• 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!

Atheists Don't Exist

Angel said:
There is nothing "of course" about your rejection of evidence in your first question, except that you're an atheist who rejects all evidence of God's existence. So I am applying your standard to the existence of atheists.
Same with your answer to your second question. The key to your rejection there is "good reason," which the atheist simply dismisses as possible.

All you've demonstrated in this post is the close-mindedness of atheists, which is precisely what this thread is about.

Can you give evidence of the existence of atheists? What is it?
Can you give a "good reason" for believing atheists exist? What is it?
Click to expand...

Atheism is nothing more than a reaction to theism. Unless you can demonstrate theism does not exist, that you do not believe in a god then your proof exists in your very existence.

The good reason is that theism needs to be challenged.

As well you demonstrate hypocrisy in calling me closed minded when you will face no other possibility than that of an existing god.
 
bluesmoke said:
I like your avatar of a photo with you and the donkey in the manger. Or, way back when, is that a daguerreotype?
Click to expand...
That's an image from Robert Bresson's film Au Hasard Balthazar (1966). And I'm male, as the little symbol below my avatar indicates.
 
soylentgreen said:
Atheism is nothing more than a reaction to theism. Unless you can demonstrate theism does not exist, that you do not believe in a god then your proof exists in your very existence.

The good reason is that theism needs to be challenged.

As well you demonstrate hypocrisy in calling me closed minded when you will face no other possibility than that of an existing god.
Click to expand...
That's a "good reason" to you, as dismissable as the good reasons to believe that you militant skeptics dismiss out of hand (this point is in the OP btw).
And it doesn't matter how you account for atheism; can you prove that atheists exist?
Finally, I said that your post exhibits close-mindedness. Please read carefully before replying.
 
Angel said:
Do Atheists Exist?

kBvSbpC.jpg


Apparently not.

Not by the standards of Internet skepticism they don't.

At the very least there is no reason to believe that atheists exist.
(This to match the more tempered skeptical claim.)

Internet skeptics demand proof of God's existence.
Internet skeptics jeer at mystery presented as evidence.
Internet skeptics reject personal testimony out of hand.

(I use the word "prove" throughout in the loose sense popularized by Internet skeptics of course.)

So let us turn the tables on the Internet Skeptic.

Let's demand a proof of the existence of atheists.

Let us reject personal testimony as evidence.

(But let's leave the jeering to the Internet Skeptic, yes?)

The purpose and point of this thread is to show the Internet Skeptic the folly of his ways.

(Drum roll please)

because by the standards of the Internet Skeptic

Atheists Don't Exist

Comments
Proofs?
Concessions?​
Click to expand...

Yup, we do. Actually a proud third generation atheist in my case. And the fourth generation is already living their atheists lives as we speak.
 
Peter King said:
Yup, we do. Actually a proud third generation atheist in my case. And the fourth generation is already living their atheists lives as we speak.
Click to expand...
Prove it, as the Internet Skeptics say..
 
Angel said:
All right, look, if you're going to misread and misunderstand the topic, be humble in your posts.
Now listen: it is no part of the thread topic and no where claimed in the OP "that atheists claim to be able to prove that there is no god."
You are misunderstanding the OP claim. Did you get that? You are confused.
Your offering this misunderstood and false claim as proof of my dishonesty and so proof that you use the word "lying" correctly is typical hilarious Internet Chat vomit.
Click to expand...

Then my claim that I know that I don't believe in God stands.

How can it be false?

You don't believe in Thor, neither do I. So why is it impossible for me to not believe in your particular god?
 
Angel said:
Prove it, as the Internet Skeptics say..
Click to expand...

Part of it is that we don't have the deep psychological need to try to prove our beliefs to internet strangers. How many threads have you made making wild and unprovable claims that you declare as fact then demand we disprove them? You do this to convince yourself, not us.

Tim the plumber said:

Then my claim that I know that I don't believe in God stands.
How can it be false?
You don't believe in Thor, neither do I. So why is it impossible for me to not believe in your particular god?
Click to expand...

It's such a retardedly unique argument. Making a positive claim that god exists is equivalent to someone claiming they do or do not believe something? Totally incoherent thought process.
 
Last edited:
Angel said:
Prove it, as the Internet Skeptics say..
Click to expand...

Are you slow? Seriously, if someone say "I'm atheist" you think he's lying? Guess what, if everyone out there believe in God, there's no need for Bible anymore as it's a source of Christianity.
 
FinnFox said:
Are you slow? Seriously, if someone say "I'm atheist" you think he's lying? Guess what, if everyone out there believe in God, there's no need for Bible anymore as it's a source of Christianity.
Click to expand...
Someone saying "I'm atheist" is personal testimony. Personal testimony is rejected and dismissed by Internet Atheist. This is covered in the OP. Are you a speed reader?
Moreover, I'm not talking about the Bible or any religion when I talk about the existence of God.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Part of it is that we don't have the deep psychological need to try to prove our beliefs to internet strangers. How many threads have you made making wild and unprovable claims that you declare as fact then demand we disprove them? You do this to convince yourself, not us.
It's such a retardedly unique argument. Making a positive claim that god exists is equivalent to someone claiming they do or do not believe something? Totally incoherent thought process.
Click to expand...
Is that a No? You can't prove it.
 
Tim the plumber said:

Then my claim that I know that I don't believe in God stands.

How can it be false?

You don't believe in Thor, neither do I. So why is it impossible for me to not believe in your particular god?
Click to expand...
You can believe whatever you like. My point, my thread, is about the Internet Atheist's demand for proof of God and his rejection and dismissal of personal testimony from the theist.
 
