Should Believers Avoid and Fear Athiest?

[yossarian22]

Actually those people THE GADFLY is referring to are insulting themselves. and referring to him as THE GADFLY is not annoying, people who has nothing else to say will think that way. i guess you dont have anything else to say huh?

Actually, I do.
And I noticed that neither you nor THE GADFLY have responded to them. Here, I will show you them.

The formation of a black hole in another universe.

That's just one theory, by the way. But that is besides the point.
Both our theories force an infinite regression. Mine is just more useful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GadFly
You are welcome to explain your non-fallacies ideas. For example, what is the universe like without God?:bow:

The universe.
What is the universe with God?
The universe.
A useless, fallacious question gets nothing but a useless answer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel07
The tool you seem to favor is the delusion of your own intellect. There is no logical basis for atheism.

Occam's Razor.

So chop chop. Respond

 

[uss_bigd]

Come on, really? I wasn't sure before, but it's getting clearer that you don't really want to discuss anything, you're just looking to start an argument over nothing. That's too bad, you could learn a lot from the people here if you'd open up, and try a real dialogue.

tsk tsk tsk.

nobody answers my replies with something that will sustain a dialogue.

all the replies i received was that i am a murderous psycopath, a hypocrite, baby killer, child murderer the worst i got so far was endorser of pure evil.

cut me some slack will you? i have recevied a ton of personal bashing already, and they don't get to pay for it.

besides? why were you offeded? the USS_BIGD is a ship, it does not bite .... hehehe:angel2:

 

[Magic Man]

tsk tsk tsk.

nobody answers my replies with something that will sustain a dialogue.

all the replies i received was that i am a murderous psycopath, a hypocrite, baby killer, child murderer the worst i got so far was endorser of pure evil.

cut me some slack will you? i have recevied a ton of personal bashing already, and they don't get to pay for it.

besides? why were you offeded? the USS_BIGD is a ship, it does not bite .... hehehe:angel2:

I'm not offended, just saddened briefly when I come across this kind of attitude and thinking.

 

[GadFly]

Rick I just mentioned in post 56 that I could be wrong about something. Athiest have no problem being proven wrong. We have no problem admitting that we could be or are wrong. Here's the question...can or will you admitt that all that you believe could be wrong?

You have believed strongly in your heart and mind that your faith and your god is the absolute all that is and there are no other gods but I'm quite sure other theist will disagre with you. Both sides are armed with their scriptures, rituals and traditions but neither side can say for sure they are correct. Both sides have their faith but does that mean your faith outweighs theirs?

Athiest take no sides. We don't care. I respect what you feel and what you believe and you have every right to that. Since neither of you can prove or disprove the existance of your deities what importance is it to us?

I think the verbiage in this thread has greatly been exaggerated to a boiling point at times and has been a contest to see who could make the others logic seem foolish. The idea that our logic might be called into question seems to excite the conversation beyond a comfortable level. I for one would like to change that.

I can not speak for Rick but I think he would agree with me. We are not trying to prove God 100% to every bodies satisfaction that God exist but we would enjoy and appreciate if the atheist would admit that there is some evidence that God exist. There may not be enough evidence for atheist to construct a complete system of religion such as the Catholic have, but to admit there is enough evidence that the unbeliever is not justified in claiming the Catholic are narrow minded for believing in God.

Myself, I am a Methodist. I do not take my Methodists faith so far that I will not admit that Methodism has its faults and errors. Yet, I know that there is more believable evidence that God exist than there is that Methodism is true. I think there are more pieces of evidence that God is true than there are that Methodism is true. The belief in God is better supported with strong premises in logic and reasonable thinking. I believe, critics that say there is no God, should challenge the premises for belief in the existence of God. If atheist or Christians want to prove their arguments or points of faith, it will be best for their arguments to be as impersonal as possible. I am made to realize this more and more as this thread goes on. What I shall do is focus on the premises for arguing against atheism and for God. That is fair and reasonable for both sides. In this respect I do not fear or desire to avoid atheist, which is the point of this thread. I suggest that Christians and atheist support this concept of debate to remain civil. Now, go to your corners and come out slugging with criticisms of premises. Or, go to the bathroom and empty your bladder.
The GadFly

 

[GadFly]

On what premise do you support this assertion?

