Another conversation with some Christians

[lordhathor]

The following is a forum topic and quotations from it. No point was left out, only ad-hom and posts like "why bother debating religion" and the like.



I am an Atheist. I was recently told by a Christian that the only evidence they have FOR god is that I can't prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is NO god.

I invite any christians or theists to prove there is no allah, or flying spaghetti monter, Zeus, or bigfoot.

Thanks.


My honest answer, I can't prove those don't exist. Has this shaken my faith in any way? No


I'm glad that you don't need any reason, logical or otherwise, to believe extraordinarily unbelievable things. I hope you don't base the rest of your life on that sort of logic.

Prove bigfoot is real.

Prove god is real.

Religion is called such because it is a faith. If Christianity, or Atheism, or any other belief system could be proven, there would only be one religion which everyone would have to accept.


Faith means belief based on absolutely no evidence, or possible in direct contradiction to evidence.
People who have "faith" and mean it are not my problem.
I find the idea of faith to be stupid, but that's fine.
It's the people who try to justify their beliefs by sullying science that bother me.


Atheist is not a belief system, it's a lack thereof, fyi.



Correct.



It's the belief that there is no God or supreme being of any kind that gave intelligent design to this world, and the world came to be by random chance. That is a belief system.


incorrect.

If atheism is a belief, not collecting stamps is a hobby.
If atheism is a belief, not believing in bigfoot is a belief.
If atheism is a belief, nudity is a matching outfit.

Atheism has nothing to do with the origins of the universe, or anything else besides whether or not there is a theistic god.
However, NO valid or accepted scientific theory states that the universe came to be through random chance. Unless you have a ridiculously broad definition of "random and "chance".

You should study more.

For example, check out abiogenesis and the big bang theory. Check the Miller/Urey experiment.

First off, don't worry, I will. It's my choice of belief and it has yet to hurt me or anyone and makes more sense to me than anything most atheists argue.

Second, you are the one asking us to disprove bigfoot, so don't you think you should prove him first?

And third, I, personally, don't "sully" science. I know some science, but, again, anything I have learned of it has yet to shake me in my faith.



Believing in something for admitedly no legitimate reason "makes sense" to you? Interesting.


you are the one asking us to disprove bigfoot, so don't you think you should prove him first?



hey, look at that. You've made my argument for me.
Now, prove your god plz.
(PS- we have pictures and VIDEOS of big foot. Got any videos of god?)

Flaming people for their faiths is cool brah,

you know, you flaming people makes every other atheist out there look good. I'm sure they will thank you broski

Oh, hey brofist. Prove god isn't real.



I don't think you understand what "flaming" is.
I am making a simple polite request for the purpose of proving a point.
Should I take it from you ad-hominem attack that you have no answer for my questions?

I like you.



i like you too. Let's be BFFs.



Militant Atheism, which appears to be your drug of choice, is actually a belief system. You argue your point of view, and try to convert others to it.


I am not a "militant atheist". I am a "strong atheist". I make the claim that there is no god, only to the extent that I claim there is no big foot or loch ness monster. I can point out several simple reasons why a god is improbable, but like any man of science, I won't say it's impossible. I also won't say the flying spaghetti monster is impossible.
I don't try to convert people. I try to de-convert them. Everyone is born an atheist.


The type of atheist who doesn't wield it like a belief system, is the one who doesn't wear it like a badge of honor.



I don't think you understand what a belief system is. I am an atheist only as a result of my true sense of pride, or "badge of honor", and that is my free thought, and critical thinking skills.


How was the universe created? please answer this Atheist iim dying to know.



There are so many things wrong with this.

1: I don't know. Does that make you uncomfortable? Are you SO concerned that there might be something you don't know, that you're willing to accept the first wild and logically improbable claim you come across, and build your entire life around it?
2: Actually, we do have some good ideas. The big bang is one. To understand the big bang, and "what banged", you have to understand the physics of space/time. M theory actually puts forward a good hypothesis about the origin, or start, of the "bang", and that is 2 dimentional membranes collided, and matter was the result. That's not a real theory though. Just a hypothesis. The honest answer is, we don't know.
Yet.
But when you claim to have the answer..... but base it on absolutely nothing... and then stop looking for a better answer....
well, they didn't call it the dark ages because it was dark.
3: If you demand an origin for the universe (which by the way, is the source of our laws of physics, and without a universe, you don't really have to follow the rules of said universe, but I digress), if you demand that, then why not demand an origin for your god?