Angel said:
To be sure, but I'm not talking about the religious claims about the nature of God; I'm talking about the bare existence of God, the fact of God's existence without any further claims about the nature of God. That cannot be proved or disproved, anymore than the existence of atheists can. So whence does your praxis derive in that case?
Click to expand...
I thought you were talking about atheists. :cool:

The concept of "some kind of god" without any characteristics strikes me as fairly pointless and I don't see how believing or not believing that alone would make the slightest practical difference. Of course, the moment you write "God" with a capital-G, you're already saying something about the nature of the being you're talking about. To an extent, you can't use the word "god" (or any other defined noun) without implicitly stating something about the concept (even if the something readers take from it aren't the same something you intend). The existence of a god is a positive claim and requires a definitive definition and hypothesis. Anything short of that can only ever really be answered with; "Maybe, so what?".

Even with specificity defined God (and I've seen several hypothesised), the fact none can be definitively proven or disproven is precisely why I don't treat any as existing in practice.

As it happens, even if I thought a god existed, I wouldn't necessarily behave any differently.
 
HonestJoe said:
I thought you were talking about atheists. :cool:

The concept of "some kind of god" without any characteristics strikes me as fairly pointless and I don't see how believing or not believing that alone would make the slightest practical difference. Of course, the moment you write "God" with a capital-G, you're already saying something about the nature of the being you're talking about. To an extent, you can't use the word "god" (or any other defined noun) without implicitly stating something about the concept (even if the something readers take from it aren't the same something you intend). The existence of a god is a positive claim and requires a definitive definition and hypothesis. Anything short of that can only ever really be answered with; "Maybe, so what?".

Even with specificity defined God (and I've seen several hypothesised), the fact none can be definitively proven or disproven is precisely why I don't treat any as existing in practice.

As it happens, even if I thought a god existed, I wouldn't necessarily behave any differently.
Click to expand...
God is the necessary and sufficient condition for the physical universe, life on earth, and consciousness.

I've bolded the sentiment in your post that represents the Internet Skeptic's attitude, the attitude which my thread addresses.
 
Angel said:
Someone saying "I'm atheist" is personal testimony. Personal testimony is rejected and dismissed by Internet Atheist. This is covered in the OP. Are you a speed reader?
Moreover, I'm not talking about the Bible or any religion when I talk about the existence of God.
Click to expand...

Let's try this table turning so you should see how it works as you're misunderstanding what's the anatomy here.

If you say "I'm Christian"(Believe in God) and someone else say "I'm Atheist"(Don't believe in God) and both are personal testimonies about what's their relation to God. It's about state of those individuals, where they are in field where some people think "God exist" and some "God doesn't exist". By saying "God exist" isn't proof of God and same thing when someone say "I don't think God exist" isn't proof of God's non-existence. You're messing those things. Maybe you can't see your logical fallacies, but it's there. By stating personal when it comes to things like beliefs is about what's personal.

For example: If I say: "Oatmeal tastes good" what do you think that mean? What if you don't like it? Concept of personal beliefs is similar. By saying "I'm atheist" don't mean nothing else than this (who's talking) don't have believe in God.

If you really are Christian and you take Bible as Words from God, you should see why - in your context - gospel is needed. Motivation to preach gospel is because there is so many without believing in God (it's only real motivation and you can find it from Bible, if you ever read it?)
 
Angel said:
That is the definition: the necessary and sufficient condition for the physical universe, life on earth, and consciousness.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can expound upon this. Are we talking natural, or supernatural? Your "definition" is extremely vague. At the very least, it doesn't explain anything.


OM
 
Angel said:
You can believe whatever you like. My point, my thread, is about the Internet Atheist's demand for proof of God and his rejection and dismissal of personal testimony from the theist.
Click to expand...

Theists personal testimony about God for Atheist is only and only proof of what Theist is believing.
 
Angel said:
Internet skeptics demand proof of God's existence.
Internet skeptics jeer at mystery presented as evidence.
Internet skeptics reject personal testimony out of hand.
Click to expand...

Would you accept mystery or personal testimony as evidence for Gods of religions that you don't believe in? Why don't you believe in those other religion's Gods given the "evidence" presented for them?
 
jamesrodom said:
Yawn.

There are interesting discussions to be had on the subject of whether God exists. This just isn't an example of one.

As a matter of fact, it's the kind of conversation people I knew would have in college, after having ingested a lot of beer and/or various psychoactive substances. :lol:
Click to expand...

Hell, even 3.2 beer will generate that discussion.
 
Questerr said:
Would you accept mystery or personal testimony as evidence for Gods of religions that you don't believe in? Why don't you believe in those other religion's Gods given the "evidence" presented for them?
Click to expand...

There is evidence that Krishna will steal your butter. Does that mean there's a possibility that Krishna will steal your butter?


OM
 
Angel said:
Prove it, as the Internet Skeptics say..
Click to expand...

Why should I prove I don't believe in the existence in gods/magic people in the sky?

I don't have an issue with people who say they know god exists because of their faith in him, I do have an issue with those who say there is empirical evidence that anyone can see and agree with, because that is untrue IMHO.
 
Omega Man said:
Perhaps you can expound upon this. Are we talking natural, or supernatural? Your "definition" is extremely vague. At the very least, it doesn't explain anything.
Click to expand...
It explains the existence of the grand phenomena mentioned in the definition. My definition derives from a logical abduction: it is based on an inference to the best explanation.
 
JustHanging said:
If he is, he's terrible at it. Every time he makes ridiculous and untruthful arguments, gets called on them, and is quickly left with nothing but hurling insults. It's sad watching it happen over and over.
Click to expand...

Apparently thats his goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom