What Is The Biggest Drawback Of Atheism?

[dblack]

Atheism's biggest drawback? It's false.

What is false about not believing something?

They're all liars. They're just pretending to not believe.

 

[rightwinger]

Atheism's biggest drawback? It's false.

What is false about not believing something?

They're all liars. They're just pretending to not believe.

LOL

I think many Christians are pretending to believe. They have the same doubts as atheists but are afraid to express them to friends and family

 

[abu afak]

You have never examined the evidence so how would you know. You don’t even have a realistic perception of God. You don’t want to believe in God. It’s not that there’s no evidence. It is literally all around you.

So First, and unquoted/unanswered..
Your attempted Deception on the definition of Faith.
That was 100% Dishonest.
Faith, as it pertains to religion, is belief without proof/evidence.

In fact you are arguing that Genesis should be read literally.

FALSE
I was pointing out YOU do NOT speak for Christianity and many others Do take Genesis' creation story literally.
Tens of Millions do.
Ergo that degree of faith is NOT compatible with science.

You are just full of either Misunderstanding or Intentional deception.
You have to be.
You have a premise error
There is no valid argument for god, only FAITH in 'him'/'them'/'other peoples', and FAITH 'he/they/them' created something.

Here’s what Genesis tells us...

And ALL of which is FAITH (belief withOUT evidence/proof) and 100% irrelevant to the debate a god exists at all.

Again/time saver:
There is no valid hard evidentiary argument for god, only your FAITH in 'him' and/or FAITH 'he'/THEY (there are many different 'gods') created something.

`

 

[ding]

Yes, and those people aren’t here validating their non-belief by criticizing the beliefs of others.

No, it is the case of rejecting every single shred of evidence. It isn’t statistically possible that every single claim has no value in the argument.

Even expert witnesses who oppose other expert witnesses concede some points.

That is the point
I have not seen a single piece of credible evidence of a creator, let alone a God who watches over us

Claiming things on earth are pretty, so that means a God must have made them is not evidence

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

It was created from nothing. It literally popped into existence. We do know these things.

 

[ding]

Yes, and those people aren’t here validating their non-belief by criticizing the beliefs of others.

No, it is the case of rejecting every single shred of evidence. It isn’t statistically possible that every single claim has no value in the argument.

Even expert witnesses who oppose other expert witnesses concede some points.

That is the point
I have not seen a single piece of credible evidence of a creator, let alone a God who watches over us

Claiming things on earth are pretty, so that means a God must have made them is not evidence

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

No. You claim it was magic because you have never considered any other perception of God than magic.

You have never given this any serious consideration at all.

 

[ding]

Yes, and those people aren’t here validating their non-belief by criticizing the beliefs of others.

No, it is the case of rejecting every single shred of evidence. It isn’t statistically possible that every single claim has no value in the argument.

Even expert witnesses who oppose other expert witnesses concede some points.

That is the point
I have not seen a single piece of credible evidence of a creator, let alone a God who watches over us

Claiming things on earth are pretty, so that means a God must have made them is not evidence

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

Existence is your proof. It’s all around you.

It’s your fault for not examining it.

 

[ding]

All of your questions are valid and interesting but they also can have endless hypothetical guesses that can be made by countless different people of different beliefs and not one of them will know what is the right answer. The Bible says "for we live by faith, not by sight." For me, I know that I can never fully understand why God does or doesn't do things both in the past or present, but I'm also not supposed to know all, and i'm perfectly ok with that fact. Faith isn't about putting your faith in the wisdom of men, but in God.

I have no problem with that
If you have faith in God, good for you
If it fills a void in your life....that is great

Personally, I went to church every week. I reached a point at a relatively young age that I realized it did not seem true to me. I could fake like I believe and say all the right words.....but it is just not there

And yet here you are discussing it.

That is what this thread is about

Yes but why are you here? Why are you discussing God? You don’t want to believe in God. So why do you want to talk about God?

I am here because the topic is the drawbacks of atheism. As an atheist, I am qualified to discuss it

Why are you here?

You post in religious forums to validate your religious beliefs. You have elevated atheism to a religion.

 

[ding]

Atheism's biggest drawback? It's false.

What is false about not believing something?

You can’t prove what you believe by criticizing what you don’t believe.

 

[ding]

You have never examined the evidence so how would you know. You don’t even have a realistic perception of God. You don’t want to believe in God. It’s not that there’s no evidence. It is literally all around you.

So First, and unquoted/unanswered..
Your attempted Deception on the definition of Faith.
That was 100% Dishonest.
Faith, as it pertains to religion, is belief without proof/evidence.

In fact you are arguing that Genesis should be read literally.

FALSE
I was pointing out YOU do NOT speak for Christianity and many others Do take Genesis' creation story literally.
Tens of Millions do.
Ergo that degree of faith is NOT compatible with science.

You are just full of either Misunderstanding or Intentional deception.
You have to be.
You have a premise error
There is no valid argument for god, only FAITH in 'him'/'them'/'other peoples', and FAITH 'he/they/them' created something.

Here’s what Genesis tells us...

And ALL of which is FAITH (belief withOUT evidence/proof) and 100% irrelevant to the debate a god exists at all.

