Is there anything more weak-minded and meaningless than having "faith"?

[contractor79]

To claim to be an atheist and to claim that no God exists is just pure ignorance. As stated earlier you can only make that argument if you are all knowledgable.

Agreed. That's why they pretend they've got it all worked out. They want us to follow them, not God. No thanks.

[contractor79]

God as Father

The Bible often talks about God as Father and we His children.

The Bible also teaches in the ten commandments for us to respect our parents.

Atheists brought up in Christian homes end up disrespecting both their parents on earth and their Father in Heaven. We must wonder why some people turn out this way.

Often it is down to a troubling childhood experience or some kind of feud or hatred of their earthly father. This could be as a consequence of molestation in extreme cases or a grudge against their father for abandoning them or disciplining them. Or maybe their father was an outwardly religious man who was nasty or immoral at home i.e. a religious hypocrit.

I can understand therefore why young men would find it difficult to accept a God that is described as Father. But these young men need to understand that God is the true Father and not the shameful unfortunate loser their father might have been.

It's hard to tell but often the truth is not something people want to talk about.

Atheists never open up about the real reasons they reject their heavenly Father. Often the reasons are just too personal and difficult to discuss. It's a shame. I pray for them.

[sasguru]

To claim to be an atheist and to claim that no God exists is just pure ignorance. As stated earlier you can only make that argument if you are all knowledgable.

Atheism - Strong Atheism
Does "strong" atheism correspond with or contradict objective reality? Let's look at this question objectively. Suppose someone asks you, "Does God exist?" You could answer in one of three ways: "I know for certain that God exists" (assured theism), "I don't know whether or not God exists" (insecure theism, agnosticism, "weak" atheism and/or skepticism), or "I know for certain that God doesn't exist" ("strong" atheism).

To know for certain that God exists, you don't have to know everything but you do have to know something - you must either know God personally or you must be aware of some evidence establishing His existence. To be unsure whether or not God exists, you don't have to know everything. In fact, by your own admission you don't know everything. However, to claim to know for certain that God doesn't exist - to positively assert a universal negative - you would have to know everything. To be absolutely certain that God doesn't exist outside the limits of your knowledge, you would have to possess all knowledge.

Let's make this practical. Do you know everything? Do you know half of everything? Do you know 1% of everything? Let's be incredibly gracious and suppose that you know 1% of everything there is to know. Thomas Edison confidently declared, "We do not know a millionth of one percent about anything." Nevertheless, given the supposition that you know 1% of everything, is it possible that evidence proving God's existence exists in the 99% of everything you don't know? If you're honest, you'll have to admit that it's a real possibility. The fact is, since you don't possess all knowledge, you don't know if such evidence exists or not. Thus, you cannot be a "strong" atheist - you don't know that God doesn't exist

You (or your cut'n'paste) are making the classic mistake of positing the existence of "God" and starting your argument from that basis.(It probably is a logical fallacy with some fancy Latin name).

Whereas given the lack of evidence for a supernatural being, (current belief systems about supernatural beings being quite easily explained as artificial human artefacts, given their immense variety across cultures), you really should start with the assumption that "God" doesn't exist and go from there.

If you are making the assumption of "God", why stop there? Why not make the assumption of "Gods", as some other cultures do, ancestor spirits, elves, pixies, goblins and indeed the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may his noodly appendage be blessed). Personally I'm "atheist" about all these entities too, although millions of people around the world believe in one or more of them.

[Cliphead]

What a load of pish

Another candidate for therapy.

[sasguru]

Chico's back

[contractor79]

You (or your cut'n'paste) are making the classic mistake of positing the existence of "God" and starting your argument from that basis.

You want people to argue the existence of God from an atheistic basis/worldview?

You can't argue anything from that worldview, you can't even justify the laws of logic which you seek to use from that worldview.

[MarillionFan]

You (or your cut'n'paste) are making the classic mistake of positing the existence of "God" and starting your argument from that basis.(It probably is a logical fallacy with some fancy Latin name).

Whereas given the lack of evidence for a supernatural being, (current belief systems about supernatural beings being quite easily explained as artificial human artefacts, given their immense variety across cultures), you really should start with the assumption that "God" doesn't exist and go from there.

If you are making the assumption of "God", why stop there? Why not make the assumption of "Gods", as some other cultures do, ancestor spirits, elves, pixies, goblins and indeed the Flying Spaghetti Monster (may his noodly appendage be blessed). Personally I'm "atheist" about all these entities too, although millions of people around the world believe in one or more of them.

You'll be telling us you don't believe in Aliens next!

[contractor79]

You'll be telling us you don't believe in Aliens next!

I bet he does believe in aliens. They often do. No evidence for aliens but that doens't stop these hypocrits believing in them.

[EternalOptimist]

it's a priori, i think.


One thing I do know. Take a nice person, he then becomes an atheist - a nice atheist.
Take a nasty person - they become a nasty atheist.

judging by some of the vitriol expressed above, the same holds true of our religious brothers as well.

[Bunk]

I know I'm going to regret this but:

Suppose someone asks you, "Does God exist?" You could answer in one of three ways: "I know for certain that God exists" (assured theism), "I don't know whether or not God exists" (insecure theism, agnosticism, "weak" atheism and/or skepticism), or "I know for certain that God doesn't exist" ("strong" atheism).

That's quite a limited way of answering the question though. I would have to choose the middle option (agnosticism) because I can't know for certain there is a god, but I believe the probability is so tiny that I can discount it.

Nevertheless, given the supposition that you know 1% of everything, is it possible that evidence proving God's existence exists in the 99% of everything you don't know?

Well, yes, but it's equally possible that in that 99% there is absolute evidence that god doesn't exist so I'm not sure how that helps either argument.