Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-01-2017, 11:03 AM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(01-01-2017 10:34 AM)ShadowProject Wrote:  
(01-01-2017 10:16 AM)true scotsman Wrote:  This right here is the essence and the fatal flaw of theism. It confuses what can be imagined with what is real. It's a direct result of theism's inherent subjectivism. I've asked many theists how I can reliably distinguish what they call God from something that is merely imaginary. To date none have been able to do it. This should be a real red flag to them but it seems it is not.

My favorite is when they point to things in nature as proof of god's existence. Often with expletives (because they are EXCITED!!)
God provided us with clean water for drinking! Food to eat! Wood to burn for warmth! This is proof that He loves us!!

Except that the fucker didn't provide us with clean drinking water not unless you are near an uncontaminated spring or a river in Canada's wilderness and then only maybe, science is the reason we have clean water In the developed world funny how theists attribute human endeavour to their almighty deity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
01-01-2017, 11:47 AM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
My 6 yr old grandson showed me yesterday that kids can use critical thinking and skepticism.

He asked me to make him a peanut butter & jelly sandwich.
I made the sandwich while he was playing and placed it on the table for him.
He walks over to the table and with surprise he says "Oh, my sandwich is ready."

I replied "It just magically appeared. POOF !!"
He says "Grandpa, magic isn't real."

I felt so proud. It wasn't something I had ever taught him or talked with him about, but he's seen me make sandwiches before.
He knows that things don't magically appear, except in video games. He recognizes the difference between a video game and reality.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Rahn127's post
01-01-2017, 11:51 AM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(01-01-2017 11:47 AM)Rahn127 Wrote:  My 6 yr old grandson showed me yesterday that kids can use critical thinking and skepticism.

He asked me to make him a peanut butter & jelly sandwich.
I made the sandwich while he was playing and placed it on the table for him.
He walks over to the table and with surprise he says "Oh, my sandwich is ready."

I replied "It just magically appeared. POOF !!"
He says "Grandpa, magic isn't real."

I felt so proud. It wasn't something I had ever taught him or talked with him about, but he's seen me make sandwiches before.
He knows that things don't magically appear, except in video games. He recognizes the difference between a video game and reality.

AwesomeSmile my boys were like that, like Teflon nothing stuck, just as well given their crazy mom and her husband and their nutty fundamentalism
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2017, 01:48 PM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(31-12-2016 09:55 PM)SkeptiCal Wrote:  All religions have one thing in common - overcoming fear of the unknown. Whether that's the weather, natural disasters, or death, people needed an easy to understand explanation for why the world is the way it is. Being the one to explain to that gives the person power {emphasis Mine} so wherever there are people there will be an opportunist who will take advantage of people's fear.

Indeed. The power of tribal shamans comes largely from the stories they weave. Control the stories, control the people.

One need only look at how the RCC restricted access to the Bible in the Middle Ages, and how many Muslims insist that only the Arabic version of the Qur'an is authoritative, or indeed any group that calls for practising a religion without understanding it, to see this phenomenon in action.

I used to belong to a Buddhist group that chanted excerpts from the Lotus Sutra in 13th century Japanese, written in Chinese kanji -- a language that none of us were fluent in. When I made efforts to translate the Chinese characters to find out what I was actually chanting, a couple of people looked at Me as if I had three heads. Facepalm
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Astreja's post
01-01-2017, 05:05 PM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(28-12-2016 04:19 PM)Yadayadayada Wrote:  Hello, I am hoping someone can explain the atheist viewpoint to me on the validity and probability of God's existence.

Most atheists will claim that the facts show the concept of a God to be so utterly unlikely as to be considered impossible.

But, this is not what the facts show at all.

The theory of Evolution does not attempt to explain the origin of life, nor can it explain the existence of life from the first organic cell onward.

How does natural selection explain the eye, for example? How can atheists claim that complex organs like the eye could have evolved, when everything we know about the eye says that it is useless unless all the components are in place at the same time.

As for reptile-mammal transition evidence, where is it in "evidence"?

What are the actual mechanics that achieve it? Not speculation, actual. Not variation in a genus [which evolutionists cling to as being evolution]. Biological changes where a living entity can be observed to be changing into something different, breaching the barriers of its DNA.

For reptiles to become mammals, that breach must have happened. So, someone please show where reptiles are in a state of doing so today - where that transition is taking place.

The facts show that what is overwhelmingly in evidence is what the Bible itself says, that like begets like, and we all rely on that to occur in all facets of life, from growing/eating fruit and vegetables through to human/animal procreation.

It seems that the evidence supports the concept of God, rather than the atheistic claim that "God probably doesn't exist".

Drive by trying to bait us with dumb arguments.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2017, 11:39 PM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
You only have to look at the Russian experiments with foxes to see evolution taking place over only a few generations https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_...ed_Red_Fox

Humans engage in selective breeding. We all do it in choosing a spouse and in ancient times they had no problem with incestuous relations to preserve blood lines.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-01-2017, 11:56 PM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
I still thin k that we miss the boat on this argument. My view now is that the word "God" is derived from the word "Khald" The Asssyrians had a God called Khaldi but in studying the language of this region I realized that the "I" ending is a suffix denoting possession. In other words, the name is Khald and the "I" is added to show it is the Assyrian's god"i" Turkish is like this still.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ḫaldi

I have a real problem with this because it seems so effing obvious. This is the God who could fly down from heaven using his wings and inseminate the land and sea and make life etc. Ancient people only thought of creation in a sexual way. They had animistic religions.

How and when do we go from the idea that there is a super stud dude with wings using his dingaling to create life to the idea that there is some invisible man-force magician type Ultimate all-knowing Maker who is everywhere but unknowable etc etc?

Sam Harris calls this an "infinitely elastic" God concept. We have, in truth, as a species, gone from a view of a God as creating via sex, like us, which is stupid, to a view which is a manifestation of systemic species-wide "denial" as it becomes more and more plain that the big guy with the big magic "wand" could not be found or be responsible for all that he had ascribed to him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-01-2017, 12:36 AM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(01-01-2017 11:56 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I still thin k that we miss the boat on this argument. My view now is that the word "God" is derived from the word "Khald" The Asssyrians had a God called Khaldi but in studying the language of this region I realized that the "I" ending is a suffix denoting possession. In other words, the name is Khald and the "I" is added to show it is the Assyrian's god"i" Turkish is like this still.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ḫaldi

I have a real problem with this because it seems so effing obvious. This is the God who could fly down from heaven using his wings and inseminate the land and sea and make life etc. Ancient people only thought of creation in a sexual way. They had animistic religions.

How and when do we go from the idea that there is a super stud dude with wings using his dingaling to create life to the idea that there is some invisible man-force magician type Ultimate all-knowing Maker who is everywhere but unknowable etc etc?

Sam Harris calls this an "infinitely elastic" God concept. We have, in truth, as a species, gone from a view of a God as creating via sex, like us, which is stupid, to a view which is a manifestation of systemic species-wide "denial" as it becomes more and more plain that the big guy with the big magic "wand" could not be found or be responsible for all that he had ascribed to him.

Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_(word)

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
02-01-2017, 07:02 AM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(30-12-2016 02:11 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  
(30-12-2016 01:57 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Not even Michael Behe believes this.

I'm sure Behe would, if he could. They have simply taken the opportunity for him to hold out on the "complexity" of the eye by doing the research that clearly demonstrates it... as they later did on his own chosen pet idea, the bacterial flagellum.

One of the best moments in the Kitzmiller case transcript is where he makes the assertion on the stand, and says no one has proved him wrong, and they break out like ten scientific papers that do exactly that... then force him to admit he hadn't bothered to read any of them. Laugh out load

The eye is such a useful organ that it seems to have evolved at least 40 times and possibly as many as 65 times according to scientists who have studied the issue. Ain't an evolutionary problem nor mystery.

http://redwood.berkeley.edu/vs265/landfernald92.pdf

When I shake my ignore file, I can hear them buzzing!

Cheerful Charlie
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cheerful Charlie's post
02-01-2017, 02:04 PM
RE: Why do atheists claim that the concept of God is so unlikely
(02-01-2017 07:02 AM)Cheerful Charlie Wrote:  
(30-12-2016 02:11 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  I'm sure Behe would, if he could. They have simply taken the opportunity for him to hold out on the "complexity" of the eye by doing the research that clearly demonstrates it... as they later did on his own chosen pet idea, the bacterial flagellum.

One of the best moments in the Kitzmiller case transcript is where he makes the assertion on the stand, and says no one has proved him wrong, and they break out like ten scientific papers that do exactly that... then force him to admit he hadn't bothered to read any of them. Laugh out load

The eye is such a useful organ that it seems to have evolved at least 40 times and possibly as many as 65 times according to scientists who have studied the issue. Ain't an evolutionary problem nor mystery.

http://redwood.berkeley.edu/vs265/landfernald92.pdf

Indeed.

It's one of my absolute favorite things that everyday Creationists tend to claim, in discussions of this sort. "What about the complexity of the eye!? Golly gee wiz it must be magic!" (They then usually misquote the intro to the part of Origin where Darwin explains that, in 1859, it seemed counter-intuitive to think the eye could evolve stepwise... leaving out the fact that he then goes on to explain exactly how it happened. And, as we now know, happened several times.)

At least Behe, with his bacterial flagellum and other DNA-related assembly questions, bothered to find an area that had not (yet) been demonstrated to be possible by steps from previously existing and functioning organisms. That it gave so many graduate students an area to focus on and thereby discover those steps, proving Behe wrong, warms my heart. Smile

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: