• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is your religion?

What is your religion?

  • Total voters
    132
Athiests have faith that there is no God, they believe "There is no God", not "I don't know".....


Unless you can prove how the universe was created, what was there before it, etc etc... saying "there is no God" is faith, in a belief that "there is no god"....


That's how I see it. :shrug:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Athiests have faith that there is no God, they believe "There is no God", not "I don't know".....
Click to expand...
Some atheists might. I can't speak for all atheists.

Most people who believe the sun will come up tomorrow don't have "faith" that it will come up. What they have is a confidence based upon and limited by repeatable, objective experiences. But what you want to do is claim that such people have faith because they don't believe that the sun won't come up tomorrow. What you fail to comprehend is that atheists and theists are not operating or thinking the same way. We are not forming and evaluating beliefs in a similar manner. So your use of the word "faith" on both types of people is an equivocation: Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Unless you can prove how the universe was created, what was there before it, etc etc... saying "there is no God" is faith, in a belief that "there is no god"....
Click to expand...
Once again you are equivocating by ignoring the vast differences in reasoning. An atheist doesn't have to claim to know where everything came from in order to conclude there is no valid evidence or reason to believe in the Christian God. It isn't a conclusion based upon "...assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." The only sort of "faith" which might be common among atheists is that of mere confidence based upon and limited by repeatable, objective experiences. This "faith" is only as strong as the evidence or reason allows and it is defeatable given new evidence or arguments. Once again, you are equivocating with your use of the word "faith". Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Athiests have faith that there is no God, they believe "There is no God", not "I don't know".....
Click to expand...

Which only proves that you don't know what you're talking about. Those who say "I don't know" are still atheists, atheism is simply the state of not being a theist. A vast majority of atheists do not demand "there is no God", they simply find no evidence whatsoever for the factual existence of God, therefore they don't believe in one.

Of course, I predict you won't be able to differentiate between the two.

Unless you can prove how the universe was created, what was there before it, etc etc... saying "there is no God" is faith, in a belief that "there is no god"....
Click to expand...

Actually, we're doing a pretty good job. We don't have a complete answer but we certainly have excellent ideas and evidence to back them up. But even if we didn't, that doesn't give theists license to just make crap up because they don't like not knowing. That's essentially what religion is.
 
Cephus said:
A vast majority of atheists do not demand "there is no God", they simply find no evidence whatsoever for the factual existence of God, therefore they don't believe in one.
Click to expand...
Proof?
Cephus said:
But even if we didn't, that doesn't give theists license to just make crap up because they don't like not knowing. That's essentially what religion is.
Click to expand...
My, how bigoted you are. Since when did you gain the right to tell me what I may believe?
 
Coronado said:
Proof?
Click to expand...

I agree with Cephus. I do not make the claim that God does not exist. That would require that I support my claim with facts and evidence, which I cannot do since God is supernatural and illogical.
 
Coronado said:
Since when did you gain the right to tell me what I may believe?
Click to expand...

No one said you can't believe whatever it is you want. You can believe the sky is red or that money grows on trees. But to claim you are being rational and reasonable in doing so simply because you believe it is true is invalid. Neither the passion of one's beliefs or the number of people who believe have any bearing on the truth of a belief.
 
Cephus said:
Which only proves that you don't know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...


Hmm. well let's see if this personal attack is justified or not.



Those who say "I don't know" are still atheists, atheism is simply the state of not being a theist.
Click to expand...

"I don't know" aren't they "agnostic"?

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism]Agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]






A vast majority of atheists do not demand "there is no God", they simply find no evidence whatsoever for the factual existence of God, therefore they don't believe in one.
Click to expand...


Symantics.... So you don't know if there is a god, gods, or not? Is this your position, that there may be gods? Thanks for telling us...


Of course, I predict you won't be able to differentiate between the two.
Click to expand...


Personal attack #2.... Do you think being snotty is condusive to intellectual discourse?


Actually, we're doing a pretty good job. We don't have a complete answer but we certainly have excellent ideas and evidence to back them up. But even if we didn't, that doesn't give theists license to just make crap up because they don't like not knowing. That's essentially what religion is.
Click to expand...


You have faith or belief that there is no god. You have faith enough in that there is no god that you find it easy to insult those who do... :shrug:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
You have faith or belief that there is no god. You have faith enough in that there is no god that you find it easy to insult those who do... :shrug:
Click to expand...

Again, you misuse the word "faith". Unless you think that saying "I am a human being" is a statement based on faith. As Lachaen stated earlier, atheism is about as much based on faith as is not believing in unicorns. It's not an act of faith, it's a lack of evidence.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
common sense tells us that. not being afraid of death makes god and this delusion go away i am sure.
Click to expand...

Common sense tells you that "God" doesn't exist? How so?
 
Lachean said:
Just how does an atheist become a sheep? Following what exactly?
Click to expand...

By being so arrogant as to claim that common sense must invariably dictate the non-existence of "God."
 
scourge99 said:
Some atheists might. I can't speak for all atheists.

