On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
No, because I'm not a believer myself. I just get annoyed that atheists don't understand the concept of faith. Christianity doesn't endeavor to prove to you that god exists, instead it asks you to believe particularly in spite of lack if evidence (see doubting Thomas). The burden of proof is on you because you are the one that wants proof.
lol I was not asking proof, I am asking you why do you think there is a god. And for that you should have some claim or proof. And with that I will be "informing" you why I think it is not the case. And with reason, maybe or probably the person can realize how faulty his claim or proof is. The concept of faith comes from that believing from something without logical reason which is plainly wrong. I don't need to understand "faith" because it comes from a faulty logic at the 1st place.
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
Why is there no God? What proof do you have? Cwutididthere
haha yup clever. When they go that route I would like to give an analogy to better explain what they are trying to cook up.
like say in a trial, we are not there to prove that person A did NOT kill person B. We are there to prove if person A is guilty of killing person B.
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
No, because I'm not a believer myself. I just get annoyed that atheists don't understand the concept of faith. Christianity doesn't endeavor to prove to you that god exists, instead it asks you to believe particularly in spite of lack if evidence (see doubting Thomas). The burden of proof is on you because you are the one that wants proof.
lol I was not asking proof, I am asking you why do you think there is a god. And for that you should have some claim or proof. And with that I will be "informing" you why I think it is not the case. And with reason, maybe or probably the person can realize how faulty his claim or proof is. The concept of faith comes from that believing from something without logical reason which is plainly wrong. I don't need to understand "faith" because it comes from a faulty logic at the 1st place.
You are confusing empirics and logic. Believing something where there is no evidence is faith. Because the nature of god means that there can be no evidence for (or against) it's existence, empirical analysis can come to no conclusion. Therefore in absence of a logical proof that such an entity must not exust, there is no reason why faith is illogical.
To answer "why do you believe in god" I think the christian response would be that they were asked to believe and it felt right to do so
"If you could use one word to describe Christians, what would you use?"
The top three were anti-gay, judgemental, and hypocritical. Other words that were used were hateful, condescending, and excluding.
Hahahahaha. Well what did you expect?
Christianity / religion might have been a bastion of civility in the dark ages when everything was in chaos, but these days it is the cause of much of the world's chaos and hate. The problem with many religions is that they have no stipulation for tolerating other beliefs. It's not 'be good and go to a nice place!' it's 'be good and be one of us. If you're not one of us you're automatically bad.'
I can respect the place religion has had in history and the good things it accomplished (though it did many bad things too), but in such a globalised world the idea of everyone believing in one god is so ludicrous and misguided it just creates problems. Even if people still want to be spiritual and have faith in this terrifying technocracy, they need a system which preaches tolerance not exclusion. Jesus taught love, but the Christians today don't. They only love each other, and they're more afraid of Hell than morally righteous. To say that love describes Christianity is laughable when they cry that a black man became president, or that gays are going to marry soon, or the bible tells us about the proper way to treat slaves (but doesn't condemn having slaves), or what a man and a woman's place is. They praise Jesus as their teacher but follow none of his teachings. Jesus wanted people to decide for themselves what was right. Very rare to find a Christian like that. I didn't even know that there were Christian universities, and I find it pretty disturbing. Although I guess it is not much worse than all the catholic high schools I've seen.
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
Why is there no God? What proof do you have? Cwutididthere
haha yup clever. When they go that route I would like to give an analogy to better explain what they are trying to cook up.
like say in a trial, we are not there to prove that person A did NOT kill person B. We are there to prove if person A is guilty of killing person B.
The question is : is your analogy half as smart as you think you are ? Aren't you arbitrarily deciding that this is how things work ? Or in other word, is someone going to cite Bertrand Russell, or are we going to go directly to Dawkins and the like ? Am I going to convert to the cult of Quetzacoatl out of despair in my fellow atheists ?
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
No, because I'm not a believer myself. I just get annoyed that atheists don't understand the concept of faith. Christianity doesn't endeavor to prove to you that god exists, instead it asks you to believe particularly in spite of lack if evidence (see doubting Thomas). The burden of proof is on you because you are the one that wants proof.
lol I was not asking proof, I am asking you why do you think there is a god. And for that you should have some claim or proof. And with that I will be "informing" you why I think it is not the case. And with reason, maybe or probably the person can realize how faulty his claim or proof is. The concept of faith comes from that believing from something without logical reason which is plainly wrong. I don't need to understand "faith" because it comes from a faulty logic at the 1st place.
