The origins of atheism

[As I was saying]

The "-less" part makes that negative claim. One doesn't "believe" negative claims.

Atheist know thyself. If I believe that Ford cars are not as good as Holden's, that is a negative claim and it is a belief. if I believe that chasing a car with a bigger engine than mine that is doing 150kph is a waste of time that is a negative claim but it is still a belief. If I believe that I will die soon because of cancer it is a negative claim but it is still a belief.

The world is full of negative claims but as the positive thinking experts tell us you can accept those negatives or reject them because they will affect the way you live and think. The evidence is that people do believe negative claims that is why psychologists and psychiatrists are having a field day trying to get people sorted out and why suicide had been on the increase for along time now.

 

[ScottA]

Isn't that a book?

Genesis 4:16

 

[quatona]

Two or three books of evidence are hardly anything I can start sharing.

Which means you come to the discussion empty-handed.

 

[quatona]

No one strongly believes or disbelieves anything if they think they might be wrong. But anyone might be wrong. Religious belief (and disbelief) is mostly a choice which comes from deep motivations ... so we believe what we want to believe.

Well, as opposed to belief lack of belief can simply be based on indifference.

If you don't want there to be a God, then you won't believe in one.

This may often be the case - but you have been employing the reverse conclusion which isn´t valid.
Personally, I´d have no problem with a God existing. I´m not as emotionally involved as you are.
And even if I had an emotional resistence against the idea - there are plenty of inconvenient and downright terrible things which I´d rather not believe, but believe anyway. So there´s something wrong about your hypothesis.

There is enough evidence for those who want to believe but not enough to force others to believe who don't want to. That is how the spiritual universe is set up by God. He is allowing us to be who we really are.

Interesting choice of words. So, if I make my existence known to someone, I am using force and prevent them from being who they really are?

And of course, there are consequences to our choices. Perhaps eternal consequences.

Yeah, perhaps. Who knows - perhaps believers are thrown in hell and skeptics get to heaven. But according to your hypothesis you will reject this idea simply because you don´t like it.

 

[Davian]

1. You quoted just the "what"...and omitted the "why" of the forum philosophy. Nice of you to claim a half-truth.

I only quoted the bit that you transgressed.

2. The door is open for discussion, assuming their

...there...

is a God.

As an ignostic, I make no such assumptions.

3. God does not need defending.

Religious opinions posited as accurate descriptions of reality do. Yet you keep striking out at the plate.

4. I think you better pull out that dictionary you keep waving around. Mute is not Dumb. Arguing against God's people, is a claim in and of itself.

I made no such claim.

5. Actually, you should toss that dictionary, it's not helping you understand reality.

I do not accept your religious opinion as reality.

Your definition of facts falls below the topic of discussion.

It is your definitions that are under scrutiny here. Venture outside the common vernacular and you can - and do - render your claims incoherent.

 

[Davian]

East of Eden.

I saw the movie. It wasn't that good.

Or was that Exit to Eden?

 

[quatona]

You deny the spiritual realm then, I take it?

No, but its significance pales dramatically in view of the meta-spiritual realm.

 

[Davian]

My claims are true,

Every religionist says that. You can't all be right.

and they are only fantastic to those who are far from knowing it.

Or to those comparing them to observations of reality.

You may as well be the hick who exclaims, "Why, I never hearda such a thing!" ... and it is obvious that you cannot fathom the idea.

The idea that there is a "God" that allegedly walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every objective measure to date indistinguishable from nothing? I have tried, but I cannot fathom that.

But just like the hick, if you go demanding some backwater explanation that you can sink yer tooth into...you may as well stay on the porch.

No, I would like a testable, falsifiable scientific explanation, if you have it. Got anything?

 

[Davian]

good point the person has to at least be openminded to the possibility that God could exist if they are completely absolutely closeminded to the idea there could be a God then their mind will constantly fight any efforts that God makes.

So you have to believe that a god can exist before you can believe that a god can exist?

 

[Eudaimonist]

since [even] science concludes that time (and matter) are not what they appear...then...truth cannot come by "seeing."

And that is simply false.

Seeing is how one comes to know that things are not what they initially appear to be. It was only through seeing that we know just how much of the volume of an atom isn't protons, neutrons, and electrons, which isn't obvious from some perspectives. It is only because of seeing that we are even aware of the issue.

Scientists are working on answering questions such as what time and matter are, and they are doing that through observations. They haven't just thrown their hands up in the air and declared that seeing won't accomplish anything. Science just doesn't take the epistemologically skeptical position that you would like, nor does it support your conclusion.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Davian]

Oh my. Watch:

Q: How do you know that God exists?
A: Because God told me.
Q: How do you know that it was God that was speaking?
A: Because God exists!

Circular Reasoning Works Because Circular Reasoning Works

• Davian
• Jun 25, 2015

 

[DogmaHunter]

Right, the universe is the way it is - no matter what neurons are firing in your brain. Meaning the universe could be created by an eternal infinite God and no matter what neurons are firing in your brain, that truth would never change.

The universe could also have been created 5 seconds ago by the ghost that never lies.

This God could prove himself to everyone at any time.

So can the cosmic chicken-cheese sandwich.

The universe could also be one of an infinite amount of universes in an eternal reality, but we'd have no way to verify this as true because other universes don't seem to be trying to reach us and let us know they're there, therefore, is it really reasonable to believe it?

When you don't know, it's never reasonable to believe anything either way. And that goes for "other universes" as well as your god.

