Why are most people who answer my questions atheists ?

[Valjean]

Unseen spirit beings. A realization among humans all over the world and all across time. The representations of abstracted thought that causes humans to ask questions that they cannot answer.

You're arguing an ad pop.
Humans all over the world see faces in clouds, too, and make up stories about the questions they cannot answer., They imagine all sorts of supernatural causes for events they don't understand. They're not even consistent in their imaginings.

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Valjean]

You are clearly not undecided. You like to think you are, I guess, but every post you write indicates that you are firmly entrenched in the "no gods until proven otherwise" camp. That's not being undecided.

Rather: "No belief till objective evidence is found."

 

[PureX]

You're arguing an ad pop.
Humans all over the world see faces in clouds, too, and make up stories about the questions they cannot answer., They imagine all sorts of supernatural causes for events they don't understand. They're not even consistent in their imaginings.

Argumentum ad populum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Why would we expect our imaginary representations of the great mystery of existence to be 'consistent' across time and geographical location?

And you should ask yourself why you have to keep changing the subjust to try and discredit the point I'm making.

 

[LuisDantas]

You are clearly not undecided. You like to think you are, I guess, but every post you write indicates that you are firmly entrenched in the "no gods until proven otherwise" camp. That's not being undecided.

Quite right. But not the point.

Tragically, I will not have the opportunity to show you the true nature (™ and ©) of my atheism.

It ought to, if not surprise you, at least put the challenge your professed certainties.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

That was rhetorical and expressing surprise at the lack of logic in the question.

Well you did. It's said too many times by religious people that atheists should study the facts and such. Is this not a better place to learn than an atheist forum? Both sources of information would be balanced. You cannot know your arguments are air tight by only speaking to atheists?
Knowledge is an ongoing process, and religion and the like is a huge topic. So I'm seeing this surprise at people with different belief systems to be strange. It is demonizing learning. In both ways. Atheists and religious people should be exposed to different arguments and different answers.
You never discussed faith? Ok cool, but I care about what is true and if faith is a reliable path to truth and this is a good place to discuss faith.
If you want knowledge you should go to places that think differently and find out if they have good reasons for their beliefs.

@joelr, I’m sorry if you feel attacked by my wonder at atheists’ interest in faith. I’m not attacking you, truly. I was simply telling the author of OP that I myself am not too sure why the engagement is there to that extent.

But just because I don’t seek to understand things I don’t believe in, doesn’t mean others don’t. We’re all different. It’s all good.

 

[PureX]

@joelr, I’m sorry if you feel attacked by my wonder at atheists’ interest in faith. I’m not attacking you, truly. I was simply telling the author of OP that I myself am not too sure why the engagement is there to that extent.

But just because I don’t seek to understand things I don’t believe in, doesn’t mean others don’t. We’re all different. It’s all good.

I see very little 'seeking to understand' going on from most of the atheists, here. What I'm seeing is much more akin to 'seeking to discredit and dismiss', with a bit of insult thrown in for good measure. And nearly all of it is aimed at religion, not theism. Because they can't/won't recognize the difference.

 

[Valjean]

We’re at cross purposes then. If you’re opposed to religious institutions receiving special political or tax status, I acknowledge the strength of your case.

That said, the nonsense about philately, unicorns, leprechauns etc is infantile and doesn’t fly in any case.

What makes it nonsense? Are you missing the analogy?

 

[SalixIncendium]

How silly. If nobody had invented stamps, we wouldn't have philatelists. But we do have stamps, and some people are philatelists. Nobody, so far as I know, seems to think that not collecting stamps is something that should define a person.

How many people do you know that identify as aphilatelists or astampists?

 

[SalixIncendium]

There are no a-philatelists debating the existence of stamps with philatelists, as far as I’m aware.

There might be...

Best Part of Atheism

The gutter? No better place to relax after a pub crawl. Another thing about atheism, the humerus humorous banter Fixed.

www.religiousforums.com

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

I see very little 'seeking to understand' going on from most of the atheists, here. What I'm seeing is much more akin to 'seeking to discredit and dismiss', with a bit of insult thrown in for good measure. And nearly all of it is aimed at religion, not theism. Because they can't/won't recognize the difference.

I think that there is certainly something to that and I suspect that some of it comes from people who previously belonged to some form of religious group themselves (those, I do understand; that they’d have an interest in criticising faiths, that is), but I still did not intend to insult that other person - my comments were taken far too personally and their claim that I’d wish to “demonise” was somewhat odd to me.

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[Copernicus]

When people demonize demonizers for acts of demonization and are themselves accused of the same thing, I think that everybody in that debate wins the argument.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The fact that you had to change the subject to try and make your point dismisses your point. Astrology is predictive. Such 'oracles' have always been popular, but they are not the same as nor as universal as the ideal of "God/gods".

But they do what gods do -- as you yourself go on to show:

Deities are not generally predictive. They are representations of the great mystery of existence. Often used to provide humans with an illusion of knowledge and control that we do not actually possess.

And there you have it: gods are "representations," and they are representations made by us. And since all they provide is an illusion, and illusions are not truth, is it any wonder I see no more use for them than I do for Astrology?

 

[PureX]

I think that there is certainly something to that and I suspect that some of it comes from people who previously belonged to some form of religious group themselves (those, I do understand; that they’d have an interest in criticising faiths, that is), but I still did not intend to insult that other person - my comments were taken far too personally and their claim that I’d wish to “demonise” was somewhat odd to me.

Humbly,
Hermit

I wasn't following that conversation. I was just responding to the one post. I didn't see any "demonizing" going on.

 

[PureX]

But they do what gods do -- as you yourself go on to show:

And there you have it: gods are "representations," and they are representations made by us. And since all they provide is an illusion, and illusions are not truth, is it any wonder I see no more use for them than I do for Astrology?

Words are representations. Your name is a representation. Mathematics is representation. Stories, paintings, sculptures, and plays are representations. That which you call "reality" is a mental representation. And ALL of these things are 'real'. All of them constitute the truth of what is and help us to understand that truth. Yet your bias won't allow you to acknowledge this, will it. Instead you're going to go on insisting that only matter is truth. Even when "truth" itself is an immaterial concept.

 

[joelr]

@joelr, I’m sorry if you feel attacked by my wonder at atheists’ interest in faith. I’m not attacking you, truly. I was simply telling the author of OP that I myself am not too sure why the engagement is there to that extent.

But just because I don’t seek to understand things I don’t believe in, doesn’t mean others don’t. We’re all different. It’s all good.

Yes I see. I don't feel attacked. Also this forum is called "religious debates" so
i would expect all sides to be here.

 

[Audie]

@joelr, I’m sorry if you feel attacked by my wonder at atheists’ interest in faith. I’m not attacking you, truly. I was simply telling the author of OP that I myself am not too sure why the engagement is there to that extent.

But just because I don’t seek to understand things I don’t believe in, doesn’t mean others don’t. We’re all different. It’s all good.

" i'm sorry if you feel""I’m Sorry You Feel That Way" and Other Gaslighting Tactics

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Words are representations. Your name is a representation. Mathematics is representation. Stories, paintings, sculptures, and plays are representations. That which you call "reality" is a mental representation. And ALL of these things are 'real'. All of them constitute the truth of what is and help us to understand that truth. Yet your bias won't allow you to acknowledge this, will it. Instead you're going to go on insisting that only matter is truth. Even when "truth" itself is an immaterial concept.

Not all "representations" represent realities. Think Harry Potter and Superman.

 

[PureX]

Not all "representations" represent realities. Think Harry Potter and Superman.

They ALL represent aspects of reality as we experience and understand it. It's why and how we generate them.

 

[Eli G]

How does faith differ from knowledge, then?
"Faith" is generally used to mean belief unsupported or poorly supported by facts or objective evidence.

Real faith is based on knowledge about facts. Faith is about things you long for or things you know are somewhere you can't reach, but you are sure those things exist and will happen, because you got enough evidence (knowledge) to trust...

There are different attitudes related to faith, and they all have to do with the type of belief it is placed in and the evidence that this belief is truly reliable. Faith is not credulity.

 

[Alekdar]

Apparently atheist forums are boring so they come here to hone their heckling skills.

Certainly in religious circles there's certain prevalent Biases, and from an Atheist perspective, we all have the same thing, science! In the religion department if two people interpret something differently they already can make two different religious branches
Christianity alone has a few: Christian denomination - Wikipedia
Cheers!