Yeah. Again, it has yet to hurt me or anyone else, and I don't see any reason not to. I look at science, the world, nature, physics, and, quite honestly, God is the only answer that makes sense to me as to how it all holds together.


"Magical sky daddy made everything" makes sense to you?

Q u o t e:
I have a cup of water.

I leave it on the table for 3 hours.

When I come back, trust me, it won't be purple drank.

It will still be water;


Nothing can't make something.



Sure, not in our universe.... which was formed post-big-bang.

You mean ridiculous claims like you "knowing" there is no god of any sort?

I'm actually not a theist. I just don't like the hypocrisy of "shooting down" ridiculous claims with different ridiculous claims.



Who here made that claim? I didn't. I just know that YOU don't know there IS a god, and that furthermore, there is no evidence for a god, and no good reason to believe in one.

 

[lordhathor]

If you believe in god, you would know that he is infinite and we as humans simply couldn't comprehend god, or the way he works.



And how do you know that, exactly? The ancient norse gods weren't infinite.
If you can't comprehend god or how he works, then why even claim belief in him? You certainly can't claim to know how to live your life for him, or how he wants you to, or even to know WHAT he wants you to do.

The belief that there is no god ties you together. There are different brands of atheism, different levels to it, but the same can be said for theism as well. A common central belief is all that is required to create a belief system.



CORRECTION: The LACK of belief in a god.
I also have a lack of belief in the flying spaghetti monster. Does that tie you and I together as well?

I'm an aFSMist. So are you. That's a belief system, by your logic.



The argument could also be:

- No one knows how the universe came to be
- My answer is God

The answer to atheists is that a random fleck of energy suddenly exploded and created matter. But they don't know that. They can prove that it may have happened. But they can't know that it did. Heck, my answer could be both and would still make some sense. The fact that we cannot know leaves it open to anyone to make any answer they want. To say one is stupid and that yours is absolutely right is rather stupid in and of itself.



The answer to atheists (most, anyway) is "I don't know, but we have some pretty good answers so far, and we're still working on it".
You use the word "random" a lot, and I don't think you know what it means because you put it in places it doesn't belong.
You can claim anything you want, sure. You can claim that cucumbers came to this universe and exploded into a ball of brine and that's where pickles came from. But it wouldn't be correct. It woudln't make sense.


You act as if a belief in something for which there is NO EVIDENCE AT ALL
and the acceptance of a theory FOR WHICH THERE IS MOUNTAINS OF EVIDENCE
are on level ground.
As if there's no difference between them.

you are wrong.

Lack of evidence is not carte blanche to make things up. You can't claim cars are powered by imagination and expect me to take you seriously. Without evidence, you can't claim an undetectable, disembodied sentience created the universe either. If you don't know anything about anything, don't say anything.

THIS


Things like that are where you show your bias. That's a completely subjective statement. Many people could give you lots of good reasons to believe in a god.

Now, if you said there's no logical reason to believe in a god, I'd agree with you. However, contrary to popular belief, most of your life isn't based on logic. Instincts, feelings, and emotions end up deciding most things for us, not logic. Not that that's a bad thing, we'd be robots if it was otherwise, but it's important to be aware of before you go smacking others over the head for not being totally logical.



By "good", I meant "logical". I don't know what other definition of "good" could be taken in that context.
I believe it's important to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible. If not, why send our children to school?

I didn't create a thread stating with certainty that the FSM doesn't exist, and neither did you. Nor did either of us bash anyone for believing in the FSM. In fact, we probably don't think about it much at all.

That's very different from the type of atheism, or shall I say, anti-theism I'm seeing here. If you go out of your way to bash theists, I dare say it's likely you've turned your lack of belief into a belief system, probably without even realizing what you've done.



Pointing out the flaws in a belief system makes you "ANTI-"(that belief system)

I'm not BASHING anyone. If you feel bashed, when I present evidence for MY claims, and request evidence for YOUR claims, you either need to see a the!#@!%* for persecution syndrome or change your beliefs. It's an indication that you don't truly believe what you're saying because you immediately feel attacked when someone presents an opposing view with more evidence than yours.

