Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The "flawed statement" is the claim that Atheism is not a belief.
Even that "FAQ" in the A&A subforum states that Atheism is a Belief.
And it is definitively so: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/atheism
Everything and anything that anyone has considered and/or contemplated is a "Belief".
Only if you've never heard of something, or never considered it, could you not have a belief about it.
Atheists believe that there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of a God...even though the vast majority of the people in this world (4+ out of 5) do find there to be sufficient evidence.
It is important to get this straight, so it is possible to have a logical discussion and debate about it.
So you are saying that anything a person disbelieves is a belief? Ridiculous.
For years and years I've heard that argument, yet not one religious person has ever produced credible evidence for the existence of any god, fairies, Santa Claus, angels or demons.
Oh dear, I'm going to attempt this but it's probably futile. It's not about intelligence, beliefs or the universe, atheists don't claim to have all the answers.
“Having an answer” in matters of faith or lack of it, is relative. What May be an answer to me, could mean nothing to you. And the vice versa.
So yes, believers don’t have all the answers either - nobody does.
Quote:
But so far there is no empirical or scientific proof that a god or gods exist.
There is no empirical or scientific evidence either that God does not exist.
Absence of evidence is not always the evidence of absence.
1000 years ago, there was no empirical or scientific evidence that oxygen exists. This doesn’t mean that oxygen didn’t exist then.
And as I said it a million times - there is no scientific formula or method or oracle that we can use to verify and validate to prove if something is a God or not?
And hence, it’s brutally ironic that those who demand a scientific evidence of God cannot come up with a scientific criteria as to what exactly would they consider as “an evidence of God” and how are they going to verify n validate it? Which scientific book are they going to use as their reference?
So far as an empirical evidence go, there is none either way.
No one has came back from the dead to tell us whether a God exists or it does NOT.
Otherwise, some people consider a cow as god. A statue with 6 arms and 8 legs is a god to some. How much more empirical can it get? You tell me. Flying over the Grand Canyon - does that make David Copperfield a God?
And therefore, Atheism is NOT a position - it’s a belief based on faith with no scientific or empirical evidence.
Quote:
The bolded above is such a flawed statement. These are the things I was talking about dispelling. Atheism is NOT a belief it's a position you take when there is no evidence to believe in something. Also, it's egregious statements like above that make your christianity look like.....well.....unstable and laughable.
“Having an answer” in matters of faith or lack of it, is relative. What May be an answer to me, could mean nothing to you. And the vice versa.
So yes, believers don’t have all the answers either - nobody does.
There is no empirical or scientific evidence either that God does not exist.
Absence of evidence is not always the evidence of absence.
1000 years ago, there was no empirical or scientific evidence that oxygen exists. This doesn’t mean that oxygen didn’t exist then.
And as I said it a million times - there is no scientific formula or method or oracle that we can use to verify and validate to prove if something is a God or not?
And hence, it’s brutally ironic that those who demand a scientific evidence of God cannot come up with a scientific criteria as to what exactly would they consider as “an evidence of God” and how are they going to verify n validate it? Which scientific book are they going to use as their reference?
So far as an empirical evidence go, there is none either way.
No one has came back from the dead to tell us whether a God exists or it does NOT.
Otherwise, some people consider a cow as god. A statue with 6 arms and 8 legs is a god to some. How much more empirical can it get? You tell me. Flying over the Grand Canyon - does that make David Copperfield a God?
And therefore, Atheism is NOT a position - it’s a belief based on faith with no scientific or empirical evidence.
Already answered above.
The burden is and always has been on the individual that makes the claim to provide proof.
Quote:
And therefore, Atheism is NOT a position - it’s a belief based on faith with no scientific or empirical evidence.
The burden is and always has been on the individual that makes the claim to provide proof.
As I said before ridiculous.
Now you talk that same old stuff about, "The Burden of Proof".
You were wrong years ago...and wrong now....
Because.....
That obligation is upon the one making the "extraordinary", "remarkable", or "new" claim.
