Atheists, smarter than religious people

edgarblythe wrote:

real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

You need it to back up your statement.

Your statement was that science knocks out all the claims of religion.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

God has never refused to prove He exists.

Hahaha...

Seriously, though... That's funny!

Quote:

Proof doesn't deny faith.

Yes it does. If you have proof you don't need faith. If you know, you don't believe.

Quote:

God doesn't need faith to exist.

I don't know how to respond to that.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

real life wrote:

God has never refused to prove He exists.

Hahaha... Seriously, though... That's funny!

Quote:
Proof doesn't deny faith.

Yes it does. If you have proof you don't need faith. If you know, you don't believe.

Quote:
God doesn't need faith to exist.

I don't know how to respond to that.

conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

0 Replies

real life wrote:

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

And when he tries to tell you one, just give the sucker one of these:

God can do ANYTHING, and don't have to bow to the laws of the universe.
It's just figuratively speaking that he made everything in 6 days, killed everyone person in the world except two people because he was angry etc.
He didn't forget to mention the dinosaurs, if you read the bible in hebrew it all makes sense.
Well, who said that Adam and Eve weren't monkeys?
We don't read that old testament, it's for the Jews.

And if none of the above fits, this one always makes 'em shut up:
Well, God moves in mysterious ways.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

Come on!

From: http://www.webster.com/dictionary/faith

Main Entry: faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Anglo-French feid, fei, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the>

0 Replies

real life wrote:

conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence

Quote:

Merriam Webster Online: BELIEVE

Main Entry: be·lieve
Pronunciation: b&-'lEv
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): be·lieved; be·liev·ing
Etymology: Middle English beleven, from Old English belEfan, from be- + lyfan, lEfan to allow, believe; akin to Old High German gilouben to believe, Old English lEof dear -- more at LOVE
intransitive verb
1 a : to have a firm religious faith b : to accept as true, genuine, or real <ideals> <believes>
2 : to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something <believe>
3 : to hold an opinion : THINK <I>
transitive verb
1 a : to consider to be true or honest <believe> <you>
2 : to hold as an opinion : SUPPOSE <I>
- be·liev·er noun
- not believe : to be astounded at <I couldn't believe my luck>

Quote:

Merriam Webster Online: FAITH

Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Anglo-French feid, fei, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the>
synonym see BELIEF
- on faith : without question <took>

Quote:

Merriam Webster Online: KNOW

Main Entry: 1know
Pronunciation: 'nO
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): knew /'nü also 'nyü/; known /'nOn/; know·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English cnAwan; akin to Old High German bichnAan to recognize, Latin gnoscere, noscere to come to know, Greek gignOskein
transitive verb
1 a (1) : to perceive directly : have direct cognition of (2) : to have understanding of <importance> (3) : to recognize the nature of : DISCERN b (1) : to recognize as being the same as something previously known (2) : to be acquainted or familiar with (3) : to have experience of
2 a : to be aware of the truth or factuality of : be convinced or certain of b : to have a practical understanding of <knows>
3 archaic : to have sexual intercourse with
intransitive verb
1 : to have knowledge
2 : to be or become cognizant -- sometimes used interjectionally with you especially as a filler in informal speech

Quote:

Merriam Webster Online: UNDERSTAND

Main Entry: un·der·stand
Pronunciation: "&n-d&r-'stand
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): un·der·stood /-'stud/; -stand·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English understandan, from under + standan to stand
transitive verb
1 a : to grasp the meaning of <understand> b : to grasp the reasonableness of <his> c : to have thorough or technical acquaintance with or expertness in the practice of <understand> d : to be thoroughly familiar with the character and propensities of <understands>
2 : to accept as a fact or truth or regard as plausible without utter certainty <we>
3 : to interpret in one of a number of possible ways
4 : to supply in thought as though expressed <"to be married" is commonly understood after the word engaged>
intransitive verb
1 : to have understanding : have the power of comprehension
2 : to achieve a grasp of the nature, significance, or explanation of something
3 : to believe or infer something to be the case
4 : to show a sympathetic or tolerant attitude toward something

Faith is believing in what you know isn't so.
Mark Twain.

0 Replies

To those who label themselves "Christians" etc...