So aFSMism isn't a belief system, but atheism is?
And it all depends on how often you think about it?
If I don't think about atheism much, I'm not an atheist?
If I care about truth, and seek after it, and even point it out to others, it's a religion? (or belief system)?
If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?

you know how the universe was created? You went back in time, watched the Big Bang happen, and came back? I'm not the one saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that I think it may have happened differently from what you think.



You know god created the universe? You went back in time, became noncorporeal, and watched him say "let there be light"?
No?
then how about we stick to methods of knowing things which are reasonable.


Evidence is evidence. I don't have to see the wind to know that it blows, because I can measure it by proxy. Similarly, I can measure the background radiation caused by the big bang and measure the redshift caused by universal expansion post-big-bang.

That's not a belief, that's a provable fact. You believe that there is no god and ridicule those that do believe in such a being. THAT is a belief, because you are basing your stance on something you cannot logically know one way or another.

It's becoming more and more apparent that you have no idea what belief is.



Once again, even though I've said it 3 times and you're apparently just missing my replies or ignoring them like you do with evidence and logic,


If atheism is a BELIEF
NOT collecting stamps is a HOBBY.
Bare feet are a new shoe style.
A blank canvas is a work of art.

do you see the problem?

NOT believing in something IS NOT A BELIEF IN SOMETHING.


Where did those dimensional membranes come from? And I understand you believe this is your theory, and not solid fact.

Just pointing this out, as you asked "What created God?"



dimensional membranes are not "things". They're just potentials. That's like saying "Where did empty space come from".
"I understand you believe this is your theory, and not solid fact." - huh? It's not MY theory. It also not solid fact. It's actually not a theory at all. It's a hypothesis. It's making the rounds and may soon BECOME a theory once the math is worked out, but right now it's just a decent idea.


I'm saying my personal answer is God, yes, but I don't know. Does this make me wrong by default? It shouldn't. Does my belief make you wrong by default? It shouldn't. I'm saying don't claim that you know everything by your own beliefs then turn around and insult others' beliefs.

I admit, I'm stereotyping with that, but most every atheist I hear accepts the big bang theory. Heck, I think it may have happened, but it doesn't kill God or anything. I'm just using atheists as the prime example.



You're not wrong in the same way that a person who believes he has gnomes in his underpants is not wrong. He is however, insane.

i don't claim to know everything. I don't claim to know ANYTHING for which there is no evidence. YOU are the one doing that.

Why would I feel attacked? I've stated that I'm not a theist. Try to keep up.


Atheism... can be. aFSMism could be, but it's unlikely considering it's just a joke to try and rile up theists.


Right, and you "believe" the truth to be that there is no god. You have no way of knowing that, but you are certain of it. That's a belief my friend. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation because you wouldn't feel the need to disprove something that's not provable if you were simply operating on logic.



Even if I accepted the phrasing "I believe the truth is there is no god" (which isn't true, I DISBELIEVE the claims presented to me that there IS a god. Once evidence is presented that supports god, i'll review and possibly accept it.)
i have also said many times, I do NOt claim certainty about it. Try to keep up.

I'm not trying to disprove anything. I'm pointing out that there is no good logical reason to believe in it.


why does the big bang have to kill the God theory?



Firstly, there is no "god theory". It's "god hypothesis" at BEST. Secondly, if you're talking about a DEISTIC god and not a THEISTIC god, I have no problem with that. It's logically unsupported, but that's not theism (ie- a personal life-intervening god).

Q u o t e:

dimensional membranes are not "things". They're just potentials.



What gives them the ability to be potentials?


Why does something have to be GIVEN the ABILITY to be a potential? What gives empty space the ability to be a potential? Do you see how dumb that question is?

5 second explanation:

Background Radiation - we've mapped the radiation that was emitted from the creation of the universe. We have detailed images of the distribution of matter and energy just after our universe was born.

Red Shift - This comes from the Doppler Effect. As things move towards or away from you, light or sound waves will bend accordingly. With galaxies in particular, you can measure the wavelengths of light. If they are moving away, causing their wavelength to be longer, they will shift read. As all the galaxies in the universe have a red shift to them, we know they are all moving apart. If we work this out backwards, it means that they at one time were much much closer together... op top of each other in this case.

There are many other independently verifiable methods that have arrived at the big bang theory.

