Separate the issues

[Opsnyder]

I think it would be good idea to make it clear that existence of god, afterlife, the properties of specific god and his doctrines are all separate issues and should not be blended together.

Cause what I see everywhere is that people think that if god does exist it automatically becomes some specific god(like christian for instance) and that afterlife automatically exist to. I think it's a bullshit which even most atheists fall for.

Like on youtube a christian is arguing and when atheist can't disprove the existence of a god the christian goes "Aha so you can't prove that god doesn't exist which means that this specific god exist and he wants this and that and afterlife works like this and that and you the gods orders are this and that".
It's surprising to see how many people fall for this kind of stuff.

Even if there would be a god it would not mean that the god is christian or that afterlife exists. God could very well exist without afterlife and afterlife could exist without god.
In the nutshell STOP making shit up.
Even if there would be a god believers still have to show that he is giving specific orders and not just some ancient dude who made em up.

[frankiej]

They aren't really issues at all.

I think it's a bullshit which even most atheists fall for.

I am not quite sure what you mean by this.

[Opsnyder]

Well sometimes atheists think if they can't disprove the existence of god then somebody else can say that god surely exist and he has specific properties and wants us to do specific things.

[frankiej]

I don't see how that is atheists falling for anything.

[Zen Badger]

Well sometimes atheists think if they can't disprove the existence of god then somebody else can say that god surely exist and he has specific properties and wants us to do specific things.

It's not up to us to disprove the existence of god.

It's up to the theists to prove he/she/it exists.

And i'm sure that it has been mooted before that while the existence of a generic god can't be disproved it is quite easy to disprove a specific god, i.e yahweh or allah.

[Skepsis]

I wouldn't go so far as to say that atheists fall for the shifting of the burden of proof. Perhaps they pause for a moment to wonder how people could be so damn ignorant as to suggest the skeptic ought to prove the inverse of their claim, however atheists certainly aren't "fooled". How many atheists would exist if we were all so frail-minded?

When you originally said "even atheists fall for it", I have a feeling you meant that atheists generalize, subconsciously granting that, if a God were to exist, it would likely have traits x,y,and z. Any intellectually honest person, whether atheistic or theistic, should have the integrity and rigor to come to their own conclusions after they have accepted a new concept.

People and their fairytale beliefs and make-believe fantasy is something we will all have to deal with for the rest of our lives.

[Kayenneh]

If we indulge the believers in discussion and say that a god/gods exist, all bets are off. What does it matter if we cram all other bs in the same package? Since there is no evidence for any of that crap anyways, why not use your imagination as much as you like? There seem to be no concensus whatsoever what a god is, how it works/behaves/manipulates the world, not even amogst the followers of the 'same' deity. I don't understand why you fret over fiction so much..

[KichigaiNeko]

As far as i am concerned...ALL religious belief is a mental health problem..meh