*[I believe] Atheism is an absurd worldview

[Reflex]

As much as you wish to deflect and dodge, or use terminology, definitions and quotes... it doesn't prove your claim a God exists... therefore, please provide proof. It really *is* that simple.

I claim no "proof," not now, now ever. In fact, I have often made it a point to say there is none. I only try to point out inconsistencies and require that atheists do more than simply sit on their high horse of simple-minded denial..

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Correct. What's your point?

You claimed Christ's Prophet was wrong in his understanding of what an atheist is, and he in fact was correct, but you said he was mistaken and you did nothing more than use different words to say the same thing.

Theists are both theists and atheists

Theists are not atheists as they believe in some god concept. An atheist does not believe in a god concept. That's why we have two different words to describe these two different views.

 

[Reflex]

Bahahaha!!

Thanks. It's been a tough day, always nice to finish it with a chuckle.

*hands him a banana*

Is this your example of a "bright"? Derision without an example is asinine.

 

[ArtieE]

You claimed Christ's Prophet was wrong in his understanding of what an atheist is, and he in fact was correct, but you said he was mistaken and you did nothing more than use different words to say the same thing.

No I didn't "use different words to say the same thing." You are confused.

Theists are not atheists as they believe in some god concept.

Theists believe in one or more gods and are atheistic towards all other gods as they don't believe in them. A Christian is for example a theist regarding the Christian god but an atheist regarding all the other gods since he doesn't believe in them.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I claim no "proof," not now, now ever. In fact, I have often made it a point to say there is none. I only try to point out inconsistencies and require that atheists do more than simply sit on their high horse of simple-minded denial..

It's not the denial that is simple minded. It is the same mechanism as telling your child their imaginary friend doesn't exist. You are not born with the knowledge of a God. It is brainwashed into you by the religious club your parents belong to.

It's the childlike belief in the imaginary friend that is retained in the simplistic, and stunted adult mind.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

Theists are both theists and atheists in that they believe in the existence of one or more gods and don't believe in the existence of the rest of the gods. Atheists don't believe in the existence of any gods. Of course there are any number of different "world-views" possible.

The whole "world view" debate is a stupid distraction from having the believers prove their claim.

Atheism is a 'world view' if you define 'world view' as a particular opinion on a subject, and it is not a 'world view' if you define 'world view' as an absolute rigid, overpowering belief that cannot set you apart as an individual.

Back to the real discussion... is asking for proof of a God before wearing his silly hat "absurd", and is life "meaningless" without God's guide book?

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

I always find the parallels between Jesus and David Koresh rather striking.

Killed by the government at the time, a life with followers believing he was the son of God... all it would take is for his followers to write a book.

Perhaps they can make up a story that he came back from the dead, gave them some instructions, and then start brainwashing kids to believe it. In order for the brainwashing to take hold, one follower will have to write a book that creates fear in children... so maybe if he narrates it from the perspective of a dream he had... something where David comes back and sends the non-believers into an ocean of fire, (oceans are bigger and scarier than lakes).

Would it take a simple mind to believe David Koresh is a God? Is it absurd if you ask for some proof before you believe it? Is your life meaningless if you don't follow David Koresh's teachings?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Theists believe in one or more gods and are atheistic towards all other gods as they don't believe in them.

A theist is not an atheist because they accept some god concept while rejecting another. A theist believes. That is why they are called theists, and lack the a- prefix, which denotes a lack of belief, specifically the lack of belief in a god concept, which is what defines atheist.

 

[Reflex]

It's not the denial that is simple minded. It is the same mechanism as telling your child their imaginary friend doesn't exist. You are not born with the knowledge of a God. It is brainwashed into you by the religious club your parents belong to.

It's the childlike belief in the imaginary friend that is retained in the simplistic, and stunted adult mind.

No one believes that we are born with knowledge of God's existence, so making that an argument is about as meaningful as saying "Goo goo ba goo." The sad thing is, atheists say "Goo goo ba goo" all the time, as though it has some bearing on the religiosity of human beings.

The problem is, simple denial has no epistemic value and "I dunno" does not provide a conceptual frame in which to think. Even science functions on unprovable assumptions.

 

[ArtieE]

A theist is not an atheist because they accept some god concept while rejecting another. A theist believes.

A Christian theist believes in the existence of the Christian god.

That is why they are called theists, and lack the a- prefix, which denotes a lack of belief

And they lack a belief in the existence of any other god such as Thor or Zeus.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

No one believes that we are born with knowledge of God's existence, so making that an argument is about as meaningful as saying "Goo goo ba goo." The sad thing is, atheists say "Goo goo ba goo" all the time, as though it has some bearing on the religiosity of human beings.

The problem is, simple denial has no epistemic value and "I dunno" does not provide a conceptual frame in which to think. Even science functions on unprovable assumptions.

