Things about atheism that should be self-evident.

[Czernobog]

Hate God - There is no God.

You invest a significant and inordinate amount of time arguing with people about something you don't believe exists.

Yes. This is because religion is dangerous. Find a war in History that has had no basis in religion. Hitler said “I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator” as he exterminated Jews. The crusades were purely for the purpose of converting or destroying non-Christians. The 911 attacks, Al-Qaeda, and terrorism in general are conducted under the umbrella of religion. EVERY religion has terrorists, even Buddhists. Remember the Sarin gas poisoning of hundreds of people on a Tokyo subway in 1995? Buddhists…

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

 

[Czernobog]

The same fucking god that is in your Bible!!!!!

You seem unhinged arguing about something you know doesn't exist.

Not unhinged, and not about "something I don't believe in". I believe that Judaism exists. I believe it exists, because it does. I believe Jews are religious, and theist. I believe this, because they are. I get a bit heated about blatant anti-Semitism, because there is no call for it.

 

[K9Buck]

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

It's too bad you couldn't have conveyed that to infamous atheists such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Korean stooges, Castrol, etc., etc., etc. that have murdered tens of MILLIONS in the past century alone. Hitler and the Jihadists can't come anywhere close to the numbers murdered by the aforementioned atheists. Atheism's contribution to humanity in the 20th century was mountains of dead bodies and oceans of blood.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And Christians always think of themselves. "waaaah, I'm a martyr, I lost the court battle for creationism in the classroom...."

Especially Christians who believe in evolution! (We get painted with the same broad brush as Christian Creationists, so we should be able to be martyrs, too, even if we are in the majority.)

What's that? The press didn't inform you that Creationists are the minority? Well, you know what Mark Twain said about that. Those who don't keep up with the news are uninformed, while those who do keep up with the news are misinformed.

I'm still trying to figure out which group most atheists who frequent Religion Forums fall into. Are they the uninformed, or are they the misinformed? What say you?

Even if I grant you that creationist Christians are in the minority, 25% of the country (more) is still a force. As evidenced by the ongoing lawsuits. So you can't dismiss this solely on the grounds of a few percentage points. Either way, I am on your side in your efforts to reform Christianity to stop opposing science on religious grounds.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

Psalms 53:1: The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Well...by co-exist, I mean that you can't pretend to be both a scientist, and religious. It is a foregone conclusion that, sooner or later, the two will contradict one another. Then you're going to have to choose which one you are - a scientist, or a theist.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”—Albert Einstein

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well...by co-exist, I mean that you can't pretend to be both a scientist, and religious. It is a foregone conclusion that, sooner or later, the two will contradict one another. Then you're going to have to choose which one you are - a scientist, or a theist.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”—Albert Einstein

Would you care to show me the religion in his equations? Of course not, because it isn't there .

As long as everyone is cool with that objective truth, there's no problem....right? Where is the struggle, between science and theism? There is none. Only religious dogma gets in the way.

 

[Czernobog]

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

It's too bad you couldn't have conveyed that to infamous atheists such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Korean stooges, Castrol, etc., etc., etc. that have murdered tens of MILLIONS in the past century alone. Hitler and the Jihadists can't come anywhere close to the numbers murdered by the aforementioned atheists. Atheism's contribution to humanity in the 20th century was mountains of dead bodies and oceans of blood.

Yes...atheism is eeevilllll!!! How many wars throughout history were started by atheists, again? Oh, that's right. None.

 

[Czernobog]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

Psalms 53:1: The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.

IKNORITE?!?! Even a fool gets it! Why is it so hard for theists to understand, there. Is. No. God!!!!

 

[Bob Blaylock]

IKNORITE?!?! Even a fool gets it! Why is it so hard for theists to understand, there. Is. No. God!!!!

One day, you will stand before Him and be judged. You'll have the chance to tell Him to His face that He doesn't exist.

I don't think He'll be impressed.

 

[Czernobog]

IKNORITE?!?! Even a fool gets it! Why is it so hard for theists to understand, there. Is. No. God!!!!

One day, you will stand before Him and be judged. You'll have the chance to tell Him to His face that He doesn't exist.

I don't think He'll be impressed.

And if "He" existed, that would really worry me. Refer to point #1. Threatening an atheist with “going to Hell” doesn’t work. There’s no Hell and the atheist knows that. Christians spend their whole lives trying to get to a paradise after they die, avoid that other nasty place in the afterlife, and convert other people to their delusions. Atheists try to live every day to its fullest because they know there’s nothing at all after death and they value the life they’ve got.

 

[westwall]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

Why can I not be an atheist and believe in the laws of physics? I think physics drives everything. Physics -> chemistry -> biology -> life -> man -> religion

You were fine right up until you hit religion. Sorry, physics does not dovetail with religion. So, my question would be when the latter contradicts the former, which do you go with?

I know plenty of scientists who also believe in God. A few are creationists, though with a twist. When i asked them if the world was truly only 6,000 years old in their belief system they responded with " how long is a day in God time?" They fully acknowledge the Laws of physics, that the world operates via cause and effect, etc. etc. etc.

Your assertion that science and religion can't coexist is absurd.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

There is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists – ‘god’ exists as a creation of man, a concept, a metaphor for the good humans are capable of.

And being free from faith is neither a ‘religion’ nor a ‘belief’ – to acknowledge the fact there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists has nothing to do with ‘faith’ or ‘belief.’

