Official Atheist/Non-Believer Appreciation Thread. Vol. Yes we exist

[stylishstef89]

@ myself for believing this would actually be an open-minded thread

 

[bboy1827]

Originally Posted by Master Zik

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Originally Posted by Master Zik

The burden of proof always rests on the person making the claim not the person discrediting the claim. It does not go either way. Yall believers should just stick to the whole I don't have to prove something I believe in because I have faith argument. That's more logical than trying to make a nonbeliever prove something that you should be proving if you want to jump in that arena.

Yall forget that if you have faith in a higher being you can only do so by having doubt. If you have no doubt, you have no faith. Faith without doubt is not faith but certainty. Now if you're certain that this higher being you believe in exists you should be able to prove that without a shadow of a doubt. Seeing as the claim would now be it's a fact that this higher being does exist.

And Huey you gotta make up your mind when correcting concepts that are only limited to man and other labels. You talk about "GOD" being a 500 year old Germanic word but you initially referenced the higher being whose existence you claim makes more sense than any other theory ppl come with as GOD.

Wait aren't you making the claim that there is no God?...Prove it...

No. I'm not an atheist. The actual stance for a nonbeliever would be a religious person making the claim that GOD does exist and a simple request for the ppl making this claim to validate it. Furthermore, yall are not claiming "Well you can't prove GOD doesn't exist" There are ppl in this thread saying he does in fact exist. I never said he doesn't but that's how it works in an argument. You make a claim, bring forth proof/evidence that validates your claim on the opposite side we bring forth ideas/theories among other things that arises doubt in that claim to no longer make it a certainty.

Any person who claims they are certain GOD exists CAN NOT say they have faith. It's contradictory.

I can ascribe my belief in GOD to an immeasurable and unseen cosmic element that you can't quantify...that can be proof enough for me but how do you disprove that?

There's nothing wrong with that belief. Thing is it's not proof. If it's "proof enough for you" you should be able to prove it, no?(If you can't prove it it's not proof and it's just an idea that you accept despite what others would say is not enough to make a arguable claim). Problem is your belief is in something immeasurable and unseen.

I will admit this is something being argued with human limitations set on it. If you want to talk about something that surpasses human beings there really is no debate and/or argument. We can definitely discuss that tho but it's definitely not a stance one should take when you're trying to prove something.

So no matter how insignificant and feeble minded I may be in comparison to any higher being there is no soundness, deductive reasoning or validity behind the claim that GOD does in fact exist. It's a logical fallacy.

I seriously don't understand why ppl who believe in any higher being won't admit that they can not prove it exists. The whole structure/foundation of the belief system is not rooted in facts and certainty.

A) I don't think you read my last post because I explicitly say that I can't prove the existence of God, but I can provide a paradox thatcan only be answered by him(or whatever you want to call him existing)

B) everything you are saying about the rules of an argument works in reverse, since I've already said that I cannot prove God but indirectly, and the"nonbelievers" seem to not believe that existence of God, they are making the claim that God doesn't exists(hence the term nonbeliever)

...thus my statement is "Prove it"

 

[bboy1827]

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Lol Atheists are dumb, well at least the ones that go around trying to disprove god and condemning religion. As for me I have my beliefs(I'm a Cartesian when it comes to God) But I'm not about to stand here and debate what something means to someone else, Christianity means little to nothing to me, neither does Islam neither does any religion, but if it helps someone get through their day who am I to spit upon it? The argument shouldn't be whether or not we believe in God, but rather we should argue for the right to believe, without someone telling us that our beliefs are trivial.

sidenote Atheists is literally A-Theists, meaning not that they don't believe in god,but they believe in something else. Classical atheists(byzntainne atheists) actually believed in nature, among other things.

I don't think your beliefs are trivial or whatever. I just think they are wrong. You do have the right to believe. No one is trying to take that away.

Hows this, Something can't come from nothing, so whether you call it God or Science it doesn't rightly matter. This is a fact that you can't deny, I happen to call the "great mover" God, you can call it the Big bang, but what put that there? I don't believe in an old white guy sitting there that is all good, all powerful and all knowing, but I do believe in a action, an event that started it all. While I recognize there is no proof, I do like to think of someone there listening when I pray, or when I'm down and out. Thats not something,as an intellectual you should trounce on, or even argue about. Like I said your not arguing against God with your Atheism you're arguing against humanity, you're arguing against something that gets people through their day. Would you seriously look at a 13 year old sex slave from russia, that has nothing but the hope in a good after life, that there is no God? Would you tell a slave that there is no God? Hold your beliefs discuss them with your peers, but remember that discussing God is discussing humanity. The world is bigger than the one you live in, there are grave injustices that only a belief in God could make somewhat bearable.

so basically you're just praying for the sake of praying? you don't even know what it is that you're praying to, but you're just gonna keep praying?

