Total Posts:83|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Atheism vs. Reality

Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.
Electric-Eccentric
Posts: 1,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 3:48:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
You want God/god?

here I AM

p.s. I AM also the Way, the Truth that is not subjective and the LIFE that LIVES and breathes.
Life is what YOU make it,
Most just try and fake it...
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,963
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2015 5:04:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Yeah that is a pretty retarded argument
tejretics
Posts: 6,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2015 6:20:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Justification of P2

Argument from Sheer Willpower

I do believe in God! I do believe in God! I do, I do, I do! I do believe in God! Therefore, God exists.

Argument from Emotional Blackmail

God loves you .... how could you be so heartless to not believe in him? Therefore God exists.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
joetheripper117
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2015 2:09:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 6:20:17 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Justification of P2

Argument from Sheer Willpower

I do believe in God! I do believe in God! I do, I do, I do! I do believe in God! Therefore, God exists.

Argument from Emotional Blackmail

God loves you .... how could you be so heartless to not believe in him? Therefore God exists.

He was not making the argument himself, he was mocking the way in which others make it.
"By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out."
-Richard Dawkins
"The onus is on you to say why; the onus is not on the rest of us to say why not."
-Richard Dawkins
tejretics
Posts: 6,086
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 12:07:21 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/31/2015 2:09:45 PM, joetheripper117 wrote:
At 5/31/2015 6:20:17 AM, tejretics wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Justification of P2

Argument from Sheer Willpower

I do believe in God! I do believe in God! I do, I do, I do! I do believe in God! Therefore, God exists.

Argument from Emotional Blackmail

God loves you .... how could you be so heartless to not believe in him? Therefore God exists.

He was not making the argument himself, he was mocking the way in which others make it.

Who's "he"?

These wonderfully hilarious arguments are found in the "GodlessGeeks" website.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:43:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

I think it's more like this, Envisage:

1. Atheism claims to know there cannot possibly be a God
2. The gaps! Atheists haven't looked at all the gaps!
C. Atheism is a statement of faith in the gaps.

Now here's the argument hit back over the net:

1. Theological claims regarding physics, history, biology and psychology have been near-universally disproved;
2. These claims were also religion's chief claims to authority regarding the existence of God;
3. Religion has reluctantly abandoned claims to authority over science, but has not abandoned claims to God;
C. Religion wants a God; but has no idea how God fits into reality.

And a corollary:

1. Atheism claims there is no place for God in an understanding of reality;
2. Religion knows it wants a God, but has no idea how God fits into reality;
C. It requires no faith for atheists to dismiss religion.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 5:49:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 5:43:36 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

I think it's more like this, Envisage:

1. Atheism claims to know there cannot possibly be a God
2. The gaps! Atheists haven't looked at all the gaps!
C. Atheism is a statement of faith in the gaps.

Now here's the argument hit back over the net:

1. Theological claims regarding physics, history, biology and psychology have been near-universally disproved;
2. These claims were also religion's chief claims to authority regarding the existence of God;
3. Religion has reluctantly abandoned claims to authority over science, but has not abandoned claims to God;
C. Religion wants a God; but has no idea how God fits into reality.

And a corollary:

1. Atheism claims there is no place for God in an understanding of reality;
2. Religion knows it wants a God, but has no idea how God fits into reality;
C. It requires no faith for atheists to dismiss religion.

I think you missed the point in my post (as have several others). My post wasn't meant to be a joke or satire in any way whatsoever.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 6:05:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 5:49:06 PM, Envisage wrote:
My post wasn't meant to be a joke or satire in any way whatsoever.

I'm aware, Envis.

However as I've seen it, most of the attacks against atheism in this forum, and attacks against empiricism in the Science forum, aren't based on material belief in divine agency, but against an atheism and/or materialism frequently described as an arrogant, biased or faith-based position.

Underneath that I suspect, is not so much logic, but a kind of wounded outrage that anyone would prefer a life of no spiritual comfort, and no religious fellowship to a life with those things, however irrationally derived. So the attack is almost a form of denial: surely, you must have a faith, be it in science, or hedonism, or nihilism. You can't not have a faith.

And then the religious try to support this with some sort of evidence that atheism is a faith -- usually based on atheists not diligently examining the gaps in human knowledge.