Theism is the aberration, an authoritarian contrivance born of fear and arrogance.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In other words, atheists are just like everyone else. They want everyone else to think just the way they do.

Actually not.

Theists seek to compel conformity, as theism is fundamentally authoritarian.

Being free from faith is the opposite of theism: absent religious doctrine and dogma there is no need or desire to compel conformity.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

Why can I not be an atheist and believe in the laws of physics? I think physics drives everything. Physics -> chemistry -> biology -> life -> man -> religion

Because eventually your position will become untenable the consequence of an appeal to ignorance fallacy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

.

Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all.

your statement is absurd, you are just someone who has gone over the edge ...

View attachment 160292

the scientist above is a perfect example, someone in the middle, neither of the two - science has proven everymuch as irresponsible as the desert religions the person above promoted the A-bomb during a world war.

science studies the unknown the same whether atheist or theist.

Science and theism cannot co-exist because as knowledge expands the realm of ‘god’ starts to decrease.

We don’t know the answer to ‘x’ so we say ‘god’ is the ‘answer.’

In time we discover what the answer to ‘x’ is, and it isn’t ‘god.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And Christians always think of themselves. "waaaah, I'm a martyr, I lost the court battle for creationism in the classroom...."

Especially Christians who believe in evolution! (We get painted with the same broad brush as Christian Creationists, so we should be able to be martyrs, too, even if we are in the majority.)

What's that? The press didn't inform you that Creationists are the minority? Well, you know what Mark Twain said about that. Those who don't keep up with the news are uninformed, while those who do keep up with the news are misinformed.

I'm still trying to figure out which group most atheists who frequent Religion Forums fall into. Are they the uninformed, or are they the misinformed? What say you?

False dilemma fallacy.

Because religion is a creation of man it’s perfectly appropriate and warranted for those free from faith to address issues of religion.

Belief in a ‘god’ that doesn’t exist is not a prerequisite to discuss that which is a creation of man.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I spend "an inordinate amount of time" arguing against dangerous stupidity.

It's too bad you couldn't have conveyed that to infamous atheists such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Korean stooges, Castrol, etc., etc., etc. that have murdered tens of MILLIONS in the past century alone. Hitler and the Jihadists can't come anywhere close to the numbers murdered by the aforementioned atheists. Atheism's contribution to humanity in the 20th century was mountains of dead bodies and oceans of blood.

This fails as a guilt by association fallacy, as well as a red herring fallacy.

And theists have just as much blood on their hands, if not more.

 

[ChesBayJJ]

1. Atheists Do not:
   1. Hate God - There is no God.
      
   2. Worship Satan - There is no Satan.
      
   3. Hate Christians - Christians were all born atheists, and then had religion forced upon them.
      
   4. Eat Babies - There are no words for for the kind of deranged and deplorable imagination that thought this up.
      
   5. Lack morals - Every person has a sense of right and wrong regardless of whether they have a book of fairy tales to tell them what right and wrong is.
2. Creationists like to ask, "How do you know the Big Bang happened? Were you there?" Yeah....right. Because I'm sure you were right there picking up shells while toddling along the bottom of the Red Sea, as the water was standing as two walls, waiting for you to cross, right?
   
   
3. “Evolution is just a theory” demonstrates an almost misunderstanding of what a scientific theory actually is. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. The non-scientific word theory refers to a guess or conjecture, a contemplation or speculation. In science, this latter definition is actually called a hypothesis. The two terms are not interchangeable.
   
   
4. As is the case with justice, it is the burden of the party making an assertive claim to offer proof of said claim. As in a criminal trial by jury, the prosecution needs to offer objective evidence that events took place a certain way. The job of the defence is to show why the arguments of the prosecution are not valid. In such a court situation, the prosecution could never say “Well, this book says that such and such happened on the night of July 15th, therefore it is true.” The referenced book would immediately be questioned along the lines of who the author was, what their intentions and motivations were, when it was written, whether the writers were credible and in their right minds, etc. Since this horse shit doesn’t work in a trial, why do we suffer it to work for explanations of the entire universe? When science makes a claim, it is substantiated with plenty of objective evidence, yet when a religion claims something, the only justification is “well, there must be a God because we have sunsets.” Ah, of course, why didn’t we silly scientists think of that? And “You can’t prove God doesn’t exist” is the coward’s shifting of the burden of proof.
   
   
5. Science and theism cannot co-exist. At all. They are opposite, nemeses, antonyms, call it whatever you wish. Anyone who claims to live by both is fooling themselves and not truly following either.

These are just a few things that most atheists can agree on. And I, personally, don' think a single one of them is unreasonable.

Why can I not be an atheist and believe in the laws of physics? I think physics drives everything. Physics -> chemistry -> biology -> life -> man -> religion

You were fine right up until you hit religion. Sorry, physics does not dovetail with religion. So, my question would be when the latter contradicts the former, which do you go with?

Obviously, science. And I guess you missed the point I was making - religion is a product of man's mind.

 

[ChesBayJJ]

Well...by co-exist, I mean that you can't pretend to be both a scientist, and religious. It is a foregone conclusion that, sooner or later, the two will contradict one another. Then you're going to have to choose which one you are - a scientist, or a theist.

I really have to disagree with you on that one. Someone I know well is a staunch Southern Baptist, a believer in Jesus Christ as his savior, and has a PhD in physics. He has had no difficulty being both a scientist and a theist.