Yup it's called being human, it's call the need for something that makes sense. It's call compassion. I admit that I may be wrong, butyou don't seem to be able to make that same claim. And like I said, since you are making the claim God doesn't exist...Prove It.

 

[Master Zik]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

A) I don't think you read my last post because I explicitly say that I can't prove the existence of God, but I can provide a paradox that can only be answered by him(or whatever you want to call him existing)

I'm pretty sure I never quoted you. You quoted me. See how that went? If you did in fact say that in a previous post there's no reason toassume my post was directed towards you.

B) everything you are saying about the rules of an argument works in reverse, since I've already said that I cannot prove God but indirectly, and the "nonbelievers" seem to not believe that existence of God, they are making the claim that God doesn't exists(hence the term nonbeliever)

...thus my statement is "Prove it"

And again I'm talking to the ppl who do say that GOD does in fact exist. Thing is just like you they know they can't prove it but theystill speak in certainties.

 

[bboy1827]

Originally Posted by Master Zik

Originally Posted by bboy1827

A) I don't think you read my last post because I explicitly say that I can't prove the existence of God, but I can provide a paradox that can only be answered by him(or whatever you want to call him existing)

I'm pretty sure I never quoted you. You quoted me. See how that went? If you did in fact say that in a previous post there's no reason to assume my post was directed towards you.

B) everything you are saying about the rules of an argument works in reverse, since I've already said that I cannot prove God but indirectly, and the "nonbelievers" seem to not believe that existence of God, they are making the claim that God doesn't exists(hence the term nonbeliever)

...thus my statement is "Prove it"

And again I'm talking to the ppl who do say that GOD does in fact exist. Thing is just like you they know they can't prove it but they still speak in certainties.



but why don't you turn the same gun at Atheist who maintain that God doesn't exist?

 

[Master Zik]

Originally Posted by bboy1827

Originally Posted by Master Zik

Originally Posted by bboy1827

A) I don't think you read my last post because I explicitly say that I can't prove the existence of God, but I can provide a paradox that can only be answered by him(or whatever you want to call him existing)

I'm pretty sure I never quoted you. You quoted me. See how that went? If you did in fact say that in a previous post there's no reason to assume my post was directed towards you.

B) everything you are saying about the rules of an argument works in reverse, since I've already said that I cannot prove God but indirectly, and the "nonbelievers" seem to not believe that existence of God, they are making the claim that God doesn't exists(hence the term nonbeliever)

...thus my statement is "Prove it"

And again I'm talking to the ppl who do say that GOD does in fact exist. Thing is just like you they know they can't prove it but they still speak in certainties.

but why don't you turn the same gun at Atheist who maintain that God doesn't exist?

There's no need to since they can't prove he doesn't exist either. Funny fact about "atheists" who claim GOD doesn'texist is that since that claim can't be proven it is something they simply believe in.

Besides that why it might appear I'm siding with those ppl is cuz the posts I initially read arguing that GOD does exist were far more flagrant than thecommon arrogance of some ppl who label themselves atheists. Also arguing from this side helps religious ppl see the error in their ways. To have such faith inGOD as they claim they have there's no reason to be wasting time arguing about something they believe. There's far more religious than there arenon-religious although that's changing.

I'm late for class now so if anybody else responds to me I'll be back around 9pm

 

[thebachellor]

Originally Posted by HueyP in LouieV

.

Once you start plugging in specific religious versions of the concept of GOD, then you can start picking it apart with different forms of logic.


I can ascribe my belief in GOD to an immeasurable and unseen cosmic element that you can't quantify...that can be proof enough for me but how do you disprove that?

Its all flawed arguments and backwards thinking. When discussing the spiritual, you have to deal with spiritual science, history and language. Its a science on its on.

Unless you can tell me that Western science has a definitive answer for everything in the cosmos and prove it to me, then the concept of GOD always has validity. And you will see that more and more.

GOD has been with us from the beginnings of humanity and will be with us until the end of humanity. It may evolve and take on different understandings and names but the concept of GOD will always remain.