Again/time saver:
There is no valid hard evidentiary argument for god, only your FAITH in 'him' and/or FAITH 'he'/THEY (there are many different 'gods') created something.

`

No. I don’t accept your definition. Faith as it pertains to anything, including religion, is having complete trust in something or someone. Look it up.

 

[ding]

You have never examined the evidence so how would you know. You don’t even have a realistic perception of God. You don’t want to believe in God. It’s not that there’s no evidence. It is literally all around you.

So First, and unquoted/unanswered..
Your attempted Deception on the definition of Faith.
That was 100% Dishonest.
Faith, as it pertains to religion, is belief without proof/evidence.

In fact you are arguing that Genesis should be read literally.

FALSE
I was pointing out YOU do NOT speak for Christianity and many others Do take Genesis' creation story literally.
Tens of Millions do.
Ergo that degree of faith is NOT compatible with science.

You are just full of either Misunderstanding or Intentional deception.
You have to be.
You have a premise error
There is no valid argument for god, only FAITH in 'him'/'them'/'other peoples', and FAITH 'he/they/them' created something.

Here’s what Genesis tells us...

And ALL of which is FAITH (belief withOUT evidence/proof) and 100% irrelevant to the debate a god exists at all.

Again/time saver:
There is no valid hard evidentiary argument for god, only your FAITH in 'him' and/or FAITH 'he'/THEY (there are many different 'gods') created something.

`

Only dumb asses and atheists argue Genesis literally.

So I don’t give a shit what people like that believe. I am telling you that at its simplest Genesis tells us that:

1. God created existence
2. Everything he created is good
3. What he created was done in steps
4. Man is a product of that creation
5. Man is unlike any other creature in creation
6. Man is made in God’s image in that he is a being which knows and creates
7. Man was told to go forth and be fruitful
8. Man was told to do as the original creator; to create for 6 days and then rest
9. Man knows right from wrong
10. Rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong when man does wrong, he rationalizes he didn’t do wrong
11. Successful behaviors naturally lead to success
12. Failed behaviors naturally lead to failure
13. Pass it down to the next generation

But if you want to argue how Noah got kangaroos on the ark, I believe that must be the extent of your intellect and you should seek out creationists because that’s your speed.

But if you ever want to have a serious discussion on origin questions then you will have to step up your game.

 

[rightwinger]

That is the point
I have not seen a single piece of credible evidence of a creator, let alone a God who watches over us

Claiming things on earth are pretty, so that means a God must have made them is not evidence

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

It was created from nothing. It literally popped into existence. We do know these things.

Exactly
magic

poof there is a planet
Poof, there is water
poof, look at all the plants
Poof, Horse's and alligators
Poof, look we got people

 

[ding]

You have never examined the evidence so how would you know. You don’t even have a realistic perception of God. You don’t want to believe in God. It’s not that there’s no evidence. It is literally all around you.

So First, and unquoted/unanswered..
Your attempted Deception on the definition of Faith.
That was 100% Dishonest.
Faith, as it pertains to religion, is belief without proof/evidence.

In fact you are arguing that Genesis should be read literally.

FALSE
I was pointing out YOU do NOT speak for Christianity and many others Do take Genesis' creation story literally.
Tens of Millions do.
Ergo that degree of faith is NOT compatible with science.

You are just full of either Misunderstanding or Intentional deception.
You have to be.
You have a premise error
There is no valid argument for god, only FAITH in 'him'/'them'/'other peoples', and FAITH 'he/they/them' created something.

Here’s what Genesis tells us...

And ALL of which is FAITH (belief withOUT evidence/proof) and 100% irrelevant to the debate a god exists at all.

Again/time saver:
There is no valid hard evidentiary argument for god, only your FAITH in 'him' and/or FAITH 'he'/THEY (there are many different 'gods') created something.

`

Bullshit. The evidence for God is literally all around and in you. You have just never examined it because you don’t want to believe in God.

 

[ding]

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

It was created from nothing. It literally popped into existence. We do know these things.

Exactly
magic

poof there is a planet
Poof, there is water
poof, look at all the plants
Poof, Horse's and alligators
Poof, look we got people

Good lord you are dense. The magic was a quantum tunneling event which obeyed the laws of nature which existed before space and time itself.

There’s your magic, Naven.

 

[ding]

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

It was created from nothing. It literally popped into existence. We do know these things.

Exactly
magic

poof there is a planet
Poof, there is water
poof, look at all the plants
Poof, Horse's and alligators
Poof, look we got people

It’s pretty funny you proving my point about how atheists argue the account of creation literally. It’s like you have no intellectual capacity to make any other argument.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Let’s see. The definition of faith is having complete trust in something or someone. I never place complete trust in anything without first having good reason.

That's a general def.
If one googles "definition faith" one will see the one pertaining to religion Also at the top of the page.
There's #1 you posted, then the pertinent one.

2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on Spiritual Apprehension Rather than proof.​

How honest was that? Not.

The evidence for God is all around you and in you. You are without excuse if you have never seriously considered the evidence. I can’t do it for you.

