The Folly of Atheism

[usfan]

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.

Abuse? Really? With the unrestrained hostility toward Christianity, you're claiming abuse?

 

[Altfish]

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

Thus doesn't "come from" anywhere.

Well, I stop one step earlier.

Special pleading to justify your god does not impress.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

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

Thus doesn't "come from" anywhere.

Citation needed.

1) You failed to show that god(s) are possible.

2) You failed to show god(s) exist.

3) you failed to show, that if possible, god(s) are creative beings.

4) you failed to show any god(s) are "uncreated"

Dismissed.

 

[Catholicus]

And I have no problem with that; as long as they don't try to foster their beliefs on me.
So don't tell me that I can't have an abortion, can't be homosexual, can't insult your beliefs, etc., etc., and we'll be fine.

Abortion is murderous, homosexual behaviour is self-destructive.

These are verifiable facts - not merely "beliefs."

 

[usfan]

And every single Straw Man "point" you posted? Was thoroughly refuted-- multiple times over.
So what?
Truth? Do you have any? It's not evident... certainly not in any of your .... stuff.

Nevermind.. enjoy your beliefs. I've only offered an alternative viewpoint.. nothing to get outraged over..

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Nevermind.. enjoy your beliefs. I've only offered an alternative viewpoint.. nothing to get outraged over..

I have no beliefs-- stop lying about me.

 

[Catholicus]

That was never a problem that good evidence couldn't fix.
First, that's not a 'dilemma'

Second, it's an ordinary rule of debate that the onus of demonstration is on the one who makes the assertion in question.

So one proper reply to any assertion with which you don't agree is, Show me.
So may Satan, or Harry Potter, or the Easter Bunny. That's scarcely a demonstration of their objective existence, their reality.
Since there's no satisfactory definition of a real God, a God with objective existence, such that we could tell one if we found one, the expression "God" can only refer to imaginary gods.

Most Atheists are VERY assertive when claiming - or implying ! - that God doesn't exist.

The burden of proof of that statement is on them, of course.

The existence of a real God is all around you (namely in the fact that the universe and everything in it exists) - but you refuse to see.

God alone is Real. The universe and its contents (such as ourselves) are merely figments of God's imagination, nothingness held in existence only by the loving will of God.

 

[Catholicus]

Well, I stop one step earlier.

Special pleading to justify your god does not impress.

Truth never impresses atheists.

 

[HonestJoe]

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?

I've no responsibility for other people's illiteracy. I've long had an consistent definition of the word atheism, including an understanding of all the variations and uses in different contexts. I also recognise how little the word matters if you actually care about people.

Can I take your lack of response to the rest of my post as acceptance of my criticisms of your list?

 

[Catholicus]

Citation needed.

1) You failed to show that god(s) are possible.

2) You failed to show god(s) exist.

3) you failed to show, that if possible, god(s) are creative beings.

4) you failed to show any god(s) are "uncreated"

Dismissed.

Show how a universe is possible without God; show that it created itself.

You can't:

therefore: Dismissed.

 

[Altfish]

Abortion is murderous, homosexual behaviour is self-destructive.

These are verifiable facts - not merely "beliefs."

You're doing it. Stop it, keep your beliefs to yourself.
They are NOT facts, they are right wing christian beliefs.

 

[Altfish]

Truth never impresses atheists.

..or Christians.

You can't plead for your god to be the start of everything with absolutely no evidence for this god's existence or the fact that she did start things off.

Don't you see the stupidity of saying "Something must have created the universe ... but my god doesn't need a creator" - is it any wonder atheists think like they do when logic like yours is on the other side.

 

[Catholicus]

So circular it bites you in the butt.



Science does not propose that the universe created itself, nor that it happened by chance. This is a foolish notion by theists with a lack of basic knowledge of science.



Philosophical question without an answer. Our physical existence simply exists (unless as many Hindus believe it is only an illusion and only exists in the minds of humans.), and the questions as to whether our universe is eternal or temporal, nor infinite or finite cannot be falsified by objective verifiable evidence.

As a theist I consider the above views and questions ridiculous

So - if the universe didn't create itself and wasn't created by chance - how come it exists ?

Which is, of course, a philosophical question unanswerable by science (still less by those pretending a knowledge of science).

To say that a philosophical question is unanswerable is Obscurantism or (more vulgarly) Dodging the Issue.