Actually, the red shift I was referring to is the sort we use to measure distance. It's got a bit more of a complex explanation,

Light moves at a constant speed no matter your frame of reference or velocity, relative to the origin of the beam of light or otherwise. The further away something is, the more space it must travel through.
How do we know how much space something has traveled through? redshift.
How does something shift to the red (lower frequency)? the space-time through which the light passes is expanding, causing the "packet" or light (photon) to "stretch out".

the cause for this is that the big bang was the expansion, not just of matter in the universe, but of the spacetime of our universe itself.

Good answer though, you were 100% correct, I was just referring to another cause

I did for awhile, but I kept getting crap for "not picking a side".

Honestly, it depends on the definition. To most people, agnostic seems to carry the notion that you can't decide. I would put myself in the realm of not believing, which would label me atheist, however I don't presume to think we actually know as much as we like to claim we do, which would cause many people to label me agnostic.

<shrug>

I'm probably just a plain atheist that has a beef with the hypocrisy I so often see in other atheists.



i'm an agnostic.
An agnostic atheist. That means I don't claim absolute knowledge one way or the other, but I don't BELIEVE in a god. I reject claims of a gods' existence.


Weak atheism (or agnostic atheism, if you prefer) is not a belief. it is the lack of belief in god.

Strong atheism is, it makes a positive claim: that no god exists.

It literally uses the word 'believe' to make the point seen: "I believe there is no god"



Correctomundo!
However, I am not a "strong atheist" - I am close, in that I find a god to be logically improbable, but as a man of science I never claim that a negative is absolute fact.
I would not, however, call "atheism" itself a belief.

igh* This is probably the last one. You're not really listening.

You are again not taking the issue directly. You are comparing my belief to something we both find far-fetched. This does not make a good argument.

Once again, I am not claiming to know that God created the universe (I even italicized that, if you bothered to acknowledge it), I'm saying I believe He did. You say that you believe the Big bang theory. I don't care that you do, go ahead. But stop putting words in my mouth and pigeonholing my argument.



Your beliefs ARE far-fetched, so if you take issue with my comparison, try coming up with some reasonable evidence to set yourself apart from the other ridiculous beliefs.

I AM taking the issue directly. You just don't like my answer and can't think of a way to state your position that sounds more credible...

I hear repeating things over and over makes them true. Holy crap, it looks like you'll have to become a christian with that "logic" system.


And yet you refuse to acknowledge or respond to the point and resort to ad-hominem.



Right, which is why you go out of your way to get in arguments about it.


I care about truth. If everyone around you was trying to screw in a screw by turning it counter-clockwise, would you not stop and possibly even put some effort into educating people that your'e supposed to turn it clockwise?



If you pointed out every time someone did something illogical, your index finger would wear off. Be honest, you have a beef with religion for whatever reason.


It indoctrinates children and is divisive. It is responsible for countless murders, and wasted lives.
i have a problem with hitler too. Guess why.

I did actually respond to that notion earlier in the thread. You convienently ignored it so you could make your "you aren't listening" argument.


I looked. Didn't see it. Your reluctance to re-post it implies it was either nonexistent or very weak.


Can you prove that atheism makes for a stronger healthier society? You may theorize that that is so, but I would disagree.


Yes, i can. Just for starters, atheists have a lower divorce rate, have kids who do better in schools, and on top of that the more likely you are to be an atheist, the more likely you are to make more money, become a scientist, or take part in higher education. (all statistical facts). Atheists also commit fewer crimes than theists per capita, and oh yeah, we weren't responsible for the dark ages.

No matter what, you're going to have good people doing good things, and bad people doing bad things.
But for good people, to do bad things... THAT takes religion.

This argument is so weak and old it's pathetic. Everything we do indoctrinates children. That is how they learn, by imitating. Interestingly enough, the most damaging and destructive "indoctrination" is whatever happens to be outside social norms, not whatever is most false.



Teaching children is different from indoctrinating them. Give a dictionary a go, would ya? We teach children things for which we have good reason to teach them, usually for which there is evidence. Except santa clause and religion, pretty much.

Santa clause and religion.


It's also saved lives, and given many people meaning and hope. If you want to make a sweeping generalization, you need to be able to back it up.



Name one single benefit of religion that can NOT be attained through secular means.
Also, I DID back it up.


And there we go. Godwined the thread already. Yes, you're right. Religion is Hitler, you win the argument.


Saw that coming.
The point is, I have a problem with murder. Savvy?


After that, they stopped responding.



The end