It's a rather hypocritical attack in the first place, since the standards of theological evidence are so artificially low to start with -- if anyone needed to review knowledge-gaps, it's people believing in the historical existence of Abraham, or a single author of the Old testament.

It's also a misguided attack, because atheism isn't doctrinal so it's not a faith.

But it also reveals unacknowledged fragility in modern theology: they want a god, but can't say with any confidence where it fits. So this attack seems a near-desperate plea to atheists to admit that a god might fit somewhere in reality even if nobody quite knows where, because if atheists acknowledged it, then the faithful might more confidently believe it too.

Hence the humour with which I was writing.
Dragonfang
Posts: 1,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 6:29:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
1- Laws of logic/consciousness/reasoning/intuition/free will/morality/objective laws of nature cannot exist without God.
2- The previously mentioned entities exist.
C: Therefore God exists.

I am confused, do Atheists have faith and principles for their worldview, like I don't know sentient human beings, or do they not?

Don't know much theists who are trying to "fit" God rather than state that nothing fits in reality without God. In other words, God would be an axiomatic and foundational belief needed for any coherent worldview of reality to exist.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 6:33:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 6:29:05 PM, Dragonfang wrote:
1- Laws of logic/consciousness/reasoning/intuition/free will/morality/objective laws of nature cannot exist without God.

You would need to establish that however. Since the God proposition alone says nothing inherent about reality, lest you commit the fallacy of affirming the consequent. the only thing atheism entails about reality is the non-existence of God.
Lee001
Posts: 3,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 6:41:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

How do we know god exist in reality?
"Condoms are societal constructs created by the government to restrain 'Murican freedom!"-SolonKR

"But I jest and digress (sick rhymes, yo); every boob is equal in the eyes of the Lord."- SolonKR

"Oh Hey, Seeing Artichokes Makes Me Want to Have Sex."- SolonKR

"Yep, but anyone who touches my hair immediately ascends to the heavens..You're already an angel, so touching my hair can do nothing <3" -SolonKR

My hubby Hayd <3 <3
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 6:59:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 6:41:29 PM, Lee001 wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

How do we know god exist in reality?

Misses the point of the OP regarding "attacks on atheism", or what "atheism entails regarding reality"
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:47:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Actually the definition of Atheism is "a lack of believe in god/s."

It makes no claims about reality. It is a statement of a personal level of belief in the proposition that god/s exist in reality.

So when challenged to support the claims that (paraphrased) "God does not exist", the Atheist can hide and coward in ambiguity, doubt, and skepticism.

Atheism by definition makes no truthful about reality... and makes no falsifiable claim about a persons inner thoughts.

In logic we call that "meaningless" or "useless"
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 7:49:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 7:47:51 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Actually the definition of Atheism is "a lack of believe in god/s."

It makes no claims about reality. It is a statement of a personal level of belief in the proposition that god/s exist in reality.

So when challenged to support the claims that (paraphrased) "God does not exist", the Atheist can hide and coward in ambiguity, doubt, and skepticism.

Atheism by definition makes no truthful about reality... and makes no falsifiable claim about a persons inner thoughts.

In logic we call that "meaningless" or "useless"

Did you bother to actually read the OP, which already addressed all of this within about 10 words?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 8:01:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 7:49:18 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 6/1/2015 7:47:51 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Actually the definition of Atheism is "a lack of believe in god/s."

It makes no claims about reality. It is a statement of a personal level of belief in the proposition that god/s exist in reality.

So when challenged to support the claims that (paraphrased) "God does not exist", the Atheist can hide and coward in ambiguity, doubt, and skepticism.

Atheism by definition makes no truthful about reality... and makes no falsifiable claim about a persons inner thoughts.

In logic we call that "meaningless" or "useless"

Did you bother to actually read the OP, which already addressed all of this within about 10 words?

Did you read my post?

I doubt a theist says Atheism is contrary to reality. I bet many say Atheist don't have a clue what reality is.

Don't equivocate "Atheist" with the definition of Atheism.

For instance when someone tells me they are an Atheist, I immediately assume with 85% confidence that that person has poor skills in discerning truth and reality. And that they are probably most successful in environments that are constructed and controlled by human minds. (programming, fashion, chemistry, theater, ect..)

None of that is in the definition of Atheism.
dee-em
Posts: 6,464
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 8:06:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 6:41:29 PM, Lee001 wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

How do we know god exist in reality?

