sufficient diversion that you can once again avoid meeting the burden of proof for that which you DO claim.....

I understand that you're desperately holding on to that one phony excuse to vilify science and knowledge as a way to bolster your belief in magic and superstition.

As to your comment regarding burden of proof, meet that requirement for your gawds.

 

[dblack]

I think some of you are misstating the atheists argument for proof.

The argument is:
If there is no evidence/proof for the existance of something, then there is no reason to believe it does exists.

Another way of saying this is:

If there is reason to believe something exist, then there is evidence for it.
(Is the above true? )

If there is no evidence for something, then there is no reason to believe it exist.(the Atheist argument concerning god)


Note that we can't cut the word believe out. Why? Because we could have evidence of something that no longer exist. Also we could lack evidence for something that currently/previously did exist.




The mis-statement that some of you are making is
"If there is no evidence, then it does not exist"
Which is not the atheist argument. The argument is based on the belief on whether something exist or not. Not if it actually exists or not.

(I guess this is where some believers try to claim that atheism is a religion.)

There could be a god. But I don't believe in the God of Abraham because the only evidence I have for it is circumstantial and hearsay--some of it including obvious elaborations that makes me doubt the sources of these claims even more.

By the way, once you can't believe in the God of Judaism, Western religion is no longer viable for you.

I fully understand the argument. However, just because that is the claim does not make it so. I go based upon the statements made, not what I am told is the argument.

When the claim is made that anyone who does believe in a God is stupid, and that claim has been made many times, that is more than just not believing. When the claim is made that theism is a mental illness, also made many times, that is more than just not believing.

This, in a thread claiming that "atheism is a fringe kook theory cult"? Whatever. Religious people proselytize a "hell" of a lot more than atheists, and invest a lot more time and energy claiming that those who disagree with them are evil.

There are definitely atheist assholes. If you want to hold them up as representative of everyone who doesn't believe in your god, go for it. But don't be surprised when the 'favor' is returned.

 

[PratchettFan]

I think some of you are misstating the atheists argument for proof.

The argument is:
If there is no evidence/proof for the existance of something, then there is no reason to believe it does exists.

Another way of saying this is:

If there is reason to believe something exist, then there is evidence for it.
(Is the above true? )

If there is no evidence for something, then there is no reason to believe it exist.(the Atheist argument concerning god)


Note that we can't cut the word believe out. Why? Because we could have evidence of something that no longer exist. Also we could lack evidence for something that currently/previously did exist.




The mis-statement that some of you are making is
"If there is no evidence, then it does not exist"
Which is not the atheist argument. The argument is based on the belief on whether something exist or not. Not if it actually exists or not.

(I guess this is where some believers try to claim that atheism is a religion.)

There could be a god. But I don't believe in the God of Abraham because the only evidence I have for it is circumstantial and hearsay--some of it including obvious elaborations that makes me doubt the sources of these claims even more.

By the way, once you can't believe in the God of Judaism, Western religion is no longer viable for you.

I fully understand the argument. However, just because that is the claim does not make it so. I go based upon the statements made, not what I am told is the argument.

When the claim is made that anyone who does believe in a God is stupid, and that claim has been made many times, that is more than just not believing. When the claim is made that theism is a mental illness, also made many times, that is more than just not believing.

This, in a thread claiming that "atheism is a fringe kook theory cult"? Whatever. Religious people proselytize a "hell" of a lot more than atheists, and invest a lot more time and energy claiming that those who disagree with them are evil.

There are definitely atheist assholes. If you want to hold them up as representative of everyone who doesn't believe in your god, go for it. But don't be surprised when the 'favor' is returned.

I don't care if you believe in my god. I don't even want you to. This has absolutely nothing to do with my god. This is about how people believe, not what they believe. Believe whatever you like, but at least acknowledge that is what you are doing. Don't pretend you are on some higher intellectual ground because you believe B rather than A. Because that makes you exactly like the people saying you're going to hell.

If the actual definition of an Atheist is someone who lacks beliefs in God, then I am probably the closest thing to an Atheist here... and I am a Theist. Because I at least don't care if there is a God. If this discussion was actually about God, I wouldn't bother to be in it. To me that is like sitting in absolute darkness and arguing about the color of the walls without even knowing if there are any walls. No one who lacked beliefs would waste their time on that.

 

[dblack]

I think some of you are misstating the atheists argument for proof.

The argument is:
If there is no evidence/proof for the existance of something, then there is no reason to believe it does exists.

Another way of saying this is:

If there is reason to believe something exist, then there is evidence for it.
(Is the above true? )

If there is no evidence for something, then there is no reason to believe it exist.(the Atheist argument concerning god)


Note that we can't cut the word believe out. Why? Because we could have evidence of something that no longer exist. Also we could lack evidence for something that currently/previously did exist.




The mis-statement that some of you are making is
"If there is no evidence, then it does not exist"
Which is not the atheist argument. The argument is based on the belief on whether something exist or not. Not if it actually exists or not.

(I guess this is where some believers try to claim that atheism is a religion.)

There could be a god. But I don't believe in the God of Abraham because the only evidence I have for it is circumstantial and hearsay--some of it including obvious elaborations that makes me doubt the sources of these claims even more.

By the way, once you can't believe in the God of Judaism, Western religion is no longer viable for you.

I fully understand the argument. However, just because that is the claim does not make it so. I go based upon the statements made, not what I am told is the argument.

When the claim is made that anyone who does believe in a God is stupid, and that claim has been made many times, that is more than just not believing. When the claim is made that theism is a mental illness, also made many times, that is more than just not believing.

This, in a thread claiming that "atheism is a fringe kook theory cult"? Whatever. Religious people proselytize a "hell" of a lot more than atheists, and invest a lot more time and energy claiming that those who disagree with them are evil.

There are definitely atheist assholes. If you want to hold them up as representative of everyone who doesn't believe in your god, go for it. But don't be surprised when the 'favor' is returned.

I don't care if you believe in my god. I don't even want you to. This has absolutely nothing to do with my god. This is about how people believe, not what they believe. Believe whatever you like, but at least acknowledge that is what you are doing. Don't pretend you are on some higher intellectual ground because you believe B rather than A. Because that makes you exactly like the people saying you're going to hell.

If the actual definition of an Atheist is someone who lacks beliefs in God, then I am probably the closest thing to an Atheist here... and I am a Theist.

I doubt that. You seem to be making all of unwarranted - and in at least one case, wholly inaccurate - assumptions about what people here believe.