Favourite Atheist arguments

[rational experiences]

Evidence in theism for God. As named by humans doing all arguments.

Uses multi words to describe one body.

One word God is not just a reason God.

Science says one word atom first. As one body atom. Then discusses atom being changed

God. Body description one word described why God O earth mass owned presence.

Correct way to describe God earth in theism versus science as a destroyer theist.

 

[Valjean]

By any definition on the kind of level we are talking about definitions are grey. For example I'm not fundamentalist more a centralist Christian does that mean I'm not a Christian? No because these things are not clear cut.

However the article insight complains that in a Christian dominated society athiets where looked down upon, which I think is repressible all the people I consider friends are atheists and they should believe and argue as they like. But the article seems to only give one defontion from an atheist. And they say that they don't understand the concept of God so need to remain neutral. That isn't the case though as for centuries there have been, as I have said before major attempts to clarify and define the nature of God. Most of the Christian disagreement are on irrelevant details (don't tell them I said that but it's true) and most polytheist pantheons operate similarly.

Listen I'm sorry if u think I'm arrogant but I'm truly trying to understand it point of view can we start over and engage with other. (I promise I'll try too).

Atheists don't claim not to understand the concept of god, they claim there's no evidence for god, so are withholding belief pending evidence.
For centuries atheists have been defined by theists; by communities that oppose them and see them as a threat.
Now, the question is out in the open and is being seriously explored, necessitating technical definitions of terms so everyone is on the same page.

A "definition" is not an explanation, discussion or a clarification. It's a lowest common denominator; a single feature that distinguishes a thing from all other things.
There are many variations of atheism, but a definition of atheism, per se, focuses on the single feature common to all flavors of atheism -- lack of belief. If you say "atheism," unmodified, this is what you mean.

 

[lukethethird]

What is Atheism? | American Atheists

Who knew atheism would need explaining over and over again?

 

[paarsurrey]

I cannot discus atheism with you, tried before and got fed up of bang my head on the wall.

But FYI, atheism is a faith like not collecting stamps is a hobby

Magenta ^
isn't it a dogmatic/apologetic/oft-repeated response of the Atheism people , please?
The next time, will one be seeing a flying kettle in the sky, perhaps, please?
Right friend, please/

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

What does atheism proclaim? What is its position?

Atheism, per se, is a default, not a position. We're born atheist. Subsequent theological beliefs are enculturated. Theology is learned.
A blank slate proclaims nothing.

"atheism"

ism
See definition of ism *

• congregation
• denomination
• faith
• religion
• sect
• society
• affiliation
• body
• chapter
• communion
• connection
• creed
• cult
• doctrine
• faction
• gathering
• order
• persuasion
• schism

* noun
a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice:

Synonyms of ism | Thesaurus.com

Right ?

Regards

 

[lukethethird]

"atheism"

ism
See definition of ism *

• congregation
• denomination
• faith
• religion
• sect
• society
• affiliation
• body
• chapter
• communion
• connection
• creed
• cult
• doctrine
• faction
• gathering
• order
• persuasion
• schism

* noun
a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice:

Synonyms of ism | Thesaurus.com

Right ?

Regards

Atheism means without theism, so no distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice. Right?

 

[lukethethird]

Favourite Atheist arguments

Theist: There's an invisible God out there.

Atheist: You talkin' to me?

 

[ChristineM]

Magenta ^
isn't it a dogmatic/apologetic/oft-repeated response of the Atheism people , please?
The next time, will one be seeing a flying kettle in the sky, perhaps, please?
Right friend, please/

Regards

It is a response like all the dogmatic claims to the theistic stance that atheism is a religion. Ir is a very apt simile.

So you see your god as a flying kettle? Who'd of thought it.

 

[PureX]

A simple "I don't believe you" is all the justification necessary.

