Is it possible for atheism to ever be anything more than critical theory?

[dblack]

You believe you are not a materialist but you don't believe that everything proceeded from spirit. Therefore, you must believe that everything proceeded from something which is material. And since you disagree with this your argument is illogical and flawed.

It is absolutely relevant that you do not know something but still hold a belief like you do. If you do not know that everything proceeded from spirit, then you do not know you are an atheist. But since you claim you are an atheist, you must believe that nothing proceeded from spirit. Therefore, you must believe that everything proceeded from material.

Unsupported claims bolded. Garbage in, garbage out.

Can you explain how it doesn't make sense using logic?

Apparently you're working with a different definition of logic as well.

 

[ding]

You believe you are not a materialist but you don't believe that everything proceeded from spirit. Therefore, you must believe that everything proceeded from something which is material. And since you disagree with this your argument is illogical and flawed.

It is absolutely relevant that you do not know something but still hold a belief like you do. If you do not know that everything proceeded from spirit, then you do not know you are an atheist. But since you claim you are an atheist, you must believe that nothing proceeded from spirit. Therefore, you must believe that everything proceeded from material.

Unsupported claims bolded. Garbage in, garbage out.

Can you explain how it doesn't make sense using logic?

Apparently you're working with a different definition of logic as well.

If you could actually prove what you were trying to say using logic, you would. What you are doing is resorting to using rhetoric.

Where is the flaw in the logic that if one does not believe that God created the universe than everything in it was created by material things?

 

[dblack]

Where is the flaw in the logic that if one does not believe that God created the universe than everything in it was created by material things?

First of all, it assumes that the universe was "created". Second, it assumes God is the only non-material thing. Two errors in one sentence. At least you're efficient.

 

[WinterBorn]

If you cannot prove that God exists, then you and I are both operating under our beliefs. Both are equally valid.

I disagree because I don't believe there is any proof you will accept. You can't even tell me what it would take.

We aren't operating under different beliefs, we are operating under different standards.

I don't believe they are equally valid. I believe your standard of proof is unrealistic. You can't even tell me what kind of proof you would accept.

YOu said you can prove it to yourself but not to me.

Can you prove it to someone else besides me? Is there actual, empirical proof that God exists?

Yes, I did say that I can prove God exists. Just not to you. You will have to do that for yourself.

I can't prove it to someone like you who rejects all proof of a creator that is offered. Look, we can have that discussion but I already know you will reject everything I offer because that's how critical theory works. You aren't looking for proof, you are looking to validate your beliefs. You are looking to confirm your bias. How do I know this? Because you can't even tell me what evidence you would accept for a creator.

Empirical evidence? The evidence is all around and in you. You have either never looked for it or ignored it or never given it any serious consideration.

Absolute nonsense. The fact that you see "proof" all around you does not make it actual proof. You see what you want to see. This is also evidenced by your insistence that I am a materialist or that all atheists are either marxists or supporting marxism (even if they don't intend to do so).

I am simply asking for actual proof. What you are describing is faith. I respect faith. But it is not the same as proof.

I never said faith was proof. Faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I don't place complete trust in anything unless I have good reason to do so. I have investigated and tested it for myself which is how I proved it to myself.

What is created is absolutely evidence of a creator. Have you ever studied what the evidence shows?

One day you will meet the creator and discover the truth that what he created is indeed evidence. It should be fairly obvious to you at that point. Or will you argue with him that it is his fault that he didn't give you enough proof? Have you ever considered that you are being tested?

You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing.

Are you trying to say you believe in spirit but don't believe in God who is spirit?

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

 

[ding]

I disagree because I don't believe there is any proof you will accept. You can't even tell me what it would take.

We aren't operating under different beliefs, we are operating under different standards.

I don't believe they are equally valid. I believe your standard of proof is unrealistic. You can't even tell me what kind of proof you would accept.

YOu said you can prove it to yourself but not to me.

Can you prove it to someone else besides me? Is there actual, empirical proof that God exists?

Yes, I did say that I can prove God exists. Just not to you. You will have to do that for yourself.

I can't prove it to someone like you who rejects all proof of a creator that is offered. Look, we can have that discussion but I already know you will reject everything I offer because that's how critical theory works. You aren't looking for proof, you are looking to validate your beliefs. You are looking to confirm your bias. How do I know this? Because you can't even tell me what evidence you would accept for a creator.

Empirical evidence? The evidence is all around and in you. You have either never looked for it or ignored it or never given it any serious consideration.

Absolute nonsense. The fact that you see "proof" all around you does not make it actual proof. You see what you want to see. This is also evidenced by your insistence that I am a materialist or that all atheists are either marxists or supporting marxism (even if they don't intend to do so).

