why do you not believe in God?

373 posts / 0 new
Last post
arakish's picture
I am always willing to admit

I am always willing to admit to when I am wrong. Thanks for accepting.


Randomhero1982's picture
I haven't been on here as

I haven't been on here as long as most of you but there is a distinct trend of theist, believers, religiously minded people... whatever way they wish to describe themselves, that come on here and play the same boring games over and over again.

All they have are the standard arguments, like Kalam, contingency.... etc...

So this is what their precious beliefs have boiled down to... logical arguments.

That's it pretty much, and it's a shame.

Creationists are the very epitmy of the word 'dipshits' but at least they have a go.

But not this fallacy screeching new mob, no sir!

Its a case of where scientific knowledge ends (and not where the universe actually begins, if it indeed had a beginning)...That's where they slide in their little gambit.

Can you demonstrate a causal link to it... well no, because it's outside of the natural world.

So it's ok to build these entire arguments on the findings of science and naturalism, but when they slide in their repertoire of utter bollocks, they then refuse to play by the same rules.

So disappointing.

Cognostic's picture
Yes honey, Real atheists are

Yes honey, Real atheists are real things. Just like your bicycle which is a real thing too. You should not twist around on your bicycle. Whether or not atheists have "faith" in anything depends on your definition of faith. If you are using the biblical definition "Faith is justification for truth." then of course you are correct. Typically atheists are critical thinkers and require facts and evidence before believing in a proposition. And of course belief is allocated to the degree of proof. For example. I believe I will get lucky if I swing by your neighborhood. I do not believe this on faith but on past experience. I might have faith that I will get lucky at the local bowling ally; however, this is not based on any information at all and so I have no idea at all if my faith is justified. Faith without facts is unjustified. Faith itself is evidence of nothing. You be good now and don't upset the mean atheists too much.

Sheldon's picture
Wed, 12/19/2018 - 10:53

Wed, 12/19/2018 - 10:53 (Reply to #137)

"You are trying to con ME by repeating yourself. Again, it's illogical to demand physical evidence for non-physical things. It's like demanding to see a married bachelor."

Obviously that's because married bachelors don't exist, so a very good analogy for once.

Sapporo's picture
JazzTheist: The

JazzTheist: The philosophically necessary first cause

What utter nonsense.

Spectre of Marxism's picture
Because the God I assume you

Because the God I assume you speak of hasn't given any reason for us to believe in him, let alone that he has our best interests in mind, and factoring him into our understanding of the universe complicates, not simplifies, things. "God" (and his attributes) quickly becomes one among many philosophical queries which, while interesting, thought-provoking and entertaining, leads to no practical knowledge of the world and remains an unknowable.

Tin-Man's picture
Very nicely put, Spectre...

Very nicely put, Spectre... *thumbs up*...

Sheldon's picture
Very well put, I must say.

Very well put, I must say.

arakish's picture
I always see this thread with

I always see this thread with many new posts but never see them. I know this thread has gotten to be 12+ pages, and when the first page is the one with a few new posts, I just skip to the last page and never all the other new ones in between. If only there were a better to find the new posts without having to go through every last page of old posts.


Tin-Man's picture


Yeah, I've pretty much just stopped trying to find them at this point. This thread has gotten waaaaay too bulky. Not worth the time now to sift through all these pages just to find three or four scattered posts. Speaking of which....

Small announcement: If anybody has recently responded to any of my posts in this thread, my apologies if I have not replied. I've given up trying to keep up with all the dozens of separate discussions in here. Too difficult to find individual posts. Moving on to other threads now.

arakish's picture
@ Tin-Man

@ Tin-Man

To be honest, I have not noticed whether you have responded or not. Same reason. I see the first few new posts, then skip. Not worried whether you have responded or not.


Grinseed's picture
I know this thread has lost

I know this thread has lost appeal but just to add a little balance to the reincarnation claims made in this post concerning Dr Tucker, and the little boy, James Leininger, who supposedly died as a US pilot in WWII, I offer the small contribution of doing a little bit of research.

Dr Jim Tucker, author of the book referred to, (from Wikipedia)
"Though raised as a Southern Baptist, Tucker does not subscribe to any particular religion, and claims to be sceptical about reincarnation, but sees it as providing the best explanation for phenomena associated with the strongest cases investigated to date."
However he seems to think there is a quantum explanation for the transfer of memory at point of death, and not the eternal existence of souls or spirits.

Carol Bowman, the counsellor from whom the Leingingers sort help for their little boy, has built a lucrative career out of the belief in reincarnation. She cannot be regarded as an uninterested investigator, seeking only the truth of the matter.

Robert Todd Carroll, the US sceptic, referred to Bowman's work in reincarnation as being the study of "firsthand testimony to ignorance of science, to gullibility and, above all, to wishful thinking."

Professor Christopher C. French, professor of psychology, University of London, has said reincarnation is "an intriguing psychological phenomenon, but I think it is far more likely that such apparent memories are, in fact, false memories rather than accurate memories of events that were experience in a past life."
And also "The problem with Dr Tucker's research is that the research typically begins long after the child has been accepted as a genuine reincarnation by his or her family and friends."

Of James Leininger he says, "Although his parents insisted they never watched World War II documentaries or talked about military history we do know that at 18 months of age, James was taken to a flight museum where he was fascinated by the World War II planes. (and his parents claimed they never talked about it). In all probability, the additional details were unintentionally implanted by his parents and by a counsellor (Bowman) who was a firm believer in reincarnation."

So its not just us wilfully ignorant atheists who discount reincarnation, there are scientists, doctors and researchers who cannot accept the unreliable testimonies, anecdotal claims and wishful thinking of people hoping for things they want to be true, to be actual evidence of their claims.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.