You are confusing empirics and logic. Believing something where there is no evidence is faith. Because the nature of god means that there can be no evidence for (or against) it's existence, empirical analysis can come to no conclusion. Therefore in absence of a logical proof that such an entity must not exust, there is no reason why faith is illogical.
To answer "why do you believe in god" I think the christian response would be that they were asked to believe and it felt right to do so
That concept of your nature of a god is again logical fallicy. We can go around in circles and in the end it is an endless loop if that is the case. You cant claim for something and just say "yeah there can be no evidence for that okay?"
Yeah they are asked or brought up / "trained" to believe. Lots of words similar to that like "brainwashed" etc
On October 11 2013 01:53 farvacola wrote: You should check out the academic ratings of the likes of Notre Dame, Boston College, and Gonzaga. You might be surprised
Not to mention that half of the ivy league started as divinity schools
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
No, because I'm not a believer myself. I just get annoyed that atheists don't understand the concept of faith. Christianity doesn't endeavor to prove to you that god exists, instead it asks you to believe particularly in spite of lack if evidence (see doubting Thomas). The burden of proof is on you because you are the one that wants proof.
lol I was not asking proof, I am asking you why do you think there is a god. And for that you should have some claim or proof. And with that I will be "informing" you why I think it is not the case. And with reason, maybe or probably the person can realize how faulty his claim or proof is. The concept of faith comes from that believing from something without logical reason which is plainly wrong. I don't need to understand "faith" because it comes from a faulty logic at the 1st place.
You are confusing empirics and logic. Believing something where there is no evidence is faith. Because the nature of god means that there can be no evidence for (or against) it's existence, empirical analysis can come to no conclusion. Therefore in absence of a logical proof that such an entity must not exust, there is no reason why faith is illogical.
To answer "why do you believe in god" I think the christian response would be that they were asked to believe and it felt right to do so
That concept of your nature of a god is again logical fallicy. We can go around in circles and in the end it is an endless loop if that is the case. You cant claim for something and just say "yeah there can be no evidence for that okay?"
Yeah they are asked or brought up / "trained" to believe. Lots of words similar to that like "brainwashed" etc
You're really not getting it. I offer no proof for god. However, lack of empiric evidence does not mean that something is illogical. Logic and empirics are not the same thing. We can induce nothing about god since there is no evidence for or against. All modern attempts to logically deduce something about god have failed. Logic and empirics are silent on the question of whether god exists.
By the way, if you could somehow arrive at a proof that there is no god using only our assumptions about the nature of god and formal logic you could have a faculty position at any philosophy dept in the country
On October 11 2013 02:03 packrat386 wrote: By the way, if you could somehow arrive at a proof that there is no god using only our assumptions about the nature of god and formal logic you could have a faculty position at any philosophy dept in the country
I trust that a pretty smart guy called Emmanuel said something interesting about that question a few hundred years ago
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
Why is there no God? What proof do you have? Cwutididthere
haha yup clever. When they go that route I would like to give an analogy to better explain what they are trying to cook up.
like say in a trial, we are not there to prove that person A did NOT kill person B. We are there to prove if person A is guilty of killing person B.
The question is : is your analogy half as smart as you think you are ? Aren't you arbitrarily deciding that this is how things work ? Or in other word, is someone going to cite Bertrand Russell, or are we going to go directly to Dawkins and the like ? Am I going to convert to the cult of Quetzacoatl out of despair in my fellow atheists ?
At the end of the day, it is really up to the person to decide. No matter how good your point is, if they refuse to reason then nothing will happen. However, trying to reason is always a better option.
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
Why is there no God? What proof do you have? Cwutididthere
haha yup clever. When they go that route I would like to give an analogy to better explain what they are trying to cook up.
like say in a trial, we are not there to prove that person A did NOT kill person B. We are there to prove if person A is guilty of killing person B.