 

[Catholicus]

You are describing gnostic atheism i.e the belief that one can know with certainty that God/gods don't exist. I agree that this is folly. However, agnosticism is the most intellectually honest position to take. No one has proven the existence or non-existence of God. Therefore agnosticism is the only rational position.

Except for the purposes of real life ! - no one can live a life on the basis of "Maybe" or "Perhaps" unless they are very sheltered.

Which is why agnosticism is a belief confined to the comfortable classes of the world's rich nations.

 

[Catholicus]

There is a giant invisible dragon following you! If you believe in It, It will convey you to paradise upon your death. If you don't, it will burn your soul to ashes. It chooses not to reveal Itself as a test.

Do you believe in it?

Atheists don't believe because there is not sufficient evidence for them and there are very good reasons for someone to make up a scenario like this.

One could bring up Pascal's wager, that one may as well believe on the off chance the scenario is correct. But then, there's the problem of choosing to worship or believe in something that punishes disbelief without providing adequate proof.

God's existence is visible - from the universe He created and maintains in being.

The invisible dragon's existence isn't.

 

[Catholicus]

..or Christians.

You can't plead for your god to be the start of everything with absolutely no evidence for this god's existence or the fact that she did start things off.

Don't you see the stupidity of saying "Something must have created the universe ... but my god doesn't need a creator" - is it any wonder atheists think like they do when logic like yours is on the other side.

SOMETHING must be the First Cause, the starting-point; and thus Uncreated.

If not, God - what ?

 

[Catholicus]

You're doing it. Stop it, keep your beliefs to yourself.
They are NOT facts, they are right wing christian beliefs.

No - they are scientifically verified facts.

And how is abortion liberal or "progressive" ?? - the murder of unwanted babies is fascist in the highest degree.

 

[JJ50]

No - they are scientifically verified facts.

And how is abortion liberal or "progressive" ?? - the murder of unwanted babies is fascist in the highest degree.

The life and wellbeing of the mother must always come first before the foetus is viable.

 

[Catholicus]

That's how theists that can't be bothered to learn what an atheist is say. Most of us make no such assertion. But you've been told that multiple times. It never makes any impact. You just keep repeating this error



You began with an unshared premise of what an atheist is, so nothing that follows is of any value to the agnostic atheist, which is most of us. OP refuted.



It's your argument and that of the atheist who says there is no god.



I've seen the opposite - deluges of threads like this one from you promoting your caricature of what an atheist is.



Yes, your argument was dismissed because you couldn't define an atheist. Figure out what an atheist is and then come back. Hint - ask an atheist what he actually believes rather than listening to your preacher or reading your holy book.



Who started a thread called the folly of atheism?

My contempt for your religion derives in part from the filth it spreads about atheists, a law-abiding, hardworking class of citizens trying to raise their families well and make their communities better places to live. People like you have been commissioned to beset atheists and atheism - to demonize and marginalize them.

But as I've stated elsewhere, you live in a glass house. Your religion is extremely vulnerable to scathing treatments of its flawed moral code, its tepid version of spirituality, its deformed views of love, justice, and mercy. You have no



Hypocrite much? It's your religion promoting this war. It teaches people like you to see people like me as immoral, as the rebellious group of people that resists religion because we want to be bad people. Well, we have a voice today thanks to the Internet and the rise of atheism, and now you'll have to hear what the people your religion has been maligning think about that.

What kind of reaction do you think the atheist should have to your hostility toward him? Respect? Affection?

Let me rewrite a couple of your scriptures, but make them about Christians rather than "unbelievers," and tell me how you feel about it.

• "The fool says in his heart,'Jesus is God.' They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good"

Got that? You're vile and corrupt. Not one of you is any good. Why? Because it is written. I just wrote it.

• “Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than a Christian.”

Is that even possible - being worse than a Christian?

• "But the fearful, and the Christians, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone."

How does that make you feel? You're the moral equivalent of a murderer or whoremonger. Why? Because it is written.

How would you feel to know that an institution has been set up to disseminate those ideas to uncritical thinkers willing to believe them by the millions, one that wrote it in a book that it gives away free to as many people as they can get to take one?

You're a Golden Rule kind of guy, right? Is this how you wish to be treated? If so, fine.

If not, why do you promote a religion that does exactly that?



He doesn't care. He has his caricature of atheism to promote.



