What Is The Biggest Drawback Of Atheism?

[james bond]

"The internet atheists"? Who are these people? In any case, the statement is not strictly correct.

They're the lowest IQ atheists. I pointed out with God you are comparing supernatural to natural and you provide a natural example, but whatever.

"For example, if there is an absence of evidence of an elephant in my living room, that is evidence of the absence of the elephant in my living room."

The absence of evidence of an elephant in your living room does not mean evidence of absence of an elephant in your living room. What if it is a small elephant and it is hiding behind your sofa and it moves elsewhere when you look. Or it could be a metaphor for the 900-lb elephant in the room. You're the only one who doesn't know what it is.

Again, you are trying to use an example to fit your hasty conclusion. The classic case for this is all swans are white. Zoologists and people believed this for the longest time until a black swan was discovered. It could be the same with the flying spaghetti monster, but that's something that is probably imaginary like the unicorn.

Suppose I am told, "an elephant will dance in your yard every night at sunset". I watch for ten thousand nights, and the elephant never appears. That is good evidence that no, the dancing elephant is not real. Not absolute proof, but absolute proof is not needed.

Why would you watch for ten thousand nights ? All you had to do was watch for one night at sunset.

Your example is what then? There are no dancing elephants? What if some circus trainer taught one to dance? Then the there are no dancing elephants statement becomes wrong. We have the absence of evidence for ten thousand nights, but maybe it shows up on the following night and makes the statement wrong like the all swans are white statement. You may be gone, but maybe your friend tells you what happened.

Same for gods. If there's no evidence for them anywhere, when evidence is expected, then the best conclusion is that they don't exist.

Again, there is evidence for God. We have the universe, Earth, and everything in it here. Stephen Hawking could not figure out why we are here. He thought we should not be here and he's the quantum mechanics guru.

To use your argument, I can say there are no aliens because we have no evidence of aliens. We would've found them by now if there were, because of Drake's equation and Fermi's paradox. Furthermore, I say the Bible says God created aliens. This means no aliens, right? Try telling that to the atheists here. NASA still thinks we'll find them or evidence of past aliens by 2025 due to having expensive telescopes and high tech equipment.

As evasions go, that was awful. None of it even attempted to address the issue.

Bald is not a hair color. Not collecting stamps is not a hobby. Not believing in gods is not a religion.

Those are the things that internet atheists say and we know atheists are usually wrong such as people are not completely bald. They still have hair and we can tell what color it is. I already addressed your second statement. It is a ridiculous example. Again, you reach a hasty conclusion with your third statement and are wrong due to fallacy.

Historical, in some places. Non-fiction? Nonsense.

We can bet $100 and go to the library to see what section the Bible is in. We can check the Guinness Book of World Records to see what the Bible is classified as. Again, atheists are usually wrong.

As for the rest, it's not worth going over.
.

 

[james bond]

I got a new drawback for atheism.

There is no logical argument that supports the belief that there is no God.

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Let's eliminate gods that are mythological. We can focus on the God or gods that designed the universe and created life.

I get sick and tired of answering there is no evidence for God. We know that the universe had a beginning, so Kalam's Cosmological Argument is one for God. Second, when I provide the scientific evidence, then atheists generally attack religion and me that it's not empirical evidence. The atheists do not have empirical evidence that ToE and evolutionary thinking is true. All they have is a theory by consensus. I don't think atheists/ags have any evidence for no God or gods. They just have a "faith-based" belief" which makes atheism a religion.

 

[james bond]

as for the bible being the BEST SELLING book every year....

Sales are over inflated because; churches buy them to give to children in their congregation, the Gideons are still buying them and putting them in hotels and motels, and people buy them as gifts for family members.

MOST people do NOT actually buy a bible for themselves.

If we go just by people buying books for themselves the bible wouldn't make the list of top 100

How do you know they aren't buying it for themselves? There are new members who want their own copy besides the one they received from church or they want a specific version. People also want a new Bible when theirs is worn.

"Best-selling book of non-fiction
Who The Bible What 5000000000 unit(s) sold Where United Kingdom ()
Although it is impossible to obtain exact figures, there is little doubt that the Bible is the world's best-selling and most widely distributed book. A survey by the Bible Society concluded that around 2.5 billion copies were printed between 1815 and 1975, but more recent estimates put the number at more than 5 billion.