I am simply asking for actual proof. What you are describing is faith. I respect faith. But it is not the same as proof.

I never said faith was proof. Faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I don't place complete trust in anything unless I have good reason to do so. I have investigated and tested it for myself which is how I proved it to myself.

What is created is absolutely evidence of a creator. Have you ever studied what the evidence shows?

One day you will meet the creator and discover the truth that what he created is indeed evidence. It should be fairly obvious to you at that point. Or will you argue with him that it is his fault that he didn't give you enough proof? Have you ever considered that you are being tested?

You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing.

Are you trying to say you believe in spirit but don't believe in God who is spirit?

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

 

[ding]

Where is the flaw in the logic that if one does not believe that God created the universe than everything in it was created by material things?

First of all, it assumes that the universe was "created". Second, it assumes God is the only non-material thing. Two errors in one sentence. At least you're efficient.

There is no doubt the universe was created. How do you think it got here?

 

[OnePercenter]

Plus the other problem with atheism is that it is a purely political stunt. Mostly used by Marxist political strategists. In contrast, religions offer personal enrichment.

The problem with atheism is that god can't be fully proven nor fully disproven.

Speak for yourself. The evidence for God is all around and in you.

I'm agnostic.

 

[ding]

Plus the other problem with atheism is that it is a purely political stunt. Mostly used by Marxist political strategists. In contrast, religions offer personal enrichment.

The problem with atheism is that god can't be fully proven nor fully disproven.

Speak for yourself. The evidence for God is all around and in you.

I'm agnostic.

And?

 

[dblack]

Where is the flaw in the logic that if one does not believe that God created the universe than everything in it was created by material things?

First of all, it assumes that the universe was "created". Second, it assumes God is the only non-material thing. Two errors in one sentence. At least you're efficient.

There is no doubt the universe was created.

There's no proof either.

How do you think it got here?

I don't know. Neither do you.

 

[ding]

Where is the flaw in the logic that if one does not believe that God created the universe than everything in it was created by material things?

First of all, it assumes that the universe was "created". Second, it assumes God is the only non-material thing. Two errors in one sentence. At least you're efficient.

There is no doubt the universe was created.

There's no proof either.

How do you think it got here?

I don't know. Neither do you.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, inflation theory and the Second Law of Thermodynamics say otherwise.

 

[WinterBorn]

YOu said you can prove it to yourself but not to me.

Can you prove it to someone else besides me? Is there actual, empirical proof that God exists?

Yes, I did say that I can prove God exists. Just not to you. You will have to do that for yourself.

I can't prove it to someone like you who rejects all proof of a creator that is offered. Look, we can have that discussion but I already know you will reject everything I offer because that's how critical theory works. You aren't looking for proof, you are looking to validate your beliefs. You are looking to confirm your bias. How do I know this? Because you can't even tell me what evidence you would accept for a creator.

Empirical evidence? The evidence is all around and in you. You have either never looked for it or ignored it or never given it any serious consideration.

Absolute nonsense. The fact that you see "proof" all around you does not make it actual proof. You see what you want to see. This is also evidenced by your insistence that I am a materialist or that all atheists are either marxists or supporting marxism (even if they don't intend to do so).

I am simply asking for actual proof. What you are describing is faith. I respect faith. But it is not the same as proof.

I never said faith was proof. Faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I don't place complete trust in anything unless I have good reason to do so. I have investigated and tested it for myself which is how I proved it to myself.

What is created is absolutely evidence of a creator. Have you ever studied what the evidence shows?

One day you will meet the creator and discover the truth that what he created is indeed evidence. It should be fairly obvious to you at that point. Or will you argue with him that it is his fault that he didn't give you enough proof? Have you ever considered that you are being tested?

You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing.

Are you trying to say you believe in spirit but don't believe in God who is spirit?

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

 

[ding]

Yes, I did say that I can prove God exists. Just not to you. You will have to do that for yourself.

I can't prove it to someone like you who rejects all proof of a creator that is offered. Look, we can have that discussion but I already know you will reject everything I offer because that's how critical theory works. You aren't looking for proof, you are looking to validate your beliefs. You are looking to confirm your bias. How do I know this? Because you can't even tell me what evidence you would accept for a creator.

Empirical evidence? The evidence is all around and in you. You have either never looked for it or ignored it or never given it any serious consideration.

Absolute nonsense. The fact that you see "proof" all around you does not make it actual proof. You see what you want to see. This is also evidenced by your insistence that I am a materialist or that all atheists are either marxists or supporting marxism (even if they don't intend to do so).

I am simply asking for actual proof. What you are describing is faith. I respect faith. But it is not the same as proof.

I never said faith was proof. Faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I don't place complete trust in anything unless I have good reason to do so. I have investigated and tested it for myself which is how I proved it to myself.

