Reasons for belief

[Broseph Ballin]

There is no proof of any god. I especially ignore the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Islam, Christianity) because if an all knowing, all loving god really did create us, he wouldn't have don't it in such an illogical, hare-brained way. If he really did create us, then he would understand science, and he would know he couldn't possibly create light before he created stars, he would know plants couldn't live before there was light, he would know the ark described in the Bible is illogical and would never work, he would never send a "prophet" who ordered the deaths of 800 Jews and then watched their executions with his 12 year old wife. Unless these are supposed to be tricks to test our "faith", then is he really all loving? No, that makes him a major deceitful douche bag. And if the devil planted them there, can't god change it back? God is supposed to be more powerful than satan. If he can't change these "tricks" back then he isn't all powerful.

[Napoléon]

It's the term "believing in atheism".

Words just fail me. They really do. If someone is that interested, and that genuine, it would take them all of 5 seconds to google 'atheist beliefs' and find out that atheists don't require belief. The very definition is "lack of belief". It strikes me as not only incredibly ignorant that someone would ask the question they did in the OP, but also incredibly fucking lazy.

[Nine]

It's the term "believing in atheism".

Words just fail me. They really do. If someone is that interested, and that genuine, it would take them all of 5 seconds to google 'atheist beliefs' and find out that atheists don't require belief. The very definition is "lack of belief". It strikes me as not only incredibly ignorant that someone would ask the question they did in the OP, but also incredibly fucking lazy.

Sure but we know our more persistent believers seem to have very selective memories. To be honest I think they know better but give it a shot just in case.

[Arthur123]

Gotchya Broseph, sounds like you find the argument from natural evil to be effective in dismantling the idea for God. I don't necessarily agree but historically it has been the largest hurdle for theists to hurdle.

[Nine]

I find it odd when believers ask what evidence would be required. If we knew that and there actually was a god then surely we would have found the evidence and be believers.

[Foxaèr]

what evidence would sway you?

It would take the type of evidence that could leave no doubt whatsoever to the deities existence. Of course, just because a deity exists does not mean it is worthy of worship.

what happens when you loose a debate against someone who has stronger reasoning for an argument than you?

When that happens, I reevaluate my beliefs. However, no theist has ever properly reasoned for the existence of god.

[Jacob(smooth)]

Right, most of you are weak atheists. Understood, but it is a belief nonetheless in the sense that inherent in the statement atheism is you believe in your lack of belief concerning God(s). A few questions, besides the obvious( God showing up saying he is real act.) what evidence would sway you? For example, if the universe was designed what would that look like? Secondly, where does cognitive dissonance play a role in the phenomena that is atheism. If you are an atheist because you see no reasons to think otherwise what happens when you loose a debate against someone who has stronger reasoning for an argument than you? Do you instantly switch sides? Or stubbornly continue in your belief?

Chad, it sounds like your more open to deism, than theism. Am I correct in this assessment?

Assuming you're not trolling, you're barking up the wrong tree here. As others have said, Atheism is the lack of a belief, not a belief!

Try this. Consider the Fsm (flying spaghetti monster). If you want to know people's reasons for Atheism they are probably the same as your disbelief in the Fsm. If I invent a negative term for that, apastaism , then let me ask you, why do you believe in apastaism? What evidence would it take to sway you away from your apastaish beliefs? What happens when you lose a debate with a pastafarian, do you instantly switch sides or stick to your apastist belief?

[Broseph Ballin]

what evidence would sway you?

It would take the type of evidence that could leave no doubt whatsoever to the deities existence. Of course, just because a deity exists does not mean it is worthy of worship.

And of course, if a creator does exist, why would it require our worship? If it's capable of making life why does it require us to believe in it without even showing itself to be real? Is it so lonely that it wants people to praise it, yet uncomfortable with showing itself to us?

[Chad32]

Right, most of you are weak atheists. Understood, but it is a belief nonetheless in the sense that inherent in the statement atheism is you believe in your lack of belief concerning God(s). A few questions, besides the obvious( God showing up saying he is real act.) what evidence would sway you? For example, if the universe was designed what would that look like? Secondly, where does cognitive dissonance play a role in the phenomena that is atheism. If you are an atheist because you see no reasons to think otherwise what happens when you loose a debate against someone who has stronger reasoning for an argument than you? Do you instantly switch sides? Or stubbornly continue in your belief?

Chad, it sounds like your more open to deism, than theism. Am I correct in this assessment?

I'm not sure what would prove Yahweh or another god existed, aside from the guy showing up, or seeing a miracle working and having him tell me his power comes from the lord. And by miracle I mean something like multiplying food before my eyes, or commanding the dead to rise, or some such.

If I'm debating someone, and it seems like they have a point, I may go look it up on the internet to see if they're telling the truth. Like if someone claims that all bible prophesies have come to pass, I'll look it up and find out that this is wrong. Or even if a prophesy came true, like Israel becoming a nation again, I'd be more impressed if it listed a date. If the bible said Israel will become a nation in the year 19XX, then I'd be impressed.

I don't really care for deism. If you want to believe that the universe can't be eternal, and needed a creature that is eternal to get it going, that's all well and good. I just don't see the point in a deistic god.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Right, most of you are weak atheists. Understood, but it is a belief nonetheless in the sense that inherent in the statement atheism is you believe in your lack of belief concerning God(s). A few questions, besides the obvious( God showing up saying he is real act.) what evidence would sway you? For example, if the universe was designed what would that look like? Secondly, where does cognitive dissonance play a role in the phenomena that is atheism. If you are an atheist because you see no reasons to think otherwise what happens when you loose a debate against someone who has stronger reasoning for an argument than you? Do you instantly switch sides? Or stubbornly continue in your belief?

Chad, it sounds like your more open to deism, than theism. Am I correct in this assessment?

I'm not sure that 'belief in lack of belief' makes logical sense. Anyway...

As for evidence that would sway me, I'd accept a natural phenomenon for which there is no possible explanation other than gods. I'll give you the test I've given countless other theists. I lost my left eye at the age of 17. Pray to your god that my eye grows back. If this occurs within 30 days, I'll join whatever church you like and take up preaching.

As to cognitive dissonance, I don't think that's much of an issue. Losing a debate with a theist means that you've lost a debate with a theist, it doesn't mean atheism is false. By way of an example, there is an anecdote (very likely untrue) about the encounter between Diderot, a free thinker, and Euler, a devout Christian. Euler declaimed, 'Sir, (a + b^n)/n = x, therefore, God exists. Answer, please!' The story goes that Diderot was non-plussed and hideously embarrassed by the joke. He 'lost' the debate, but Euler hadn't disproved atheism.

Boru