• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is the best argument for an atheist?

Meow Mix

Chatte Féministe
yeah but, yeah but, yeah but, Honestly I am too self-conscious of my unusual looks:

little_britain_narrowweb__300x4310.jpg


But thanks, of course for the 'wellwishes'.

Now that's the type of profound compliments that makes it all worth posting here ideas that were actually inspired by listening repeatedly to Russell Brand's material.

BTW, someone should start a Thread about:

What is the biological reason for "stammering momentary micro-bursts of vassilating hyper-ventilation" ---aka, "Laughing"??

What really is happening in the body when the physical act of "Laughing" occurs?

[I'm not asking about "what is funny/what makes people laugh"?']

LOL at the picture.

I read a blurb a while back that said laughing provides some of the same benefits of sleep to the brain. Unfortunately it was on the television so I'm not sure if I'll be able to find a reference, just throwing that tidbit out there. Otherwise I don't know, that's a good question.
 

Meow Mix

Chatte Féministe
It's a bit of a fun question: what would we do on a national atheist day?

I think it would be silly to have an atheist day but it would be interesting to have a national skeptic day, where everyone is encouraged to look to their own beliefs and examine them critically to see if they really know them, how they can justify them, and to see if they identify any fallacies in themselves.

That's not very festive though so, Skeptic Day should be a day to party and debate each other about everything and test each other for fallacies and knowledge. Yay?
 

Blackdog22

Well-Known Member
I think it would be appropriate to spend the day not in church. Beyond that, I'm open to ideas.

Make lots and lots of Pasta and drink lots and lots of beer.

(sarcasm)We would also spend our time worshiping Satan, dabbling in Witchcraft, Sitting in a drunken stupor, tearing down anything that looks like a cross, running around naked, half of us would be possessed by the Devil himself, and just basically filling the entire world with an evil aura that could be seen from space for an entire day, and that is a fact.(/end sarcasm)
 

bhaktajan

Active Member
Atheist does not believe Theist.

I like this statement --but it should be completed thus:

"The Atheist does not believe the Theist ~ The Theist does not believe the Atheist"

together they are forever inseperately bound in material grip of absolute Irony with "No Exit" from their bound.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Suggested Reading:
The dramitic stage Play, "No Exit".

No Exit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

darkendless

Guardian of Asgaard
I like this statement --but it should be completed thus:

"The Atheist does not believe the Theist ~ The Theist does not believe the Atheist"

together they are forever inseperately bound in material grip of absolute Irony with "No Exit" from their bound.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Suggested Reading:
The dramitic stage Play, "No Exit".

No Exit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They also both demand proof from the other and "proof" means something completely different to both sides. Sounds like a sibling rivalry right?
 

Snowcat

Member
Atheists need to deal with the First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it can only be transferred from one form to another.

Everything has always existed.

Haunting.
 

McBell

Unbound
Is that the only argument atheists have or is there something better?
Seems to me that "prove it" is not an argument so much as it is a request for the theist to support their argument that God does exist.

Seems to me also that the atheist needs no other reply given that theists have no empirical evidence, let alone proof, to present.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Everything has always existed.

we dont know what happened beyond 13.7 billion years ago. Does that make the idea that a magic man said "poof" "there it is" right?

we know nature has done its own thing for 13.7 billion years, just when did the magic man step in?
 

Gloone

Well-Known Member
we dont know what happened beyond 13.7 billion years ago. Does that make the idea that a magic man said "poof" "there it is" right?

we know nature has done its own thing for 13.7 billion years, just when did the magic man step in?

If this world and universe isn't made up of some type of magic then someone is looking through the wrong telescope / microscope. Might be time for a new one. :cool:
 

outhouse

Atheistically
If this world and universe isn't made up of some type of magic then someone is looking through the wrong telescope / microscope. Might be time for a new one. :cool:


Ok but you didnt answer the question.

Just when did magic man step in? :eek:

and a answer like when did he step out doesnt cut it lol :angel2:
 

outhouse

Atheistically
It would depend on what you consider to be magic man.

I believe you know what im getting at lol.

Imnot talking about all the other gods lol :) im talking about the christian god.

just when do you think he stepped in and did magic?

its not for homo sapiens we see a clear path for 7 million years back to a common ancestor.

So was it magic in the water that started abiogenesis? or did he create the earth? Or did he create the universe 13.7 billion years ago.?

All creation ist have a different opinion so please exuse me that im not sure how you stand bud. :)
 

Tathagata

Freethinker
Atheism offers no world view but is more like existentialism and is really very foolish not being supported by any metaphysical reality.