That is the whole point. This is where theists must begin. Until they establish this premise, their argument (where they try and shift the burden to atheists) will always fail.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 8:12:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 8:06:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/1/2015 6:41:29 PM, Lee001 wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

How do we know god exist in reality?

Through logic and connecting with spiritual truth.

That is the whole point. This is where theists must begin. Until they establish this premise, their argument (where they try and shift the burden to atheists) will always fail.
dee-em
Posts: 6,464
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/1/2015 8:16:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 8:12:08 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 6/1/2015 8:06:02 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/1/2015 6:41:29 PM, Lee001 wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

How do we know god exist in reality?

Through logic and connecting with spiritual truth.

I didn't write what you are responding to. Why address it to me?

Since you have, my response would be this. What logic and what connection to spiritual truth? You have been repeatedly asked to explain these assertions. You have been given every opportunity. Yet in each case you have either dodged the questions or run away.

That is the whole point. This is where theists must begin. Until they establish this premise, their argument (where they try and shift the burden to atheists) will always fail.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2015 4:08:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:48:07 PM, Electric-Eccentric wrote:
You want God/god?

here I AM

p.s. I AM also the Way, the Truth that is not subjective and the LIFE that LIVES and breathes.

Hello god among gods.
It seems the rest of the gods don't want to pay much attention to you.
They are all too busy debating whether gods exist or not.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2015 8:31:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/1/2015 8:01:23 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
For instance when someone tells me they are an Atheist, I immediately assume with 85% confidence that that person has poor skills in discerning truth and reality. And that they are probably most successful in environments that are constructed and controlled by human minds. (programming, fashion, chemistry, theater, ect..)
And that is so funny when we consider that you have a 100% confidence that your god exists regardless of the FACT that there is not even a scrap of evidence to support your confidence.
Your god was created by the Canaanites as a member of their pantheon of gods and even they would not have had the certainty that you claim.
Good luck with your graded confidence, I hope it is as effective in your blindfolded prediction of M&M colours.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Electric-Eccentric
Posts: 1,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2015 11:31:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/5/2015 4:08:44 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:48:07 PM, Electric-Eccentric wrote:
You want God/god?

here I AM

p.s. I AM also the Way, the Truth that is not subjective and the LIFE that LIVES and breathes.

Hello god among gods.
It seems the rest of the gods don't want to pay much attention to you.
They are all too busy debating whether gods exist or not.

EE: I'm reminded of a experience I had about 4 years ago. I was visiting a friend that is in his 60's and his 30 something daughter is there and they are arguing about her road trip/drive to visit her mother and how she should go about the plans for the trip.

I have known these people for many years so I'm treated like family. But anyway, I sat and listened to what they were arguing about and understood the situation at hand.

I interrupted them and they quit talking for a moment, I then quickly told them the solution. They looked at me and went back to where they had left off in their arguing.

They ended up going with exactly what I had suggested in the end.

I learned that they were NOT seeking a solution as the FIRST goal. The game of the argument was what they were MORE interested in.

That is the way it is around here. Most are NOT seeking the Truth and solutions and such. They are seeking a means of ESCAPE that the DISTRACTION of the childish game of argument in circles seems to provide them.

The PROOF of that is CLEAR to SEE around here and else where as there are NO NOTTA NONE solutions or clear conclusions presented by the many.

Only those of the FEW have their heads on level and their Lives in balance as perfect is as perfect does and those of the many prefer the Forrest Gump ways of life.

Nothing new under the sun when the many of the confused want to try and have their FUN

and try and ESCAPE from what bothers them the most...

themselves...
Life is what YOU make it,
Most just try and fake it...
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/5/2015 5:40:53 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/5/2015 11:31:51 AM, Electric-Eccentric wrote:
At 6/5/2015 4:08:44 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:48:07 PM, Electric-Eccentric wrote:
You want God/god?

here I AM

p.s. I AM also the Way, the Truth that is not subjective and the LIFE that LIVES and breathes.

Hello god among gods.
It seems the rest of the gods don't want to pay much attention to you.
They are all too busy debating whether gods exist or not.

EE: I'm reminded of a experience I had about 4 years ago. I was visiting a friend that is in his 60's and his 30 something daughter is there and they are arguing about her road trip/drive to visit her mother and how she should go about the plans for the trip.