To argue you would believe in God if God gave you enough evidence is blaming God for his failure when the failure is yours.

You have shown ZERO evidence, just EMPTILY alleged "it's all around you."
LaLa Land.
(Which/WITCH god is that btw?)

As for Genesis, it is the allegorical account of world history before the migration from Mesopotamia. The accounts were told in story fashion so that the history and understandings being passed down could be easily remembered. It was passed down orally for thousands of years from generation to generation before Moses recorded it in writing.

I see. The Truth couldn't be remembered so Genesis/Moses just fudged it from oral tradition, including the wrong/impossible order of 'creation.'
And who are YOU to say it's "allegorical"?
Many Literalists (ie, Young Earth Creationists/YEC) believe is true as written. You are saying they're wrong/Lying.


`

You have never examined the evidence so how would you know. You don’t even have a realistic perception of God. You don’t want to believe in God. It’s not that there’s no evidence. It is literally all around you.

In fact you are arguing that Genesis should be read literally.

Here’s what Genesis tells us.

1. God created existence
2. Everything he created is good
3. What he created was done in steps
4. Man is a product of that creation
5. Man is unlike any other creature in creation
6. Man is made in God’s image in that he is a being which knows and creates
7. Man was told to go forth and be fruitful
8. Man was told to do as the original creator; to create for 6 days and then rest
9. Man knows right from wrong
10. Rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong when man does wrong, he rationalizes he didn’t do wrong
11. Successful behaviors naturally lead to success
12. Failed behaviors naturally lead to failure
13. Pass it down to the next generation

But you can keep reading it literally or pretend that it is a fairytale because all that is proving is that you don't want to believe in God.

This fails as an a priori fallacy.

An attempt to rationalize subjective belief is not ‘evidence’ that ‘god’ exists as perceived by theists.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

That is the point
I have not seen a single piece of credible evidence of a creator, let alone a God who watches over us

Claiming things on earth are pretty, so that means a God must have made them is not evidence

All of creation is your evidence. What the fuck are you talking about. Do you not even logic?

But putting that aside you are literally proving my point that there is no evidence you will even consider. Again, a statistical impossibility.

That is no evidence of a creator..it is a theory

We don’t know how the earth and life was created, so it must have been magic

No. We know how space and time were created and how space and time evolved until it produced beings that know and create.

Space and time were created from nothing. And then began to expand and cool.

So creation is the evidence you need to examine to answer this question because it’s the only evidence you can examine and you have never done that.

But you don’t even have a realistic perception of God. So you have never examined the evidence because you don’t want to believe in God.

No, you don’t know how it was created
You claim it was created by magic and have no proof

Existence is your proof. It’s all around you.

It’s your fault for not examining it.

This fails as a scapegoating fallacy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have no problem with that
If you have faith in God, good for you
If it fills a void in your life....that is great

Personally, I went to church every week. I reached a point at a relatively young age that I realized it did not seem true to me. I could fake like I believe and say all the right words.....but it is just not there

And yet here you are discussing it.

That is what this thread is about

Yes but why are you here? Why are you discussing God? You don’t want to believe in God. So why do you want to talk about God?

I am here because the topic is the drawbacks of atheism. As an atheist, I am qualified to discuss it

Why are you here?

You post in religious forums to validate your religious beliefs. You have elevated atheism to a religion.

This fails as a tu quoque fallacy.

Theists might believe in their ‘god’ but they clearly have no belief in logic.

 

[abu afak]

No. I don’t accept Your definition.
Faith as it pertains to anything, including religion, is having complete trust in something or someone.
Look it up.

I did "look it up" and cited to you, you MORON.

Google - definition faith
Top of the page
definition faith - Google Search

faith
/fāTH/
noun

1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
   "this restores one's faith in politicians"
   
   2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

You are TOO STUPID to debate.

 

[Hollie]

Atheism's biggest drawback? It's false.

What is false about not believing something?

They're all liars. They're just pretending to not believe.

Floating silly conspiracy theories isn’t helpful.

 

[abu afak]

So I don’t give a shit what people like that believe. I am telling you that at its simplest Genesis tells us that:

1. God created existence
2. Everything he created is good
3. What he created was done in steps
4. Man is a product of that creation
5. Man is unlike any other creature in creation
6. Man is made in God’s image in that he is a being which knows and creates
7. Man was told to go forth and be fruitful
8. Man was told to do as the original creator; to create for 6 days and then rest
9. Man knows right from wrong
10. Rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong when man does wrong, he rationalizes he didn’t do wrong
11. Successful behaviors naturally lead to success
12. Failed behaviors naturally lead to failure
13. Pass it down to the next generation

But if you want to argue how Noah got kangaroos on the ark, I believe that must be the extent of your intellect and you should seek out creationists because that’s your speed.

But if you ever want to have a serious discussion on origin questions then you will have to step up your game.

Asked and Answered.
AGAIN:

And ALL of which is FAITH (belief withOUT evidence/proof) and 100% irrelevant to the debate a god exists at all.

Again/time saver:
There is no valid hard evidentiary argument for god, only your FAITH in 'him' and/or FAITH 'he'/THEY (there are many different 'gods') created something.

`​