The assertion that Christians have better premises than atheist is that Christians believe God is their ultimate premise for living. Atheist do not believe in God, therefore, they have no premises for reasoning in the view of the Christians. I did not do good enough job in explaining this. I did not mean to say there was a difference in the intelligence level of either. If anybody though that is what I was saying, I apologize.

 

[GadFly]

Perhaps; but ideas about God are constantly changing and being renewed, and those are what we know God by.

But my opinion on change is that change is an appearance and not real. The fact that ideas on God constantly change does not mean that God changes. We understand more about God which we call change.

 

[GadFly]

How so? Did you not watch the video? How is not believing in a god make logic impossible. The world has benefited from countless theist and non-theist throughout history.

This is not a one sided deal. Theist are in the same boat. The christian and muslims have dozens of sects. "Their logic" and reasoning as to why they believe what they do are so vast. Some of their ideas, even though they may be all considered christian or muslim, are not compatible. Do we not see thousands linning up to take their complimentary flu shot every year? These people, theist and non-theist alike, are prone to believe that this vaccine is engineered to help them.

You believe in a god. OK.....We have no problem with it until you focus your belief system on us. I don't believe in gods. You have a problem with me not believing in a god. You believe that because I don't believe in a god my logic must be flawed. For kicks and giggles if I start beliving in Zeus or Vishnu or any of the countless gods would my logic be corrected or is it that I must believe in a judeo christian god? This is where logic is flawed. One does not have to believe in a god in order to think logically. This has already been proven. You reap the rewards of those non-theist in history who have paved the way for you to live the lifestyle you live today.


You know as well as I do that it takes a people (collectively) working together to effect change. If people don't like the way they live they change the system or they change themselves. The people of china and russia have come a long way. They don't live in the "oppressive" society they use to. Those that feel it is too oppresive move to other countries to seek a better life.

How is not believing in a god make logic impossible. This statement is based on the belief that the rules of logic come fro God. God being the most basic principle, it follows that logic is not possible. Logic is therefore evidence of God.

Do we not see thousands linning up to take their complimentary flu shot every year? This statement proves scientific advancements trust that the rule of logic and science do not change or the vaccine would not be trusted.

This is where logic is flawed. One does not have to believe in a god in order to think logically. This has already been proven. But you must believe that the premises of logic do not change. Every thinking person knows this is true or no one could trust science. We believe that God is the source of science's rules. Do you believe in logic that has changing premises? If you do , your logic is flawed.

 

[camanintx]

:yes:My bible tells me that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, I guess this explains why some people are lacking in wisdom.....Some day soon they will know what I know in my heart now.....There is a God......

Do you have an argument to make here or not? It almost sounds like you are prostylizing.

 

[camanintx]

The tool you seem to favor is the delusion of your own intellect. There is no logical basis for atheism. I consider myself in better intellectual company with the likes of Copernicus, Einstein, Gregor Mengel , Isaac Newton etc. who all believed in God. But at the end of the day knowing of God is not for the proud. So what's your intellectual claim to fame?

If this is what you believe then there is probably little point in debating with you. It has been shown many times in many places that atheism is more logically consistent than theism. My personal favorite is this one by Quentin Smith.

 

[camanintx]

I commend you on the try. It is really quite good but now you will have to explain the catalyst for the big bang. Nothing comes out of nothing. What part of that do you guys not get? An Eternal God that is one who lives in the past, the present and the future at the same time ( omniprescence) could easily use evolution etc. But again what was the catalyst for the Big Bang? That is checkmate.

Before you can claim victory, you would have to show how any claim that God is eternal cannot equally apply to the universe itself.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I think the verbiage in this thread has greatly been exaggerated to a boiling point at times and has been a contest to see who could make the others logic seem foolish.

If we had simply ended with a (NO) then maybe the thread wouldn't have gone on as long.

The idea that our logic might be called into question seems to excite the conversation beyond a comfortable level. I for one would like to change that.

This is far beyond your limited ability to help both sides find common ground. I don't mean that in a negative way. It is what it is.

I can not speak for Rick but I think he would agree with me. We are not trying to prove God 100% to every bodies satisfaction that God exist but we would enjoy and appreciate if the atheist would admit that there is some evidence that God exist.