Most people who believe the sun will come up tomorrow don't have "faith" that it will come up. What they have is a confidence based upon and limited by repeatable, objective experiences. But what you want to do is claim that such people have faith because they don't believe that the sun won't come up tomorrow. What you fail to comprehend is that atheists and theists are not operating or thinking the same way. We are not forming and evaluating beliefs in a similar manner. So your use of the word "faith" on both types of people is an equivocation: Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).

Once again you are equivocating by ignoring the vast differences in reasoning. An atheist doesn't have to claim to know where everything came from in order to conclude there is no valid evidence or reason to believe in the Christian God. It isn't a conclusion based upon "...assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." The only sort of "faith" which might be common among atheists is that of mere confidence based upon and limited by repeatable, objective experiences. This "faith" is only as strong as the evidence or reason allows and it is defeatable given new evidence or arguments. Once again, you are equivocating with your use of the word "faith". Equivocation is classified as both a formal and informal fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time).
Click to expand...

Atheism, it seems, is a mere rejection of certain arguments and not really an argument in and of itself.

In the end, we're all agnostics. No one knows either way whether or not "God" exists.
 
EgoffTib said:
I agree with Cephus. I do not make the claim that God does not exist. That would require that I support my claim with facts and evidence, which I cannot do since God is supernatural and illogical.
Click to expand...

Why is "God" illogical? I've made logical arguments in favor of the existence of "God", as have many others in the course of human history. Remember, logical is not the same thing as falsifiable. People can make logical postulations in the absence of proof.
 
Ethereal said:
Why is "God" illogical? I've made logical arguments in favor of the existence of "God", as have many others in the course of human history. Remember, logical is not the same thing as falsifiable. People can make logical postulations in the absence of proof.
Click to expand...
It is logical for a being to exist that was not born, nor will die? It is also logical that this being is omnipotent?
 
EgoffTib said:
It is logical for a being to exist that was not born, nor will die? It is also logical that this being is omnipotent?
Click to expand...

Why is it illogical for a supernatural being to defy the laws of nature?
 
It's illogical for a supernatural being to defy the laws of nature when various elements of natural conditions are referred to as evidence of its existence.
 
EgoffTib said:
It is logical for a being to exist that was not born, nor will die? It is also logical that this being is omnipotent?
Click to expand...

There's nothing illogical about an eternal being.

There are logical contradictions which can be constructed from omnipotence.
 
Ethereal said:
Atheism, it seems, is a mere rejection of certain arguments and not really an argument in and of itself.
Click to expand...
Its the antithesis to theism. So yes, you are absolutely correct. Its like calling someone an a-unicornist or an a-astrologist. Its for this reason some atheists claim its a stupid term to apply to people because we typically don't label people based on what they don't believe but rather on what they do.

Ethereal said:
In the end, we're all agnostics.
Click to expand...
No not necessarily. Some people claim to know certainty. These people are neither agnostic theists or agnostic atheists.

Ethereal said:
No one knows either way whether or not "God" exists.
Click to expand...
I agree but that doesn't stop people from believing otherwise. All we are discussing is beliefs. A belief can literally be anything. It can be contradictory or illogical.
 
Ethereal said:
Why is "God" illogical? I've made logical arguments in favor of the existence of "God", as have many others in the course of human history. Remember, logical is not the same thing as falsifiable. People can make logical postulations in the absence of proof.
Click to expand...

I can make a logical postulation about any noun. This is why a claim being logical is almost entirely useless when not coupled with some other basis for establishing truth. For example, empirical evidence.

Combining logical absolutes with empirical evidence is monumentally more powerful a tool for extracting truth from reality than either one alone. This is demonstrable.
 
Last edited:
What's with the 34 people who voted "other"?
What are you people? Wiccans or something? Satanists?
What's with 34 people on an internet forum this size claiming a religion other than Protestant, Catholic, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, or atheist/agnostic?
What else is there? :confused:
 
EgoffTib said:
It is logical for a being to exist that was not born, nor will die? It is also logical that this being is omnipotent?
Click to expand...

God does not defy logic in that the proposition of God does not defy any of the logical absolutes:
Law of identity
Law of non-contradiction
Law of excluded middle

But neither do an infinite number of other things.
 
1069 said:
What's with the 34 people who voted "other"?
What are you people? Wiccans or something? Satanists?
What's with 34 people on an internet forum this size claiming a religion other than Protestant, Catholic, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, or atheist/agnostic?
What else is there? :confused:
Click to expand...

Most likely spiritualists of some form or another. Or Mormon.
 
scourge99 said:
Its the antithesis to theism. So yes, you are absolutely correct. Its like calling someone an a-unicornist or an a-astrologist. Its for this reason some atheists claim its a stupid term to apply to people because we typically don't label people based on what they don't believe but rather on what they do.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

No not necessarily. Some people claim to know certainty.
Click to expand...

But their claim is untrue.

I agree but that doesn't stop people from believing otherwise. All we are discussing is beliefs. A belief can literally be anything. It can be contradictory or illogical.
Click to expand...

Mmmmmm, true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom