Apology to AR

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
David Killens's picture
Welcome back Jo.

Welcome back Jo.

An open exchange of opposing positions can be healthy, if both sides play by the rules. Neither side may not be able to sway the other, but it is still a healthy exercise for our brain cells.

Have you played by the rules? Have you openly and honestly responded to questions, or have there been any instances of evasion?

Jo's picture
@ David Killens

@ David Killens

I have not been evading anything.
Just not had the time to properly address it.

Cognostic's picture
@Jo: "I have not evaded

@Jo: "I have not evaded anything" Another fking lie. You have done nothing but evade, twist, turn, switch topics, and ignore posts you did not like. Your suppositions and positions are completely trashed by logic and reason and you simply ignore the FACTS and push on with your inane bullshit. What is really sad for people like you is that you come onto the site to push your bullshit agenda, and while you are incapable of learning a damn thing, lurkers and readers are all witnessing your utter and complete nonsense dragged into reality. While you are stuck with blinders over your eyes, you have actually aided many of your fellow theists to open their eyes with your utter nonsense.

Tin-Man's picture
@Jo Re: "@ David Killens - I

@Jo Re: "@ David Killens - I have not been evading anything."

...*COUGH-cough-cough-bullshit-cough-cough-COUGH*...

Sheldon's picture
"

Jo "I have not been evading anything.
Just not had the time to properly address it."

Nonsense Jo, you've posted the same claims using the same argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy, that no one an disprove a deity exists, again and again for months. Never once acknowledging that your claim is logically fallacious and therefore irrational, and even after that claiming your beliefs were based on evidence and logical argument, despite presenting no objective evidence, and offering no logical arguments.

That's evasion Jo....it's also dishonest, and where you and I parted company in your dishonest claim to be looking for debate or answers.

Your petulance in finally ignoring my objections is fooling no one, anymore than your faux apology, which was simply a dishonest accusation of bias against the atheists who use this forum.

Sheldon's picture
Jo "I think it is very

Jo "I think it is very unlikely either of us will change our mind on God."

Yes but for very different reasons. The atheists here set an open minded or unbiased standard for all beliefs, that sufficient objective evidence be demonstrated for them. Every atheist here would change their mind if anyone could demonstrate evidence for a deity comparable to established objective facts like evolution.

You and the other theists set a closed minded biased position for your belief in a deity, without a shred of objective evidence, but not for any other belief outside of your religious belief. As we have shown in my thread asking theists to offer beliefs they hold without any objective evidence, that form no part of their theistic belief, not one theist has been able to offer even one such belief, you included.

Your arguments as we have shown repeatedly, use the same logical fallacies and subjective rhetoric religious apologists always resort to. Though of course as we have seen, you dishonestly refuse to acknowledge these flaws and fallacies when they are pointed out again and again. That's not debate, that's preaching. Whatever your expectations of the result may or may not be.

Tin-Man's picture
@Jo Re: OP analogy

@Jo Re: OP analogy

Oooooo.... So close, but no cigar. Unlike your analogy, the AR site is not a private family home. And you are not a neighbor arriving uninvited to a private family party. Also, this is not a child's "birthday party" full of a bunch of young and inexperienced little kiddies eating cake and ice cream and playing innocent little kids games. In other words, unlike your analogy, in here you are not an adult "competing" with a bunch of children. With that in mind, based on various observations and the contents of your posts the past several months, one cannot help believing you arrived on this site with the misguided impression and delusions of grandeur that you would be the "adult who arrived at the children's party and beat their little asses at their own silly little games." Problem is, though, it is pretty damn tough when you realize those "children" are much better equipped and much more experienced than you are in "playing those games", and it can be pretty embarrassing when the adult gets his own ass spanked by a bunch of "kids". Now the adult who was trying to crash the party has to find a way out while still trying to save face. Good luck with that.