See, that's the problem. There is no evidence. You have a strong belief but so does the Hindu as well as other religions that profess the belief in a deity or deities. Are you suggesting that their gods do not exist? See, you believe that there is no god but the one you believe in. You believe he is the one true god and all others are false gods. Is this not what you believe? Can you disprove the existence of their deities?

If we start admitting that there is some evidence that your god exist, which has really shown to be a futile attempt, then we must also admit the possibility of the existence of other gods....Which...so far also appears to be a waste....Do you admit the possibility that the gods from other religions, whom these followers believe just as strong as you do, exist?

There may not be enough evidence for atheist to construct a complete system of religion such as the Catholic have, but to admit there is enough evidence that the unbeliever is not justified in claiming the Catholic are narrow minded for believing in God.

You and the catholics can believe whatever you want. You can believe in easter bunnies, christmas trees, fat pudgy angel babies with arrows filled with love juice, knocking on doors begging for treats or whatever else you are into. We, as atheist would like to be left out of it. Truth be told....your own monotheistic way of life is deep rooted in paganism so the same people you condem you're most like.

I have no problem talking to theist and I truly do respect their ways of life. I find myself involved in plenty of religious threads here even though I'm an atheist. I may not agree with them but it does help me to understand why they believe what they do.

If atheist or Christians want to prove their arguments or points of faith, it will be best for their arguments to be as impersonal as possible.

I could be wrong and If I am then I fully admit that I am but I think there are far fewer threads here of atheist going on the attact than what you think. Look around you. Throughout the world it is not the atheist who are at odds with you. I say this because we truly don't care about you unless you are messing with our civil liberties. When I say the world I'm talking about other theist who don't beleve what you do who go so far as to hijacking planes and strapping bombs to themselves or even the ones who call themselves christians bombing clinics or the ones who codem the gay and lesbian community. You have far more important things to worry about than what we atheist think about your gods.

What I shall do is focus on the premises for arguing against atheism and for God. That is fair and reasonable for both sides.

You're going to have to invite ALL theist because we have made the statement that we do not believe in gods. We don't just (not) believe in your god. We don't believe in any. Why should we when you don't even believe in other gods?

 

[Michel07]

If we had simply ended with a (NO) then maybe the thread wouldn't have gone on as long.




This is far beyond your limited ability to help both sides find common ground. I don't mean that in a negative way. It is what it is.




See, that's the problem. There is no evidence. You have a strong belief but so does the Hindu as well as other religions that profess the belief in a deity or deities. Are you suggesting that their gods do not exist? See, you believe that there is no god but the one you believe in. You believe he is the one true god and all others are false gods. Is this not what you believe? Can you disprove the existence of their deities?

If we start admitting that there is some evidence that your god exist, which has really shown to be a futile attempt, then we must also admit the possibility of the existence of other gods....Which...so far also appears to be a waste....Do you admit the possibility that the gods from other religions, whom these followers believe just as strong as you do, exist?




You and the catholics can believe whatever you want. You can believe in easter bunnies, christmas trees, fat pudgy angel babies with arrows filled with love juice, knocking on doors begging for treats or whatever else you are into. We, as atheist would like to be left out of it. Truth be told....your own monotheistic way of life is deep rooted in paganism so the same people you condem you're most like.

I have no problem talking to theist and I truly do respect their ways of life. I find myself involved in plenty of religious threads here even though I'm an atheist. I may not agree with them but it does help me to understand why they believe what they do.



I could be wrong and If I am then I fully admit that I am but I think there are far fewer threads here of atheist going on the attact than what you think. Look around you. Throughout the world it is not the atheist who are at odds with you. I say this because we truly don't care about you unless you are messing with our civil liberties. When I say the world I'm talking about other theist who don't beleve what you do who go so far as to hijacking planes and strapping bombs to themselves or even the ones who call themselves christians bombing clinics or the ones who codem the gay and lesbian community. You have far more important things to worry about than what we atheist think about your gods.



You're going to have to invite ALL theist because we have made the statement that we do not believe in gods. We don't just (not) believe in your god. We don't believe in any. Why should we when you don't even believe in other gods?

Your problem is obvious and twofold.

1. No one is calling you god.

2. Vanity prevents you from being able to say that some people in history have known more about God than you. You can't handle that because if God is real then God is the most important subject to know something about. So to not admit yout ignorance you refute the very existence of God. How childish or remarbably arrogant. Take your pick.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

How is not believing in a god make logic impossible. This statement is based on the belief that the rules of logic come fro God. God being the most basic principle, it follows that logic is not possible. Logic is therefore evidence of God.

