Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why Atheism?
#26

Why Atheism?
Why atheism? Because I could never force myself to believe in something that lacks supporting evidence.
[Image: Bastard-Signature.jpg]
Reply
#27

Why Atheism?
Oh, no, another fat little cherub died.
The following 1 user Likes Phaedrus's post:
  • Fireball
Reply
#28

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 12:46 AM)Ima Believer Wrote: ...I'm not challenging you, judging you or criticizing you, I just want to try and understand you.

Yes you are, and have been ever since you landed here.  You're rude, intolerant, belligerent, patronising, hypercritical,
and devoid of any genuine and/or obvious desire to "understand" we atheists or atheism.  You seem to post deliberately
inflammatory comments designed for no other reason than to antagonise us.

Quote:Of course I make my assumptions but I don't assume them correct.

What does this even mean?  Why make assumptions if you don't believe they're valid?  If I were to assume you were
an ignorant, smug little brat, I'd certainly have the conviction that I was correct in that assumption.

Quote:Having said that . . . . Why atheism? 

Primarily because of 21st century science, logical prowess, a lack of superstition, denial of the supernatural or paranormal,
skepticism, rejection of mythology, an absence of gullibility etc etc.  Theists are driven by fear, irrationality, ignorance of science,
naivety, wishful thinking, belief in miracles, intransigence, a lack of rationale, and immutable dogma etc etc.

Quote:Now, the most obvious would be you don't believe in, or worship gods. But there seems to be a stark contrast between your everyday atheist and the atheists you encounter on forums like this.

In my case, it's erroneous of you to claim I don't believe in gods.  I'm an ignostic before I'm an atheist.  And, pray tell,
what is an "everyday" atheist?  Are there different types of atheists?  Please elucidate me.

Quote:You seem so angry, mean, hateful and facetious.

I'm sorry, but flattery will get you nowhere mate.

Quote:The majority of people I know are atheist, at least in their beliefs.

I don't even know what this means.  Atheists simply don't have "beliefs" in any/all religious senses.  That's the purview
of theists.  And there is no "collective" of atheists to be a "part" of.  This reinforces my opinion that you actually have no
real knowledge of atheists or atheism.

Quote:From my admittedly brief observation of atheists online I can see them roaring into town in a beat up SUV with atheist bumper stickers pasted all over the vehicle, hanging out of the windows, hollering, guns shooting into the air, looking for the local church and courthouse to make absolutely certain that never the twain shall meet.

What a load of horseshit.  Have you ever had an atheist knocking on your door trying to deconvert you?

Quote:You rant about hating the mythology. The pretense that the alleged deities are real, but it is more likely than not that you teach your young children Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and Easter Bunny are real. In their prime stage of development. 

Oh, fer fuck's sake!  Atheist children know instinctively by age 8 years that Santa and the Fairy and the Bunny aren't real.  On the
other hand, the children of theists often go into adult life fully believing in supernatural entities (gods) and paranormal events
(miracles), sometimes until the day they die.  Have you ever come across an adult who believes in Santa Claus et al?

Quote:Why atheism?

Well, for one more reason maybe; in order to treat mindless, theist dickheads like you with disdain in real life.
I'm a creationist;   I believe that man created God.
The following 3 users Like SYZ's post:
  • Szuchow, Tres Leches, Fireball
Reply
#29

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 12:46 AM)Ima Believer Wrote: Before you start foaming at the mouth and spitting poison at me like some Benzedrine puff adder (Sybil Fawlty) just let me say I'm not challenging you, judging you or criticizing you, I just want to try and understand you. Of course I make my assumptions but I don't assume them correct. Having said that . . . . Why atheism? 
....


Why atheism?
 

Because, atheism is true.  Theism is not true.  It is that simple.
I am a sovereign citizen of the Multiverse, and I vote!


The following 1 user Likes Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • Fireball
Reply
#30

Why Atheism?
Adders are not poisonous.
Reply
#31

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:39 AM)Dancefortwo Wrote: Non organized religion is also a bunch of hooey.   No religion,  organized or not,  has provided evidence of a god. No theist has ever proven a god exists.

I've proven it here several times myself, its just that atheists are in denial. They say things like "That's just a figure of speech." Or "That's figurative." Or "That wasn't meant to be taken literally but refers to all manufacturers of dairy food products."
Reply
#32

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 08:15 AM)no one Wrote: Adders are not poisonous.

Exactly. Think about it.
Reply
#33

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 07:26 AM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: Because, atheism is true.  Theism is not true.  It is that simple.