No it's not. The universe is evidence that it is here, how it works, and how it evolved, not its origin. All we can do is list the logical possibilities, unable to rule any in or out at this time. It's very possible that there are no gods.



The noise seems to be coming from Christianity, this thread being the latest example.

I can assert with confidence that the god of the Christian Bible doesn't exist, but I can't say that no god exists. The Christian god allegedly reached out to man wanting to be known, believed, loved, obeyed, and worshiped. The evidence for the theory of evolution rules that possibility out. Even if the theory were falsified tomorrow, you would still be left with the evidence that preceded it, now needing reinterpretation, but still not allowing for any kind of god or other agent that wasn't a great deceiver.



That's not credible. Faith is always based on nothing more substantial than the willingness to belief an insufficiently supported idea. If you have evidence, then you aren't believing by faith.

That's how theists that can't be bothered to learn what an atheist is say. Most of us make no such assertion. But you've been told that multiple times. It never makes any impact. You just keep repeating this error



You began with an unshared premise of what an atheist is, so nothing that follows is of any value to the agnostic atheist, which is most of us. OP refuted.



It's your argument and that of the atheist who says there is no god.



I've seen the opposite - deluges of threads like this one from you promoting your caricature of what an atheist is.



Yes, your argument was dismissed because you couldn't define an atheist. Figure out what an atheist is and then come back. Hint - ask an atheist what he actually believes rather than listening to your preacher or reading your holy book.



Who started a thread called the folly of atheism?

My contempt for your religion derives in part from the filth it spreads about atheists, a law-abiding, hardworking class of citizens trying to raise their families well and make their communities better places to live. People like you have been commissioned to beset atheists and atheism - to demonize and marginalize them.

But as I've stated elsewhere, you live in a glass house. Your religion is extremely vulnerable to scathing treatments of its flawed moral code, its tepid version of spirituality, its deformed views of love, justice, and mercy. You have no



Hypocrite much? It's your religion promoting this war. It teaches people like you to see people like me as immoral, as the rebellious group of people that resists religion because we want to be bad people. Well, we have a voice today thanks to the Internet and the rise of atheism, and now you'll have to hear what the people your religion has been maligning think about that.

What kind of reaction do you think the atheist should have to your hostility toward him? Respect? Affection?

Let me rewrite a couple of your scriptures, but make them about Christians rather than "unbelievers," and tell me how you feel about it.

• "The fool says in his heart,'Jesus is God.' They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good"

Got that? You're vile and corrupt. Not one of you is any good. Why? Because it is written. I just wrote it.

• “Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than a Christian.”

Is that even possible - being worse than a Christian?

• "But the fearful, and the Christians, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone."

How does that make you feel? You're the moral equivalent of a murderer or whoremonger. Why? Because it is written.

How would you feel to know that an institution has been set up to disseminate those ideas to uncritical thinkers willing to believe them by the millions, one that wrote it in a book that it gives away free to as many people as they can get to take one?

You're a Golden Rule kind of guy, right? Is this how you wish to be treated? If so, fine.

If not, why do you promote a religion that does exactly that?



He doesn't care. He has his caricature of atheism to promote.



No it's not. The universe is evidence that it is here, how it works, and how it evolved, not its origin. All we can do is list the logical possibilities, unable to rule any in or out at this time. It's very possible that there are no gods.



The noise seems to be coming from Christianity, this thread being the latest example.

I can assert with confidence that the god of the Christian Bible doesn't exist, but I can't say that no god exists. The Christian god allegedly reached out to man wanting to be known, believed, loved, obeyed, and worshiped. The evidence for the theory of evolution rules that possibility out. Even if the theory were falsified tomorrow, you would still be left with the evidence that preceded it, now needing reinterpretation, but still not allowing for any kind of god or other agent that wasn't a great deceiver.



That's not credible. Faith is always based on nothing more substantial than the willingness to belief an insufficiently supported idea. If you have evidence, then you aren't believing by faith.

The theory of evolution has nothing whatever to say about religion. No scientific theory does.

 

[Catholicus]

The life and wellbeing of the mother must always come first before the foetus is viable.

Why ? The foetus is as much a human being as she is.

Merely less powerful.

You argument is only permissible in the (rare) cases of life versus life, where NOT aborting the foetus would DIRECTLY cause the mother's death.

No one, of course, has the right to kill another person in order to maintain their own "wellbeing."