People think we will move away from GOD as time advances but we will only move closer to the original concepts of GOD. We are beginning to understand that not everything is quantifiable and there is nothing that is indivisible. It is only Western arrogance and cultural indoctrination that prevents us from having a truer understanding of existence and causes us to assign these supremely vague titles and definitions to things as important as "dark matter".

There is a spiritual component to existence and if you deny it you are only denying yourself. You'll be walking around with sunglasses and earplugs on, thinking that your are seeing the world as it really is.


Contradict yourself much?

Where in the definition of an atheist does it refer to the non-belief of the "religious versions of the concept of God"?

Your "God", an unseen and immeasurable cosmic element that you can't quantify, is the same as their (religions') "Gods", alsounseen and immeasurable cosmic elements that can't be quantified. What is the difference? Just because you don't believe in a book with a multitude ofquestionable stories, or attach morality or human qualities to your "God" doesn't make your "God" any different. Strip those thingsaway and what is left is a carbon-copy of what you believe in. Get off your high horse.

Furthermore, you criticize humanity for just now finding out that not all things are quantifiable, then in the same paragraph, blame western arrogance fornot being able to understand and define (in essence, quantify) what dark matter is.

How is the "spiritual" a science on its own? You said yourself that the "spiritual" is not quantifiable. Yet it's a science, a wordthat at its base is dependent on the quantifiable?

Simply put, one cannot argue for or against what one does not know. You may believe in a "God" or spiritual force, but you do not know. No oneknows. The last bolded statement indicates that you think otherwise. However, currently human knowledge is limited in that field; are you sure you are notdenying (the truth) to yourself?

It's almost laughable how humans must come up with a justification for everything that we do not understand.

Once more of you learn to simply accept that your time is finite (and as suchthe knowledge that you will gain is finite), you will realize that there are questions that you may have that will never be answered in your lifetime. As such,"I don't know" is the correct attitude to take in this debate.

 

[sundoobie]

And again I'm talking to the ppl who do say that GOD does in fact exist. Thing is just like you they know they can't prove it but they still speak in certainties.
I am certain that God exists. When I pray to the Lord I feel his presence. When I close my eyes, I feel the holy spirit in my heart, in my mindand in my soul. When I open my eyes, I feel better, physically and emotionally. So for that I am certain that God is for real. That's my proof to youthat God is real. Obviously you're not going to believe me because it isn't at par to your standards of "proof."

Religious belief is each individual's state of mind. To prove that, look at this monk praying and meditating before setting himself on fire. Why isn'tthis monk screaming in pain? Explain this atheist folks!

You think any individual without the power of spirituality and belief can endure this type of pain?

 

[friendliest ghost]

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

And again I'm talking to the ppl who do say that GOD does in fact exist. Thing is just like you they know they can't prove it but they still speak in certainties.

I am certain that God exists. When I pray to the Lord I feel his presence. When I close my eyes, I feel the holy spirit in my heart, in my mind and in my soul. When I open my eyes, I feel better, physically and emotionally. So for that I am certain that God is for real. That's my proof to you that God is real. Obviously you're not going to believe me because it isn't at par to your standards of "proof."

Religious belief is each individual's state of mind. To prove that, look at this monk praying and meditating before setting himself on fire. Why isn't this monk screaming in pain? Explain this atheist folks!

You think any individual without the power of spirituality and belief can endure this type of pain?




Because his nerve endings were cauterized immediately following the immolation.

 

[sundoobie]

Because his nerve endings were cauterized immediately following the immolation.
Following? This monk died. He sat there on fire there until he died.

After approximately ten minutes, Thích Quảng

 

[hueyp in louiev]

Bachellor...

That sentence was a hypothetical, so your whole rant was pointless.

I said that someone could take the stance that their GOD was an unquantifiable essence....not that SPIRITUALITY is unquantifiable.

Spirituality is a science on its own.

 

[jerryjones]

everytime i see the burning monk it blows my mind

 

[ninjallamafromhell]

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion, I've seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the 'will of God'.Holiness is in right action an courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves. And goodness - what God desires - is here and here. By what you decideto do every day, you will be a good man - or not."

