Atheist Desire to Disprove God

[Willamena]

It may help (to understand the other's viewpoint) that there is no "the way the world isn't." That is, in English, a valid figure of speech, but logically it represents a fallacy. There are no "non-existent things" - existence is for things. The world, including all its negation-things, is "what is." We believe in the world just the way it is.

 

[atanu]

So there you have the purposes of two of the better read books in the New Atheist Movement. I think it's important to recognize that Dawkins and Harris are not trying to discuss each and every religion on the planet, nor, really, religion in general, nor even all the specifics of even just one of the world's religions.

The most pertinent point, IMO. Yet, some sweeping counter faith systems have got built on these.

...

 

[atanu]

I agree, from the little I know, they do not consider God to be different to the Abrahamic concept of God taken at face value. As you say they stop at "fundamentalist christiantiy etc.". This is the premise on which they build their argument and why their arguments are not sound, in my opinion.

I, personally, struggled to understand Abrahamic religions, I considered myself as an atheist for many years, until I began to better understand Eastern traditions e.g. Hindu/Sikh/Tao Scriptures etc. What I found interesting was that this opened a way to understand Abrahamic religions/scriptures and to see the same 'truth' in them also. This is why I say I personally don't think they fully understand what they are attempting to refute.

I have similar experience and I agree. I have been a strong atheist and then a turncoat. Although, I do not know for sure as to which stand was/is more foolish, I have the following opinions:

1. Atheist begins from the premise that "God exists" position of strong theists is a meaningful proposition to refute. That premise, IMO, is nearly as faulty as the position they wish to refute.

2. No religious scripture teaches hatred and bigotry. Not eastern scriptures and neither the western ones. Selective reading of scriptures and selective applications thereof --to rationalise instinctive bigotry -- is totally unrelated to scriptures ( just as Einstein cannot be faulted for dropping of atom bombs on Japan).

3. IMO, without scriptures providing pointers to oneness of existence, there might be more effects of instinctive hatred that might not be even recognised. That human animals can read scriptures and analyse them itself is a tentative proof of that.

...

 

[Thief]

Lol, "people who disagree with me are stupid" is an argument for fools and trolls. Got nothing better?

People who claim there is no God are fools.

Really....if you believe there is no god....
What are you doing in a religious forum?....trolling?

If you insist there is no God....
what could you possibly say that would cause me to agree with you.

I believe in cause and effect.
Can't have one without the other.

The universe (the one word) is the effect....God is the cause.

 

[outhouse]

People who claim there is no God are fools.

funny many here feel the same for the people that believe in the fantasy and fiction of it all.

Really....if you believe there is no god....
What are you doing in a religious forum?....trolling?

learning about real religious history without the fictional dogma

If you insist there is no God....
what could you possibly say that would cause me to agree with you.

brainwashing is hard to reverse

The universe (the one word) is the effect....God is the cause.

this is only your personal opinion, nothing more

 

[Thief]

funny many here feel the same for the people that believe in the fantasy and fiction of it all.

And you think you've got the facts!!!!!!...lol

learning about real religious history without the fictional dogma

And still you don't believe?.....lol

brainwashing is hard to reverse

Yeah...you're stained alright!......lol

this is only your personal opinion, nothing more

Nay, to the last.

Cause and effect are never separated.

 

[PolyHedral]

Cause and effect are never separated.

Except when Heisenburg comes along. Sorry.

 

[Alceste]

Why is this assertion (of Orias) ridiculous?

...

"Not a theist" is a belief in the way "not a Romanian" is an ethnicity. As worded, it is at best a very vague description. Kilgore asked for a single tenet of atheism. One single, specific thing resolutely believed to be unambiguously "true" by all atheists.

 

[McBell]

People who claim there is no God are fools.

Merely your unsubstantiated opinion.

Really....if you believe there is no god....
What are you doing in a religious forum?....trolling?

This is a religious EDUCATION forum.
There are already numerous threads addressing this very point.
Perhaps you could look at one of them and learn something?

I believe in cause and effect.
Can't have one without the other.

The universe (the one word) is the effect....God is the cause.

You have not demonstrated how the universe is an effect.
You merely repeat the same unsubstantiated claim as though your merely repeating it ad nauseum will somehow make it true.

 

[Willamena]

"Not a theist" is a belief in the way "not a Romanian" is an ethnicity.

Well, no... "Not a theist" is a belief in the same way that "not a Romanian" is a belief.

 

[Thief]

You have not demonstrated how the universe is an effect.

Cause and effect.... was taught to me at an early age.

How is it you got this far...and still don't get it.

 

[Thief]

Except when Heisenburg comes along. Sorry.

This implies an equation?

Numbers can be used on God?....really?

 

[PolyHedral]

Numbers can be used on God?....really?

Numbers can be used for everything we've found so far. Why not God?

 

[Orias]

Essentially, for some, they do indeed say the same thing. The point is that for others, they do not. I am with you in understanding that belief follows truth, which is inherent in an honest posit --if we didn't believe a thing, we wouldn't be positing it.

I'm glad you are able to see my point.

Unlike others who tend to add unneeded baggage to my own axioms

Wow, you really can't see the difference, can you?

What about this: "Either one does or does not believe in gods" and "One believes either that gods exist, or that gods do not exist"?

Any difference yet, or do they still look interchangeable to you?

I think if there was a real meaning behind this you would of told me what it was when I asked you.

It's okay though, some still struggle with the Opposition in their own mind.

 

[Thief]

Numbers can be used for everything we've found so far. Why not God?

And what number do you want to call Him?

How about?...the One.

 

[McBell]

Cause and effect.... was taught to me at an early age.

How is it you got this far...and still don't get it.

You can try all the mystical bull **** you want.
The fact is you have not shown that the universe is an effect.

And here you blatantly avoid doing so.

I can just as easily claim that the universe is the cause and your god is the effect.

Now all I have to do is refuse to support my claim and threaten you with some sort of imaginary punishment for your denial of my obvious truth all the while talking like some damn fortune cookie and everyone could call me "Thief Junior."

 

[St Giordano Bruno]

For most atheists I have met it is not a question of disproving the existence of god(s); it is just excercising their freedom of thought. Some people find god(s) plausible, some don't. Some people like to speak to an imaginary friend in the sky or others find that whole excercise pointless and only look on that as wishful thinking.

 

[Alceste]

Well, no... "Not a theist" is a belief in the same way that "not a Romanian" is a belief.

Well, no... "Not a theist" is an ethnicity in the same way "not a Romanian" is a belief.

 

[atanu]

Well, no... "Not a theist" is an ethnicity in the same way "not a Romanian" is a belief.

I think this is a view from one perspective.

On the other hand, a statement "I think he is not a romanian" is a simple statement of belief.

...

 

[atanu]

"Not a theist" is a belief in the way "not a Romanian" is an ethnicity. As worded, it is at best a very vague description. Kilgore asked for a single tenet of atheism. One single, specific thing resolutely believed to be unambiguously "true" by all atheists.

Thank you Alceste for explaining it. True, but I do not see ridiculousness in a statement 'not a romanian'.

...