What is created is absolutely evidence of a creator. Have you ever studied what the evidence shows?

One day you will meet the creator and discover the truth that what he created is indeed evidence. It should be fairly obvious to you at that point. Or will you argue with him that it is his fault that he didn't give you enough proof? Have you ever considered that you are being tested?

You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing.

Are you trying to say you believe in spirit but don't believe in God who is spirit?

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

And that changes the reality that you believe you are more than just atoms how?

This isn't about the existence of God. This is about your illogical belief that you aren't a materialist.

 

[edthecynic]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

 

[ding]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

 

[WinterBorn]

Absolute nonsense. The fact that you see "proof" all around you does not make it actual proof. You see what you want to see. This is also evidenced by your insistence that I am a materialist or that all atheists are either marxists or supporting marxism (even if they don't intend to do so).

I am simply asking for actual proof. What you are describing is faith. I respect faith. But it is not the same as proof.

I never said faith was proof. Faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I don't place complete trust in anything unless I have good reason to do so. I have investigated and tested it for myself which is how I proved it to myself.

What is created is absolutely evidence of a creator. Have you ever studied what the evidence shows?

One day you will meet the creator and discover the truth that what he created is indeed evidence. It should be fairly obvious to you at that point. Or will you argue with him that it is his fault that he didn't give you enough proof? Have you ever considered that you are being tested?

You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing.

Are you trying to say you believe in spirit but don't believe in God who is spirit?

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

And that changes the reality that you believe you are more than just atoms how?

This isn't about the existence of God. This is about your illogical belief that you aren't a materialist.

If I believe there are incorporeal things, then the supposition that I am a materialist is inaccurate.

 

[edthecynic]

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Prove it!

 

[ding]

I never said faith was proof. Faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I don't place complete trust in anything unless I have good reason to do so. I have investigated and tested it for myself which is how I proved it to myself.

What is created is absolutely evidence of a creator. Have you ever studied what the evidence shows?

One day you will meet the creator and discover the truth that what he created is indeed evidence. It should be fairly obvious to you at that point. Or will you argue with him that it is his fault that he didn't give you enough proof? Have you ever considered that you are being tested?

You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing.

Are you trying to say you believe in spirit but don't believe in God who is spirit?

You continue to invent what I believe, while denying what I tell you I believe. So you know better than I do?

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things"? I have not said this at all. You are either inventing or lying. I'll let you choose.

"You are a materialist because you believe incorporeal things come from material things. Whereas I believe all things (material and incorporeal) came from something which is incorporeal. If you believed that that incorporeal things came from incorporeal, then by definition you wouldn't be an atheist because then you would believe in spirit which is not a material thing." Nice of you to decide what I believe. Keep me posted on my own beliefs, willya? The fact is that I do believe in incorporeal things. I do not believe in God. The definition of an atheist is someone who does not believe in God.

You have no logical basis to believe you are more than just material. I have a logical basis for believing I am more than just material. I am sorry this offends you but it is the consequence of believing in no God as you do.

You have no logical basis to believe that God is the only incorporeal thing in the universe. I have a logical basis for allowing that there are things we do not know, yet. I'm sorry this offends you but it is the logical consequence of insisting that your beliefs are the only accurate beliefs.

And that changes the reality that you believe you are more than just atoms how?

This isn't about the existence of God. This is about your illogical belief that you aren't a materialist.

If I believe there are incorporeal things, then the supposition that I am a materialist is inaccurate.

Not if you are an atheist.

I'm not arguing that you don't believe in the existence of incorporeal things. I fully agree that you do believe they exist. But if you are an atheist you must believe incorporeal things originate only from material things. That they don't originated because you are a spiritual being. The very best you can believe is that your spiritual responses are nothing more than evolutionary programing that only exist for evolutionary purposes. That the love or anger or sadness you feel are only because of an electrochemical process firing inside your brain.

I totally get why you are repulsed by this thought but it is the reality of being an atheist. You can't eat your cake and have it too.

 

[ding]

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Prove it!

He says it better than I do.

 

[ding]

Except that the laws of nature were in place before space and time. Which means that the potential for all of those non-material things you believe in existed before space and time began. Which means that non-material things existed before space and time.

Prove it!

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

 

[edthecynic]

Can you tell me where these things that are not material came from?

Spirits in the material world

Would you say you are a materialist? Specifically that everything in the universe proceeds from material things? Even things like thoughts and beliefs and love and sadness?

I would say you can't get something from nothing no matter how hard you try. Therefore the spiritual comes from the material and not the material coming from the spiritual.

Again I refer you to music. The material composer creates the music that lives on spiritually after the composer materially decomposes. The music did not create the composer.