Argument for God's existence.

[ToddNotTodd]

We "seem" happy because we are. I don't know why you're implying we're depressed after noticing how happy we are. Seems weird.

It’s pretty obvious he’s goading us. Of course, if we point it out he’ll just deny it.

Which says something...

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Function and purpose are basically the same thing. Again, do you deny that your eyes are for seeing? Careful study of eye structure shows that they are designed for sight. Even most non-Christian scientists agree that the purpose of eyes is to see.

My eyes see.

Now try and say that they “had” to be designed by an intelligence, because eyes have a purpose, and purposes have to come from a mind.

Dare ya...

 

[ToddNotTodd]

But they were unable to demonstrate that the arguments were nonsensical. I am sure that may have also contributed to their anger. But I think it goes much deeper.

I suppose some people need to think that atheists are secretly unhappy, as the idea of their happiness somehow makes them more happy.

Oooooo, I smell research paper...

 

[createdtoworship]

Atheism isn't a worldview.

according to most dictionaries, atheism would qualify as a world view:
In order to know if atheism is a worldview, we need to first define our terms. A worldview is a set of propositions, beliefs, and assumptions that a person uses when relating to and interpreting the world around him. If that definition isn't sufficient, please consider the following definition:

"The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world. A collection of beliefs about life and the universe held by an individual or a group." (thefreedictionary.com, answers.com/topic/worldview)

according to that definition atheism would qualify as a world view.

 

[createdtoworship]

My whole worldview exists around having fun. Hanging out around here is only a small part of that.

it seems it's a large part of your day actually. You seem to post here all times of the day.

 

[createdtoworship]

Christian worldview: Jesus exists and we serve Him
Muslim worldview: allah exists, and muhammed and we serve them
Jewish worldview: Moses existed and we serve Him

atheist world view: We don't have any beliefs but we sure don't agree with the above.

 

[Moral Orel]

it seems it's a large part of your day actually. You seem to post here all times of the day.

Yeah, I had a vacation day today. I got the computer set up right next to my TV so I glance over from time to time between playing video games and hanging out with the fam.

 

[createdtoworship]

Yeah, I had a vacation day today. I got the computer set up right next to my TV so I glance over from time to time between playing video games and hanging out with the fam.

well enjoy your vacation day with the family.

 

[createdtoworship]

I enjoy reading this guy's material:

"
In fact what we find in reality is that the majority of people who identify as agnostics are actually inclined toward one belief or the other, whether or not they prefer to acknowledge that belief. The philosopher Michael Ruse, for example, identifies as an agnostic, but it is almost certain from his written work that he is not inclined to theism and therefore, by exclusion, must believe that atheism is true and that theism is subsequently false. Bertrand Russell, no less, said;

“I ought to call myself an agnostic; but, for all practical purposes, I am an atheist.”[150]

No person in his right mind can say that the Catholic Pope is not a theist, since the Pope obviously believes that there is a God, even though he cannot be any more certain of his position than Russell, Ruse or Dawkins. (I disagree with that last statement as for all purposes we have proven God's existence in this thread) Similarly, no one in his right mind can say that Russell was not an atheist, because Russell adamantly believed that there was no God. If by the word ‘atheist’ we mean a person who believes that the proposition “God does not exist” is true (which is what an atheist is), then that is the description Professor Michael Ruse and Bertrand Russell would fall under. Withholding belief is not the same as not believing. Therefore, anybody who confuses agnosticism with atheism is really only confusing belief with certainty. This brings us to the tangled web woven by the new atheist community around the entire epistemological concept of faith."


“Faith consists in believing when it is beyond the power of reason to believe.”



- Voltaire



Voltaire almost had a perfect description of faith, if it were not for but the last word in his famous dictum. Faith does not consist in believing what is beyond the power of reason to believe. Faith consists in believing what is beyond the power of reason to know with absolute certainty. "

above quote from : Illogical atheism by Jin Bo

 

[holo]

atheists don't have an identity of their own, but live as the negation of some thing else. Living as a parasite of sorts only to attack and live on someone else's life. They leach onto religion for their identity, even though they hate religion. Without religion they would have absolutely no power at all. So the thing they hate the most, is crucial for their survival and without it they would have no relevance at all.