I have known these people for many years so I'm treated like family. But anyway, I sat and listened to what they were arguing about and understood the situation at hand.

I interrupted them and they quit talking for a moment, I then quickly told them the solution. They looked at me and went back to where they had left off in their arguing.

They ended up going with exactly what I had suggested in the end.

I learned that they were NOT seeking a solution as the FIRST goal. The game of the argument was what they were MORE interested in.

That is the way it is around here. Most are NOT seeking the Truth and solutions and such. They are seeking a means of ESCAPE that the DISTRACTION of the childish game of argument in circles seems to provide them.

The PROOF of that is CLEAR to SEE around here and else where as there are NO NOTTA NONE solutions or clear conclusions presented by the many.

Only those of the FEW have their heads on level and their Lives in balance as perfect is as perfect does and those of the many prefer the Forrest Gump ways of life.

Nothing new under the sun when the many of the confused want to try and have their FUN

and try and ESCAPE from what bothers them the most...


themselves...

It seems that when you hand people solutions on a golden platter, they still cannot see the solution because the problem is distracting them from seeing it. They seem to get so wrapped up in the problems that those problems make them blind to the solutions.
It is as if they cannot take a step back from their own "problem" to see the bigger picture.
Their individual "tree" is stopping them from seeing the forest and understanding their own tree is part of that forest. The bigger the "tree", the less they see of the forest.

All the trees in the forest drop their "seeds" on the forest floor. Some of the seeds grow and some do not depending on if they land on fertile soil or not.

All you can do is keep throwing seeds to the birds and hope a few land on good ground and grow a revelation or two in the soil that receives them.

Life is like a box of chocolates to some people. They never know what they will get. They just pick random chocolates from the box and when they get sick of the taste they try a different one and leave the chocolate making to others.
Others make the chocolates and get exactly what they want.

Life is what you/we make it. Some obviously enjoy making it a life of debate filled with conflict.
Stephen-of-Wimbledon
Posts: 28
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:05:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hi Envisage,

I'm a bit lost - I don't really understand what you're trying to say. Could you please break that down a bit more for me? Here's where I'm most bamboozled:

Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality

As an atheist I don't understand the use of the word atheism here. If there is such a thing as atheism, I've never seen it. There is no atheist system, dogma, reference text nor any atheist habits that are necessary for them to be labelled an ism.

Also the word god gets bandied about a lot. There seem to be thousands of different interpretations. As far as I'm aware I'm skeptical of all descriptions of god(s), but I'm always ready to learn. What do you mean by god?

God exists in reality

It's clear to me that everyone who claims to have knowledge of a god or gods thinks that the knowledge they claim is enough to also claim that their god or gods is/are real. This second step therefore appears to be redundant? What are you trying to say?

Atheism contradicts reality

Again, there is no ism. If you believe in a god or gods then, of course, any atheist will deny the truth of your belief. If a Hindu and a Muslim meet, each will deny the reality of the others position because they are both atheists with regard to the other's god(s).

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality.

I'm sorry, but to me that sentence is just gobbledegook. What do you mean?

Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

If I understood you correctly, yes it would be good to hear your arguments for your god(s) existence.

Peace.
Stephen of Wimbledon
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:19:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
As an atheist I don't understand the use of the word atheism here. If there is such a thing as atheism, I've never seen it. There is no atheist system, dogma, reference text nor any atheist habits that are necessary for them to be labelled an ism.

This is only is a problem for you because you have cut apart my post away from its context. You ignored my later qualifier (and removed it from your reply):

"And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism"

Also the word god gets bandied about a lot. There seem to be thousands of different interpretations. As far as I'm aware I'm skeptical of all descriptions of god(s), but I'm always ready to learn. What do you mean by god?

Well this post was open to theist's personal definition of God. It actually doesn't matter what the definition of "God" is since the argument remains valid regardless. You could define "God" as a "cup with a handle" and my argument wouldn't lose any validity.

God exists in reality

It's clear to me that everyone who claims to have knowledge of a god or gods thinks that the knowledge they claim is enough to also claim that their god or gods is/are real. This second step therefore appears to be redundant? What are you trying to say?

You are completely kissing the point of the post. Which was that "atheism" can only be attacked one way - by proving God exists. Atheism doesn't entail anything except that one single claim. Thus attacking the ontology of mind, the fact the universe has a cause, of that information is immaterial doesn't attack "atheism". Which was the original purpose of this thread.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,217
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:28:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 5:04:38 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Yeah that is a pretty retarded argument

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Accipiter
Posts: 1,163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:37:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Your argument is ridiculous and that alarms me.

