Take this. Many atheists believe that belief in God is like belief in Santa Claus right? Well do you see any atheists writing books or making lectures the attempt to disprove Santa? I don't think so. And why is that? Because they know full well in their heart that he doesn't exist so why would they waste their time trying so hard to disprove it? If they believe God is just as fake as Santa Claus, then why do they spend their time trying to disprove his existence so much? It makes no logical sense. If you really don't believe in God you won't waste your time trying so hard to disprove his existence. Think about it atheists.
Why would someone talk about something that doesn't exist? I mean, people don't talk about the tooth fairy as if he is real. Yet, when God comes up, people get argumentative. Why is that? Is it because you don't want God to exist? I'm a bit puzzled about this? It seems contradictory to me.
Think about it. You see atheists constantly trying to convince people that God doesn't exist. Why do they do this? It's really pretty silly, when you think about. I don't see any of them trying to convince people that the Easter Bunny doesn't exist. Why is that? God is the only "fictional" character they go after.
Try asking an atheist if they believe in the possibility of an alien life force out there. Every single time I ask, I get a yes. Wait, what? You can believe in aliens, but not in God? Hmmmmm. Hold up, I'm about to blow your mind......"technically" God would be an alien.....Not from this earth, yadayada. I'm just sayin'
I agree with both MyFangirlFace and Varrack. Discussing an idea you believe to be false is not a contradiction. Entertaining the possible truth of an idea you believe to be false is not a contradiction either. Both situations are the signs of a good debater and such discussions should be encouraged. So, for an atheist to entertain the existence of God for the purpose of a debate is not a contradiction of his belief . To talk about something does not concede its existence.
What does seem to be a contradiction is the emotion/anger that sometimes accompanies religious debates. These two worldviews have two completely different consequences depending on which one is true. At times the responses do not match the believed consequences of the worldview.
Atheists believe that there is no ultimate consequence. So no matter what one believes the ending is the same. This worldview does not justify a strong emotional response to differing worldviews. If the ending is the same for all, regardless of the worldview they hold, then who cares what others believe? There would be no reason to be upset over those who do not believe what you believe.
It is the same vice versa. It would be strange for a person who believes in God to NOT emotionally respond to those who do not believe in God. Especially since this person believes there are dire consequences for not believing in God.
The logical expectations for these worldviews are reversed. The atheist would be expected to not care about what others believe while the believer in God would have every reason to care what others believe. It is here the contradiction lies, when the responses from either party do not match the consequences of their worldview.
I don't believe in the Easter Bunny. Yet if someone were to announce that they do, then I may choose to challenge their beliefs. It's about sharing an opinion that counters another. Why is it strange for an atheist to voice their views on a topic that others have contrasting views about?
I don't believe in the tooth fairy, but I still acknowledge that it's an idea that some people (small children) believe to be true. The USA is so intolerant towards atheists, it's staggering. Everyone can have their own opinion and express it freely. Also, the plural form of "Atheist" is "Atheists", not "Atheist's".
Cant believe so many said yes. I can tell a fictional story without believing its true. I can talk about fairies even though i dont believe in them. Have you every talked about santa clause or fairies or anything? Yes you have even though you dont believe in them so your a hypocrite.
Actually, I talk about the theory of god or how god appears in literature (scriptures). I demonstrate that the theory is not only without evidence but how known facts contradict the theory. I also refer to god as a fictional character much the same as people discussing a book or movie character. If I talked as if he actually existed, as a few do, then I would be contradicting myself. The only times I have spoken of a god as if it was a real being is in reflection of a time when I was a Christian.
Seeing that you can logically discuss a theory to oppose it and speak of fictional character in a manner that reflects it being fictitious, there is no contradiction.
This argument is positively ridiculous. Talking about a position does not mean you identify with it. The moment you turn it on, one realizes that Fox News ( very) frequently talk about democrats and Preident Obama but you certainly don't call Fox News a liberal organization. This argument is just about as crazy as they come.
Atheists do not believe in a supernatural power; we (I am an atheist) do not find any rationality or logic in the belief in a supernatural power, nor do we see any evidence for this belief, which leads to our conclusion that it is implausible to believe in God.
The reason that we discuss God as if he exists is that if we entertain the idea of God's existence, we can point out the fallacies in this belief.
Talking about something you don't believe in doesn't mean you're "contradicting" yourself by talking about it. If I don't believe in Zeus, there's nothing contradictory about me talking about him. This doesn't even make sense. Some atheists discuss God because belief in God is so widespread and there are literally billions of people who follow major religions. There's churches and mosques everywhere and God is even imprinted on our money, if you're American. So no, I don't see why one would believe this.
Let's say you are walking down the street and a stranger walks up to you and says that there hair is green and on fire and is yelling at them to cut parts of their body apart. Now you can observe that the persons hair is black, not darkened by burning at all, and no words are escaping it, let alone making demands for self mutilation. Are you contradicting yourself by giving your reasons for why what the stranger is proclaiming is false? First of all the stranger approached you and presented their belief to you for your apreciation. In fact, give this person enough free time and they will be demanding their belief be influential in politics, in society, in schools, everywhere. Religion proclaims their god to be present, in a particular way, who has certain demands, and religious people then force their ways upon others. Atheists are less than 10% of the U.S. Population, have virtually no political or societal sway, and it is my experience that virtually all atheists do not wish to force their theological beliefs and convictions upon others. We may attempt to inform you of what we believe and invite you to do likewise but we don't put into practice laws that prohibit religious people from holding government offices. There are over half a dozen states that have it written that you may be whatever religion you please to be a governor or mayor or judge, so long as you believe in some form of higher power. Millions of children are indoctrinated into stating that they live in a country "under god" before every school day. Our currency says that it is "in god we trust" that our money has value. My point is that it is only when religious people force their belief that their hair is green, afire, and talkative upon nonbelievers that we take action and oppose you. If there truly was a separation of church and state there wouldn't be half of these debates about religion.
I am an atheist and I enjoy debating and discussing religion. It can be discussed with religious people, agnostics or atheists. My religious friends don't get offended when I question them and I don't get offended when they question me. If you had to believe in God in order to talk about God then why should non religious people listen when religious people talk about God to them? Talking about a subject and hearing points from all sides will only provide benefits. Shutting people out makes no sense.
That's like saying that people who talk about Harry Potter think that he exists... The act of talking or discussing does not make something true. And atheists talk about it in the sense of a concept. And when one talks about a concept, it doesn't mean that they believe in it.
Furthermore, what's up with atheists being viewed as people who constantly want to argue how god does not exist, and get all emotional about it? Nearly all atheists don't really care what others think. Its usually (in certain countries, not most) the religious people who come to the people to say how god exists and one should believe in him.