False. Atheism has nothing to do with Existentialism. Sure, Existentialism is Atheistic, but so is Objectivism. Also, Atheism doesn't deny a metaphysical reality. Atheism simply denies God. You could be an Atheist and still believe in souls, spiritual dimensions, and an afterlife. For example, one of the major religions of the world, Jainism is exactly that; a religion that rejects God, but believes in souls and an afterlife.

Learn what Atheism first before you try to make claims about it.

You do not challenge the ontology of of Christianity, which is Far superior to the ontology of atheism.

The ontology of Christianity?? LMAO. The Bible is completely oblivious to most philosophical topics, let alone ontology. It wasn't til later that the Christian theologians had to delve into ontology which only happened because they needed to defend the Christian paradigm.

But please tell me, what is the ontology of Christianity? I'd love to hear it. Also, there is no "ontology of Atheism," Atheists can have many different beliefs concerning ontology, not all Atheists have to ascribe to one ontological paradigm.

Look at the unfairness of the first comment by referencing "prove it" argument. In any legitimate intellectual debate, both are required to prove their theis statements by logical explanations.

This is correct, though not only through logical explanations, but also empirical explanations.

You should never demand a Christian to prove anything unless you are willing to prove your position that there is no God.

Demanding Negative Proof fallacy. It is logically fallacious to ask your opponent to prove a negative. However, while it is not required of the Atheist to disprove God, there are at least 40 syllogistic arguments that refute the existence of God.

Atheist just will not do this. It is not so simple to just say "there is no God". Without God, you must show how reasoning and logic (induction & deduction), metaphysics (cosmology/ontology) and knowledge
are possible.

First of all, cosmology is not classified as part of "metaphysics." I don't know who lied to you but that's wrong.

Secondly, reason/logic/metaphysics/knowledge are not what is being called into question. We already know that reason, logic, and knowledge are possible because obviously we use them everyday. Why is the Atheist required to show how these are possible when the question is whether God exists or not?

If anything, the burden of proof is on you demonstrate that there MUST be a God in order for reason/logic/metaphysics/knowledge to be possible. That is your claim that you have to justify.

The ideas criticised in this post and throughout this thread targets mostly what atheist think Christianity is saying, not what Christianity is saying. Pointing to the many denominations of Christianity does not mean Christianity is false.

This is true and I am disappointed that other Atheists present such weak and futile arguments. However, don't think that that is all the Atheist has in his arsenal.

Most Christians have a sensible ontological view of God and the universe. They believe in cause and effect, free will rather than determinism, with the overall belief that persons reap what they sow and God gives the unjust and just the same playing field. Most Christians are not obsessed with heaven or hell. Most Christians do not view God as an eternal torturer of sinners but a savior of the human race. But atheist target the worse representatives of Christianity to use as examples of the shortcomings of faith in God.

Weren't you the one who was just complaining that Atheists target what Christians are doing rather than what Christian doctrine says? See, it doesn't matter what "most Christians" do, what matters is Christian doctrine. There is no need to criticize the actions and beliefs of Christians, all you need to do is target the Bible itself.

This website here exposes all of the gruesome, horrific, reprehensible, and utterly immoral passages of the Bible. Enjoy. Evil Bible Home Page
 

ellenjanuary

Well-Known Member
What is a good argument for Chromium? Atomic number 24? Melting point of 1857 degrees C? Specific heat of 0.45 j/gK, ionic radius of .62(+3), or valence of 2.8847? Not in this case. Here the best argument for chromium is that it belongs to the family of transition metals; and what is often argued in terms of atheism itself is the agenda of the community of atheists. Because of semantics, atheism is often seen as the opposite of theism. It isn't. Because of the family of religious philosophy, atheism often is seen as a form of theology. It isn't. It is akin to specific heat. Do you know your specific heat?

Of course not. You'd have to be more of a geek than I, who is not a chemist but has a periodic table on his computer. As for atheism, there is no argument; there is a set of linguistic calipers, and there is always a degree of uncertainty in measurement. What should be considered is atheistic agenda, what should be anticipated is atheistic community, what should no longer be forwarded is the fallacy that a belief in a lack of belief is an actual belief; education in philosophy is poor enough without making it more difficult for dunderheads like me.

Remember Carlin? "Atheism is a non-prophet organization!" Woah, an act of creation right there! By addressing things that need no voice, an environmental niche was exposed for an opportunistic mutation. What atheism needs is a prophet; what atheism has is Dawkins. And while I like the man more each day; rest assured, where once was environmental niche, tomorrow shall fill with sects.

What is the best argument for an atheist? Ellenjanuary is a theist, of course! I'm sure you don't want none of this! :D

But the paradox of the prophet is that the job of the past is to create the future. If the atheism community does not self-organize and recognize the need for agenda; yours will be a story told by others. And most theists just as soon write you out of the book.
 
Top