By the end of 1995, combined global sales of Today's English Version (Good News) New Testament and Bible (copyright for which is held by the Bible Societies) exceeded 17.75 million copies, and the whole Bible had been translated into 349 languages; 2,123 languages have at least one book of the Bible in that language."

To give you a comparison,

"It has been reported that 800 million copies of the red-covered booklet Quotations from the Works of Mao Zedong (Tse-tung) were sold or distributed between June 1966, when possession became virtually mandatory in China, and September 1971, when its promoter Marshal Lin Biao died in an air crash."

Best-selling book of non-fiction

 

[diver52]

I got a new drawback for atheism.

There is no logical argument that supports the belief that there is no God.

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Let's eliminate gods that are mythological. We can focus on the God or gods that designed the universe and created life.

I get sick and tired of answering there is no evidence for God. We know that the universe had a beginning, so Kalam's Cosmological Argument is one for God. Second, when I provide the scientific evidence, then atheists generally attack religion and me that it's not empirical evidence. The atheists do not have empirical evidence that ToE and evolutionary thinking is true. All they have is a theory by consensus. I don't think atheists/ags have any evidence for no God or gods. They just have a "faith-based" belief" which makes atheism a religion.

Your argument is unconvincing, so you shouldn't be frustrated that you are not convincing anyone.

 

[Hollie]

I got a new drawback for atheism.

There is no logical argument that supports the belief that there is no God.

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Let's eliminate gods that are mythological. We can focus on the God or gods that designed the universe and created life.

I get sick and tired of answering there is no evidence for God. We know that the universe had a beginning, so Kalam's Cosmological Argument is one for God. Second, when I provide the scientific evidence, then atheists generally attack religion and me that it's not empirical evidence. The atheists do not have empirical evidence that ToE and evolutionary thinking is true. All they have is a theory by consensus. I don't think atheists/ags have any evidence for no God or gods. They just have a "faith-based" belief" which makes atheism a religion.

There is a logical argument that there are no gods. You will have to come to terms with that.

I’m not sure that anyone cares that you are sick and tired answering there is no evidence for God. There is no evidence for your gods. Silly references to Kalam's Cosmological argument are merely time wasting. Similarly, your suggestion to offering “scientific evidence” to your gods are nothing more than screeching tirades that offer no evidence.

Empirical evidence for the Theory of Evolution is abundant.

You do yourself no favors by making these emotional outbursts denigrating knowledge and evidence when your tirades are utterly contradicted by the relevant sciences.

 

[mamooth]

The absence of evidence of an elephant in your living room does not mean evidence of absence of an elephant in your living room.

It absolutely, positively does. If A->B, then !B->!A.

What if it is a small elephant and it is hiding behind your sofa and it moves elsewhere when you look.

Just stop. You're humiliating yourself. There are no tiny invisible elephants. You're dishonestly changing the definition of what an elephant is.

Your example is what then? There are no dancing elephants?

That the dancing elephant of my yard is a myth, and it was just a story. Like your god.

You keep confusing absolute proof with actionable evidence.

When you step on the ground, does it hold you up, or do you plunge to the center of the earth? Sure, it's always held you up the past, but by your standard, a lack of evidence that physical laws don't vary from moment to moment is no proof that physical laws aren't variable. Hence, you'd best stop stepping on the ground.

Your standard is absurd. We've seen no evidence for physical laws varying, so we assume they don't. We don't have absolute proof they won't vary, but sheer repetition gives us confidence they won't. The sheer quantity of lack of evidence matters.

Again, there is evidence for God.

We don't think so. And for this argument, that's all that matters. If we see no evidence, then our lack of belief is logical.

To use your argument, I can say there are no aliens because we have no evidence of aliens.

That would be a logical statement, if you were speaking of just the earth. The lack of evidence for any aliens on the earth is very good evidence that aliens aren't on earth.

Those are the things that internet atheists say and we know atheists are usually wrong

<Snap><Snap>Eyes front. You're talking to me. Stop deflecting with tales of the internet atheists who have humiliated you in the past.

such as people are not completely bald. They still have hair and we can tell what color it is.

