The Folly of Atheism

[Willamena]

That is completely illogical.
If God exists, God would be out of human reach so humans could never demonstrate that God exists.
Humans do not have the ability to reach God, so only if God chose to demonstrate Himself could we ever see such a demonstration.

The ability for something to be demonstrable is not dependent on human reach, it's an objective quality. Whether or not we were where 'god' is, it would either be demonstrable or not. If not, then it really doesn't get to qualify as an existent, because it is indistinguishable from a fiction.

Well obviously, but God is not beyond existence, God is just beyond human reach.

Again, indistinguishable from fiction.

 

[usfan]

Your posts are irrational, you make statements about the god character as if they were a fact instead of a mere belief.

Projection.
You just wanted to get a shot in, it seems. I COMPLETELY recognize belief, as a subjective opinion, based on the influences, information, background, and Indoctrination we have experienced.. unlike the militant atheists, who presume their opinions are 'Fact!'

Your opinion of 'no God' is no more 'objective fact!' than anybody else's.

Your accusation of 'irrational!' applies equally to you.. more so, since i acknowledge the subjectivity of religio/philosophical opinions.

 

[JJ50]

Projection.
You just wanted to get a shot in, it seems. I COMPLETELY recognize belief, as a subjective opinion, based on the influences, information, background, and Indoctrination we have experienced.. unlike the militant atheists, who presume their opinions are 'Fact!'

Your opinion of 'no God' is no more 'objective fact!' than anybody else's.

Your accusation of 'irrational!' applies equally to you.. more so, since i acknowledge the subjectivity of religio/philosophical opinions.

I rest my case.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

There is only one problem with agnosticism.....its a fence-sitting position when there is no fence.....sorry. It requires a decision. Jesus said "whoever is not for me, is against me"...seems pretty simple...."I dunno" is obviously not a valid position.

He also said "whoever is not against me is for me." Learn your Bible.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

You don't need to prove God exists to know God exists, since there is so much evidence....

However, agnosticism is a more rational position than atheism, and it is a respectable position since some people just cannot recognize the evidence for God, obvious as it is.

Evidence is subjective, proof is not.

 

[Twilight Hue]

If the author of the universe cared what we thought about Him I'm sure He could make his presence clear to us.

Especially when every portrayed character in the Bible has more objectiveness to go by then people have now. Which is none.

Another huge contradiction is the Bible's objectiveness portrayed in the narratives, and Christians denial that objectiveness is needed today.

 

[Trailblazer]

Evidence is subjective, proof is not.

But whatever the evidence is evidence of can be the truth regardless of whether it can be proven or not.

Proof does not make anything true, it is either true or not. Proof is just what people want to be able to believe in something.

 

[usfan]

Atheism still isn’t “The belief in ‘no God”. Maybe you need to recognise the human folly in yourself?

Maybe.. or maybe resign myself to fluid, orwellian redefinitions, since i live here in Progresso World..

So, 'Atheism still isn’t “The belief in ‘no God”..
Others have indignantly demanded that this is EXACTLY what atheism is.. you have your own fluid definition, that can change to fit the argument?

 

[Trailblazer]

These atheism threads sure take off and grow like wildfire.

I [don't] wonder why.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

But whatever the evidence is evidence of can be the truth regardless of whether it can be proven or not.

Proof does not make anything true, it is either true or not. Proof is just what people want to be able to believe in something.

You are correct in that something unprovable and hence unknowable may in fact be true. Thus, God/Gods may exist, and yet their existences may still be unknown.

 

[Willamena]

Maybe.. or maybe resign myself to fluid, orwellian redefinitions, since i live here in Progresso World..

So, 'Atheism still isn’t “The belief in ‘no God”..
Others have indignantly demanded that this is EXACTLY what atheism is.. you have your own fluid definition, that can change to fit the argument?

For the record, I have no problem with people saying that atheism is belief in no god, because I believe in a positive world.