- Hospitaller from Kingdom of Heaven

 

[prodigalson11]

rambling a bit here, 21 pages of white text on a black background has my mind a bit muddy.

up until about 3/5 of the way through this thread i was planning on coming in here and saying that the Atheist sector sounds far less ridiculous than thereligious sector. Then i kept reading and decided that maybe they didn't sound less ridiculous.

i was raised catholic up through confirmation but i do not consider myself to be catholic anymore, i also dont consider myself atheist. i dont know what iconsider myself. what pushed me away was the fact that the church is so sure that they are right. WE ARE RIGHT! YOU ARE WRONG! YOU GO TO HELL!

i dont know who's right and who's wrong, claiming that you do know you're right and everyone else is wrong is asinine. NO ONE KNOWS! atheists dontknow there's no god, religious people dont know there is a god.

use your belief system for what it's there for, as an outline to living a moral life. be nice to people. rewind.

 

[Master Zik]

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

And again I'm talking to the ppl who do say that GOD does in fact exist. Thing is just like you they know they can't prove it but they still speak in certainties.

I am certain that God exists. When I pray to the Lord I feel his presence. When I close my eyes, I feel the holy spirit in my heart, in my mind and in my soul. When I open my eyes, I feel better, physically and emotionally. So for that I am certain that God is for real. That's my proof to you that God is real. Obviously you're not going to believe me because it isn't at par to your standards of "proof."

Religious belief is each individual's state of mind. To prove that, look at this monk praying and meditating before setting himself on fire. Why isn't this monk screaming in pain? Explain this atheist folks!

You think any individual without the power of spirituality and belief can endure this type of pain?

If you're that certain (and it's a fact) you should be able to prove it. I suggest you go look up what proof/evidence is and look up theact of proving something. Just saying you're certain doesn't mean that you are in fact certain. Also like I said before if you truly are certain inthis there is no way you have faith cuz as I said before there is no faith without doubt. Go look it up. Basically I'm saying so what if you thinkyou're certain. PPL have been certain of many things in the past and have been proven wrong; Salem witch trials, abolishment of slavery being the downfallof America, etc.

It's like you don't understand the words you're using. Just because you think something does not make it true. There are plenty of mentally ill pplthat are certain of their delusions.

Also you're claiming something ridiculous with the monk example. To say only a person with "the power of spirituality and belief" can enduresetting themselves on fire is something you can go out and prove if you believe that act can't be accomplished without said requirement. I will say I dothink it's possible without any involvement of spirituality or belief but obviously you have a problem with this believing thing. You seem to underestimatethe human psyche.

 

[True Blues]

Easily two of the brightest men on the planet: Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.






Bottom line: debating this is silly. Religion is one of those eternal cleavages-- there is no common ground on this issue, and to be frank, there never willbe.

 

[madskillzmia]

sidenote Atheists is literally A-Theists, meaning not that they don't believe in god,but they believe in something else. Classical atheists(byzntainne atheists) actually believed in nature, among other things.

LOL, wrong 'A Theism' literary means 'negation' of theism. In other words, NOT Theism-- Not God. An atheist, defined as "a person whodenies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.", is self-refuting. You are denying the existence of God WHILE proving its existence byDENYING IT! Therefore, if God did not really exist then the word 'atheism' would not really exist either; a better term is a non-believer or Humanist.

I seriously don't understand why ppl who believe in any higher being won't admit that they can not prove it exists. The whole structure/foundation of the belief system is not rooted in facts and certainty.
First of all, I completely agree with you. The issue is that God's existence, to a true believer, has never been up for logical"debate". Look at the bible, which is not and never has been a PROOF for the existence of god. It always has ASSUMED God's existence. Ourdiscussion is BEYOND logic. Not everything in life is black or white, true or false. Furthermore, the only 'true' certainties in life are that we areborn and that we will soon die. Everything else, is based on faith.

 

[joe camel smooth]

Originally Posted by MadSkillzMIA

sidenote Atheists is literally A-Theists, meaning not that they don't believe in god,but they believe in something else. Classical atheists(byzntainne atheists) actually believed in nature, among other things.

LOL, wrong 'A Theism' literary means 'negation' of theism. In other words, NOT Theism-- Not God. An atheist, defined as "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.", is self-refuting. You are denying the existence of God WHILE proving its existence by DENYING IT! Therefore, if God religion did not really exist then the word 'atheism' would not really exist either; a better term is a non-believer or Humanist.

nice try dude.

 

[ace bomber]

This thread has gotten crazy!!

Can most people at least agree on the fact that was stated above a short while ago... Religion is not based on facts,that is why you "believe" in something. Therefore it can not be proven or dis proven. Enough of this "you prove it." "No YOU proveit!" Nobody is proving anything... End of story. Hate to burst everybody's bubble in here looking for definitive answers, but that is the honesttruth. Live and let live...

good day fellas

 

[18key]

Originally Posted by ACE BOMBER

This thread has gotten crazy!!