I don't agree. Egyptians believed in many gods and thought they were gods as well or would become gods and to this day we still can't figure out how the great pyramids were built. Their knowledge of science, mathmatics and engineering was not based off some logic ("God") existed and responsible for what they knew. They attributed their knowledge of these uderstandings to male and female deities alike.

Do we not see thousands linning up to take their complimentary flu shot every year? This statement proves scientific advancements trust that the rule of logic and science do not change or the vaccine would not be trusted.

Ofcourse they do. What we thought we knew about the flu 10 or 20 years ago has changed drastically because the virus itself has changed (mutated). One particular vaccine may not work on a different strain of flu so we have to change our thinking on how to deal with these viral changes and explore different methods of developing and testing new vaccines before the medicine can be dilivered to the public.

This is where logic is flawed. One does not have to believe in a god in order to think logically. This has already been proven. But you must believe that the premises of logic do not change. Every thinking person knows this is true or no one could trust science. We believe that God is the source of science's rules. Do you believe in logic that has changing premises? If you do , your logic is flawed.

I don't know what more you want from me. I stand by the statement. I don't have to believe in a deity in order to think logically. You say with a level of emphaticallness that "God is the souce" but what of the deities in other religions? Do they not exist? Why don't they? What resoning brings monotheist to the conclusion there is only one? Is this reasoning sound?

 

[Magic Man]

Dirty Penguin, I'd just like to make a suggestion. I have started ignoring Gadfly and his friends, and I'm much happier now. Unfortunately there are people like him in the world, and we can't change that.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Dirty Penguin, I'd just like to make a suggestion. I have started ignoring Gadfly and his friends, and I'm much happier now. Unfortunately there are people like him in the world, and we can't change that.

Yeah it's most unfortunate.........

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Your problem is obvious and twofold.

1. No one is calling you god.

I have no idea what you mean here maybe you'd like to clarify this for me.

2. Vanity prevents you from being able to say that some people in history have known more about God than you. You can't handle that because if God is real then God is the most important subject to know something about. So to not admit yout ignorance you refute the very existence of God. How childish or remarbably arrogant. Take your pick.

If you aren't in a position to concede that other religions have gods and their belief in their god is just as valid as yours then you may be the one that's arrogant. See, I do. I believe that they believe their gods are just as real to them as you believe yours is to you. I'm simply saying that I don't believe in any god.....yours or theirs. Now, are you prepared to aknowledge the gods of other religions? Remember, they have no more or less proof for the existence of their gods then you do yours. Every attribute you give to your god they've given to theirs.....What say ye....? What makes your god a reality and theirs false....?

 

[Booko]

why are you picking on her... you can't take on THE GADFLY anymore? hehehe

Are you two married or something?

Or maybe you're the same person?

 

[GadFly]

If we had simply ended with a (NO) then maybe the thread wouldn't have gone on as long.

This is far beyond your limited ability to help both sides find common ground. I don't mean that in a negative way. It is what it is.

See, that's the problem. There is no evidence. You have a strong belief but so does the Hindu as well as other religions that profess the belief in a deity or deities. Are you suggesting that their gods do not exist? See, you believe that there is no god but the one you believe in. You believe he is the one true god and all others are false gods. Is this not what you believe? Can you disprove the existence of their deities?

If we start admitting that there is some evidence that your god exist, which has really shown to be a futile attempt, then we must also admit the possibility of the existence of other gods....Which...so far also appears to be a waste....Do you admit the possibility that the gods from other religions, whom these followers believe just as strong as you do, exist?

You and the catholics can believe whatever you want. You can believe in easter bunnies, christmas trees, fat pudgy angel babies with arrows filled with love juice, knocking on doors begging for treats or whatever else you are into. We, as atheist would like to be left out of it. Truth be told....your own monotheistic way of life is deep rooted in paganism so the same people you condem you're most like.

I have no problem talking to theist and I truly do respect their ways of life. I find myself involved in plenty of religious threads here even though I'm an atheist. I may not agree with them but it does help me to understand why they believe what they do.

I could be wrong and If I am then I fully admit that I am but I think there are far fewer threads here of atheist going on the attact than what you think. Look around you. Throughout the world it is not the atheist who are at odds with you. I say this because we truly don't care about you unless you are messing with our civil liberties. When I say the world I'm talking about other theist who don't beleve what you do who go so far as to hijacking planes and strapping bombs to themselves or even the ones who call themselves christians bombing clinics or the ones who codem the gay and lesbian community. You have far more important things to worry about than what we atheist think about your gods.

You're going to have to invite ALL theist because we have made the statement that we do not believe in gods. We don't just (not) believe in your god. We don't believe in any. Why should we when you don't even believe in other gods?

GadFly is going to respond to this posting, because it offers an excellent opportunity to point out the flaws in atheist thinking. I have previously said that I do not fear atheist and see no reason to avoid them.Now, I will demonstrate why it is necessary to confront their ideas. Perhaps the word attack is misunderstood. It means to challenge to the GadFly. If it is less freighting to the atheist, then I will attempt to use the word challenge when possible. In honor of the two most famous gadflys, I will not soften my language of the gadfly stings and bites. These will be used more discreetly. The two most famous gadflys historically were Socrates and Jesus Christ. They were both well versed in the use of the Socratic Method, which is to answer a question with a question. The original GadFly method was an attempt to urge the proponent of ideas to find the flaws in their thinking processes. Today the method is used mainly to win debates and the truth of an idea is not relative; the goal is to win the debate.

This is far beyond your limited ability to help both sides find common ground. I don't mean that in a negative way. It is what it is. I do agree, there is no common ground between the atheist and the theist.The differences are huger than the atheist would like for the Christian to believe. In this respect the atheist lives up to his reputation of being subtle until he has captured his prey. For an example, the atheist made their move on China only after the peasants were convinced that communism was not a threat to civil liberties. But look at Tibet even today as we speak. The GadFly does mean this negatively and I do oppose the communist, even if they were to claim to be Christians in America. There is no common ground.

See, that's the problem. There is no evidence. Yes, we do see. The problem is that atheist will not acknowledge the evidence. Whether it offends the atheist or not, we take the Christian point of view relating to atheism: This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness (Ephesians 4). We see that you are alienated from God and you think differently than we do. This is what angers the atheist; we point this out and why it is true.

Look around you. Throughout the world it is not the atheist who are at odds with you. I say this because we truly don't care about you unless you are messing with our civil liberties. Man, is this the pot calling the skittle black? Even the Gadfly would not be dense enough to say something like this. Atheist don't believe in civil liberties (self evident proof of God) and everybody know this. We can not give you a pass on this. Communist are notorious for opposing civil liberties with their moral relativity theories. You have just been infected by a GadFly bite.

 

[Booko]

Atheist don't believe in civil liberties (self evident proof of God) and everybody know this. We can not give you a pass on this. Communist are notorious for opposing civil liberties with their moral relativity theories. You have just been infected by a GadFly bite.

Dear Gadly: I was an atheist for years, and I sure as heck did care a great deal about civil liberties.

I suggest you learn something more about atheism before you continue with your non-factual depictions of atheists, who btw are a pretty diverse lot. If you want to see that diversity, you could try someplace dedicated to the subject like Internet Infidels.

Communism, btw, is not a theological stance but a socio-economic one. A little more research there might be of benefit as well.

If the proof of God were so self-evident, there would be no atheists.
There are athiests.
Ergo, the proof of God is not self-evident.

QED

 

[Michel07]

I have no idea what you mean here maybe you'd like to clarify this for me.



If you aren't in a position to concede that other religions have gods and their belief in their god is just as valid as yours then you may be the one that's arrogant. See, I do. I believe that they believe their gods are just as real to them as you believe yours is to you. I'm simply saying that I don't believe in any god.....yours or theirs. Now, are you prepared to aknowledge the gods of other religions? Remember, they have no more or less proof for the existence of their gods then you do yours. Every attribute you give to your god they've given to theirs.....What say ye....? What makes your god a reality and theirs false....?

Kind of glad you asked that actually because I do believe there are some sacred truths in all religions.To some degree God revealed some of His truth to many people throughout history. Even the primitive man who cowered under a tree ( not the best thing to do) during a thunder storm and thought the gods were angry knew there was something greater than himself. Those are in themselves some form of revelation but all revelations are not equal. If I didn't believe that I wouldn't be a part of a religion would I?