Sad part is, you still do not get it. Even after all of this time. You arrived here with your good manners and your "humble humility" under the guise of "seeking truth." But as others have already asked several times, what truth are you seeking? And even though we have told you our truth multiple times, you STILL end up asking the same questions and making the same inane remarks over and over when those truths we tell you do not fit all nice and neatly into your particular religious dogma. You have even AGREED with many of us about several different things we have told you that totally contradict your faith system. Yet you keep plugging away and trying to zip in from another angle in attempts to refute those things with which you agreed. Why? Why bother agreeing with somebody, when you know you are only going to try to find a way to counter what they told you in an attempt to prove them wrong? But THEN you go getting all butt-hurt when caught doing that and getting called out on it, causing you to fall back on playing the "Victim Card". If you are looking for respect around here (or anywhere else, for that matter) that is NOT the way to do things.

To reiterate what others have already said, the AR is a public site open to any and all people of any and all faiths (or non-faiths, as the case may be). Matter of fact, in general, we actually WELCOME theists coming onto the site who want to discuss their particular faith and maybe learn about atheism. "Come on in! The door is open!" When they enter, though, they better understand they are not dealing with a bunch of naive little inexperienced children who are playing cute games at a party. Sure, most of us love to goof off and have a good laugh or two. Laughter is a great thing. But when it comes down to the nitty gritty, this seemingly chaotic bunch of juvenile circus clowns can turn into a unified pack of vicious wolves at the snap of a finger when the scent of condescending attitudes and dishonest tactics are detected. (And it does not matter if it is from a theist or another atheist.) Otherwise, we like to have fun and help others whenever given a chance.

So, go if you want, Jo. Or, you can stay and maybe TRULY try to learn something. Totally up to you. Just be aware, though, I'm pretty sure your trying to save face while tucking your tail and running away is not fooling anybody here.

Cognostic's picture
@Tin: That was better than

@Tin: That was better than the post I was going to make. I started mine but ended up time deficient and so just decided to do it later. Now there is no obvious need.

Tin-Man's picture
@Cog Re: "That was better

@Cog Re: "That was better than the post I was going to make."

Thanks. I would say, "Great minds think alike." However, I don't know which of us would be more insulted... lol...

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@TM

@TM

Nothing more to add mate. Sadly I suspect our resident mendacious theist will use any second chances to attempt to push his agenda.
He wants to convert and lying is seen as a positive in his quest for affirmation from his church elders.

That is the saddest thing about Jo, he obviously trots back to his support group when his ignorance or weak arguments are exposed. They give him an assortment of answers and he returns to try the 'best fit'.

When Jo realises that they do not have his best interests at heart he may start unraveling the lies and inaccuracies he has swallowed. May that day be soon. I reckon despite Jo's defense of genocide, cruelty , racism etc there is a human in there somewhere crying for release.

IF not, he will probably be making the worst sort of headlines in 10 years or so.....

Jo's picture
@ Tin-Man

@ Tin-Man

"You arrived on this site with the misguided impression and delusions of grandeur that you would be the "adult who arrived at the children's party and beat their little asses at their own silly little games." Problem is, though, it is pretty damn tough when you realize those "children" are much better equipped and much more experienced than you are in "playing those games", and it can be pretty embarrassing when the adult gets his own ass spanked by a bunch of "kids". "

I never said nor meant that. Why did you read that into it?
In my story if anyone was a child it was me.
Everyone understands what is going on except for me.

Just to be clear, with a few examples.
When it comes to the history of Christianity, I am like a first year student, and Old man shouts is like a professor.
Nyarlathotep knows exponentially more than I do about math, and probably a bunch of other subjects.
Cals writing abilities make me feel like a near illiterate.
Yes, I have had lots of spankings on AR.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ Jo

@ Jo

When it comes to the history of Christianity, I am like a first year student, and Old man shouts is like a professor.

A very GRUMPY professor especially when his students appear to learn nothing and repeat third hand assertions as if they were true.....

Yes, I have had lots of spankings on AR.

Then modify your behaviour, there is no point in continuing the beatings if the behaviour does not change. It just causes unnecessary pain to everyone.

Tin-Man's picture
@Jo Re: "I never said nor

@Jo Re: "I never said nor meant that. Why did you read that into it?"

Jo, I do not know you personally, and I cannot read your mind. Therefore, I am able to draw conclusions about you based only on what you write and how you write it. As far as HOW you write, it is obvious you are educated and literate with a fairly good amount of sense and grammar skills. As far as WHAT you write, though... Well, let's just say there's room for improvement... *chuckle*... Please allow me to clarify something real quick....

Just so you know, I will be putting aside my usual asshole-ish sarcasm for a few moments in this post. In other words, what follows is meant to be sincere and serious. (Well, at least as sincere and serious as I can manage, at least... *crooked grin*...)The reasons for that are: 1. Despite everything, I am going out of my way to try to give you the benefit of the doubt.; 2. Even if you do not heed my words, there are untold numbers of "lurkers" who read these threads, so this will be as much (or more) for them as it is for you.; 3. I don't recall that you have been DIRECTLY rude or disrespectful during your time with us. Matter of fact, you have been considerably civil. So I am taking that into consideration as part of my evaluation. Anyway, for what it is worth, here's my two cents worth in regards to your claimed reason(s) for being here. Keep in mind, a few others have already mentioned a few of the things I am about to say, so if you have already heard some of these things, then you might want to consider there could be a reason for it...

If I recall correctly, you stated in the beginning that you were here to discuss atheism and search for truth. Excellent. Fine. We (atheists) actually enjoy theists folks joining us for just such things..... (As long as they are sincere and serious about doing so.) Now, on one hand, you started out okay. You are polite and courteous, you have good writing skills, and you were asking good questions and actually discussing/debating the topics. So far, so good. However, after a while, it got to the point you were asking the same questions over and over, despite having them answered for you consistently by several different atheists members. It has been as though you did not like the answers we were giving because they were totally countered to your faith, and you were trying your best to attack from different angles in hopes of getting different answers that made you feel better. And that same behavior has been gradually progressing up to the point of where we are now. Plus, as I have already mentioned, you have even AGREED with many of the answers we have given you, yet you STILL ask those same questions in varying manners as if trying to "trip somebody up" so that you can have an, "Ah-ha!' moment. Quite honestly, that can get pretty annoying after a bit. Jo, like it or not, 2+2=4, no matter how you ask the question.

Now, with that in mind, if you did not arrive here with the intention of "beating the children at their own game", then WHY are you really here? Because based on your questions and replies the past few months, it is becoming more and more difficult to believe you are hear looking to find any truth beyond what your particular faith commands you to believe. Hmmm.... Let me try this another way... I spent a vast majority of my life chained to a religion/faith in which I did not fully believe or even pretend to comprehend. But the constant fear of Satan and hell kept me locked in a perpetual state of Pascal's Wager. It has only been within the last couple of years that I was finally able to completely cut my ties and escape that suffocating fog that clouded my mind for so many decades. And ever since I made my escape, I have had zero desire nor need to go around "preaching" to others in an attempt to help them "see the light." Knowing the things I know now, "to each his own", as far as I am concerned. Sure, I feel a bit sad for some of those folks from time to time, and I do get angry about those who constantly try to force their particular variety of religion into our government. Otherwise, though, I am simply happy to finally have a clear and unburdened mind for once in my life, and I am more comfortable with my thoughts and views than I have ever been before. And I absolutely DO NOT visit theist sites in an effort to "discuss religion" or learn their particular version of "the truth." Bottom line is, with the exception of a lucky few, most atheists struggled long and hard to shake their religious indoctrination. Why the hell would we want to go back and visit it??? Besides, even if I tried, I can pretty much guarantee I would not last more than five minutes there, regardless of how polite and respectful I might be. So why waste my time?

On the other hand, you seem to be considerably confident in your particular faith, yet you arrive on an atheist site "seeking truth" and trying to understand atheism. Cool. Good. Honestly wish more theists would do the same. (Hell, for that matter, I wish I would have visited this site years ago. Honest fact is, though, is that I probably would not have been ready for it. But I digress...) Anyway, I do happen to think it is great that you are willing to hear "the other side of the story." Most theists would never dare do such a thing. For, as I was taught, to question anything about God or the bible is a BIG No-No. Yet, here you are, Jo. Questioning, digging, probing, even agreeing on a few points here and there. Nevertheless, despite everything we have told you over the past several months, it is as if you have either learned absolutely nothing... OR that you are intentionally sticking your fingers in your ears and going, "LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA!" because you do not like the answers we give (even though you do seem to agree with a few of them). So, once again, that begs the question of, "WHY ARE YOU REALLY HERE???"

Re: Nyar, Cali, and Old Man

Since you brought them up for some reason, I figured I would reply to it. Yes, Old Man could easily be a professor in the realm of the history of the bible. And Nyar knows more about math than just about anybody else on this site, and he sometimes makes me feel like I am lucky to be able to answer the simple math question to make a post without having to take off my shoes (most of the time). As for Cali... Geeez, dude. Who on here DOESN'T stand in awe at his writing skills and knowledge? So, what's your point? What has that got to do with the price of tea in China? Superb intellect is a great thing, for sure. But, for the most part, it pales in comparison to honesty and a sense of personal integrity. And being honest with yourself is even more important, in my humble opinion.

Randomhero1982's picture
How about an analogy from an

How about an analogy from an atheistic perspective, in regards to theists on this site...

You're having a house warming party, everyones getting alone and people are welcoming... all of a sudden, theres the distinctive sound of sirens and flashing lights illuminating the night sky.

The law has arrived... its Sheriff Righteous!

Say howdie to Sheriff Righteous, partners!

You open the door and greet the officer and ask him in for bite to eat and friendly conversation.

All is well at first, until he clearly has one to many whisky chasers and the real Sheriff Righteous comes out...

He straddles up to you and whispers, "those two ladies over there... are they..."

"Yes, they are gay, don't worry it's perfectly fine and natural!"

He whips out his gun, "hands up! Your under arrest for breaking the law!"

"What law?"

"THE LAWWWW!!!"

a collective reply of, "for fuck sake...." echoes around the room as the couple are escorted out.

The party continues...

The sheriff catches you again, "I've just had to arrest that native american guy eating the little cubes of cheese on sticks in the kitchen, sorry!"

"What the fuck for?"

Righteous replies, "well... you know his kind, always breaking the law!"

"What law!"

He responds, "THE LAWWWWWW!!!!!!"

"Can you show me these laws? And who the hell made them?

"These laws are already within you, ya'll just need to feel it and accept it in your heart!" He replies.

"Errr... no, that's bollocks!"

"Do you like closed spaces?" He responds.

Hmmm...

The party goes on in deathly silence!

The sheriff announces he is to leave, greeted by a collective sigh of relief...

Just then you see your cousin coming to the door, who is an expert in evolutionary biology...

"Ohhh fuck no!!!!"

You command your friends to distract the sheriff with a set of shiney keys whilst getting rid of your relative, whilst diving out of the door like Bruce Willis in a die hard film.

Finally all calms and Sheriff Righteous is about to leave, your son walks down the stairs, asking if we can watch Carl Sagan's Cosmos again.

You here the revolver cocked back....

Cognostic's picture
Jo: You could not be more

Jo: You could not be more wrong. We have students from apologetic classes stop in here all the time. We have people that want to discuss information honestly all the time. People are treated with complete respect. You need to learn when you are wrong and to stop repeating the same stupid shit over and over and over. You need to learn what a fact is and what constitutes an unfounded groundless assertion. You need to know when you have overstated your position and honestly admit it. You don't get points on this site for stubbornly hanging onto ignorance, avoiding being cornered, or changing the subject so you don't have to deal with facts.
There is not an atheist on the site what will not have an honest discussion with you, but you have to reciprocate the honesty and stop the apologetic bullshit.

Sheldon's picture
Cognostic "You need to

Cognostic "You need to learn when you are wrong and to stop repeating the same stupid shit over and over and over. You need to learn what a fact is and what constitutes an unfounded groundless assertion."

To be fair to Jo, you've just asked him to stop believing in unevidenced superstition.

I genuinely dont think he is capable of objective critical examination of his religious beliefs. However he can fucking Google common logical fallacy, and argumentum ad ignorantiam, and therefore his continuing claim that his beliefs are supported by logic, and that his religious belief has parity with disbelief (atheism) because no one can "prove" a deity doesn't exist, is quite clearly deliberate mendacity. As of course were his list of "atheist claims" in my thread asking theists to list ten objectively moral acts, or any beliefs they held without any objective evidence, but that formed no part of their religious beliefs. When asked to link posts where atheists had made those claims he couldn't provide a single one. In short he made something up that wasn't true, and two of them he falsely assigned to me. I detest mendacity and called him on it, and he still refuses to even acknowledge the lie....even now.

I'm not impressed by the underlying dishonesty in his "apology" either, I must say. Which doesn't seem much like an apology for his dishonesty, as it does an accusation of bias against this forum...

Jo "I joined AR.
It is a site FOR Atheists. Others can ask a question or post a comment.
But it is not intended for others to camp out in and join every conversation..."

Hmmm, QED...

He hasn't been censured for camping out on here, but because he rehashed the same logical fallacy almost every time he posted, "you can't disprove a deity exists, so belief is logically a 50/50 premise." This is the very definition of an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy.

Because atheism isn't a claim that a deity doesn't exist, nor is it the belief a deity doesn't exist. And it is that dishonesty he has also rehashed again and again...

I dont leap on theists who make these fallacious claims, even though they could simply read the existing threads and see they're fallacious. However, when the same theists repeats that fallacy again and again, ignoring the explanation of that fallacy, then I get a trifle miffed...and when inevitably they're accused of being dishonest the fur starts to fly, as it were...

If you can demonstrate no objective evidence for your version of your chosen deity, then how does your belief carry any more credence than any other completely unevidenced belief that is supported by naught but unevidenced anecdotal claims?

Zeus anybody? Not as absurd as you might think, apparently Thor is making a small resurgence in some countries that are overwhelmingly secular. The adherents talked of spiritual experiences that underpinned their beliefs, but they couldn't accurately explain them, and of course could demonstrate no objective evidence, even laughed at the idea.....sound familiar Jo?

Tin-Man's picture
Poor ol' Jo...

Poor ol' Jo...

(Courtesy of Sir Elton)

What have I got to do to make you want me
What have I got to do to be heard
What do I say when it's all over?
And sorry seems to be the hardest word

It's sad, so sad (so sad)
It's a sad, sad situation
And it's getting more and more absurd
It's sad, so sad (so sad)
Why can't we talk it over?
Oh it seems to me
That sorry seems to be the hardest word

Cognostic's picture
@Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla

@Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla whiny posts bla bla bla bla bla bla bla over and over again bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla never learns bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla waste of time bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla, inane comments. Bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla repititious bullshit bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla read a book bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla...

Nyarlathotep's picture
Jo - When I told them I was a

Jo - When I told them I was a neighbor they sometimes had a puzzled look.

I wonder what kind of looks they would have given you if you had given cultural excuses for genocide, while simultaneously rejecting cultural relativism?

Sheldon's picture
How does Jo know all the

How does Jo know all the thousands of deities he disbelieve exist, are not real?

In fact how is his deity objectively different to Zeus? Beyond being currently in vogue amongst a minority of the worlds population that is?

Simon Moon's picture
@JO

@JO

Please compare this statement to yours, and see if it sounds reasonable.
“The vast majority of theists are such, because anti-theists have failed to meet their burden of proof.”

Have those who claim there is no God been able to supply you with demonstrable and falsifiable evidence?
Can what you are requesting be provided, or are you making untenable and illogical requirements?
Are you saying that you will believe, when belief is no longer required? Is that logical?
Have you created a schema that gives you the answer you want?

This is all just an dishonest way to shirk your burden of proof.

Atheism is NOT the claim that a god or gods do not exist. Atheism is the disbelief in theists claims that gods DO exist.

I am not responsible for proving your claim that a god exists, false. I am simply unconvinced that your claim that a god exists is true. I have no burden of proof.