Can most people at least agree on the fact that was stated above a short while ago... Religion is not based on facts, that is why you "believe" in something. Therefore it can not be proven or dis proven. Enough of this "you prove it." "No YOU prove it!" Nobody is proving anything... End of story. Hate to burst everybody's bubble in here looking for definitive answers, but that is the honest truth. Live and let live...

good day fellas

 

[beermann2]

I recently saw this debate on youtube. Does God exist? Everyone should check it out.



here's the text version of the debate.
http://www.bellevuechristian.org/fa...PDFs/Apol_Bahnsen_Stein_Debate_Transcript.pdf

 

[essential1]

Here's what makes atheists annoying to believers.. It is the sheer hypocrisy of religion. "Treat others as you will have done onto you." Thenalmost all acts of oppression are done under the name of God.. Family Values and all who don't live up to them will go to hell, that person ends up havingan affair.. Homosexuality is wrong, that person is having an affair with a person of his own sex.. Homosexuals can't marry because God calls it a"sin", but that person commits sins every day especially if he eats sea food, ironically a sin...

Pickers and choosers, most atheists I know don't really care for people who live 100% by the book of their choice, it is the pickers and choosers who getatheists riled up..

No religious follower has the right to judge, but they do anyways..


So once believers get off their high horse, so will atheists...

Until then you are being just as annoying..

If you prove the "being" exists, then atheists will cease to.. But there isn't that proof and never will be unless God or Jesus comes back.

And we have the fact that the religious texts are not first hand accounts, and the fact that they are wildly unbelievable.. If I told a story from the bible,and said I just did that, I would be looked at like an idiot.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by SuperAntigen

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by SuperAntigen

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by SuperAntigen

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

My man, I might as well just start making sh$%# up right now and applying it to your logic. There is no concrete evidence of flying pigs that fart rainbows and poop skittles, but I guess it does not mean they do not exist.

Y'all don't have evidence to disprove God's existence, and yet, y'all continue to "wage" this all out assault on this supposedly imaginary Being you fervently argue does not exist...ummmm...am I missing something here?
...

Like I said, I don't have to prove he/she/it exists. YOU DO. The burden of proof is on the one making the allegations. If I tell you I have this amazing burrito here and you don't believe me....is it up to you to prove I don't have one? Think please.

So you don't have to prove that God exists--I do?...

"The burden of proof is the one making the allegations"-- you don't think that goes either way?...

I'm content in my belief system--which just so happens to be belief widely accepted by people even I don't know. It's unfortunate for you, however, to have been birthed under the circumstances you are under now--which is the fact that you live in an arguable Christian nation, and in a world that is (I believe) for the most part, religiously affiliated. You are the one bothered by these state of affairs and you are the one fighting to challenge, disprove, and show just how much of a sham Christianity and other religions supposedly are.

You are the one making allegations in an attempt to "enlighten", because you just have it all figured out, us religious folk all the while demonizing religion. Like I said, I'm content with my belief system--which has been in existence longer than you or your parents have. If you want to invalidate my belief system, then it is YOU who carries the burden of proof on your back. ...

My allegation is that the unproven doesn't exist. That isn't as much of an allegation as it is the evident. You are making the outlandish claim that there is a god. Not me. That is the allegation. That's where burden of proof comes into this.

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

I don't have to prove that something isn't. That doesn't even make sense. What evidence would conclude that something isn't? What would happen that hasn't already happened to confirm there isn't a god? See I have the benefit of assumption. You don't. You make the claims there is a god. I don't.

Here are a few nice Christopher Hitchens quotes:

"Exceptional claims require exceptional evidence."
"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof."


I'm not mad that I live in a society that mostly believes in god. That is changing and that has me hopeful. Logic and reason can win.

The funny thing about you is the fact that you're so blinded by your "hate" for this Being you claim in nonexistent, that you fail to see just how double sided your arguments against Him are--or in other words, you fail to see how your very own arguments could be used in support and validation of God.

Like I stated previously, your circumstances (being born in a Christian nation, which occupies some fraction of a very religious world) put you at a disadvantage in the sense that it is YOU who must "fight" and argue about the nonexistence of God. I don't have to do that. I have the benefit of being a member of the dominant belief system, in a world where such a belief is the norm.

You're the minority looking to "change" things because the current state of affairs does not suit your constitution. THAT'S THE TRUTH. That's why the burden of proof is on you because in order for you to bring about change, you MUST provide indisputable evidence that will forever invalidate the concept and Being known to us as God.

