Atheist Forum

To be an Atheist is impossible.

Why?
One has to prove that God does not exist. Only then can one truly say one is an atheist and its a deluded worldview to think otherwise for reasons I will shortly show.

Atheism is therefore merely a belief system to the same degree as any other religion.

To be a theist one must have proof God exists.
"To really know something is to know by experience" - a Latin saying.

To be a theist is possible once it is shown that a living spiritual being
exists in an immaterial place. This can be done using the human person as an example. This will exceed my present Thread Subject however. (To follow this argument requires an inate knowledge of the inner life of the human person and consciousness and thus belongs in the field of Anthropological phenomenology)

As an alternative first step however let me demonstrate why atheism is impossible while theism is highly probable. The result of this argument is to show that the possibility for God to exist is a rational worldview while the absence of God is an impossible, irrational worldview.

Imagine the universe and all that is beyond it and that there is only one living person left in it on earth.

This person would be a solitary living being possesing free will and existng in the universe and beyond it but located on planet earth.

Therefore a living spiritual being with free will is a property of the Universe and beyond and is always possible in existential reality.

It would be impossible to say that there is no living spiritual being in the Universe and beyond if there is at least one person on earth.

Therefore it is probable that God exists because in that one person who does exist in the universe and beyond is seen all the proof for the potential of a greater living spiritual being with free will, existing and who is greater then the person on earth who merely posseses the properties of the universe and beyond.

At the same time as long as the human person was or is an existential fact and exhibiting an "image" of God in being a living spiriual being with free will, then it is impossible for atheism to be logically possible because it would exclude the potential for a spiritual living being with free will to exist at all.

Atheism is therefore merely a phenomenon of pride an inability to accept reality for the way it is. A curious existential anger related to the fact that every human beings life is always a cause of anxiety.

You don't have to dis-prove god to be an atheist.

Anyway, it's not down to us atheists to dis-prove god.

Theist's made the claim and so it's down to them to prove it.

Being an atheist doesn't automaticly mean we have a responcibility to dis-prove everything.

Atheism is simple - Lack of belief. It isn't about dis-proving something.

Try reading a little more on what being an atheist actually means. Because you haven't the slightest clue.

Your conclusions is illogical. Try reading a little more and learn from what you read before you continue this pointless debate.

You haven't the slightest idea on what an atheist is. You have no idea what atheism is all about. Atheism is not a religion. It's absence of belief.

I don't see why an Atheist has to prove anything to believe that god does not exist- atheism is simply the disbelief in a supreme being or beings. It does not have a bearing on "proven" statements. However, I do not disagree with you that it is indeed a belief system- but a belief system does not imply religion. One can have a scientific belief system based on analysis and reason, and this has nothing to do with faith. Likewise, to call atheism a belief system is simply to recognize that its fundamental idea, that there is/are no god/gods. There may be absolutely nothing in common among two atheists, then, other than their disbelief.

To be a theist, one does not need any sort of actual proof. One can be told by other people, for example, of the existence of their god, one can read about it in a book. But there need not be any scientifically testable evidence for someone to believe in god. And, often, faith despite a lack of said evidence is a valued trait among religions. In religion and theism, the only proof possible is personal religious experiences (which are not testable) and scripture. This is not adequate to "prove" the existence of a god. So, for many years, people have believed in the existence of god without any true proof/evidence to be found.

This argument hinges on the assumption that there has always been a living spiritual being with free will. In the case of organisms, humans specifically, this is obviously not so. If you are trying to say that "god" is a property of the universe then you are already assuming in your statement what you are trying to prove, which isn't an argument at all. A "property" of the universe? A being with free will is not a property of anything- it is not a natural law. The universe seems to have existed for billions of years before the emergence of any being with free will.

Spiritual in one sense, perhaps, but not necessarily in any sense at all. It could be nothing beyond, for example, reverence for existence. And, there has not always been one person on earth- how can you use that as an example then?

A person exists in the universe and beyond. But is this person is present in all parts of the universe? No, this person technically "exists" whether I'm on earth or on Alpha Centauri, but that does not prove anything. God in the christian sense is everywhere. How does that one person left on earth encompass any potential for a being greater than itself, beyond imagining it, I mean? You again seem to have assumed here that you are right, but have really only put out an overreaching statement that doesn't bring anything to the table and is not very convincing.