The question is : is your analogy half as smart as you think you are ? Aren't you arbitrarily deciding that this is how things work ? Or in other word, is someone going to cite Bertrand Russell, or are we going to go directly to Dawkins and the like ? Am I going to convert to the cult of Quetzacoatl out of despair in my fellow atheists ?
At the end of the day, it is really up to the person to decide. No matter how good your point is, if they refuse to reason then nothing will happen. However, trying to reason is always a better option.
And I'm telling you, you'll have a hard time coming up with a valid reason for why someone should assume that god exists
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote: I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote: If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of:
Their own Bible.
Evolution
Abiogenesis
Scientific theory
Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
Why is there no God? What proof do you have? Cwutididthere
haha yup clever. When they go that route I would like to give an analogy to better explain what they are trying to cook up.
like say in a trial, we are not there to prove that person A did NOT kill person B. We are there to prove if person A is guilty of killing person B.
The question is : is your analogy half as smart as you think you are ? Aren't you arbitrarily deciding that this is how things work ? Or in other word, is someone going to cite Bertrand Russell, or are we going to go directly to Dawkins and the like ? Am I going to convert to the cult of Quetzacoatl out of despair in my fellow atheists ?
Missed this post earlier. I'd be down with some Russell. Bring it on you godless commie
On October 11 2013 02:03 packrat386 wrote: By the way, if you could somehow arrive at a proof that there is no god using only our assumptions about the nature of god and formal logic you could have a faculty position at any philosophy dept in the country
Again, you don't need to prove it because your not the one claiming something
And even if there would be eventual proof, that god exist then I would still not believe in him because for me he did not do a good job for a supreme being which would translate again to not being god.
On October 11 2013 02:03 packrat386 wrote: By the way, if you could somehow arrive at a proof that there is no god using only our assumptions about the nature of god and formal logic you could have a faculty position at any philosophy dept in the country
Again, you don't need to prove it because your not the one claiming something
If you still don't see why I'm not the one claiming something then you really aren't getting the concept of faith. Christianity never claims to KNOW that god exists, only that they believe and that they have been told by others.
Let me offer an analogy for why your argument is the one that requires proof. Let us consider the case of the existence of intelligent life in the Andromeda galaxy. It seems that there is no logical argument for why such life could not exist and that there is no logical argument for why such life must exist. We also lack the ability to gather data on whether such life exists because none of our instruments have that capability. Therefore if someone were to come and tell you that they believed that intelligent life did exist (or did not exist) in the Andromeda galaxy, how could you claim that they are wrong?
Logic and empirics are powerful tools, but there exist problems of a very slippery nature such that neither is sufficient to resolve it.
On October 11 2013 02:03 packrat386 wrote: By the way, if you could somehow arrive at a proof that there is no god using only our assumptions about the nature of god and formal logic you could have a faculty position at any philosophy dept in the country
I trust that a pretty smart guy called Emmanuel said something interesting about that question a few hundred years ago
Kant never even claimed to be able to show that there was no God though. He was only really interested in showing that all the arguments for the existence of God was wrong/futile. So while it's obvious that he abhorred various apologetic arguments for having faulty logic, he still nevertheless did engage in some forms of apologia for religion.
ps. Russel sucks massive dick if only because his readings of the post-Hegelian Europeans is so bad. I honestly wouldn't really have any respect for him if he didn't play such a vital role in raising Wittgenstein.
On October 11 2013 02:03 packrat386 wrote: By the way, if you could somehow arrive at a proof that there is no god using only our assumptions about the nature of god and formal logic you could have a faculty position at any philosophy dept in the country
I trust that a pretty smart guy called Emmanuel said something interesting about that question a few hundred years ago
Kant never even claimed to be able to show that there was no God though. He was only really interested in showing that all the arguments for the existence of God was wrong/futile. So while it's obvious that he abhorred various apologetic arguments for having faulty logic, he still nevertheless did engage in some forms of apologia for religion.
ps. Russel sucks massive dick if only because his readings of the post-Hegelian Europeans is so bad. I honestly wouldn't really have any respect for him if he didn't play such a vital role in raising Wittgenstein.
What i meant is that Kant proved (or seeked to prove, but I thinjk his case is very convincing) that reason can't say anything about god, which "settles" the question in a way.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTIyMjI5MTUxMV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwMDI0ODY5._V1._SX325_SY475_.jpg)