If no one believes you are born with the knowledge of God, then you are admitting God is a man made construct of the mind, and admitting that God is unfair in that he requires belief in him, but not everyone is able to even know of him.

Unfortunately, sometimes you have to make baby talk to get through to the baby.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

No one believes that we are born with knowledge of God's existence, so making that an argument is about as meaningful as saying "Goo goo ba goo." The sad thing is, atheists say "Goo goo ba goo" all the time, as though it has some bearing on the religiosity of human beings.

The problem is, simple denial has no epistemic value and "I dunno" does not provide a conceptual frame in which to think. Even science functions on unprovable assumptions.

As well, "I dunno" is what leads to evolution and invention. It is those who claim to 'know it all' that are stuck in living standards, and beliefs from 2000+ years ago.

How do fuel injectors in an internal combustion engine work? I dunno, but it ain't no supernatural imaginary friend making it work. Admitting you don't actually know is the first step toward knowledge and intelligence.

 

[Curious George]

I claim no "proof," not now, now ever. In fact, I have often made it a point to say there is none. I only try to point out inconsistencies and require that atheists do more than simply sit on their high horse of simple-minded denial..

I would really like to start a thread and discuss atheism with you. I don't find that I have a high horse, or a horse at all, excepting the dead one I find myself occasionally beating.

We are going to have to distance ourselves from the ops argument, because...well, logic. But your generalized comments towards atheists seem humorous, as I can see the traits in some atheists, but not in all. Moreover, most atheists I know are willing to add qualifiers to their statements about "Christians, Muslims, or theists" in order not to make as sweeping generalizations as you have. (no point in denying that, unfortunately, many atheists seem to focus on abrahamic religion. Though, some do speak of theists in general and avoid such narrow views).

I would hope, from such interaction you can at least qualify some of your future statements. I enjoy thinking, I don't think an atheists worldview should not be challenged. And, I seldom think I am more righteous, than others (but I occasionally think I am more right than others )

Anyway, I will tag you, or you can start a conversation and tag me. But if the op starts as this one did, I foresee us speaking a long time about logic, before we get to any substance.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Is this your example of a "bright"? Derision without an example is asinine.

A "bright"? Phht...you're unlikely to hear me use such self-congratulatory crap. And at a guess you are unlikely to see the funny side in this, but a request for an explanation is fair enough, so...

You said the following;

However, and I want to stress this, those who deny God are almost never consistent or coherent.

I'd tend to see that as being at once both accurate and meaningless, since I think PEOPLE are almost never consistent or coherent.
Perhaps you agree, and were making a throwaway comment, but I thought it more likely that you stating a different between those who deny or embrace God in terms of consistency. Like, theists are usually consistent and coherent.

That strikes me as funny, is all.

 

[outhouse]

Killed by the government at the time, a life with followers believing he was the son of God... all it would take is for his followers to write a book.

You should study this a little better.

Jesus was killed because he started trouble in the temple. People at that time did not view him as son of god, nor did he ever make that claim.

His followers did not write anything. No eyewitness ever wrote a word about him.

 

[outhouse]

I would really like to start a thread and discuss atheism with you. I don't find that I have a high horse, or a horse at all, excepting the dead one I find myself occasionally beating.

You first could try and address his theism. You cannot discuss the lack of something, until you can mutually understand what that something is.

 

[OutOfTheDarkness]

You should study this a little better.

Jesus was killed because he started trouble in the temple. People at that time did not view him as son of god, nor did he ever make that claim.

His followers did not write anything. No eyewitness ever wrote a word about him.

John 6:37-40

Is there a difference in follower, be they second generation, second hand, or otherwise?

The comparison is in human nature and myth creation. They lived in different parts of the world too... and at different times... and had different names... one wore glasses... one was probably taller...

 

[Curious George]

You first could try and address his theism. You cannot discuss the lack of something, until you can mutually understand what that something is.

I am a strong atheist, so I wouldn't have the same problems as those trying to parse through the lack of belief disagreement. I would discuss it from that angle.

 

[Reflex]

It's a question of degree.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Like what?

An atheist can hold a gazillion worldviews, but we were talking about the one view he undoubtedly holds, the atheist worldview.

I already mentioned a few.
I guess I just don't see how atheism is a worldview. I see how it can help a person make up a worldview, but in itself, I just don't see it. Personally, my lack of belief in deities has pretty much nothing to do with how I go about my life. It only really comes up in forums such as these or if someone brings up religion in conversation.

Obviously you have higher expectations of what a worldview is. Why's that?

I guess I expect a worldview to have some kind of philosophy or beliefs behind it, rather than something just based on a lack of belief.
If I don't believe in ghosts, do you consider that a worldview?