By a show of hands, I would want to know those who became atheists because it was present as attractive. I will count.
This christian tells us
- You can’t hope for a better future, it is determined
Loaded statement. Which future? A day in the near future when I am soaking in money? This I can hope for. A life after death, that doesn’t bother at all.
- You don’t love, it is a chemical side-effect
I would be willing to let the theist tell me what love is. What is the problem with it being a chemical effect or neural effect whichever it is? Food still tastes good and it involves neural transmitters and other things that I don’t know.
- Truth doesn’t exist
When asked what is truth, if he lived, Jesus didn’t know the answer. I am certain the atheist could have thought more about truth than the theist.
- Neither Good nor Evil exist because there is nothing you can judge it by to determine its goodness or evil
I don’t need a standard to judge that stupid is an evil.
- You can’t say R.I.P when a loved one dies
Why not, though it is unfortunate the person will not hear. But they are resting in peace.
- Nothing matters, because everything is matter
Things matter because at the end, everything is matter.
- There is no purpose beyond the purpose you pretend to have and make for yourself
It is not a pretend purpose.
The reason why theism is untenable, I submit, is because
it is not a logically justifiable position to hold.
No person with their senses intact can begin even to form an idea of an immaterial, incorporeal, eternal spirit that loves them. To believe it is purely a matter of accident and indoctrination. Any theist who argues atheism isn’t a logically justifiable position is ignorant of the meaning of logical. It is a travesty of logic to call theism, any theism logical.
Natural selection is the only game in town. The theist is free to offer different theories or disprove it. Until we have a better understanding, we shall hold it as provisionally being the best explanation there is.
If relativism means
that knowledge, truth, and morality exist in relation to culture, society, or historical context, and are not absolute.
I don’t see how one can claim it is not the case that it is a very logical position to hold. The bible still has in its pages the prohibition against suffering witches to live, but no one is killing witches anymore. If that is not example of morality existing in cultural and historical context, I don’t know which is.
Scientific theories are reworked as we get more data. Science tries to get to the best explanation of observed phenomena. As means of analysis improve so the theories. If you construe this as a weakness, you suffer from a problem of thinking that because something is ancient, it must be true.
The theist insist they have evidence for their god. We demand to see this evidence. It is not idiotic. If you have evidence, make it known.
Demanding a type of evidence of an immaterial entity that can only apply to the material world, is either devious or stupid, and either way leads to a rather pointless, unwinnable argument.
is to claim to know the entity is immaterial. We want to know how you arrived at this knowledge. Is it something told to you or read in a book? Do you have any reason to believe that such an entity can possibly exist.
When a theist writes
The vigour by which atheists deny the possibility of theism rightly or wrongly makes any objective person wonder if the reason for that vehemence is based on emotional considerations rather than pure logic. And that might be the reason they lie to themselves about what they really believe.
I think it is the case that they are projecting their fears and anxieties on the atheist.
But to then write
For else how do you explain the fact that their system of faith PRECLUDES the ability to know the truth, but they will still claim it as truth and deny the opposite as a lie?
is for me the height of stupidity. One can’t go below this even if they tried.
Enjoy your week everyone.