If we want to learn anything new about what the truth is then it's unreasonable for us to make no assumptions about what that possible truth is. Therefore, your claim that you make no assumptions about what the truth is, whether knowable or unknowable, shows that you lack a willingness to find the actual truth and that you're fine with not knowing.

I have no more patience with this nonsense.
I made my point clear in such a way that children were able to understand it.
Just move on dude.

The truth has to come out at some point or else it was never there to begin with.

And I'll reserve judgement until something can be demonstrated, like rational people do.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Interesting...let me ask you, how small of a percentage of chance is it that this universe exists in the way that it does?

1 in 1, since it is the way it is.

 

[Eudaimonist]

you and your fellow athiests all suffer from the delusion that God doesnt exist so yes thats true mass belief does not make something true , fortunately mass belief isnt what convinces me that God exists , God has convinced me that God exists .

The part in bold is correct. However, neither atheists nor Christians are making that part of their arguments.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[DogmaHunter]

Okay. The evidence is all around you, make judgement of your own eternal fate.

No evidence around me supports the idea of cosmic beings that care about what we do while naked.

One of the two testimonies is wrong.

No, no...

At least 1 is wrong. And actually, there are a LOT of religions.
So, more accurately: at most 1 is correct, since all these religions are mutually exclusive.

And since they all make the same kind of claims, and since all of them depend on "testimony" and "dreams" and "visions" and NONE of them have actual proper supporting evidence... Most likely all are wrong.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I think Atheism only exists because it surest and fastest way to do all out rebellion that has spur on relentlessly on education system and freaky professors of lies .

I think that you are in need of the educational system, because I have no idea what you have just written.

so that you and they can what you want when you want to . and at the same time pretend( self justification ) to feel no guilt for it.

I don't think that I may ethically do whatever I want, and I would certainly feel guilt for many possible wrongful actions.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Ana the Ist]

Atheist know thyself. If I believe that Ford cars are not as good as Holden's, that is a negative claim and it is a belief. if I believe that chasing a car with a bigger engine than mine that is doing 150kph is a waste of time that is a negative claim but it is still a belief. If I believe that I will die soon because of cancer it is a negative claim but it is still a belief.

The world is full of negative claims but as the positive thinking experts tell us you can accept those negatives or reject them because they will affect the way you live and think. The evidence is that people do believe negative claims that is why psychologists and psychiatrists are having a field day trying to get people sorted out and why suicide had been on the increase for along time now.

None of the examples you used are "negative claims" in the same context that atheism is a negative claim.

It's odd too since you literally have an almost countless number of things that you don't believe in. One can only conclude that you avoided any correct examples because they don't fit the narrative you're pushing or you just don't have a clue about what a negative claim is...and therefore no real understanding of atheism.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Atheist know thyself. If I believe that Ford cars are not as good as Holden's, that is a negative claim and it is a belief.

That's not the same thing.
This claim is about existing properties of both cars.
They aren't claims of existence.

You don't define things by stuff that is not present.
It's completely meaningless to do that.

We don't speak about "graviton-fairy-less gravity", so why would we speak about "godless anything"?

If one has to include in a definition everything that is not present or not known to be present, then every definition of anything would become an infinite sentence.

if I believe that chasing a car with a bigger engine than mine that is doing 150kph is a waste of time that is a negative claim but it is still a belief.

No, that's also not a negative claim.
That's again claims about existing properties of existing cars.

It's a justified and factual statement that your Opel Corsa will not be capable to chase a Ferarri.

If I believe that I will die soon because of cancer it is a negative claim but it is still a belief.

That's also not a negative claim.

The world is full of negative claims but as the positive thinking experts tell us you can accept those negatives or reject them because they will affect the way you live and think.

Again, no.

I reject the positive claims of theists. ie: "a god exists"
The negative version of that claim is "god does not exist".
I don't make that claim nore do I accept it as a true-ism.

Saying "I don't believe X is true" is not the same as saying "I believe X is false".
You get that, right?

The evidence is that people do believe negative claims that is why psychologists and psychiatrists are having a field day trying to get people sorted out and why suicide had been on the increase for along time now.

With every sentence, it becomes clearer and clearer that you have no idea what negative claims are.

Your comment about "suicide" couldn't be more absurd if you tried.

 

[Colter]

​

I thought you had made up the phrase "true scientist". Now I see you took it from the teachings of something called the Urantia. I'll admit I did not bother to do a lot of reading of the Urantia literature. But from what I did read I got the impression that it was a cross between Scientology and Heavens Gate.

With all due respect, I tend to not be impressed by stories that claim to be "excerpts from the archives of Jerusem for the records of Urantia" and then to state "987,000,000,000 years ago associate force organizer and then acting inspector number 811,307 of the Orvonton series, traveling out from Uversa, reported to the Ancients of Days that space conditions were favorable for the initiation of materialization phenomena in a certain sector of the, then, easterly segment of Orvonton."

No need to opoligise, a gallon can't fit into a quart.

 

[juvenissun]

Huh? Don't most Christians accept evolution? What does that have to do with religion? Everyone knows that we're animals.

And this doesn't answer the question of what causes atheism (if anything does).

It is exactly the reason. Animals know no God. If we were one of them, then we do not know God.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It is exactly the reason. Animals know no God. If we were one of them, then we do not know God.

Is there a christian forums trophy for "most logical fallacies in the least amount of words"?