why do you not believe in God?

430 posts / 0 new
Last post
JazzTheist's picture
You’re basically saying that

You’re basically saying that the world wasn’t built because it wasn’t built. You see how that doesn’t work?

arakish's picture
JazzTheist: "You’re basically

JazzTheist: "You’re basically saying that the world wasn’t built because it wasn’t built. You see how that doesn’t work?"

Just like a Religious Absolutist. Lying about what others actually say.

The Elfin Goddess, who lives with me in my house, Lysantra Erisa Tinathis Yeraheshmiël created the universe. Prove me wrong.


SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
Purpose is defined by the

Purpose is defined by the human mind. Not the divinity that you believe in.

JazzTheist's picture
I see where this is going. So

I see where this is going. So, do you agree that consciousness is no different than any other natural phenomena (e.g. snowflakes and stellar formation)?

If so, then your definition of purpose is no more valid than how a rock defines its purpose.

David Killens's picture


"If so, then your definition of purpose is no more valid than how a rock defines its purpose."

I use my rock as a door stop.

SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
You are changing the subject

I never defined purpose. I said humans define what they interpret as purpose. You are changing the subject completely and it's getting pretty annoying. If you can't stay on topic let's end this now.

JazzTheist's picture
How in the world am I

How in the world am I changing the topic?

Sheldon's picture
"do you agree that

"do you agree that consciousness is no different than any other natural phenomena "

No, that doesn't stop it being an entirely natural phenomena though. Apples differ from kangaroos, but they are both natural phenomena.

"then your definition of purpose is no more valid than how a rock defines its purpose."

Except a rock can neither possess purpose or define it, you're analogies are becoming more erroneous as they get more desperate.

What objective evidence can you demonstrate that anything more than the natural or material is required fro consciousness? Both the material and consciousness exist as objective facts, if you are going to add something then this carries a burden of proof. Without such evidence Occam's razor applies and your assumption must be removed.

algebe's picture
@JazzTheist: I’m asking why

@JazzTheist: I’m asking why it was built.

That's why I asked you to define "reason". You're conflating cause with purpose. That's the real non sequitur here. Does the Earth exist because of accretion of debris around a new star, or because god wanted a place for humanity to live? Which "because" are you talking about.

algebe's picture
@JazzTheist: Again, you are

@JazzTheist: Again, you are confusing how questions with why questions

What's confusing me is your failure to indicate whose post you're responding to.

Randomhero1982's picture
Donald Trump

And guys like you made me a theist. Prove to me that things somehow can exist without a reason

Donald Trump

arakish's picture
@ JazzTheist

@ JazzTheist

This one is going to be quite long. Hell. In just five hours this morning, this thread jumped from 0 new posts to almost 70 new posts. That is a lot to catch up on...

JazzTheist: "Tin-man certainly does not."

He most certainly does.

Tin-Man: "... *loudly bashes open door*... *walks into room dragging large mangled carcass of unidentified animal*... *drops bloody carcass in middle of room*... *kneels down beside carcass*... *grunting while using teeth to tear large chunk of meat from carcass*... *rises up wiith bloody face and shredded hunk of meat dandling from mouth*.... *looks around room and notices everybody staring in disbelief*... *discretely reaches down to make sure fly is zipped up*... *look of realization crosses face*.... *spits out hunk of meat*.... Oh, I'm sorry. Silly me. Where are my manners? Please, everybody, help yourselves... *gestures to carcass*... Plenty to go around."

See? Perfectly civilized. We all forget our manners at one time or another...

JazzTheist: "Well, not me."

ALL Religious Absolutists are nothing more than barbaric, vicious, immoral savages who worship the Anti-Life.

Hereafter, I am going to touch on only parts of your idiocy. As said, this thread jumped from 0 to 70 new posts in just five hours. I may not even get through them all.

JazzTheist: "Citing Arakish — "Please provide objective hard empirical evidence......there is no 'thing' other than natural explanations for everything."

I used to believe the exact same line of reasoning until I realized some flaws in the methodology."

Seriously doubt that. One can only achieve the level of self-inflicted mental retardation you possess by having NEVER walking the True Path to the True Truth.

Your first thought experiment is a huge pile of horse hoowhee. I would tell you to go back and re-read it while also using critical thinking, but Religious Absolutists cannot think for themselves.

Did you know you really show off your stupidity and mental retardation by not being able to punctuate correctly? Go back to First Grade and do not skip classes this time.

JazzTheist: Here's another thought experiment: scientists discover a pattern in the DNA of every human which looked like some kind of autograph. The pattern is decoded to say, "I am God. I made this."

First of all, no such horse hoowhee would ever happen. It would have already done so. Ever heard of Project Genome?

"See," I say, "God is real!"

Provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, else The Six Razors. ***SUPER SLASH!*** ***then a shovel to throw the bullshit back***

"No," you say, "that would be invoking the supernatural."

