What Does Atheism Profit Atheists?

[Gene2memE]

No preconcieved notions, atheism and agnosticism are two sides of a coin, literally.

Curious answer. When I was a Christian, I was an agnostic theist: I believed, but I didn't claim to know for certain.
Now that I'm an atheist, I'm an agnostic atheist: I don't believe, but I still don't claim to know for certain.

So, if atheism and agnosticism are the two sides of the same coin, then the same could be equally said of theism and agnosticism.

Or, you could be completely wrong...

 

[bhsmte]

This is pointless.

Agree. Dont feed the.....

 

[David Brider]

By getting to know Christianity we get to believe in it.

But not everyone who knows Christianity, believes it.

 

[David Brider]

Curious answer. When I was a Christian, I was an agnostic theist: I believed, but I didn't claim to know for certain.
Now that I'm an atheist, I'm an agnostic atheist: I don't believe, but I still don't claim to know for certain.

So, if atheism and agnosticism are the two sides of the same coin, then the same could be equally said of theism and agnosticism.

Or, you could be completely wrong...

Yeah. Nowadays I'd probably define myself as more of an agnostic theist than anything else. I believe that there's a God, but I also acknowledge that such belief doesn't come from examing empirical evidence, since there is none - it's all about the interpretation we put on things.

 

[Dave Ellis]

You can choose. I know that you are aware that science does damage.

Can science be used to do damage? Sure.

Does science do more good than harm to society? Absolutely. It's a net positive to the world by a wide margin.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I'd rely on the subtlety of my intelligence instead. By the way Cleese said he was an antitheist atheist. So much for the pythons, Christianity, and reality.

Cleese: ‘Life of Brian’

I'd suggest relying on what John Cleese says about the point of the film rather than your own flawed interpretation.

 

[Dave Ellis]

There are many kinds of evidence. Are you ready to accept only the material ones?

What is an example of non material evidence?

 

[Dave Ellis]

No, what I'm saying that both Germany and Switzerland (remember the Red Cross society) wouldn't have been as prosperous as they are today without the Bible.

I'm not sure how you can demonstrate that.... I'm interested to see how you can support that argument.

By all means, lets see your evidence.

(Note: Even if you can prove they are more prosperous, that still doesn't prove the bible is true in and of itself though)

 

[Dave Ellis]

Currently unconvinced is dangerously close to being an agnostic.

It goes hand in hand with agnosticism. That also means you're an atheist though.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I think you may have misinterpreted my meaning in my previous post.

I was putting myself in the shoes of JABG.

Whoops, sorry! I was replying on my phone and it was tougher to see who was arguing what I didn't see you were an atheist, so I took your post at face value.

 

[Kenny'sID]

It's a pointless demand to ask you to point out specifically which fallacy I've committed after you accused me of committing a fallacy?

That's not at all an unreasonable request, and one you seem awful reluctant to address.

I did not commit a fallacy, if you still think I did then back up your words or concede the point.

Attempting to dodge as you currently are doing is simple intellectual dishonesty.

You still aren't paying attention, once you are willing to keep up and realize your question has and always was answered, we can move on, but until then, it's just a waste of both my time and yours.

I've argued against a variety of gods. Allah, Vishnu, the deistic god, the gods of Norse sagas, Greece, etc. Sometimes against followers of Islam or Hinduism, Deists, or Zeus, Apollo, Thor, etc come up in arguments with Christians

Can you point me to those threads? Also, what exactly is your point, or are you assuming because you have, that's what others do as a general rule? What people "generally" do was my point and I still think, in general Atheists don't go after other religions like they do Christianity. If you say you do, I will ask you to prove it. So again, we''ll start with you, so I can get a general idea if this is rule of thumb, or is not...threads please?

Also, is there an Atheist among you that will step up and tell me I am most likely right, or at least as far as you are concerned?

 

[David Brider]

You still aren't paying attention, once you are willing to keep up and realize your question has and always was answered, we can move on, but until then, it's just a waste of both my time and yours.

Actually, no, the question wasn't answered. You accused Mr Ellis of committing a logical fallacy, but despite being asked repeatedly you never stated what the logical fallacy was.

 

[David Brider]

The fact I could or could not convince you of my position would in no way justify my view in and of itself. That's an appeal to popularity fallacy. It doesn't matter how many people believe a claim, what matters are the facts.

As a whole, no change from my original view and the fallacy, at least overall, lies with your end. End of story.

Just so we're clear, this is the post where you accused Mr Ellis of committing a fallacy. But no, at no point since have you expanded on what fallacy you believe him to have committed.

 

[bhsmte]

Just so we're clear, this is the post where you accused Mr Ellis of committing a fallacy. But no, at no point since have you expanded on what fallacy you believe him to have committed.

No shocker

 

[Kenny'sID]

Just so we're clear, this is the post where you accused Mr Ellis of committing a fallacy. But no, at no point since have you expanded on what fallacy you believe him to have committed.

Been clear all along.

 

[bhsmte]

Been clear all along.

It is crystal clear, you have not supported your claim.

 

[Cute Tink]

Largely blind post:

What is atheism supposed to profit me? I don't know about you, but I'm not looking to get anything out of not believing in deities.

 

[Belk]

Been clear all along.

I have to disagree. I had to re-read your statement several times in order to understand your gist. Communication is a two way street and it is obvious most people did not understand what you were trying to convey. What is the point of continuing to refuse to clarify your meaning?

 

[Kenny'sID]

have to disagree.

That's ok with me.

 

[Kenny'sID]

It is crystal clear, you have not supported your claim

We might be getting somewhere now.

What was my claim?