What you don't believe is irrelevant, and does not make you an atheist. What makes you an atheist is believing that gods don't exist until they can be proven to exist. And that is a theological position that, when asserted, requires justification. This thread is about that justification.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It is a response like all the dogmatic claims to the theistic stance that atheism is a religion. Ir is a very apt simile.

So you see your god as a flying kettle? Who'd of thought it.

Do all atheists use reason, logic and evidence?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What you don't believe is irrelevant, and does not make you an atheist. What makes you an atheist is believing that gods don't exist until they can be proven to exist. And that is a theological position that, when asserted, requires justification. This thread is about that justification.

No, as an atheist I don't believe in theistic gods. Further I don't believe that they exist nor that they don't exist. As for existence I don't believe in that nor that I can prove the ontological status of objective reality including creator gods, but not limited to creator gods.

 

[PureX]

What does atheism proclaim? What is its position?

That gods don't exist until and unless they can be shown to exist.

Atheism, per se, is a default, not a position. We're born atheist. Subsequent theological beliefs are enculturated. Theology is learned.
A blank slate proclaims nothing.

The presumption that gods don't exist until and unless they can be shown to exist is not a logical "default position". And we are not born atheists. The logical "default position" would be 'undetermined'. Atheists are not undetermined.

 

[PureX]

No, as an atheist I don't believe in theistic gods. Further I don't believe that they exist nor that they don't exist.

Then you are clearly quite confused. Being confused does not make you an atheist. It just makes you undetermined.

As for existence I don't believe in that nor that I can prove the ontological status of objective reality including creator gods, but not limited to creator gods.

None of this is about what anyone can prove. Proof is not a requirement for theism, atheism, or agnosticism.

 

[paarsurrey]

Then you are clearly quite confused. Being confused does not make you an atheist. It just makes you undetermined.
None of this is about what anyone can prove. Proof is not a requirement for theism, atheism, or agnosticism.

Only magenta ^.

For Atheism just being ignorant is more than enough, I understand, please. Right?

Regards

 

[PureX]

Only magenta ^.

For Atheism just being ignorant is more than enough, I understand, please. Right?

Regards

To hold and express a position logically calls for justification. Atheism expressed, is a position. And so calls for justification.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

To hold and express a position logically calls for justification. Atheism expressed, is a position. And so calls for justification.

There is no justification possible if you believe in Agrippa's trilemma. Since I believe in that, I don't have to use justification. I just have to use another belief than the belief in justification as you believe in it. How is that possible? Well, even if I have not justification according your belief, I can still believe and act. How? I am doing it now.

I.e. it seems to work for me and that is all I need. I accept that you can do it differently, but since I can also do it differently than you, I don't have to it like you.

 

[ChristineM]

What you don't believe is irrelevant, and does not make you an atheist. What makes you an atheist is believing that gods don't exist until they can be proven to exist. And that is a theological position that, when asserted, requires justification. This thread is about that justification.

So not collecting stamps is a hobby

Not playing football is a game

Standing still is moving

Ok, i think i understand

 

[ChristineM]

To hold and express a position logically calls for justification. Atheism expressed, is a position. And so calls for justification.

The justification is lack of evidence.

Rather like i am justified in not believing in invisible pink polka dot unicorns for exactly the same reason

 

[PureX]

There is no justification possible if you believe in Agrippa's trilemma. Since I believe in that, I don't have to use justification. I just have to use another belief than the belief in justification as you believe in it. How is that possible? Well, even if I have not justification according your belief, I can still believe and act. How? I am doing it now.

I.e. it seems to work for me and that is all I need. I accept that you can do it differently, but since I can also do it differently than you, I don't have to it like you.

Then why would anyone else want to converse with you about it?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Then why would anyone else want to converse with you about it?

That is their choice, not mine. That you in effect believe that you are the objective authoritative source for how to do life, doesn't mean I have to do as you for all cases of having a life. Just as you don't do as me in all cases.

So I answer you because I feel like it. What you do, is not something I control.