TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Religion even now knowing about planets and space?
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Alex New atheists seem to like to argue that God does not exist, therefore they have to provide evidence that God does not exist based on physics, biology, philosophy, logic etc.

The notion of "god" is itself a proposition, so it's up to the theists to prove it.

Again...

quote:

Originally posted by rainbowunicorn You bring up hypothetical notions, then you have to prove it. It doesn't automatically make it valid or equal to reality just by bringing up a hypothetical notion. Otherwise, anyone can bring up any idea and if you don't believe them, then you are "believing" in reality, as if the two are equally valid?

quote:

Originally posted by rainbowunicorn atheism is not a religion. Only the religious have to prove there is a god in the first place. It's not a dichotomy logic of one or the other. You insist on the notion of a fictional character, then the onus is on you to prove it. God is as much an option as believing this is the matrix.

Interesting side discussion: who was the first human to have thought of the idea of "god" and why and how, and how did he/she convince others and spread that notion to others?

Well like I said, theists do have to prove the legitimacy of their beliefs. From the way you raise your points you sound more like an agnostic than a typical atheist.

Typical atheist or "new" atheist actively tries to disprove the idea of a god, therefore they also must present proof.

You sound more like someone who's curious, not so much like an atheist who, like I said, actively strives to prove the theist wrong.

EDIT:

Not to mention the fact that many atheists become theists, as well as many theists become atheists.

There are really smart people on both sides.

You've thrown out the word "logic", which is fine, but if you're genuinely curious and not a stubborn atheist, you may enjoy reading/listening to Alexander Pruss (theist) and his atheist counterpart Graham Oppy.

They are both super smart, civil and can make both sides sound plausible and reasonable.

(In reality though I think Oppy, the atheist, is a bit smarter) :P

quote:

Originally posted by Alex From the way you raise your points you sound more like an agnostic than a typical atheist.

Agnostic is still entertaining the notion of god. I said god in itself is a hypothetical notion, a proposition, that theists have to prove, since they brought up this hypothetical notion. You still don't understand what I've been saying. I have failed you.

Dude. I do understand, I just don't agree.

I've gone from atheist, to theist, to agnostic and now I don't know what I am anymore.

I just find your argument a bad one. And by argument, I mean that atheists don't try and prove that god DOESN'T exist, even if theists also have to prove what they believe.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex Dude. I do understand, I just don't agree. I've gone from atheist, to theist, to agnostic and now I don't know what I am anymore. I just find your argument a bad one.

What argument? What do you understand about it? It's not an argument to say god is a hypothetical notion, right? That someone brought up the idea of god, right? Since they brought up the idea, they have to prove it, right? Otherwise, I can say I'm a Spaghetti Monster, and you can just take my word for it? If you don't belive me, then that's your belief, and believing and not believing are equally plausible? By asserting that the two are equally possible, then that gives credence that being a Spaghetti Monster is more likely than not, which is absurd. You'd be putting more value into something that's supposed to be a made up idea to begin with. So, those who bring up an idea should prove it, not just settle for it's equally likely, which is biased already if you think about it.

Ok. I was waiting for the spaghetti monster to pop into this for a while. For someone who calls other people sheep then brings up that retarded atheist spaghetti monster ploy is the sheepiest of the sheep.

I thought for a second that there was hope for you.

But there isn't. I'm ignoring you from now on.

This is the reason I very rarely engage in internet debates.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex Ok. I was waiting for the spaghetti monster to pop into this for a while. For someone who calls other people sheep then brings up that retarded atheist spaghetti monster ploy is the sheepiest of the sheep. I thought for a second that there was hope for you. But there isn't. I'm ignoring you from now on. This is the reason I very rarely engage in internet debates.

Yeah, ok. You can use any other example in that. The point was not about Spaghetti Monster but any random or hypothetical idea, being proposed. The point went over your head, yet again.

quote:

Originally posted by rainbowunicorn Interesting side discussion: who was the first human to have thought of the idea of "god" and why and how, and how did he/she convince others and spread that notion to others?

Abraham. You can prolly find many articles about it and also read it in the Torah ("Old Testament").

Alex already said it best:

quote:

Originally posted by Alex It is a "belief" to say God does not exist because while a theist can't prove he does exist (without resorting to personal experience), an atheist that is sure God doesn't exist cannot prove that God doesn't exist.

quote:

Originally posted by AlphaStarred Abraham.

He was high.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.