Supernatural does not exist because there is no OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE to prove it does exist. Absolutely NONE!

You've probably noticed what I'm talking about. When the methodology of your worldview strictly excludes any possibility of other worldviews being right, then...I dunno, it doesn't sound logical to me.

I does when the only thing others can provide is a bunch of idiotic, asinine, retarded, inane, presupposed assumptions about a bunch of bullshit and horse hoowhee.

Either provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, or admit you are full of shit.

JazzTheist: "So you're against using thought experiments altogether, am I wrong?"

Yes. They are nothing more than fantasies. Also called "Whataboutism."

JazzTheist: "No no no. I'm sorry I didn't make it clear. I was refering to polytheism (and it's kins), where gods are invented just to explain how certain phenomena work."

Aren't you doing the same stupid retarded bullshit?

JazzTheist: "I don't subscribe to naturalism. I subscribe to classical theism. "Why" is different than "how." Existence needs a source. The source of all existence is the first cause. Consciousness exists; so not only is the first cause conscious, it must know everything that there is to know in order to allow consciousness to exist."

Either provide OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE, or admit you are full of shit.

JazzTheist: "I didn't disclose my religion because you'd likely turn it all into a non sequitor mess and a Bible-bashing contest."

I don't need to bash the Bible. It bashes itself. God's Nastiest Turd.

JazzTheist: "Yeah; I assume you'd have had researched the topic thoroughly before deciding that there's no God."

Yep. I did. And I thoroughly still do not believe your bullshit claims of your the Sky Faerie, Magic Lich Virgin, and Rather Comedic Spook.

JazzTheist: "Atheists often make the error of confusing how questions with why questions. For example, I may ask why does anything exists at all, and you'd throw in cosmological theories which don't quite answer the question."

I would not. First I would ask you to back up your preposterous claim with OBJECTIVE HARD EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE. Otherwise, I would have nothing to prove to you. Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit non ei qui negat.

JazzTheist: "Illogical question. The first cause, by definition, doesn't need a cause to it. Just like how a perfect sphere can't be more spherical than it."

It is not illogical when one considers the problem of "infinite regression." Which, by the way, DOES exist.

JazzTheist: "Ever heard of the dead sea scrolls? It's the original Hebrew manuscript of the Old Testament. And guess how similar it is to the modern version of the Old Testament? 95%. That's right."

Actually, as time has gone by and more studies have been done, that accuracy percentage has been dropping. Seems you "Christians" are doing nothing but continuing to lie about everything ever since your first inception in the 2nd century CE. And please explain this. Why are there older copies of the Old Testament, many hundreds of years older, written in other languages?

JazzTheist: "And to demonstrate the validity of the New Testament, let's compare it with the texts of another religion: Confucianism."

Talk about being confused. What the hell does Confucianism have to do with the New Testament? And you seem to forget that Confucianism has many thousands of pages of original documentation. The New Testament is only a few hundred at best. Oops...

JazzTheist: "I didn't say Abrahamic religions WERE the only ones that believe in God. What's more, Zoroastrianism isn't quote monotheistic."

Neither is Christianity. Islam is the only truly monotheistic bullshit racket out there. There is only Allah. With Christianity, you have three deities: the Sky Faerie, the Magic Lich Virgin, and the Rather Comedic Spook. Genesis 1:26 – "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And you can spew that 3 in 1 bullshit and horse hoowhee all you want. Christianity and Judaeism is based on three deities: the Sky Faerie, the Magic Lich Virgin, and the Rather Comedic Spook.

OK. I got tired of reading his bullshit and horse hoowhee after the third page.


JazzTheist's picture
You keep insist the I’m

You keep insist the I’m somehow Breezy’s sock pocket. Do you have any evidence? Or do you just resort to faith?

By the same reasoning I can insist that you’re a four-dimensional tree-monkey; and I’d be right by your standards.

Admit that you’re either deliberately dishonest or hypocritical.

Tin-Man's picture


Well, even if you are not Breezy's sock puppet, you most certainly do act like you are SOMEBODY'S sock puppet.

LogicFTW's picture
I kind of like "sock pocket."

I kind of like "sock pocket."

It makes me laugh. I gotta find a way to somehow use that.

A pocket.. for socks... GENIUS! Now I can carry around an extra pair of socks in a special pocket just for socks!



▮          I am an atheist that always likes a good debate.          ▮
▮   Please include @LogicFTW in responses directed to me.    ▮
▮        Useful list on forum usage. A.R. Member since 2016.      ▮

arakish's picture
And another apology for

And another apology for assuming you were Breezy making another sock puppet. I have been trying to edit my posts. However, working while perusing these boards makes it difficult. But I am trying.

Again, sorry for the accusation.


Nyarlathotep's picture
Everyone needs to stop using

E̶v̶e̶r̶y̶o̶n̶e̶ ̶n̶e̶e̶d̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶s̶t̶o̶p̶ ̶u̶s̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶"̶g̶i̶r̶l̶"̶ ̶a̶s̶ ̶a̶n̶ ̶i̶n̶s̶u̶l̶t̶.̶

From a moderator: do not use "girl" as a derogatory term on this forum.

TheBlindWatchmaker's picture
This is refreshing to see,

This is refreshing to see, thank you.

Meepwned's picture
"Everyone needs to stop using

"From a moderator: do not use "girl" as a derogatory term on this forum."

Agreed. Anything directly related to gender or biological sex should not be used as an insult. Doing so only teaches yourself and others to look down upon certain segments of society for being different in ways that are beyond their control.

I see it as a cruel leftover from the past, when discriminatory behavior was expected and applauded.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Heh, thanks; sorry about the

Heh, thanks; sorry about the edit.

arakish's picture
I must be dense. Or, I just

I must be dense. Or, I just never see "girl" as a pejorative. I do not recall seeing girl used as a pejorative. And if I did use it in what seemed to be a pejorative, then I formally apologize. Where I grew up and came from, woman, lady, girl were all synonymous. Just like guy, dude, man, boy.

Again, I apologize if my usage was seen as a pejorative. I'll try harder.

I am sorry for any offense.


Nyarlathotep's picture
I don't remember you doing it

I don't remember you doing it arakish.

And for what it is worth, it is easy to do. We pick up language from other people and many people use it that way. I wouldn't be surprised if someone dug through these forums deep enough, they could probably find an example of me doing it.

arakish's picture
Ain't that the truth. A good

Ain't that the truth. A good example of JazzTheist misinterpreting something I wrote when I said "you are full of bullshit" he took it as an ad hominem. In actuality, if you are capable of critical thinking, you can actually see I mean "your idea are bullshit." Just that where I grew up and came from, the slang term is "you are full of bullshit."


JazzTheist's picture
Since even someone like you

Since even someone like you apologized, I’ll apologize too. Guess it’s better for me to not respond to ad hominem attacks.

Cognostic's picture
Nevertheless, if someone does

Nevertheless, if someone does not like being called girl.... or boy..... (I'm guilty of "boy') and you are asked to stop, it only makes sense to do so., I probably stretch the rules as much as anyone and I will get spanked for it I am sure. At the same time, I will comply with all comments from the moderators. It is their job to keep me in line when I am incapable of doing it for myself. Everyone around here has been completely fair. I can see how someone might not want to be called "girl." or "boy" or "stupid" LOL or whatever. Frankly, it seems to me that we are given a large degree of latitude. My sense is that moderation really only steps in when someone complains. I think that's fair. Most of us take the little digs or insults with no difficulty at all. It's just part of the game. Others..... well..... they just aren't Tin Men.

Tin-Man's picture
@Cog Re: "Others..... well..

@Cog Re: "Others..... well..... they just aren't Tin Men."

*cupping hand to ear*.... Hark! Did I just hear my name used in vain?!?... *looking around suspiciously*....

arakish's picture
@ everyone

@ everyone

And one thing I have said:

Arakish – "Only YOU have the power to give a word, phrase, sentence the power to offend YOU!"

And it amazes how it seems no one else has ever thought of such. That is how I have gone through my whole life without anybody being able to offend me. I thought of that saying way back in Junior High School when I was like 12 or 13 and had to put up with everyone calling me geek, nerd, dweeb, etc.


algebe's picture
Until around Shakespeare's

Until around Shakespeare's time "girl" meant a young child of either gender. So I guess the modern use evolved from a tendency on the part of men to view females of any age as children.

I remember long ago driving through a city in New Zealand with my wife and our then 6yo daughter. We passed a building with a ground floor restaurant with a sign saying "sandwiches". On the floor above was another establishment with a garish sign saying "Girls, girls, girls". Naturally our daughter wanted an explanation. Quick as a flash, my wife answered "they make sandwiches for girls."

While we're on a feminist note, I always wondered why the women's lib movement went for that wishy-washy word "person". The real gender-neutral word for our species is "man". They should have reclaimed that and promoted the use of "male" and "female" when gender-specific words are needed.

xenoview's picture

I think we should be using human, instead of man to identify our species. Male and female are good gender words.

Cognostic's picture
Yes honey. It is a

Yes honey. It is a philosophical necessity. (You used the new word real good/) It is a necessity just like your little red helmet. The one you wear when the small yellow bus comes to picky you up in the morning. Have a good day at school...

You explained your position really good. Aint no reason for you to explain any more. The mean atheists are just treating you bad. You are a good boy and you are smarter than the other children on the little bus. Just try to have a good day and ignore the mean hateful atheists. See you soon.


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.