Further, here, a single human being does in no way exhibit an image of god- yes the person would have free will, and may be spiritual, but that does not in any way shape or form make them anything more than human. An atheist does not "exclude the potential for a spiritual living being with free will to exist at all," because that definition applies to many humans on earth right now, so I don't really understand what point you're trying to make. It would seem that either you have a misunderstanding of atheism or you simply do not realize that your arguments have no proof in them of anything.

For many atheists, the key factor is that there is no evidence for god. However, a religious person is always postulating more than is provable in reality. This is a much clearer example of an inability being able to accept reality.

How is atheism an existential anger? It offers no inherent solace to the anxious, and speaking from personal experience as an atheist I can say that atheism has done nothing to hemm me in, or cause me grief, or sadness, to not have a god to whisper to in the night. It has instead opened my life up, and enabled me to realize just how beautiful existence really is, and how crucial it is to live while we can. What is the point of enjoying life on this shitty (in comparison to heaven only) planet if we get to move on to eternal bliss afterwords? There wouldn't be one.

From my point of view, you have it backwards- religion is a much easier way for people to find comfort, to assuage their anger at the world for its indifference. It is much easier no doubt to accept disasters if one can say that it's all part of a grand plan. Atheism is not the product of anger, or pride- for myself when I realized that god was a myth I was actually very happy, and my life improved- I shook the fear of burning forever. I started living my life properly, dealing with my life as well as I can and trying to "do good" while I have the chance. Realizing you've got one shot only, and this is it, really opens your mind. Religion, or god alone if it is a more personal spiritual experience, is a crutch- I'm not saying it doesn't help people get through hard times- no doubt it is helpful to believe that there is someone all-knowing guiding your life. But atheism, when one looks at actual facts, is the only logical conclusion.

enzo your position from my standpoint is chock full of christian undertones.Experience is not only not testable but not reliable since it is open to so many disruptive factors.From my experience in the church I came to beleive that alot of what you experience in the so called supernatural realm or charismatic churches are all subject to psycho-emotional analysis and fall short.

Also,your position does not work because it relies on your having that basic biblical faith.Faith is unreliable on it's own since your belief in a god is based on word of mouth or what you have read in an old book of fairy tales.Your position therefore starts off from an negative and unrealistic source.

I personally take offense when theists state that atheism is a belief system.That is kind of like an oxymoron since atheists simply do not believe in the existence of god or gods.We dont go to church to pray to lord science,we dont have a set philosophy,and we try to keep our feet firmly planted on the ground.Atheism therefore is the more realistic position since there is no physical evidence of the existence of god.

Ok guys, this is the second scene of Religious Zealots Gone Wild
Lights, camera....action!!
-----------------------------------

To be an Atheist is impossible.

Why?
One has to prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist. Only then can one truly say one is an atheist and its a deluded worldview to think otherwise for reasons I will shortly show.

Atheism is therefore merely a belief system to the same degree as any other religion, including the belief that unicorns and fairies don't exist.

To be a theist one must have proof the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists.
"My mother wears army boots to bed while singing Klingon opera" - a Latin saying.

To be a theist is possible once it is shown that a living Spaghedeity
exists in an immaterial place, or alternatively as leftovers in your mothers fridge after a big cookup the night before.

As an alternative first step however let me demonstrate why atheism is impossible while theism is highly probable. The result of this argument is to show that the possibility for the Flying Spaghetti Monster to exist is a rational worldview while the absence of a Flying Spaghetti Monster is an impossible, irrational worldview.

Imagine the universe and all that is beyond it and that there is only one living midgit left in it on earth.

This midgit would be a solitary living being possesing a desire for tomatoey goodness and existng in the universe and beyond it but located on planet earth by the will of his Noodley Goodness, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, who we all know keeps us attached to the face of the earth by pushing us ever downwards with his Noodley appendages.

Therefore a living spaghetti being with free will is a property of the Universe and beyond and is always possible in existential reality.

It would be impossible to say that there is no living spaghetti being in the Universe and beyond if there is at least one pirate....I mean...midgit, on earth.

Therefore it is probable that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists because in that one pirate-midgit (who is possibly a black-lesbian-pirate-midgit ) who does exist in the universe and beyond is seen all the proof for the potential of a greater living spaghetti-being with free will, existing and who is greater than the pirate-midgit on earth who merely posseses the properties of a swashbuckling pirate with a peg leg and several wenches at his side.

At the same time as long as the pirate-midgit was or is an existential fact and exhibiting an "image" of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in being a living spaghetti being with foul rum breath and venereal disease, then it is impossible for atheism to be logically possible because it would exclude the potential for a spaghetti being with free tomatoey goodness and chunky meat balls to exist at all.