Well..."God Exists" has been sooooooo prolific, for sooooooo long...it is considered a "Standard of Human Understanding".
When a concept reaches a "saturation point" that is to such a degree that it is considered to be "The Standard"...a position that deviates from that would be the "extraordinary/remarkable/new claim" that will have to prove itself against the long established standard.
Belief in God has been the "norm" (8to9 out of 10) for THOOOOOOOUSANDS of years. It's the "incumbent position"...the "ruling viewpoint"...the "champion concept"!
That concept does not have to prove itself...it currently "holds office"! It's upon the challenger (Atheism) to prove itself.
So far it's gotten steamrolled and flattened, in every "race". If it were seen as an "election"...Atheism would be viewed as being defeated in the biggest landslide EVER.
Here we have the Challenger with a 1W-9L record "calling out" the REEEEEEEIGNING, AND DEFENNNNNNDING, UNNNNNN-DE-FEATED, CHAAAAAAAM-PI-OOOOOOON CONNNNNNNCEPT, OOOOOOF THE WORRRRRRRLD...and demand it "prove" itself.
Just like Galileo had to PROVE the universe DOES NOT revolve around the Earth, since that concept was in opposition to the "long established standard" that it did...the Atheists will have to PROVE God DOES NOT exist, if they want their concept to be accepted as valid.
BTW...good luck with that. It will be much harder for the Atheists than it was for Galileo...since he was right, and they are wrong (about God not existing).
The "God Exists" concept has "taken on all challengers" for thousands of years and "dusted them" like they weren't even there!!
Is it also a belief not to believe in flying spaghetti monster?
Not believing isn't a belief.
It is that "Lack Believing", "Not Believing" stuff where the Atheists are messing up. Usually intentionally...so they don't have to demonstrate any sense of conviction.
Once one considers and/or contemplates a subject or issue, they necessarily have a Belief about it.
Such as the puerile mock Deities like The Flying Spaghetti Monster, Invisible Pink Unicorn, or the Teapot...once considered...one either believes that they exist, or they believe that they don't exist.
It IS a Belief Position.
Atheism is a Belief Position...relative to the existence of a God Entity.
It is that "Lack Believing", "Not Believing" stuff where the Atheists are messing up. Usually intentionally...so they don't have to demonstrate any sense of conviction.
Once one considers and/or contemplates a subject or issue, they necessarily have a Belief about it.
Such as the puerile mock Deities like The Flying Spaghetti Monster, Invisible Pink Unicorn, or the Teapot...once considered...one either believes that they exist, or they believe that they don't exist.
It IS a Belief Position.
Atheism is a Belief Position...relative to the existence of a God Entity.
I have a sense of conviction about child abuse. Be it a teacher or a religious leader I would call it out. Conclusion don't require conviction unless you are using it for something else like building a worldview.
So you are saying that anything a person disbelieves is a belief? Ridiculous.
For years and years I've heard that argument, yet not one religious person has ever produced credible evidence for the existence of any god, fairies, Santa Claus, angels or demons.
I have experienced a common understanding of my God with other believers in my current church. It's as if we have met the same person.
We have a common understanding. Perhaps we're all equally deceived, time will tell. But the interactions are gratifying and beneficial to us all.
Then there are those who have never met the " same person " and rightly have no idea what I'm talking about.
And I think christianity is laughable since all of the 'great' bible stories all happened during the period of undocumented history and haven't repeated in the time of modern man when we could study them. Y'all are still listening to goat herders. But go ahead...god turned anyone into a pillar of salt lately?
See how easy that kind of thinking is?
YES!! And LOL I used to say the bolded above all the time, but it was more like "ancient, ignorant, goat herders" LOL. Let's see if that one doesn't start a fire.
Phet, We've been around here a long time but I plum forgot you were Buddhist. Cool - Which I am losing more and more of on this board. Might need a whiskey break.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And LOL
I used to say the bolded above all the time, but it was more like "ancient, ignorant, goat herders" LOL. Let's see if that one doesn't start a fire.