I mean a simple google search shows hundreds of cases of scholarly works on the merits and morals of forgiveness:
Handbook of Moral Behavior and Development

My identity isn't "atheist", it's just a term that reflects my stance on one single question, namely "do you believe in god(s)". You too are an atheist if the question is "do you believe in Thor?" And the term says nothing at all about whether or not I "hate" religion, or any other aspect of my person. Some atheists hate religion, some atheists like tacos, some atheists have bicycles. Some of them are interested in religion, some aren't.

It has nothing to do with power either, again it's simply a statement about a particular belief, or rather a lack of one.

I'm not sure what that book you linked to has to do with it.

 

[holo]

For any lurkers reading along,

If you want to be taken seriously when invoking logical fallacies, it is important to know what they are, and how and when they apply. Not just the names of them. Here is a good resource: Logical Fallacies

This thread itself is a good resource.

 

[holo]

If all I was was the negation of something else, I would feel worthless, irrelevant and depressed.

OK, but that's you. If you were an atheist, you would identify as that and only that. Personally I've never met an atheist whose lack of belief is the core of their self-identity. Most atheists are busy with million other things other than the fact that they don't believe. Of course we can get a different impression on these forums, since they're about Christianity and religion in general, but you shouldn't assume that just because someone debates religion, that is the only thing they care about.

 

[createdtoworship]

I’m going to second the motion saying you have a lot of anger in your heart. You truly, madly, deeply hate atheists, don’t you? Who hurt you?

no I don't hate them at all. Sir. IF you accuse me of something, please back it up or stop saying it.

 

[createdtoworship]

Can you show me that this a logical fallacy at all?

I can prove a negative. Consider the following sentence:

Jane threw the ball.

There are no uses of the letter 'Z' in that sentence. I just proved the absence of something.

things that have to do with math can be proven, you are counting the number of times Z occurs. Negative statements that are not mathematical, cannot be proven.

 

[createdtoworship]

My identity isn't "atheist", it's just a term that reflects my stance on one single question, namely "do you believe in god(s)". You too are an atheist if the question is "do you believe in Thor?" And the term says nothing at all about whether or not I "hate" religion, or any other aspect of my person. Some atheists hate religion, some atheists like tacos, some atheists have bicycles. Some of them are interested in religion, some aren't.

It has nothing to do with power either, again it's simply a statement about a particular belief, or rather a lack of one.

I'm not sure what that book you linked to has to do with it.

I mean, if my whole worldview existed around negating someone else's worldview, I personally would feel irrelevant and worthless. But you guys seem to be having fun with it, so more power to you. But I don't feel at all inclined to share in your misery.

 

[holo]

I mean, if my whole worldview existed around negating someone else's worldview, I personally would feel irrelevant and worthless.

Me too. So I'm glad my whole worldview doesn't exist around negating someone else's.

But since theism makes no sense apart from atheism, wouldn't it be correct to say your entire worldview hinges on negating atheism? Or Islam, for that matter.

 

[Moral Orel]

things that have to do with math can be proven, you are counting the number of times Z occurs. Negative statements that are not mathematical, cannot be proven.

Here, I'll do it again. Look at this picture:

The shirt that man is wearing in this photo is not blue.

 

[Moral Orel]

Also, I'd like to point out that this is what "Moving the Goalposts" is:

It is impossible for anyone to prove the absence of anything. It's a fallacy of proving a negative.

First you claim that it's impossible to prove the absence of anything.

Negative statements that are not mathematical, cannot be proven.

And now it's impossible to prove the absence of anything not mathematical. Where will the goalposts go next?

 

[createdtoworship]

Me too. So I'm glad my whole worldview doesn't exist around negating someone else's.

But since theism makes no sense apart from atheism, wouldn't it be correct to say your entire worldview hinges on negating atheism? Or Islam, for that matter.

can you prove that statement? "theism makes no sense apart from atheism"?

 

[createdtoworship]

Also, I'd like to point out that this is what "Moving the Goalposts" is:

First you claim that it's impossible to prove the absence of anything.

And now it's impossible to prove the absence of anything not mathematical. Where will the goalposts go next?

yes I often forget that mathmatics can be proven. But facts in general that are not math related cannot be. For the most part any well known fact cannot be proven. Science does not even try to prove, and often confesses that they can't prove. Yet the theist is required to prove God's existence. So if anyone is moving the goal posts, it's not me.