Atheism is therefore merely a phenomenon of pride an inability to accept reality for the way it is. A curious existential anger related to the fact that every human beings life is always a cause of anxiety.

Accept his Holy Noodleyness, allow his tasty and soft Noodley appendages to reach out and caress you brothers.

I roXxoR.

rAmen.

Touché, Jarred, touché.

"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Stephen Roberts

One of my favorite quotes, but also very relevant concerning your assertion here. So instead of arguing about the illogicality of this statment, I will ask you use your own logic to provide proof your gods existance by disproving all the other gods first. Thus, leaving only your god to stand alone. Ready?

OK here is a 'short' 9 minute video listing other gods outside of your own(best list I could find in a pinch).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZVRpqm0Cl0

I believe to be a theist you need only to have the 'believe' in a deity. To have 'knowledge' of a deity is gnostic.

BTW I stumbled across this forum from a Reddit entry talking about solidsquid's (brilliant)reply on evolution. Thank you for this forum.

Instead of refuting all your post because you seem to say the same thing over and over I'm just going to refute this.

Okay, I believe that there is a magical watermelon living in the middle of the sun having tea with Sean Connery.

Now YOU have to disprove it.

See what I did there?

If you imagine in your mind that watermelon and sean connery scene, then the only difference between you observing the real thing and imagining is that the one is existing in existential reality while the other is not. Either way, somewhere in the universe and beyond sean connery is at tea with a watermelon. In this case only in your imagination. But your imagination is existential reality too, the object of your imagination just doesnt have a material equivalent. So i can disprove by using reason. Sean connery cant get into the sun, neither can a watermelon. There I disproved it.

God on the other hand exists he has even appeared to certain people and taught as a man. Your problem is that you dont want this situation because you want to be selfish.
Atheism is to hide behind a facade and not face up to existential reality and relate to God as one should.
Every single one of you who call yourselves atheist deep down knows that God exists and deliberately build psychological protection against him.
It would be a mere matter of getting you into a very quiet place for a few weeks and teaching you how to silence your hearts and minds in contemplation. For you to see how close you are to God.

Into the desert like John the baptist, or Jesus, no food no water and slowly your blindness will fall away as your self dies.

Read the temptation of Jesus and see that the devil is allegory for the inner life of man. Man is his own devil. Man sees the devil not literally when he realises that he is evil but wishes not to be so and realises that free will does not allow him to be good.

You've just wasted a whole paragraph. And now I'm going to waste one.

My point is Atheists don't have to disprove God. It is the person who claims the existience of something that has to prove it. Otherwise YOU would have to disprove EVERYTHING that you don't believe in.

Do you see now? If I claimed Sean Connery was drinking tea I would have to prove, YOU wouldn't have to anything.

The burdon of proof is on you.

Appeared? Once two flying hamsters appeared to me when I woke up. Oh look at that, I've proven the flying hamster hypothesis.

Prove God SCIENTIFICALLY that doesn't involve quote mining, intellectual dishonesty, lying or Kent Hovind.

Selfish?

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping animal that creepeth upon the earth."

How much more selfish can you get? You're also worshipping someone who is so vain that he sends people who dsibelieve to hell and you have to praise him for the rest of your life.

How is that NOT selfish?

Yes, let's relate to Allah. Or the Jewish God of the Torah. Or any other God for that matter.

Atheists are open minded enough to realize that your God is no more special, no better or holds anymore evidence than any other God of any Religion.

When you realize why you discredit all other Religion you'll realize why I discredit yours.

Actually, I sometimes go to the North of Scotland for some piece and quiet.

I can hear my watch from across the room it's that quiet.

And no, lets not open our hearts to God, rather than you're trying to sell an idea. Facts go on their own merit, people like you have to convince people you're right with no facts what so ever.

So now I have to die? That's very moral

You have a different type of Good. Your type is praising Jesus and God and worshipping them and spreading the good word.

MY type of good however is donating money to chairty, helping others when they need you etc etc etc.

Also, if we've got free will to choose, why the hell are you trying to convice to believe?

I would like to add, what's with God? He gives us a choice, but if we pick the wrong one we go to hell.

That's like if I hold a gun to your head, then I tell you to do something. If you don't do it I'll murder you and your family. BUT you've got a choice whether or not to do this for me.

See? It doesn't make sense.