I mean that's essentially what science and the scientific method is all about. If I propose that Chickens are more closely related to us, humans, than Lemurs are, on the evolutionary branch, then it is my job--as usher of this hypothesis--to provide evidence that proves this assertion/validates and corroborates my hypothesis, all the while disproving the established notion that lemurs are more closely related to us than chickens.

The established notion is the accepted notion and the one that must be evicted if the new notion is to accepted. With respect to this thread, and what is being discussed, the established notion is that there is a God because Christianity has argued for it, and has done so for many many centuries. More importantly, this notions are widely accepted as proof that there is, at least, some sliver of merit surrounding the existence of God.

You the Atheist, who was but recently birthed--in the last, what, 30 years (I'm specifically talking about You and not the group that falls under the umbrella that is Atheism)-- in your attempt to supplant Christianity and its teachings with your hypothesis that God does not exist, must bring forth the evidence that shows this. In my Chicken vs. Lemur hypothesis, it is NOT the job of the established scientific community, and those who accept the believed principle that humans are more closely related to Lemurs than to chickens, to provide evidence that proves your hypothesis otherwise. Especially when you are the one doing the challenging.

The burden of proof is ON YOUR BACK, as you are the challenger to an already believed notion.

But this is where the problem with Atheism comes in--the fact that there is NO EVIDENCE to corroborate your claims in your attempt to enlighten us "sheep". You cannot disprove the existence of God. I don't have to worry about proving the opposite because like I stated previously, I have the benefit of being a member of the dominant group is a world that greatly identifies with my belief system, or something similar.

Popular belief does not a truth make. Look, most people were against segregation. Most believed women to be second class citizens. Most believethe Earth is thousands of years old. Hell, most don't believe in Evolution despite all of the evidence. If popular opinion is enough to validate god'sexistence, isn't the growing number of non-religious people evidence to suggest he doesn't exist? I mean you mentioned double edged swords. If yourpopular opinion wanes and becomes the unpopular opinion, does that change the existence of god in your eyes?

I don't have hate for god. You can't hate the nonexistent. I can't hate. I can say with certainty that if the popular notion of what god is isactually the truth, I hate him. Yes. If he is omnipotent, he is doing a terrible job and has more blood on his hands than anyone ever. Since that isn'tthe case, I can't hate. Do I think religion does doe some good? Yeah, like I said, hope is always good. Do I think that is more psychological thanspiritual? Absolutely.

I can't disprove the existence of god because I don't know what that would entail. I don't know what more evidence would be used to provesomething doesn't exist than the absolute lack of evidence that he\she\it does exist. Nothing has ever suggested otherwise. I am not making grandioseclaims. That is why the burden of proof is on the ones making such claims of a higher being. If the idea of god dictates how you live your life, shouldn'tthe burden of proof be on the person making such claims?


Sorry for the untimely reply. Thanksgiving and that.

 

[zapatito007]

Originally Posted by Essential1

Here's what makes atheists annoying to believers.. It is the sheer hypocrisy of religion. "Treat others as you will have done onto you." Then almost all acts of oppression are done under the name of God.. Family Values and all who don't live up to them will go to hell, that person ends up having an affair.. Homosexuality is wrong, that person is having an affair with a person of his own sex.. Homosexuals can't marry because God calls it a "sin", but that person commits sins every day especially if he eats sea food, ironically a sin...

Pickers and choosers, most atheists I know don't really care for people who live 100% by the book of their choice, it is the pickers and choosers who get atheists riled up..

No religious follower has the right to judge, but they do anyways..


So once believers get off their high horse, so will atheists...

Until then you are being just as annoying..

If you prove the "being" exists, then atheists will cease to.. But there isn't that proof and never will be unless God or Jesus comes back.

And we have the fact that the religious texts are not first hand accounts, and the fact that they are wildly unbelievable.. If I told a story from the bible, and said I just did that, I would be looked at like an idiot.

QFT,... if i told someone my boy just walked on water ,, or that my cousin turned water into wine id be laughed at or maybe put in a hospital. religion is amyth no offense to anyone,
if religion helps u as a person and makes u feel better so be it , im not knocking you but look up the word mythology, thats all it is,,

 

[antonlavey]

^If it were up to the church we would still believe the earth IS FLAT....the scientific method FTW

. Notice how the church goes to great lengths to thwart scientific discoveriesthat invalidate their beliefs.