If half the population in the US can't understand why "because the bible says so" is a terrible argument that spells trouble for everyone.

All of the most ridiculous "reasoning" I have ever seen comes from religious people.

We have a nation where half of people in it don't know how to think critically and they vote.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:38:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/6/2015 3:37:25 PM, Accipiter wrote:
At 5/30/2015 3:40:33 PM, Envisage wrote:
1. Atheism makes the claim God doesn't exist in reality
2. God exists in reality
C. Atheism contradicts reality

This is literally the only way you can argue atheism is incoherent with reality. And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism. Now stop with the retarded arguments against atheism and start with the arguments for God's existence.

Your argument is ridiculous and that alarms me.

If half the population in the US can't understand why "because the bible says so" is a terrible argument that spells trouble for everyone.

All of the most ridiculous "reasoning" I have ever seen comes from religious people.

We have a nation where half of people in it don't know how to think critically and they vote.

Seems everyone in this thread misses the point of my post...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:38:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/6/2015 3:19:46 PM, Envisage wrote:
As an atheist I don't understand the use of the word atheism here. If there is such a thing as atheism, I've never seen it. There is no atheist system, dogma, reference text nor any atheist habits that are necessary for them to be labelled an ism.

This is only is a problem for you because you have cut apart my post away from its context. You ignored my later qualifier (and removed it from your reply):

"And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism"

Also the word god gets bandied about a lot. There seem to be thousands of different interpretations. As far as I'm aware I'm skeptical of all descriptions of god(s), but I'm always ready to learn. What do you mean by god?

Well this post was open to theist's personal definition of God. It actually doesn't matter what the definition of "God" is since the argument remains valid regardless. You could define "God" as a "cup with a handle" and my argument wouldn't lose any validity.

God exists in reality

It's clear to me that everyone who claims to have knowledge of a god or gods thinks that the knowledge they claim is enough to also claim that their god or gods is/are real. This second step therefore appears to be redundant? What are you trying to say?

You are completely kissing the point of the post. Which was that "atheism" can only be attacked one way - by proving God exists. Atheism doesn't entail anything except that one single claim. Thus attacking the ontology of mind, the fact the universe has a cause, of that information is immaterial doesn't attack "atheism". Which was the original purpose of this thread.

God is not a physical human being. For an atheist to accept God exists, one eventually has to argue that human scientific knowledge as taught is not the descriptor of everything in reality.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2015 3:41:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/6/2015 3:38:57 PM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/6/2015 3:19:46 PM, Envisage wrote:
As an atheist I don't understand the use of the word atheism here. If there is such a thing as atheism, I've never seen it. There is no atheist system, dogma, reference text nor any atheist habits that are necessary for them to be labelled an ism.

This is only is a problem for you because you have cut apart my post away from its context. You ignored my later qualifier (and removed it from your reply):

"And this is assuming that #1 is the accepted definition of atheism"

Also the word god gets bandied about a lot. There seem to be thousands of different interpretations. As far as I'm aware I'm skeptical of all descriptions of god(s), but I'm always ready to learn. What do you mean by god?

Well this post was open to theist's personal definition of God. It actually doesn't matter what the definition of "God" is since the argument remains valid regardless. You could define "God" as a "cup with a handle" and my argument wouldn't lose any validity.

God exists in reality

It's clear to me that everyone who claims to have knowledge of a god or gods thinks that the knowledge they claim is enough to also claim that their god or gods is/are real. This second step therefore appears to be redundant? What are you trying to say?

You are completely kissing the point of the post. Which was that "atheism" can only be attacked one way - by proving God exists. Atheism doesn't entail anything except that one single claim. Thus attacking the ontology of mind, the fact the universe has a cause, of that information is immaterial doesn't attack "atheism". Which was the original purpose of this thread.

(I define) God is (as) not a physical human being.

Fix'd

For an atheist to accept (my definition of) God exists, one eventually has to argue that human scientific knowledge as taught is not the descriptor of everything in reality.

Fix'd again.

Atheism doesn't entail scientific knowledge is the descriptor of everything in reality. You have refuted nothing in my OP.