Why do atheists only say God doesn't exist? Why not Satan?
Donating = Loving
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.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
killing someone is not moral.
Why then do you worship a being that you believe kills people?
What's so bad about that?
Then that means either Abraham was knowingly immoral because god told him to, or he wasn't being tested.
So your God is not moral. All he does is kill children, mothers, babies, the elderly and even livestock throughout the entire bible. Could your god not have found any other way do deal with people? "The King will not set the Jews free. What shall I do? I know, kill every first born child. Send plagues to kill the rest. That will show that stupid king." Your God is a fucking idiot.
What God did was a good idea.
"Again, what makes you still think killing is bad?"
Are you saying you only think murdering a child is bad because you are told it is? That's obscene, I suppose that's why Abraham was content to eviscerate his own child, then burn the body as a sacrifice when the voices in his head told him to. That's not morality, even "good" Nazis managed to do as they were told.
Theistic morality, was there ever a more obvious oxymoron.
"It is interesting, read it at least like a fairytale"
Because it is a fairytale?
What else would you say to a kid who won't believe in the word to convince him to read it?
This forum is adults, unless you choose to be the infant in the room.
Your tactics are patently obvious to me, including talking down to those who pose challenging questions, as if they are children. You are fostering an unhealthy climate for debate. Grow up, stop acting like a dork, or else you will be treated as an immature mind.
Cool, I never knew I was using a tactic.
To be fair David never implied you were fully aware of your behaviour. You have from the start though been a condescending prat. Don't feel too bad, it is pretty typical of the apologists that breeze through here.
ALL religious texts are nothing more than fairy tales.
That depends on the reader
And whether they suffer from delusion/brainwashing.
True enough, if the reader is objective they are demonstrably fairy tales, if on the other hand the reader is suggestible, gullible, and superstitious, then they find it easier to convince themselves those fairy tales are profound. They remain fairy tales though.
How unfortunate for us: "Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever." Hebrews 14:8 Jesus never changes.
Thank you, you got that right. Your spelling of 'unfortunate' however should be fortunate.
No. The spelling is correct and clearly demonstrates you don't have a frigging clue.
You sure? Seems to me he changed from a Living Evangalizing Prophet to Magic Zombie Virgin...
You mean................................. (sniff sniff) ..................................... the Bible is wrong? FFS Imagine That!
"Why do atheists only say God doesn't exist? Why not Satan?"
I have literally never heard an atheist say this, never. Also the bible is filled with stories claiming a deity shows himself to people, so your claim he wouldn't do this to an atheist directly contradicts the bible. I would not "inevitably believe in the spiritual realm" or god, if I thought I saw "an angel or a devil or God", though I'd probably seek the help of a psychiatrist. I don't believe Satan is any more real than any deity.
To summarise, your post is just a string of unevidenced assertions. Theists make these claims on here often, and elsewhere, they're not remotely compelling.
"So, we are probably being deceived people!"
Probably by religions, that are using archaic superstitions to try and control gullible people.
"I think I saw..." and "I saw" are two different things, if you see something, you won't go to a psychiatrist, but if you think you saw something, you would.
Anyway, my post is just a string of evidenced assertions. It is not a claim. Lets put it like this, I once said that there's nothing such as rain, but, since I'm under the rain, I am compelled to believe that there's rain.
I agree that religions are using archaic superstition to try and control gullible people, but I ain't talking about religion, I am talking about God.
Semantics, believing that one saw something doesn't objectively validate the belief. It's axiomatic that our senses are easily deceived, even when we anticipate it, and any magic show can confirm this.
I have no idea what your second paragraph means, or how it is apposite to my post or the OP?
"I ain't talking about religion, I am talking about God."
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
The two definitions are inextricably linked.
Also, you have still not demonstrated any objective evidence that a deity exists. The fact you recognise religions as duplicitous doesn't add weight to theistic beliefs, quite the opposite I'd say. Until you do properly evidence your belifs, I'm unable to understand why you believe a deity or anything supernatural exists, and I certainly won't believe in any deity exists without proper evidence, as it is a fact that humans have created fictional deities throughout human history.
Religion is man-made. God is not a belief.
A belief that the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides.
That sounds funny, isn't it?
About the evidence, read my comment on xenophiew's assertion
But Pythagorean's Theorem can be proven. Reference:
for multiple proofs.
Can you provide proofs on your claims?
I have already provided it, in one of your assertions, it's the picture with the one eyed guy
You have not proven anything. Just because you make an assertion, that does not make it true.
Your above assertion may not be true too, you need to prove it. (A kind of contradiction)
The burden of proof is yours to provide, not mine to disprove.