What is the best argument for an atheist?

[Father Heathen]

Your set definition of evidence.

Empirical evidence has one single solid definition that's not open to interpretation.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Your set definition of God.

My mistake. So, you do require evidence for "God"...?

Your set definition of evidence.

My mistake again. So, what is your definition of evidence?

This is a conclusion based on your set definitions.

Once again, my mistake. So, other than faith, what evidence is satisfactory, for you, for the belief in "God"

 

[strikeviperMKII]

yes but do have a relationship with a unicorn?
does the unicorn talk to you?
and do you believe the unicorn loves you?

1. Sure.
2. Sure.
3. Sure.

Now what that all means, I'm not sure yet. But you seem to be. Mind telling me what you mean by those questions?

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Empirical evidence has one single solid definition that's not open to interpretation.

Ah. Empirical evidence. All Dirty Penguin said was 'evidence'.

 

[tumbleweed41]

When we say (evidence)..we mean that which can be tested and falsified.

Your set definition of evidence.

Ah. Empirical evidence. All Dirty Penguin said was 'evidence'.

Empirical evidence=evidence which can be tested and falsified.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Ah. Empirical evidence. All Dirty Penguin said was 'evidence'.

Nope that's why I said (testable and falsified)...which satisfies the criteria of (empirical evidence).

 

[strikeviperMKII]

My mistake. So, you do require evidence for "God"...?

Again, you are using your set definition of evidence, so I don't know what you are requiring that I give in answer to this question.

My mistake again. So, what is your definition of evidence?

Oh, that'd be nice to know, wouldn't it? I'll let you know if I ever get an answer to that, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

Once again, my mistake. So, other than faith, what evidence is satisfactory, for you, for the belief in "God"

Define evidence. Define faith.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Nope that's why I said (testable and falsified)...which satisfies the criteria of (empirical evidence).

Oh.
So why does evidence need to be 'testable and falsified' or in other words empirical, in order to be evidence?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Oh.
So why does evidence need to be 'testable and falsified' or in other words empirical, in order to be evidence?

Because the real world relies on objective empirical evidence. As opposed to faith, which relies on subjective evidence and feelings.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Because the real world relies on objective empirical evidence. As opposed to faith, which relies on subjective evidence and feelings.

So real= anything that is shown to be by empirical evidence?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Once again, my mistake. So, other than faith, what evidence is satisfactory, for you, for the belief in "God"

Define evidence. Define faith.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

Once again, my mistake. So, other than faith, what evidence is satisfactory, for you, for the belief in "God"

You assume faith is required, so I'd like to know what you think faith is. Second, you assume that I believe in God, so I'd like to know what you mean by 'believe'. Third, your use of evidence seems to imply that it can be something other than empirical evidence. Please clarify what you mean.

 

[Runewolf1973]

What is the best argument for an atheist?

Usually the first thing and only thing that comes to mind is prove it! Prove god exist!

Is that the only argument atheists have or is there something better? When I see this argument I see an argument that isn’t very well thought out or designed. Since an atheist has no grounds of belief to stand is it normal for them to criticize other people’s religion to buff up their own lack of philosophical views and beliefs?

Also if you can think of some other atheist arguments go ahead and add them to this thread. I would like to see some other out of the ordinary arguments made by atheist.

Science shows us quite clearly that there is no need to fantasize about divine "creators" or "gods" or "omnipotent beings".... Nature provides us all the answers we need. See the animals of this Earth, they have no God, nor do they need one.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

You assume faith is required, so I'd like to know what you think faith is.

I assume you believe in "God" because you do not require empirical evidence of such unless I'm wrong and you do. When it comes to believing in a god without said evidence you have faith.

Second, you assume that I believe in God, so I'd like to know what you mean by 'believe'.

Are you for real? I assume you believe in "God"....The Abrahamic definition of "God". I also think you believe in this god considering your religion says (Roman Catholic).:sarcastic

Third, your use of evidence seems to imply that it can be something other than empirical evidence. Please clarify what you mean.

I've implied no such thing. I think you have come to accept the existence of "God" (the one described in your scriptures) and you have come to this acceptance (belief) without empirical evidence. I could be wrong but that is why I asked you those questions.

 

[Gloone]

Science shows us quite clearly that there is no need to fantasize about divine "creators" or "gods" or "omnipotent beings".... Nature provides us all the answers we need. See the animals of this Earth, they have no God, nor do they need one.

I guess science can make the world perfect too right?
So since people feel science can explain the existence of everything then is it plausible to rule out divine intervention as well?

 

[demonIntegral]

God is an atheist. Thus, being an athiest is truly living as "the image of god." I would say the best argument for being an atheist is the over-abundance of religious nonsense in the world. And, of course, it would depend on whether or not such an argument was ment to be pro-active. For instance, the best tool for shearing sheep is the Bible. I know some Bible; not only do the JWs not bother me, they don't even bother my general vicinity... for myself, I say (generally) I ain't got no problem with god, I got a problem with your god... not in so many words, of course.

 

[strikeviperMKII]

I assume you believe in "God" because you do not require empirical evidence of such unless I'm wrong and you do. When it comes to believing in a god without said evidence you have faith.

Why would you need or not need such a thing?

Are you for real? I assume you believe in "God"....The Abrahamic definition of "God". I also think you believe in this god considering your religion says (Roman Catholic).:sarcastic

I know why you assume I 'believe' in God. I want to know what you mean by 'believe'.

I've implied no such thing. I think you have come to accept the existence of "God" (the one described in your scriptures) and you have come to this acceptance (belief) without empirical evidence. I could be wrong but that is why I asked you those questions.

What does it mean to 'accept the existence of God'? Why does one not need empirical evidence to 'accept God'?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Why does one not need empirical evidence to 'accept God'?

I think if one wants to make a case for the existence of "God" or gods then empirical evidence IS needed...

 

[Autodidact]

You don’t have to be an atheist to understand a religion and some of its flaws. There are a lot of people such as Christians that struggle with their faith everyday just like everyone else. That is what religion is about anyways, find a deeper understanding. If it isn’t then I don’t know why people would waste their time following or dedicating their time to it.

Me neither.

 

[ButTheCatCameBack]

I think if one wants to make a case for the existence of "God" or gods then empirical evidence IS needed...

I would add that. It really doesn't matter if one Christian or a few says something like. "Well I don't know what "faith" is or what "belief" is. I just believe in this undefined, vaguely referenced thing and I use the word "God" for this thing. And I have no empirical evidence for it." There are hundreds of millions of other Christians to go beyond that. To believe in the Christian deity is not simply to have some idea. It makes statements about how the universe works, about human society, morality and many other subjects. For everything that Christianity or any other religion for that matter wishes to impose on the world. Asking for empirical evidence of it's wide reaching wild claims is not only a good thing. It is a NECESSARY thing.