Quote:

If a man desires to obey and to follow someone, no one can prevent him; but it is most unintelligent, leading to great unhappiness and frustration. If those of you who are listening to me really begin to think deeply about authority, you will not follow anyone, including myself. But as I said, it is much easier to follow and to imitate than to really free thought from the limitation of fear and so from compulsion and authority. The one is an easy giving over of oneself to another, in which there is always the idea of getting something in return, whereas in the other there is absolute insecurity; and as people prefer the illusion of comfort, security, they follow authority with its frustration. But if the mind discerns the illusory nature of comfort or security, there is born intelligence, the new, the vital life.

J Krishnamurti (Spiritual Teacher) 1935 Italics mine

Fellow atheists might ejoy this video.

http://www.videosift.com/index.php?search=jonathan+miller%2Catheist%2Creligion%2Chistory&tag=true

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

edgarblythe wrote:

real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

Those damn flying pigs, they're such a nuisance! Why just last week I awoke to a herd of them oinking and flapping across the midnight sky.

0 Replies

They headin' south already? Hmmmm .... early this year. Must be that global warming deal.

0 Replies

Nah, vicious gang of tooth fairies have been stirring them up to cause trouble.

0 Replies

This link is perhaps a better one for Jonathan Millers intellect as an atheist.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=SzLz41WkIg0

0 Replies

JLNobody wrote:

Frank, you seem to have forgotten my most important assertion to you regarding my "atheism." Remember my distinction between "active atheism", wherein people seem to follow a doctrine that proclaims the "existence" of a No-God and worships Him (Madeline O'Hare or O'Hara, is an example) and people like myself who simply turn away from theism because it makes no sense to them. The first ARE, as you say, BELIEVING atheists; the second are simply non-theists. Mine is a perspective (i.e., a position from which theism makes no sense), that of "activie atheists" is a belief system.

A person who asserts or "believes" there are no gods...is an atheist.

A person who simply lacks a belief in gods (or "simply turn away from theism)
...which is to say, a person who also lacks a belief that there are no gods...

...are simply non-theists or agnostics who lack the integrity and sense of honesty to call themselves one of those things rather than pretending to be atheists because modern dictionaries indicate the word is being used that way these days.

And I would not be especially surprise to find out that most, if not all of them...are also liars whos considerations in this regard go much further than simply a lack of belief in gods...and really extends to beliefs that there are no gods.

I do find it interesting that you managed to post a smileywhich is a sign of concurrencein response to Edgar's assertion that "That there is no God is a statement of fact. Scientific or not, it's that simple." That gives me another clue to what I suspect you are in this matter.

Quote:

My other assertion that you seem to have forgotten is that agnostics like you (perhaps they can be called believing agnostics) argue that since neither atheists nor theists can provde "unambiguous evidence" for their positions, there is an equal chance that both can be either right or wrong. That suggests to me that you consider it possible (i.e., at least 50% likely) that there IS a god.

Well...if that idiotic bit of drivel makes your day go by easier...go with it. I thank you for the laugh.

Any of the other atheists out here who assert that there are no gods are under the same obligation to back up that assertion as a theist is to back up a claim for the existence of a God.

Both assertions are claims about the REALTIY of existence.

Both appear to be silly, blind guesses about REALITY...and until one of them comes up with some real evidence for their assertion...they should be laughed at.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Where did you get the idea that proof denies faith?

Faith and belief are listed as synonyms.

Well, isn't it true that any christian who wants proof is commiting a sin, according to the bible? The sin would be doubting god.

You know, the main reason I reject theism is theists who cannot comprehent their own religions, or who cannot convey them without spreading misconceptions like a disease of the mind.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

You need it to back up your statement.

Your statement was that science knocks out all the claims of religion.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

Science shows the physical world working without divine intervention. You run a scientific test you get the same results every time, if you don't vary the test. Evolution shows life changing on its own. Religion was made up by people like you. The onus for proving a notion of a god is on you, despite the fact you would shift it to me.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

real life wrote:
Where did you get the idea that proof denies faith?

Faith and belief are listed as synonyms.

Well, isn't it true that any christian who wants proof is commiting a sin, according to the bible? The sin would be doubting god.

No this isn't necessarily the case. Lots of examples of folks in the Bible who doubted, who asked God for confirmation or a sign of some kind, etc.

Doubt can be a sin, if it's used as an excuse to avoid doing what one already knows he should. When one has been given sufficient information but still persists in doubt, it can be a sin.

Cyracuz wrote:

You know, the main reason I reject theism is theists who cannot comprehent their own religions, or who cannot convey them without spreading misconceptions like a disease of the mind.

Well, by definition God is much more than we can adequately comprehend, and language sometimes fails to convey what the mind doesn't and can't fully understand.

So if your theist friends do not fully understand God, it simply means that they are human.

Now if you ever meet someone who says they DO fully understand God, that would be an indication that they may be less than intellectually honest.

Ever met a scientist who didn't fully understand the natural world? Most likely you have. Doesn't mean he's a bad scientist, does it?

Ever heard of a scientist making a mistake and conveying a misconception? Probably you have heard of one, but most likely the man didn't do it on purpose. Give him a break and give your theist friends a break also.

0 Replies

Edgar wrote:

Quote:

Science shows the physical world working without divine intervention.

I defy you to substantiate that assertion.

Quote:

You run a scientific test you get the same results every time, if you don't vary the test.

Actually, that is not sobut even it were, how would that impact on whether or not there are gods?

Quote:

Evolution shows life changing on its own.

That does not impact on whether or not there are gods.

Quote:

Religion was made up by people like you.

And like youbut so what?

Quote:

The onus for proving a notion of a god is on you, despite the fact you would shift it to me.

The onus for your assertion that there are no godsthat "there are no gods is a fact"IS ON YOU.

Nothing wrong with having it as a belief or guessbut since you assert it in debate, you must substantiate it. The onus for that substantiation DOES FALL ON YOU.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

You need it to back up your statement.

Your statement was that science knocks out all the claims of religion.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

Science shows the physical world working without divine intervention.

This is basically an argument from silence, isn't it? 'Science hasn't observed it, so it must not be so.'

edgarblythe wrote:

The onus for proving a notion of a god is on you, despite the fact you would shift it to me.

I'm not trying to scientifically prove the existence of God. Looking for 'natural' evidence of the 'supernatural' would be an absurdity, as we've discussed before. So I don't do it.

But you indicated you could scientifically prove the non-existence of God.

Guess not, eh?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

You need it to back up your statement.

Your statement was that science knocks out all the claims of religion.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

Science shows the physical world working without divine intervention.

This is basically an argument from silence, isn't it? 'Science hasn't observed it, so it must not be so.'

edgarblythe wrote:
The onus for proving a notion of a god is on you, despite the fact you would shift it to me.

I'm not trying to scientifically prove the existence of God. Looking for 'natural' evidence of the 'supernatural' would be an absurdity, as we've discussed before. So I don't do it.

But you indicated you could scientifically prove the non-existence of God.

Guess not, eh?

I said that science shows the universe working very well without supernatural intervention. In the imagination you come up with a god. Prove he exists.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
real life wrote:
edgarblythe wrote:
I don't know how to make it any clearer. Science knocks out all the claims made by religion in the physical world. Since you guys arbitrarily claim there is a god, I don't need further evidence.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

You don't need scientific evidence to disprove a fantasy.

You need it to back up your statement.

Your statement was that science knocks out all the claims of religion.

What scientific evidence proves there is no God?

Science shows the physical world working without divine intervention.

This is basically an argument from silence, isn't it? 'Science hasn't observed it, so it must not be so.'

edgarblythe wrote:
The onus for proving a notion of a god is on you, despite the fact you would shift it to me.

I'm not trying to scientifically prove the existence of God. Looking for 'natural' evidence of the 'supernatural' would be an absurdity, as we've discussed before. So I don't do it.

But you indicated you could scientifically prove the non-existence of God.

Guess not, eh?

I said that science shows the universe working very well without supernatural intervention.

Science 'shows' or proves nothing of the sort.

I doubt that you will find any statement remotely resembling yours in any scientific journal or professional publication.

You are attempting to get science to address areas that it does not address.

There is no scientific principle or theory which states 'there is no God'.

The existence of God is beyond the bounds of investigative science , which is limited to the observation of natural phenomena using natural means.

Is this not so? Any honest scientist will agree with me.

Your view is not a 'scientific' one at all. It is not arrived at scientifically or empirically.

It is an argument from silence (" I've never seen a God, and nobody that I know has either."), based on an absurdity ( "If a 'supernatural' God exists, then He should be observable or provable with 'natural' observation or means." )

0 Replies

Hungry Hippo, the agnostic in question does not claim that the chances of God's existence are equal to the chances of His non-existence. I was just arguing that his assertion that atheism and theism are equally in the dark IMPLIES the 50-50 equation. It seems to me a logical ENTAILMENT of an agnosticism that does not lean in one or the other direction.

0 Replies

Atheists, smarter than religious people

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know