I see no value in atheism

[JoStories]

I agree with your agnostic definition, but I'm having trouble getting my head around a requirement for denial in atheism. The vast majority of self proclaimed "atheists" make no such claim. They simply consider themselves as lacking any belief in the supernatural. But that in no way means that they actively believe the God cannot exist.

I understand that is your POV and most people's In fact. It's something I argued about with my dad for ages and we ended with a draw before he died. I will bow to your expertise my friend for the record.

 

[JoStories]

Exactly. Technically all knowledge is merely belief, inferences of tiny "leaps of faith".

Agreed.

 

[JoStories]

I've dealt with enough atheists in my time to know that atheism is undeniably rooted in emotions, rather than logic. Atheism devalues all of existence, which makes life easier to deal with for certain people. It's an emotional crutch for the weak and the wicked.

That makes no sense at all. Why on earth would you think this? The atheists I know and more importantly, the atheists on this board/forum have clearly pointed out that atheism is simply a lack of belief. It has nothing to do with emotions. It is the absence of belief or believing there is no evidence to convince there is a god. And to say atheism devalues existence is horse merde. The rest of your post seems to be written from your own emotional POV, meaning you seem to hate them. Too bad, Some great people here.

 

[JoStories]

Some like me beg to differ.

When the empirical evidence is overwhelming and unexplainable in any other reasonable terms, that is tantamount to knowing. Far more than for example how one might say they know Napoleon existed.

And some of us do not "shut down" like your relative when challenged.

Do you think Joan of Arc knew God existed? How about St. Paul? That is, if you accepted those two in fact existed in the first place.

Certainly by the time of Joan of arc there was enough historical data to prove she lived. As for Paul, I don't know that I beleive he existed. I certainly don't believe the hype surrounding him nor that he knew Jesus.

 

[thau]

Certainly by the time of Joan of arc there was enough historical data to prove she lived. As for Paul, I don't know that I beleive he existed. I certainly don't believe the hype surrounding him nor that he knew Jesus.

The point I was then making was that if you knew the written historical record of Joan of Arc, the testimony of a number of eye witnesses in the French court records (very much in tact today) as to what they observed and what they testified to what Joan saw, heard, did and prophesied --- one would surely know she was witness to the reality of God speaking to her.

 

[leibowde84]

The point I was then making was that if you knew the written historical record of Joan of Arc, the testimony of a number of eye witnesses in the French court record documents as to what they observed and what they testified to what Joan saw, heard and prophesied --- one would surely know she was witness to the reality of God speaking to her.

That is a stretch. The "eyewitnesses" would provide nothing more than confirmation of what she CLAIMED to have seen. Whether it was true or even more so real is an entirely different story. Unless all the witnesses saw the vision with their own eyes simultaneously.

 

[Quagmire]

You are a staff member, I am not going to accept being bullied by you.

Translation: "You're a staff member. ie., you are a lowly servant who should know his place. I should be able to say anything I want to you and you're obligated to just stand there and take it".

Of course, you seem to have the same attitude towards a lot of the regular members in here so I guess I shouldn't feel too bad.

Stop it.

Yes sir, and can I get you some dessert?

If childish attacks and snide insults are all you can muster, don't comment.

Hey man I know: why don't you just ignore them like you do whenever I post something that completely demolishes whatever argument you were trying to make?

 

[leibowde84]

Some like me beg to differ.

When the empirical evidence is overwhelming and unexplainable in any other reasonable terms, that is tantamount to knowing. Far more than for example how one might say they know Napoleon existed.

And some of us do not "shut down" like your relative when challenged.

Do you think Joan of Arc knew God existed? How about St. Paul? That is, if you accepted those two in fact existed in the first place.

Neither "knows" anything about God. The mere lack of a natural explanation in no way proves that God was involved. Hallucinations happen every day. Also, we knew almost nothing about medicine and science at those times.

Paul's story sounds like a schizophrenic episode followed by a seizure.

 

[thau]

That is a stretch. The "eyewitnesses" would provide nothing more than confirmation of what she CLAIMED to have seen. Whether it was true or even more so real is an entirely different story. Unless all the witnesses saw the vision with their own eyes simultaneously.

It is only a stretch to those who know so little of her life and of the documented testimonies of several contemporaries, friend and foe alike, even of the King of France. It is not only what she "heard" but what she accomplished as a 17 year old maiden commanding the French armies, and how she managed to do it. The court records of her two trials are vast and stunning (imo).

Mark Twain, the iconoclast and no friend of formal Christianity, was so fascinated by her that he spent 12 years researching everything written about her and beyond, much of it in France. His book on Joan of Arc was dismissed by secular critics for dubious reasons, but still remained his personal favorite. Here is an excerpt from an article concerning the subject -----

What Atheists Don't Want You To know About Mark Twain's Secret "I like Joan of Arc best of all my books; and it is the best; I know it perfectly well. And besides, it furnished me seven times the pleasure afforded me by any of the others; twelve years of preparation, and two years of writing. The others needed no preparation and got none."
...Mark Twain admired, maybe even venerated "Joan of Arc" and he was transfixed by the amazing spiritual events experienced by the young French virgin who called herself "Joan the Maid." Writing in a 1904 Harper’s essay, he referred to her as “by far the most extraordinary person the human race has ever produced.”

I hold no misconceptions of convincing you of anything. Just offering an anecdote for what it's worth.

 

[leibowde84]

It is only a stretch to those who know so little of her life and of the documented testimonies of several contemporaries, friend and foe alike, even of the King of France. It is not only what she "heard" but what she accomplished as a 17 year old maiden commanding the French armies, and how she managed to do it. The court records of her two trials are vast and stunning (imo).

Mark Twain, the iconoclast and no friend of formal Christianity, was so fascinated by her that he spent 12 years researching everything written about her and beyond, much of it in France. His book on Joan of Arc was dismissed by secular critics for dubious reasons, but still remained his personal favorite. Here is an excerpt from an article concerning the subject -----

What Atheists Don't Want You To know About Mark Twain's Secret "I like Joan of Arc best of all my books; and it is the best; I know it perfectly well. And besides, it furnished me seven times the pleasure afforded me by any of the others; twelve years of preparation, and two years of writing. The others needed no preparation and got none."
...Mark Twain admired, maybe even venerated "Joan of Arc" and he was transfixed by the amazing spiritual events experienced by the young French virgin who called herself "Joan the Maid." Writing in a 1904 Harper’s essay, he referred to her as “by far the most extraordinary person the human race has ever produced.”

I hold no misconceptions of convincing you of anything. Just offering an anecdote for what it's worth.

Fair enough. I agree that she was an amazing person and that she accomplished a tremendous amount, but I don't really see how God would be necessarily involved or how this would even work to prove that God exists.

 

[JoStories]

Fair enough. I agree that she was an amazing person and that she accomplished a tremendous amount, but I don't really see how God would be necessarily involved or how this would even work to prove that God exists.

Agreed leibowde. The facts are that we know she existed but her belief that it as God who guided her is her belief. And nothing more. I think,she was amazing but many people have been prodigies by that age in many fields. She is but one example of this.

 

[JoStories]

The point I was then making was that if you knew the written historical record of Joan of Arc, the testimony of a number of eye witnesses in the French court records (very much in tact today) as to what they observed and what they testified to what Joan saw, heard, did and prophesied --- one would surely know she was witness to the reality of God speaking to her.

I understood your point. You can prove she existed but you can't prove she was guided by God. There are many examples of child prodigy that have astounded. Mozart, Hawkins, Beethoven, and so on. You can believe she was guided by God but there is no way to prove that Thau.

 

[McBell]

I've dealt with enough atheists in my time to know that atheism is undeniably rooted in emotions, rather than logic. Atheism devalues all of existence, which makes life easier to deal with for certain people. It's an emotional crutch for the weak and the wicked.

You really need to get out more.

 

[McBell]

Muslim theists fly planes into buildings, massacre French cartoonists, decapitate fellow Christian theists, blow up innocent people using suicide bombers, perform honor killings and rape children to death. Muslim Man Rapes Child Bride Until She Dies - Religious Freedom Coalition
Theism really creates a better world.

Counting the hits and ignoring the misses does nothing to help your point.

 

[Bunyip]

Translation: "You're a staff member. ie., you are a lowly servant who should know his place. I should be able to say anything I want to you and you're obligated to just stand there and take it".

Not at all - here is a better translation; Be polite, address the arguments and resist personal digs - those are the rules here. I am happy to take responsibility for any comment I make to you - I do not ask that you simply stand and take it. I do not say anything to you that breaches the rules.

Of course, you seem to have the same attitude towards a lot of the regular members in here so I guess I shouldn't feel too bad.

What attitude?

Yes sir, and can I get you some dessert?



Hey man I know: why don't you just ignore them like you do whenever I post something that completely demolishes whatever argument you were trying to make?

You have never even attempted to 'demolish' any of my arguments - all you do is attack me personally. If you could demolish any of my arguments you would not respond with all of these silly personal digs.

Tell you what mate - give me an example of one of the things I have said to you that you think I just 'expect you to take'. Go on, put yer money where your mouth is - you know I have made no such inapproprate comments - so show me.

 

[Quagmire]

Not at all - here is a better translation; Be polite, address the arguments and resist personal digs

The fact that you hold me, and pretty much everybody else here, to this and not yourself pretty much verifies what I said in my last post.

- those are the rules here.

You and I both know that if you thought I'd posted anything even remotely close to a rule violation you would have reported it at least once by now.

I am happy to take responsibility for any comment I make to you -

Then you seem to be in the habit of depriving yourself of an immense amount of joy.

I do not ask that you simply stand and take it.

No, you just expect it as a matter of course.

I do not say anything to you that breaches the rules.

You seem to have your own set very one-sided of rules

You have never even attempted to 'demolish' any of my arguments -

Denial solves all kinds of problems, don't it.

all you do is attack me personally.

Then report me.

If you could demolish any of my arguments you would not respond with all of these silly personal digs.

Denial solves all kinds of problems, don't it.

 

[Bunyip]

The fact that you hold me, and pretty much everybody else here, to this and not yourself pretty much verifies what I said in my last post.

Nonsense, you are inventing false allegations. Example please?

You and I both know that if you thought I'd posted anything even remotely close to a rule you would have reported it at least once by now.

No, there would be no point.

Then you seem to be in the habit of depriving yourself of an immense amount of joy.



No, you just expect it as a matter of course.

Another false allegation, rather than addressing the topic. No I do not expect you to 'just take' anything - I am not doing anything wrong.

You seem to have your own set very one-sided of rules

Example please? Do you ever back your claims?

Denial solves all kinds of problems, don't it.

Denial of what? Example please?

Then report me.

That would acheive nothing, I am simply asking that you address the OP and my argument rather than simply attacking me.

Denial solves all kinds of problems, don't it.

Like what? Denial of what?

 

[Quagmire]

Nonsense, you are inventing false allegations. Example please?

I can't show those in the open forum, and you know it.

 

[Quagmire]

Nonsense, you are inventing false allegations. Example please? No, there would be no point. Another false allegation, rather than addressing the topic. No I do not expect you to 'just take' anything - I am not doing anything wrong. Example please? Do you ever back your claims? Denial of what? Example please? That would acheive nothing, I am simply asking that you address the OP and my argument rather than simply attacking me.Like what? Denial of what?

Showing you anything does no good, you just ignore it. Trying to reason with you achieves nothing. I know what you are. Everybody who matters in this place probably does too.

I'll leave it at that.

 

[Bunyip]

I can't show those in the open forum, and you know it.

No you can't. If you could you would have reported them.