 

[Left Coast]

There is only one problem with agnosticism.....its a fence-sitting position when there is no fence.....sorry. It requires a decision. Jesus said "whoever is not for me, is against me"...seems pretty simple...."I dunno" is obviously not a valid position.

Jesus also said, "whoever is not against us is for us."

But more to the point, the bolded statement above is key, and thank you for saying it. It's a fundamental problem with your view. So many theists simply cannot stand the idea that, "I don't know." When the truth is, "I don't know" is a completely valid, completely rational position to take, on many issues, especially pertaining to the supernatural. If we don't have sufficient evidence for a proposition one way or the other, then "I don't know" is precisely the appropriate response.

Many theists, unfortunately, can't tolerate that kind of ambiguity in their minds when it comes to something that is so important to them personally. Thus they insist that non-believers fit their either/or mold. But the truth is, we often don't.

 

[usfan]

These atheism threads sure take off and grow like wildfire.

I [don't] wonder why.

IMO, it is for several reasons:
1. Pent up anger and resentment toward God needs an outlet.. a scapegoat for relief.
2. Competing ideologies are at odds with each other, and bring sparks when they come together.
3. Reality show hysteria is morbidly fascinating. Calm reason is boring. Yelling and emotion sells.
4. Insecurities need justification and affirmation. What better way, than a flame war?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

..just like, 'Is not!!'



What else is there, when discussion subjective opinion?

Nope-- That Which Is Claimed Without Evidence --- May Be Dismissed Without Evidence.

You never-- EVER-EVER show your "evidence".

So. Saying "IS NOT" is perfectly reasonable.

 

[usfan]

You think I'm "hostile"? Because I deplore the fact my taxes support your superstitious nonsense? Because your cult has so influenced my country, that a person cannot get elected without paying meaningless homage to your beliefs?

Worse-- your cult is directly responsible for the death of countless victims who dared question your religion? And if you include indirect deaths-- because of systematic abuse, all sanctioned by your religion-- and you think **I** am ... hostile?

If it wasn't for a Godless And Deliberately Secular Constitution-- your religion would still be killing people like me.
That's a level of "Hostile" that my comments are not even in the same ball-park....
Irony.

Wow. You sure have fabricated lots of justifications for your hostility..

I still think these are smoke screens for the real issue.. your isolation from God. ..but, that is just imho.. everybody gotta believe something.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

These atheism threads sure take off and grow like wildfire.

I [don't] wonder why.

Maybe it's because of Secular Law-- which prevents the casual persecution of anyone who isn't a theist? In this Modern Age, theist are no longer (mostly) permitted to simply kill anyone they consider "heretical".

And non-theists are refusing to simply sit by, and take the abuse any more.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Wow. You sure have fabricated lots of justifications for your hostility.. .

Projection. I'm not hostile. It is 100% you. YOU would murder people like me, if you could. History taught this lesson very well to non-believers.

I still think these are smoke screens for the real issue.. your isolation from God. ..but, that is just imho.. everybody gotta believe something.

Straw Man. And reported for abuse.

 

[usfan]

Nope-- That Which Is Claimed Without Evidence --- May Be Dismissed Without Evidence.
You never-- EVER-EVER show your "evidence".
So. Saying "IS NOT" is perfectly reasonable.

I've provided a complete thread, dedicated to 'evidence' for God. It is there, for those who seek truth. But for those who want personal affirmation and justification, that is easily found, too.

What are you looking for? Justification or Truth?

 

[Catholicus]

Err, don't follow that - how does that make sense.?
Where did god come from then?

God is the starting point, the Uncreated, the only reality.

Thus doesn't "come from" anywhere.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I've provided a complete thread, dedicated to 'evidence' for God..

And every single Straw Man "point" you posted? Was thoroughly refuted-- multiple times over.

So what?

It is there, for those who seek truth. .

Truth? Do you have any? It's not evident... certainly not in any of your .... stuff.