You're evading the issue again by redefining "bald". That's a pattern you have. Whenever you can't address an argument, you evade by redefining words and changing the argument.

I already addressed your second statement.

You evaded that with a ridiculous claim of how not collecting stamps forced people to have other hobbies. It was absurd and evasive.

It is a ridiculous example. Again, you reach a hasty conclusion with your third statement and are wrong due to fallacy.

You can't just say it's a fallacy. You have to _demonstrate_ it. You haven't even tried, beyond repeating "BECAUSE I SAY SO!" over and over.

We can bet $100 and go to the library to see what section the Bible is in. We can check the Guinness Book of World Records to see what the Bible is classified as.

It will be in "religion". How would you like to pay?

As for the rest, it's not worth going over..

I see the Harry Potter thing completely flustered you, so let's keep going with it.

Many people believe in the wizard world of Harry Potter. They'll swear it's not a myth. There are bestselling books. I can visit Hogwarts. It would seem that there's more evidence for Harry Potter than for your god.

 

[anynameyouwish]

"The internet atheists"? Who are these people? In any case, the statement is not strictly correct.

They're the lowest IQ atheists. I pointed out with God you are comparing supernatural to natural and you provide a natural example, but whatever.

"For example, if there is an absence of evidence of an elephant in my living room, that is evidence of the absence of the elephant in my living room."

The absence of evidence of an elephant in your living room does not mean evidence of absence of an elephant in your living room. What if it is a small elephant and it is hiding behind your sofa and it moves elsewhere when you look. Or it could be a metaphor for the 900-lb elephant in the room. You're the only one who doesn't know what it is.

Again, you are trying to use an example to fit your hasty conclusion. The classic case for this is all swans are white. Zoologists and people believed this for the longest time until a black swan was discovered. It could be the same with the flying spaghetti monster, but that's something that is probably imaginary like the unicorn.

Suppose I am told, "an elephant will dance in your yard every night at sunset". I watch for ten thousand nights, and the elephant never appears. That is good evidence that no, the dancing elephant is not real. Not absolute proof, but absolute proof is not needed.

Why would you watch for ten thousand nights ? All you had to do was watch for one night at sunset.

Your example is what then? There are no dancing elephants? What if some circus trainer taught one to dance? Then the there are no dancing elephants statement becomes wrong. We have the absence of evidence for ten thousand nights, but maybe it shows up on the following night and makes the statement wrong like the all swans are white statement. You may be gone, but maybe your friend tells you what happened.

Same for gods. If there's no evidence for them anywhere, when evidence is expected, then the best conclusion is that they don't exist.

Again, there is evidence for God. We have the universe, Earth, and everything in it here. Stephen Hawking could not figure out why we are here. He thought we should not be here and he's the quantum mechanics guru.

To use your argument, I can say there are no aliens because we have no evidence of aliens. We would've found them by now if there were, because of Drake's equation and Fermi's paradox. Furthermore, I say the Bible says God created aliens. This means no aliens, right? Try telling that to the atheists here. NASA still thinks we'll find them or evidence of past aliens by 2025 due to having expensive telescopes and high tech equipment.

As evasions go, that was awful. None of it even attempted to address the issue.

Bald is not a hair color. Not collecting stamps is not a hobby. Not believing in gods is not a religion.

Those are the things that internet atheists say and we know atheists are usually wrong such as people are not completely bald. They still have hair and we can tell what color it is. I already addressed your second statement. It is a ridiculous example. Again, you reach a hasty conclusion with your third statement and are wrong due to fallacy.

Historical, in some places. Non-fiction? Nonsense.

We can bet $100 and go to the library to see what section the Bible is in. We can check the Guinness Book of World Records to see what the Bible is classified as. Again, atheists are usually wrong.

As for the rest, it's not worth going over.
.

"We can bet $100 and go to the library to see what section the Bible is in. We can check the Guinness Book of World Records to see what the Bible is classified as. Again, atheists are usually wrong."

"The internet atheists"? Who are these people? In any case, the statement is not strictly correct.

They're the lowest IQ atheists. I pointed out with God you are comparing supernatural to natural and you provide a natural example, but whatever.

"For example, if there is an absence of evidence of an elephant in my living room, that is evidence of the absence of the elephant in my living room."

The absence of evidence of an elephant in your living room does not mean evidence of absence of an elephant in your living room. What if it is a small elephant and it is hiding behind your sofa and it moves elsewhere when you look. Or it could be a metaphor for the 900-lb elephant in the room. You're the only one who doesn't know what it is.

Again, you are trying to use an example to fit your hasty conclusion. The classic case for this is all swans are white. Zoologists and people believed this for the longest time until a black swan was discovered. It could be the same with the flying spaghetti monster, but that's something that is probably imaginary like the unicorn.

Suppose I am told, "an elephant will dance in your yard every night at sunset". I watch for ten thousand nights, and the elephant never appears. That is good evidence that no, the dancing elephant is not real. Not absolute proof, but absolute proof is not needed.

Why would you watch for ten thousand nights ? All you had to do was watch for one night at sunset.

Your example is what then? There are no dancing elephants? What if some circus trainer taught one to dance? Then the there are no dancing elephants statement becomes wrong. We have the absence of evidence for ten thousand nights, but maybe it shows up on the following night and makes the statement wrong like the all swans are white statement. You may be gone, but maybe your friend tells you what happened.

Same for gods. If there's no evidence for them anywhere, when evidence is expected, then the best conclusion is that they don't exist.

Again, there is evidence for God. We have the universe, Earth, and everything in it here. Stephen Hawking could not figure out why we are here. He thought we should not be here and he's the quantum mechanics guru.

To use your argument, I can say there are no aliens because we have no evidence of aliens. We would've found them by now if there were, because of Drake's equation and Fermi's paradox. Furthermore, I say the Bible says God created aliens. This means no aliens, right? Try telling that to the atheists here. NASA still thinks we'll find them or evidence of past aliens by 2025 due to having expensive telescopes and high tech equipment.

As evasions go, that was awful. None of it even attempted to address the issue.

Bald is not a hair color. Not collecting stamps is not a hobby. Not believing in gods is not a religion.

Those are the things that internet atheists say and we know atheists are usually wrong such as people are not completely bald. They still have hair and we can tell what color it is. I already addressed your second statement. It is a ridiculous example. Again, you reach a hasty conclusion with your third statement and are wrong due to fallacy.

Historical, in some places. Non-fiction? Nonsense.

We can bet $100 and go to the library to see what section the Bible is in. We can check the Guinness Book of World Records to see what the Bible is classified as. Again, atheists are usually wrong.

As for the rest, it's not worth going over.
.

"We can bet $100 and go to the library to see what section the Bible is in. We can check the Guinness Book of World Records to see what the Bible is classified as. "


At the library It's located in the Non-Fiction Section Under Religion......

with all of the OTHER religions.

ALL OF THEM....

including the ones YOU claim are NOT REAL!

Including the flying spaghetti monster.

I guess this PROVES (by your logic) that there really IS a Flying Spaghetti Monster!

and that ALL religions are real.......

yes?

"We can bet $100 ...."?????!?!?!?!?!

Is it appropriate for a Christian to gamble?

Billy Graham Evangelistic Association › answer › is-it-appropriate-for-a-christian-to-gamble
Jun 1, 2004 - For the believer in Jesus Christ, there should be no appeal to take part in gambling. Gambling clearly breaks several biblical principles which ...

some christian YOU are.....

 

[anynameyouwish]

I got a new drawback for atheism.

There is no logical argument that supports the belief that there is no God.

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Let's eliminate gods that are mythological. We can focus on the God or gods that designed the universe and created life.

I get sick and tired of answering there is no evidence for God. We know that the universe had a beginning, so Kalam's Cosmological Argument is one for God. Second, when I provide the scientific evidence, then atheists generally attack religion and me that it's not empirical evidence. The atheists do not have empirical evidence that ToE and evolutionary thinking is true. All they have is a theory by consensus. I don't think atheists/ags have any evidence for no God or gods. They just have a "faith-based" belief" which makes atheism a religion.

"There is no logical argument that supports the belief that there is no God."


ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

funny stuff.....

 

[mamooth]

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Sure. Why did you think the question was difficult?

1. Lack of belief in anything is the default state.

2. Logical belief requires good evidence.

3. There's no good evidence for God.

4. Hence, belief in God is illogical.

 

[BreezeWood]

are you senile ...

"death penalty"

That could be you after you die and you end up on the wrong side of Hades. I hear it can get hot there, too.

your heretic destroyed the tablets, the phony 10 commandments you pray to are forgeries. the message could only have been the reiteration of the religion of antiquity the crowds behavior was not the issue as that of the selfrightious indignation of moses.

No quotes or verses from your 1st century book? How can the 10 commandments be phoney when it was given to head honcho Moses. Another blasphemy against M and you called him a heretic.

"The Commandments (in Jewish Tradition)
First Commandment (Exodus 20:2)
I am the Lord Your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

Second Commandment (Exodus 20:3-6)
You shall have no other gods beside Me. You shall not make for yourself any graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them, nor serve them, for I, the Lord Your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

Third Commandment (Exodus 20:7)
You shall not take the name of the Lord Your God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that takes His name in vain.

Fourth Commandment (Exodus 20:8-11)
Remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work; but the seventh day is a Sabbath unto the Lord Your God, in it you shall not do any manner of work, you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your man-servant, nor your maid-servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger that is within your gates; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day. Wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and made it holy.

Fifth Commandment (Exodus 20:12)
Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord God gives you.

Sixth Commandment (Exodus 20:13)
You shall not murder.

Seventh Commandment (Exodus 20:13)
You shall not commit adultery.

Eighth Commandment (Exodus 20:13)
You shall not steal.

Ninth Commandment (Exodus 20:13)
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

Tenth Commandment (Exodus 20:14)
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house, nor his wife, his man-servant, his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is your neighbor’s."

The Ten Commandments | My Jewish Learning

What you are doing is quibbling and not presenting any evidence besides the blasphemy. You are also in violation of the first three commandments. I guess from your view, you were in bondage. Atheists put pagan gods before them such as The Satanic Temple. Also, belief in "no God" could mean belief in Satan as cold is the absence of heat and evil is the absence of good -- What is a pagan? What is paganism? | GotQuestions.org. As for the 3rd commandment, you accuse Jesus' people and Jesus of persecuting and victimizing the innocent when they are probably far from being innocent, i.e. have no objective morals and worship false gods before them including Satan.

.

How can the 10 commandments be phoney when it was given to head honcho Moses. Another blasphemy against M and you called him a heretic.

the tablets were destroyed by the heretic - you have no idea what may have been inscribed as their message, certainly not the phony 10 dictates you came up with in your post. they are as phony as the biblical flood fairy tale story written for the adolescent.

if your story is true and moses is not a (murdering) heretic - produce the tablets with their inscriptions by the Almighty as proof and of your equally phony messiah religion of christianity that particularly would have no need for them.

No quotes or verses from your 1st century book?

the spoken religion of antiquity is only 6 words in length that's all there is a one sentence book would be hard to quote by an abridgement. prescribed by the Almighty to a & e from the beginning as the means for admission to the Everlasting. for all humanity.

 

[james bond]

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Your argument is unconvincing, so you shouldn't be frustrated that you are not convincing anyone.

You don't answer my question, so one less atheist to provide any logic.

 

[james bond]

There is a logical argument that there are no gods. You will have to come to terms with that.

I've already counted you as one who does not any logical argument.

I’m not sure that anyone cares that you are sick and tired answering there is no evidence for God. There is no evidence for your gods. Silly references to Kalam's Cosmological argument are merely time wasting. Similarly, your suggestion to offering “scientific evidence” to your gods are nothing more than screeching tirades that offer no evidence.

It's really an insult to atheists that their stupid beliefs get in the way of the truth. Besides, no logical argument, we already established atheist scientists explanations are lacking and do not include the scientific method. It's all historical BS. Thus, I've shown atheists do not have a leg to stand on.

Empirical evidence for the Theory of Evolution is abundant.

All false except for natural selection. Already covered multiple times. Yawn.

You do yourself no favors by making these emotional outbursts denigrating knowledge and evidence when your tirades are utterly contradicted by the relevant sciences.

Already covered. It's you who gets emotional and sometimes gets angry with veins bulging in the neck and red eye .

 

[anynameyouwish]

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Your argument is unconvincing, so you shouldn't be frustrated that you are not convincing anyone.

You don't answer my question, so one less atheist to provide any logic.

"You don't answer my question, so one less atheist to provide any logic"


and zero christians who can provide any logic.

belief is NOT logic.

 

[dblack]

4. Hence, belief in God is illogical.

And most of the religious people I know will reaffirm this. The whole "leap of faith" thing is supposed to be irrational. That's what makes spirituality such a different experience from reason. It's only the people who are insecure and defensive about their faith who feel the need to justify it in terms of evidence and logic - at which point it all falls apart.

 

[DGS49]

Man is intrinsically evil. The evidence is overwhelming.

So when examining human history it is imperative to find the "forces" that result in either altruistic or at least non-aggressive behavior on a large scale. When you can identify those forces you can at least make attempts to lay that same groundwork (or something similar) in the present and future in order to promote peace and altruism, and possibly prosperity. Witness the founding of the United States of America, wherein virtually every government - Federal and State - acknowledges a belief in God and a commitment to be bound by His rules and principles.

Atheism unwittingly facilitates human evil. It never successfully promotes peace, kindness, or altruism. All of the "communist" failures of the 20th century are based on atheistic "altruism," gone wrong. Without a belief in a "higher power" and a parallel belief in the ultimate reward of virtue and punishment of evil, no culture can avoid devolving into chaos and evil. Do you think the founders of the Soviet Union, or Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, or the Kim's in Korea intended to create hell-holes? No. I'm sure they all thought they were laying the groundwork for a "workers' paradise."

The international Left is facilitating that same devolution globally right now.

 

[james bond]

It absolutely, positively does. If A->B, then !B->!A.

We got into logical arguments, but yours isn't to provide any logical arguments for atheism. We're just doing logical arguments for oneupmanship. It's more evidence that you're an internet atheist, but whatever.

I was in the wff n proof club in HS for advanced students. A => B (read as if a, then b). It means you can't conclude anything from B.

I provided the all swans are white classic argument and there was eventually a black swan found. You couldn't refute that.

Again, tell the atheists here that there are no aliens based on your logic. There is no evidence of aliens, so there are no aliens. Put it in all caps. Shout it from the mountain tops. I keep saying God did not say he made aliens, so there are no aliens. Does that mean there could be a microbe on Mars? Or does finding an alien mean no God? No. It could've been panspermia from Earth. I think it would bug the believers. Just like no aliens bugs the atheists or non-believers. They have "faith" that there are aliens due to the multitude of stars, planets, and galaxies.

Here's a good story. The previous head of NASA, Ellen Stofan, thought aliens exist, such as microbes on Mars and that we'll find them by 2025 or evidence of past alien life. This is based on having expensive telescopes and high tech equipment. My thinking is they want to go to Mars to gather evidence to show that God not creating aliens was wrong. They'll never admit it, but it's one of the reasons that she had a bug up her arse for doing it. I say all this in the past tense because she said it 2015. Trump replaced her with someone more rational in 2016.

Signs of Alien Life Will Be Found by 2025, NASA's Chief Scientist Predicts

The rest of your stuff is stupid crap.

Sure. Why did you think the question was difficult?

1. Lack of belief in anything is the default state.

2. Logical belief requires good evidence.

3. There's no good evidence for God.

4. Hence, belief in God is illogical.

1. Heh. Who said lack of belief in anything is the default state? Then the void is the default state. We have nothing. No space-time.

2. You're mixing logic with beliefs. One is math based, the other is based on worldview.

3. You're just making an assertion and you're an internet atheist.

4. More stupidity. smh.

 

[diver52]

Can any atheist/ag here provide such a LOGICAL argument that supports your belief that there is no God?

Your argument is unconvincing, so you shouldn't be frustrated that you are not convincing anyone.

You don't answer my question, so one less atheist to provide any logic.

I wasn't responding to your question. But if it makes you happy, logical arguments have been made on both sides. Just no valid arguments. I include your argument. Which is why it is unconvincing and you should not be frustrated that you are not convincing anyone.

 

[mamooth]

We got into logical arguments, but yours isn't to provide any logical arguments for atheism. We're just doing logical arguments for oneupmanship. It's more evidence that you're an internet atheist, but whatever.

Just how badly did those internet atheists humiliate you? Given how awful your arguments are here, I can see why you got destroyed. Why did you think you'd do better here?

I was in the wff n proof club in HS for advanced students. A => B (read as if a, then b). It means you can't conclude anything from B.

So the club didn't tell you that if A implies B, then "not B" implies "not A"? I bet they did. Pity you didn't understand.

If there is an elephant in the room, I will be able to see a large gray pachyderm. A -> B
If I do not see the large gray pachyderm, then there is no elephant in the room. !B->!A

I provided the all swans are white classic argument and there was eventually a black swan found. You couldn't refute that.

No need, as it doesn't apply to the issue. Like I said, we're not talking about absolute proof. We're talking about actionable evidence.

Again, tell the atheists here that there are no aliens based on your logic.

Most intelligent people, and not just atheists, would agree that it's good logic.

If there are aliens on earth, we would have evidence of them.
We have no evidence of aliens on earth, so there are no aliens on earth.

There is no evidence of aliens, so there are no aliens. Put it in all caps. Shout it from the mountain tops. I keep saying God did not say he made aliens, so there are no aliens. Does that mean there could be a microbe on Mars? Or does finding an alien mean no God? No. It could've been panspermia from Earth. I think it would bug the believers. Just like no aliens bugs the atheists or non-believers. They have "faith" that there are aliens due to the multitude of stars, planets, and galaxies.

That made no sense. Oh, that's right, it was just there to deflect, so it didn't have to make sense.

Try deflecting from the logic here:

If there were gods, there would be evidence for gods.
There is no evidence for gods, so there are no gods.

Here's a good story.

Since it has zero bearing on the discussion, I don't care. It's just another deflection.

The rest of your stuff is stupid crap.

We've established there's more evidence for Harry Potter than there is for your fantasies. Good. We're making progress.

1. Heh. Who said lack of belief in anything is the default state?

Those who aren't insane, stupid or lying.

Do you believe in blue-streaked invisible snorfblats? if you say yes, you're lying. If you say no, you've admitted that my statement was correct. Ooh, sucks to be you.

So, other than deflections, insults, and repeating "BECAUSE IS SAY SO!" at ever-higher volumes, got anything to contribute? No, you don't. You have nothing to back up your claims, and everyone sees it. Thanks for that public display of how theism can lead to intellectual laziness and dishonesty.

 

[diver52]

An argument can be logical and be utterly wrong. Logic is simply a set of rules.

If A=B and B=C, then A=C. If cat=dog and dog=fish, then cat=fish. The logic is perfect, the premise is garbage. Garbage in, garbage out. If a logical argument is to also be a valid argument, the rules of logic must be followed and the premise must be supported by evidence. The arguments on both side of this discussion are beginning with premises which must simply be accepted as fact.

 

[mamooth]

Man is intrinsically evil. The evidence is overwhelming.

Speak for yourself.

So when examining human history it is imperative to find the "forces" that result in either altruistic or at least non-aggressive behavior on a large scale. When you can identify those forces you can at least make attempts to lay that same groundwork (or something similar) in the present and future in order to promote peace and altruism, and possibly prosperity. Witness the founding of the United States of America, wherein virtually every government - Federal and State - acknowledges a belief in God and a commitment to be bound by His rules and principles.

Which is why "God" is mentioned so often in the Constitution. Oh wait, that word isn't found anywhere. Huh.

Atheism unwittingly facilitates human evil. It never successfully promotes peace, kindness, or altruism. All of the "communist" failures of the 20th century are based on atheistic "altruism," gone wrong. Without a belief in a "higher power" and a parallel belief in the ultimate reward of virtue and punishment of evil, no culture can avoid devolving into chaos and evil. Do you think the founders of the Soviet Union, or Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, or the Kim's in Korea intended to create hell-holes? No. I'm sure they all thought they were laying the groundwork for a "workers' paradise."

The international Left is facilitating that same devolution globally right now.

Very Christian european capitalists and very Christian Nazis and very Christian American capitalists participated in similar scale genocides. And so your theory faceplants.