Yes, there are some atheists that DO make the claim that gods do not exist. That is a claim that does have it's own burden of proof.

While asking for those who make a claim to meet the burden of proof is a great technique that can win most arguments, does it answer the question? Is it at best, not even half an answer?

Yes, when it comes to existential claims, it is the single best method for discerning fact from fantasy. If those making an existential claim are unable to meet their burden of proof, disbelieving their claim is the most rational position to hold.

It is a method not meant to 'win arguments', it is meant to prevent one from being gullible and credulous.

Is a passive position of waiting for others to supply you with evidence that you will deem sufficient, the way to answer the question? Is that how you answer other important question in life?

I used to be a theist. I used to believe I had good reasons for my theistic beliefs. It turned out, the evidence was drastically insufficient to support the god claim. I have read the Bible several times while I was still a believer, and after I became an atheist. I also read the Quran and some of the Vedas, I've read dozens of apologetics books, attended lectures, watched many videos by the best apologists in the world. Their so called evidence and logical arguments are ALL flawed. And yes, I prayed sincerely for years before I became a nonbeliever.

I am far from passive.

What else do you suggest I do to be less 'passive'?

Simon Moon's picture
@Jo

@Jo

They ask for demonstrable, scientific, or falsifiable evidence.
When they do that they are making a claim. (see Simon Moons questions a few posts back)
That those could be provided.
They are asking for a type of evidence that cannot be provided.
Then using that lack of evidence as proof.

I am not making the claim that those types of evidence (demonstrable, empirical, and falsifiable evidence) can be provided. But without them, there is no rational reasons to believe the claims.

My positions is, without those types of evidence, WHY should I believe the claim?

Is it our fault that theist's god claims do not meet a fairly low bar for standards of evidence? If you admit that those types of evidence for the existence of a god can not be provided, you are admitting that your god beliefs are irrational and unwarranted.

As someone else asked you, name one other belief that you hold, based on the same lack of evidence you have for your god beliefs.

I am willing to bet, that you reject belief in at least some of the following claims, for the exact same reasons (lack of demonstrable evidence) we reject your claim that a god exists: alien abductions, homeopathy, bigfoot, Loch Ness monster, tarot card reading, horoscopes, chupacabra, crystal healing, all the other gods besides the one you believe exists, etc, etc.

Am I right?

Jo's picture
@ Simon Moon

@ Simon Moon

Thank you for your response.
I only have time right now for a brief response on one area.
I will get to the rest later.

"Am I right?"
No, that is not how I reject those claims.
We could drain the Loch Ness and prove there is no monster.
I am 100% certain there is no Big Foot in the room I am in.
I could prove it.

However,
I cannot prove that God is in my room right now, but I believe it.
You cannot prove God is not in my room right now, but you believe it.

Do you see the difference in reasoning between big foot and God?

You have arrived at your beliefs about God in the same way I have?
Although very different conclusions.

Cognostic's picture
@Jo: Once again you display

@Jo: Once again you display your ignorance and "all or nothing" "black and white" thinking.
You said, "I am 100% certain there is no Big Foot in the room I am in. I could prove it."

No you can not prove it. You have missed this point a thousand times now. Belief is allocated to the degree of evidence. I happen to know for a fact that there is a Bigfoot in your room. He has been right there leaning over you shoulder while you have made each and every post. We all know it. We can see his influence in the text you are sending. It was him that had you select "Bigfoot" instead of "Santa." Bigfoot is as real as your version of god. He is invisible, non-corporal, magical, and able to influence your life without you knowing it. He grants wishes and prayers to the loyal and if you believe in him, you can get naked and run in the mountains with him after you die. (You do not understand the word "PROVE.") You have not grasped it from day one as you engaged in your black and white fallacy bullshit and you do not grasp it now.

There is no difference between Bigfoot in your room and god. NONE. The only person that has made a conclusion, THE ONLY PERSON ENGAGED IN A BLACK AND WHITE FALLACY, is you. You insist there is no Bigfoot in your room and assert you can prove it WHEN obviously and realistically YOU CAN NOT!

You are engaged in all or nothing thinking. Once again attempting to shift the burden of proof to the atheist position and setting up a straw-man by asserting we have come to a different conclusion regarding God. How many times are you going to drag out the same fucking bullshit only to be told you are "WRONG" once again.

Simon Moon's picture
@Jo

@Jo

No, that is not how I reject those claims.
We could drain the Loch Ness and prove there is no monster.
I am 100% certain there is no Big Foot in the room I am in.
I could prove it.

Thanks for proving my point.
What you are doing there is disbelieving because there is no evidence.

Hell, you even came up with good method to prove there is no Loch Ness monster and Bigfoot. Are you 100% certain there is no invisible, transcendental Bigfoot in your room right now?

However,
I cannot prove that God is in my room right now, but I believe it.
You cannot prove God is not in my room right now, but you believe it.

I don't care what you believe, I care why you believe it. If you have good, evidence based, logical reasons for your belief, I want to know about it.

The "why" is the important part.

You cannot prove God is not in my room right now, but you believe it.

How dense are you? Or are you just dishonest? I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this has been explained to you countless times.

Again, it is not up to us to prove there is no god in your room right now. You are the one making the claim, that there is a god in your room.

Yes, I disbelieve your claim that there is a god in your room. I base this belief on your (and every other theist) inability to demonstrate your belief is rational and evident.My disbelief in your claim is not dogmatic. I am opened to being convinced my disbelief is unjustified.

Now, if you can provide good reasons WHY you believe a god exists, I will be forced by my intellectual honesty (a term you should understand and aspire to) accept your claim.

Sheldon's picture
@Jo

@Jo

Do you believe in invisible fairies Jo? How do you disprove those? How about the other deities you disbelieve in, how do you disprove those exactly, there are literally thousands. If all you have is an arbitrary subjective experience you claim evidences your own deity, then your deity is no more real than the rest, hence your belief is demonstrably biased, but atheists are being objective by definition.

Sheldon's picture
@Jo

@Jo

To recap on your failure in this "debate". I will use bullet points for you to accurately and honestly address.

1) You can demonstrate no objectivece evidence for any deity. Thus your deity is indistinguishable from all the others, and of course from a non existent being.
2) You have repeatedly and dishonestly distorted #1 using an argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy demanding a position of non belief evidence the non existence of a deity, a deity you can neither evidence nor accurately define.
3) You can't offer a single belief outside of your religious beliefs, that you hold without objective evidence.
4) When asked to falsify other non existent things like mermaids or unicorns, or even other deities, as you demand atheists do for your deity, you dishonestly ignore the request.
5) You dishonestly refuse to acknowledge that a belief is the affirmation of a claim, whereas the lack of it is not a contrary claim. A simple epistemological fact. Again do you believe in fairies, if not can you present your evidence for their non existence?
6) You have dishonestly and repeatedly implied bias from atheists who set an objective standard for ALL beliefs, while you set one arbitrary exception for your theistic belief, and again dishonestly refuse to acknowledge this when it is repeatedly pointed out.

That'll do for now, feel free to add to this list if I've omitted anything.

Simon Moon's picture
5) You dishonestly refuse to

5) You dishonestly refuse to acknowledge that a belief is the affirmation of a claim, whereas the lack of it is not a contrary claim. A simple epistemological fact.

This seems to be one of the most difficult things to get theists to understand.

The 'jury' analogy sometimes gets the point across, but not always.

Cognostic's picture
@Jo: RE: " You dishonestly

@Jo: RE: " You dishonestly refuse to acknowledge that a belief is the affirmation of a claim, whereas the lack of it is not a contrary claim. A simple epistemological fact."

Odd or Even Gumball / star / sands on a beach analogy. Jury Analogy. Bear Cave Analogy. NOTHING SINKS IN. IT IS THE SAME REPETITIOUS BULLSHIT, over and over and over, since day one. Jo is simply pulling everyone's chain and has no honest intent in learning a damn thing. I am half convinced that he is an atheist pretending to be a Christian as it is really difficult to believe any theist is as dense as Jo pretends to be.

Pages

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.