How very . . . dogmatic of you. Though what would I expect? Certainly not that either theist or atheist would sincerely subscribe to something they thought wasn't true.
Reply
#34

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 05:29 AM)TheGentlemanBastard Wrote: Why atheism? Because I could never force myself to believe in something that lacks supporting evidence.

I bet you could.
Reply
#35

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 08:49 AM)Ima Believer Wrote:
(05-04-2019, 02:39 AM)Dancefortwo Wrote: Non organized religion is also a bunch of hooey.   No religion,  organized or not,  has provided evidence of a god. No theist has ever proven a god exists.

I've proven it here several times myself, its just that atheists are in denial. They say things like "That's just a figure of speech." Or "That's figurative." Or "That wasn't meant to be taken literally but refers to all manufacturers of dairy food products."

(05-03-2019, 03:57 PM)Ima Believer Wrote:
(05-03-2019, 03:22 PM)Deesse23 Wrote: How do you know its used as figurative?

Because the alternative is literal.

(05-03-2019, 03:04 PM)Ima Believer Wrote:
(05-02-2019, 06:58 PM)Deesse23 Wrote: According to whom?

According to me. 
R.I.P. Hannes
The following 1 user Likes Deesse23's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus
Reply
#36

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 01:01 AM)Ima Believer Wrote:
(05-04-2019, 12:53 AM)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote:
(05-04-2019, 12:46 AM)Ima Believer Wrote: You seem so angry, mean, hateful and facetious.

Dealing with jackasses will do that to a person.  Dodgy

Like I don't know that.  Angry

I'm thinking you didn't.
  [Image: attachment.php?aid=31] Dog  
Reply
#37

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 08:54 AM)Ima Believer Wrote:
(05-04-2019, 05:29 AM)TheGentlemanBastard Wrote: Why atheism? Because I could never force myself to believe in something that lacks supporting evidence.

I bet you could.

>The burden of proof lies upon he who alleges. Religious people should be aware that I'm perfectly willing to believe in god(s), ghosts, mediums, demons, angels, spirits, channeling, miracles, horoscopes, astrology, psychics, Ouija boards, the supernatural, and anything else for that matter, as long as they adhere to one proviso: prove it! That's all I ask for. Just one simple request. Prove it!

>Don't give me speculations, guesses, hopes, dreams, wishes, desires, beliefs, faith (or appeals to faith), or indoctrinations. Don't give me one-time-only, non-repeatable, non-testable events. Don't give me internal alterations in one's psychology or physiology which cannot be tested, observed or demonstrated, only felt or believed. And don't give me effects that cannot be related to the supposed cause.

>I have no objection to believing in a deity as long as proof based upon a rational standard of knowledge is forthcoming. Is that too much to ask? But surely, theists can't expect me to adopt their beliefs on the basis of what has been presented, thus far. Every "proof" that I've heard and very piece of evidence that I've seen for the existence of God(s) has been easily countered by rational evidence/arguments to the contrary. No convincing evidence for the existence of any deity has ever emerged.

>I'm more than willing to listen to theistic arguments or view theistic evidence as long as cross-examination is permitted. No claims which must be shielded from rational scrutiny are worth believing. As conditions now stand, theology rests far more on superstition and faith, than upon facts and reason.  Consider
“I expect to pass this way but once; any good therefore that I can do, or any kindness that I can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now. Let me not defer or neglect it, for I shall not pass this way again.” (Etienne De Grellet)
The following 3 users Like Gwaithmir's post:
  • Deesse23, Dom, skyking
Reply
#38

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 08:53 AM)Ima Believer Wrote:
(05-04-2019, 07:26 AM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote: Because, atheism is true.  Theism is not true.  It is that simple.

How very . . . dogmatic of you. Though what would I expect? Certainly not that either theist or atheist would sincerely subscribe to something they thought wasn't true.

Not dogmatic, simply true.  Not only is there no evidence for God, but the God most people believe in in the US, the Christian God is so self contradictory, so incoherent, so impossible, that God cannot be true.  And of the myriad other possible types of Gods in my God Zoo, none are any better.
I am a sovereign citizen of the Multiverse, and I vote!


The following 7 users Like Cheerful Charlie's post:
  • Szuchow, Phaedrus, skyking, Deesse23, Unsapien, Thumpalumpacus, Gwaithmir
Reply
#39

Why Atheism?
I realized that whether I chose religious beliefs or not, that choice ultimately rested upon my reason and judgement, and those faculties favored disbelief, or, agnosticism at best.
[Image: afo-sig-009%20copy.jpg]
The following 2 users Like Dānu's post:
  • Ima Believer, Gwaithmir
Reply
#40

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 01:03 AM)Dom Wrote: It's not a choice. I couldn't believe any religion if you held a gun to my head. 

I could and would definitely fake it really well though with a gun to my head. Sadly so like so many atheists actually have to around the world.

Pretty sure many of us could fake it up to priest level if we had to.
_____________________________________________________

A friend in the hole

"If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are." - Captain Picard

The following 4 users Like Unsapien's post:
  • Dom, Thumpalumpacus, TheGentlemanBastard, Fireball
Reply
#41

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:09 AM)madog Wrote: So you are at least agnostic as regards the christian God?

Do you have a God you worship?

I'm reluctant to have anything to do with Christianity, not due to Christ, the Christian Greek Scriptures or early Christians, but rather to do with the history of apostate Christendom beginning in earnest during the emperor Constantine's time. So when you say Christian God what immediately comes to mind is the Platonic Trinity. I've only just begun my Bible study, but at this point believe in Jehovah the God of the Bible and the one whom he sent forth, Christ Jesus. 

(05-04-2019, 02:09 AM)madog Wrote: I would posit you are actually an agnostic atheist  .....

I hate labels. Here I would say I'm a theist or henotheist for your clarification but I don't take any of those things seriously. I'm not going to be boxed into someone else's definition or label.
Reply
#42

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:35 AM)GenesisNemesis Wrote: Personally I don't have any bumper stickers. I think they're pretty obnoxious. Also no idea where you get the image of atheists "shooting guns into the air", that's a thing conservative Christians do.  ROFL2

If you understood more about atheists you'd know their opinions are fairly divided on political matters, including guns. 

Atheists keep telling me that they only have one thing in common followed by them telling me all the other things they have in common. I move around a lot and I've seen a lot of atheists shooting guns into the air. Rednecks, hired assassins, drug lords and so on.

(05-04-2019, 02:35 AM)GenesisNemesis Wrote: And yes, Church and state ought to remain separate. That's built into the foundation of U.S. government. You can read the founders' own words on the subject. In fact the U.S. was never even founded on Christianity. Deal with it.

I'm happy to deal with it. It is vital that church and state are separate. There has never been and there never will be a "Christian nation."  Jesus was no part of the world and neither are his followers. ALL of the kingdoms of men will be destroyed and replaced by Jehovah's Kingdom and that gives me great comfort.  

(05-04-2019, 02:35 AM)GenesisNemesis Wrote: But anyway, I'm an atheist because there's nothing that suggests whatsoever that this Universe was in any way meant for us, and everything suggests the belief that we were created by some divine, perfect being is pure delusion.

Okay. Thanks for the response.
Reply
#43

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:38 PM)Unsapien Wrote:
(05-04-2019, 01:03 AM)Dom Wrote: It's not a choice. I couldn't believe any religion if you held a gun to my head. 

I could and would definitely fake it really well though with a gun to my head. Sadly so like so many atheists actually have to around the world.

Pretty sure many of us could fake it up to priest level if we had to.

Could, yes, would - not me. I'm old and just don't give a flying leap about what others think of me. Hopefully they won't show up at my door with pitch forks, but short of that, I couldn't care less.
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
The following 2 users Like Dom's post:
  • Thumpalumpacus, Fireball
Reply
#44

Why Atheism?
@Ima Believer 

Please don't create so many threads. When your threads clog the "new posts" or "today's posts" sections, we consider it spamming. That is against the rules here. For your consideration. This is not an official warning (yet), a warning will appear in mod colors.
[Image: color%5D%5Bcolor=#333333%5D%5Bsize=small%5D%5Bfont=T...ans-Serif%5D]
The following 3 users Like Dom's post:
  • julep, adey67, Fireball
Reply
#45

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 11:37 AM)Gwaithmir Wrote: >The burden of proof lies upon he who alleges. Religious people should be aware that I'm perfectly willing to believe in god(s), ghosts, mediums, demons, angels, spirits, channeling, miracles, horoscopes, astrology, psychics, Ouija boards, the supernatural, and anything else for that matter, as long as they adhere to one proviso: prove it! That's all I ask for. Just one simple request. Prove it!

>Don't give me speculations, guesses, hopes, dreams, wishes, desires, beliefs, faith (or appeals to faith), or indoctrinations. Don't give me one-time-only, non-repeatable, non-testable events. Don't give me internal alterations in one's psychology or physiology which cannot be tested, observed or demonstrated, only felt or believed. And don't give me effects that cannot be related to the supposed cause.

>I have no objection to believing in a deity as long as proof based upon a rational standard of knowledge is forthcoming. Is that too much to ask? But surely, theists can't expect me to adopt their beliefs on the basis of what has been presented, thus far. Every "proof" that I've heard and very piece of evidence that I've seen for the existence of God(s) has been easily countered by rational evidence/arguments to the contrary. No convincing evidence for the existence of any deity has ever emerged.

>I'm more than willing to listen to theistic arguments or view theistic evidence as long as cross-examination is permitted. No claims which must be shielded from rational scrutiny are worth believing. As conditions now stand, theology rests far more on superstition and faith, than upon facts and reason.  Consider

Prove it . . . . Atheists love saying that! It isn't anyone's responsibility to prove anything to you. It's your responsibility. God doesn't live on a petri dish. He doesn't feel the need to prove himself to anyone, so if you reject him that's your thing. If you want to come looking for him you know where to find him. Not in any church, but the Bible. 

If, tomorrow afternoon a press conference is held by the world's leading scientists announcing that evolution was incorrect and we were in fact created. In effect, they discovered God . . . it would mean nothing to me. Today's science is tomorrows joke just as yesterdays science is today's joke.

Reply
#46

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:56 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote: So Ima Believer is now saying Ima Nota Believer ?
Goodness.

I think there are meds for that.

Trolls rarely keep their stories straight for long!
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
The following 4 users Like Minimalist's post:
  • Deesse23, Szuchow, Thumpalumpacus, Fireball
Reply
#47

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:41 PM)Ima Believer Wrote: I'm reluctant to have anything to do with Christianity, not due to Christ, the Christian Greek Scriptures or early Christians, but rather to do with the history of apostate Christendom beginning in earnest during the emperor Constantine's time. So when you say Christian God what immediately comes to mind is the Platonic Trinity. I've only just begun my Bible study, but at this point believe in Jehovah the God of the Bible and the one whom he sent forth, Christ Jesus. 
That's a very JW point of view (shared, for different reasons, by Mormons and some other groups who self-label as Christian while rejecting historic church creeds). That Christianity as a whole went off the rails in the long-ago, during or even before the time of Constantine, and of course it is they who come along after two millennia to restore the true doctrine. Not any of those other guys.

This raises a few practical issues for such theists:

1) What is the problem with divine revelation that it peters out in at most a few generations and is vanquished for millennia only to be grokked by a special and favored few even then? I mean historic / mainstream Christianity has enough of a poor showing when you consider that after 2,000 years they have only managed to get buy-in for their supposedly compelling value proposition by a mere third of the world population, even by the most charitable estimation -- that being self-identifying cultural Christians, as opposed to observing / devout or adhering to a particular hermaneutic. If you take even that pathetic performance away and say they've all been wrong the whole time ... what does that say about millions of people over thousands of years who were so thoroughly misguided -- and by the views of the JWs have been annihilated rather than ushered into the promised afterlife? And how can you claim that now suddenly your belief -- a belief many Christians view as heretical -- is any more "right"?

1a) In a few years Islam will surpass lamestream Christianity as the dominant world religion, so that's even worse.

2) JWs and Mormons (I focus on them because I know their doctrines reasonably well) are divergent enough from Christianity that they have to cook the books even by Christian standards. In the case of the Mormons they have their own add-on holy books (The Book of Mormon, Doctrines and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, etc) In the case of JWs they have their highly questionable New World translation which is pretty much universally panned by scholars of the source languages and experts on textual criticism. That's pretty clearly an effort to go beyond the supportable sense of the original to purge textual ambiguity that is leveraged by trinitarians, to push the JW doctrines against blood transfusions, etc.

3) If one's religion is a corrective or restorative movement that returns one to a lost "primitive" or "pure" Christianity then why does it not organically inspire droves of Christians to defect? Why does it require authoritarian tactics to keep people from LEAVING much less to attract people to JOIN? In other words to extend point (1), why doesn't it have more to show for itself after over a century beyond gumming around the edges of Christian orthodoxy rather than demolishing it?

4) If god loves his children and wants them to enjoy paradise with him then why does he effectively consign so many of them to hell (Christianity) or annihilation (JWs and a few other annihilationists)? WTF is his messaging problem anyway? Does he need to hire an outside agency or something?

I could go on, but this is my basic issue with JWs, Mormons, Science of Mind, New Thought, Christian Science ... they all seem to represent a desire to reform Christianity but end up in an even worse place. And the reason for this is, historic Christianity represents an interlocking series of memes that have evolved organically over a very long time to self-perpetuate about as well as possible (which is to say, not all that well as it is). Reform happens generally at the peril of reformers, who generally become obsessed with some narrow doctrine that they imagine if reformed would cause everything to Just Work. But what ends up happening is there are all sorts of unintended consequences and they have to make a raft of other changes to compensate, and end up with something that's marinating off to the side in its own juices.

I'm not even sure the Protestant reforms were that much of a success. Protestantism is fragmented and less influential in some ways compared to Catholicism even to this day, and I think in the end it succeeded less because it was a superior belief system variant than because it allowed Christianity to divide organically between those who find ritual and tradition and centralized, bureaucratic control and an alleged unbroken chain of command back to Christ himself comforting, and those who find it otherwise, or who are indifferent. It allowed free-lancing in other words.
The following 1 user Likes mordant's post:
  • julep
Reply
#48

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 02:41 PM)Ima Believer Wrote: I've only just begun my Bible study, but at this point believe in Jehovah the God of the Bible and the one whom he sent forth, Christ Jesus.
Yep, JW. Thumbs Up
R.I.P. Hannes
Reply
#49

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 03:07 PM)Ima Believer Wrote: Prove it . . . . Atheists love saying that! It isn't anyone's responsibility to prove anything to you. It's your responsibility.
Noone came to your house and asked you for proof of your god. You came here and made claims. Put up, shut up, or at least admit you have nothing to back your beliefs! Noone will force you to abandon your belief, but you shouldnt be suprised when you are called out after having made bold claims and been offensive (from the start!) to the people whose house you entered.

Its not only a matter of reason but civilty. Angry
R.I.P. Hannes
The following 2 users Like Deesse23's post:
  • TheGentlemanBastard, Fireball
Reply
#50

Why Atheism?
(05-04-2019, 03:07 PM)Ima Believer Wrote: It isn't anyone's responsibility to prove anything to you. It's your responsibility. God doesn't live on a petri dish. He doesn't feel the need to prove himself to anyone, so if you reject him that's your thing. If you want to come looking for him you know where to find him. Not in any church, but the Bible.
Who is it that's not owning their "thing"? Of course it's every person's responsibility to own their own decisions. But that's a separate matter from who is making the positive truth claim. I make none. You do. I am indifferent to your claims unless you can evidence them. Simples. Why can't you simply accept that? Why do so many theists (of whatever stripe) have the impulse to impose their codes of RightThink and behavior on people who don't give a fig?

My quibble with believers isn't that they believe, it is that they want ME to believe. In fact they feel I'm obligated to agree with them.
(05-04-2019, 03:07 PM)Ima Believer Wrote: If, tomorrow afternoon a press conference is held by the world's leading scientists announcing that evolution was incorrect and we were in fact created. In effect, they discovered God . . . it would mean nothing to me. Today's science is tomorrows joke just as yesterdays science is today's joke.
Since the widespread adoption of the modern scientific method (roughly, the time of Newton), NO scientific theory (proven explanatory framework) has been overturned. Not one. Sometimes they are broadened to more general cases, but never overturned. Newton's theory of physics still serves for most everyday purposes. Relativity and Quantum Electrodynamics for example did not overturn Newton, they just explained different behaviors at extreme scales. Newton is still adequate for most celestial mechanics even today, for example. The Theory of Evolution is no different than the Theory of Gravity, it is not going to be repealed, though it may be better understood and refined. The TOE has moved well beyond Darwin for example, as it has successfully incorporated better understanding of some of the underlying science. But Darwin was not wrong, either.

You are conflating the process of converging on future theories by eliminating competing hypotheses, as a bug rather than a feature. Most of this imagined capriciousness of science is the failure to distinguish association from cause. A lot of that comes from an inexplicable aversion in the field of statistics for the past two hundred years, to even discussing cause. It's very easy in statistics to get the causes exactly backwards, because statistics have no concept of cause. That is why people like Judea Pearl are working on a causal calculus, to reverse the accident of history that made cause a dirty word. This is necessary to move the AI field forward for example. Another source of this conflation of association and cause is the need of modern digital content providers to produce clickbait. "Science" headlines routinely take a very tentative and small scale demonstration of some association of two factors to be a provocative and earth shattering causal determination because it gets you to look. A third source is structural: the desire for research funding and tenure causes scientists to overreach in their own arguments and to protect the status quo.

But none of this argues against the scientific method, in fact the SM is designed to resist all these forces and on balance it does so. Just not on a timeline that pleases us usually.

The proof is in the pudding, which is applied science (technology). Your cell phone won't quit working tomorrow because of some pronouncement of a new discovery invalidating quantum electrodynamics or because of some theological-style debate about waves vs particles. It works because it's based on settled science. It might work better tomorrow because of new discoveries, but those will build on, not replace, existing settled science.

So stop peddling this hand-waving dismissal of science as a bunch of alternate woo when it plainly isn't.
The following 2 users Like mordant's post:
  • Deesse23, julep
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)