Atheists... why do you believe that God doesn't exist?

[fr0d0]

Of course belief in the xtian god is not a matter of evidence or proof, it is a faith-option. It is the honoring of an inner hunch for which no corroborating evidence can be found. It is probably grounded in an impulse not to go through life as a muggle. If it stopped there, it would be an honorable option. Clearly there are mysteries in the world, not all of which are likely to fall to science. Staying open to what little birds have to tell you can keep you connected to the mystery. Unfortunately it seems every xtian is offered a devil's bargain: have faith in the mystery as you find it - or - trade that in on the set of pseudo facts they call the bible. Few xtians are capable of true faith. Most will opt for the smug superiority afforded by the bible.

Never a wiser word spoken.

I wouldn't call logical deduction a hunch though.

And I think the facts are OK. It's their use and abuse that's the problem. And wow what a problem

---

If you're saying that skepticism = ignorance I have no quarrel with you. You confirmed what I said above.

Personally I need reason to dismiss something. Otherwise my opinion is neutral.

My dog won an award after he jumped through a burning hoop to save a circus baby from dingos.

Is your opinion on this claim neutral? Explain.

Do I trust you? I know a little about you from what I know of you on here.
Do I think this is a true statement? Given the context I'm doubtful. I'd give the story a 5% chance of being truthful.

See... I have knowledge and context to form an opinion. That opinion is personal to me, since I will have seen and understood your input here on AF differently to everyone else.

---

(pocaracas' fr0d0 premise),

hehe, I liked that one!

At least it's accurate: it's yours

[Coffee Jesus]

If you're saying that skepticism = ignorance I have no quarrel with you. You confirmed what I said above.

Personally I need reason to dismiss something. Otherwise my opinion is neutral.

edited for enlarged bolding

My dog won an award after he jumped through a burning hoop to save a circus baby from dingos.

Is your opinion on this claim neutral? Explain.

Do I trust you? I know a little about you from what I know of you on here.
Do I think this is a true statement? Given the context I'm doubtful. I'd give the story a 5% chance of being truthful.

See... I have knowledge and context to form an opinion. That opinion is personal to me, since I will have seen and understood your input here on AF differently to everyone else.

I don't know what my dog went through before landing in the pound. Indeed, I made the story up. Does that mean it's false? Are you suggesting that I actually looked for a "reason to dismiss" the story before I posed it to you? I do not have evidence that this didn't happen.

How about the claim: my dog has encountered dingos?

[Rampant.A.I.]

Uh huh...

Try looking at that again imbecile. I don't want you to prove something that you cannot. Only a fucking idiot would do that. You and your idiotic compadres keep insisting on that.

As mentioned earlier,

You keep saying that, and yet you never do. You restore to name-calling, accusations, and eventually sniveling that people are "being mean to you." We're now on the 3rd response in this thread alone where I have asked you to provide said evidence, yet all you have provided is "I can provide plenty [of] evidence."

A simple link to where you've actually provided any rational reasoning to back up your beliefs would suffice.

You keep saying that, and yet you never do. You restore to name-calling, accusations, and eventually sniveling that people are "being mean to you." We're now on the 3rd response in this thread alone where I have asked you to provide said evidence, yet all you have provided is "I can provide plenty [of] evidence."

What the fuck are you on about? I swear you're seriously deranged. You have an imaginary friend all of your own you're talking to don't you?

I have plenty of evidence that I'm very happy to provide. All I need from you is a specific request that's actually logical. You don't seem to be able to ask one.

"You're seriously deranged. You have an imaginary friend all of your own you're talking to don't you?" is an odd statement coming from someone who professes a belief in a supernatural being indistinguishable from an imaginary friend, "for which there is no possible transferrable evidence," a statement which would make Elwood P. Dowd proud in defense of Harvey.

Examples of specific requests you have thus far failed to respond to:

We're now on the 3rd response in this thread alone where I have asked you to provide said evidence, yet all you have provided is "I can provide plenty [of] evidence."

Way to miss the point and shift the burden of proof again.

So, before you launch into another lie-rade, do you think "aha! Gotcha! There is NO evidence anyone can present to support this claim!" Is a compelling argument?

You say repeatedly that your faith "is rational" then refuse to elaborate further. Why is your specific entity, not just "the supernatural" completely immune from necessary evidence, unlike any reasonable belief?

Do you then believe every reported encounter with ghosts, imps, Djinn, Leprechauns, Unicorns, Fairies, and other supernatural entities? If not, why not?

You said yourself the supernatural doesn't need transferable evidence to be believable.

So, you claim your deity cannot have transferable evidence (a characteristic of completely imaginary entities), and then want me to disprove it's existence without you first defining what you are asking me to disprove. You claim to have rational evidence for said entity, but are unable to provide anything, again, because it's conveniently "non-transferable." Not unlike someone who believes in leprechauns, which you reject as "something you never said," so I'll ask you again:

Do you believe in leprechauns, unicorns, or fairies? Why or why not?

I don't know what you believe in, you haven't outlined what you believe in, and yet you want me to provide you evidence of its absence. For all I know, your God could be a giant leprechaun, who goes by another name. Perhaps you could lay out some characteristics.

I have expressed no belief in supernatural beings. Please refrain from lying. The question posited to you was whether you, yourself, believe in supernatural beings other than the one you specially plead for, and what gives you the ability to dismiss their existence if not.

After all, unicorns are in the bible. Why do you disbelieve in unicorns? On what criteria do you reject their existence? Do you have any evidence they do not exist?

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-monsters-in-the-bible.php

These are simple questions, yet instead of answering them directly, you deflect and ridicule them as irrational, without seeming to grasp the lack of evidence for unicorns and the lack of evidence for your deity are interchangeable. You are ridiculing your own beliefs as irrational, unable to provide any reason your beliefs are more valid than a belief in unicorns. Insofar as you claim transferrable evidence isn't possible for your deity, and you have been unable to present any arguments in support of your deity belief, it now seems less plausible than a belief in unicorns. Your only recourse has been "any rational person knows unicorns don't exist," within a forum post complaining atheists state: "any rational person knows God doesn't exist".

Why, then, do you express disbelief in unicorns, for which possible transferrable evidence could exist, for an entity you claim no possible transferrable evidence can exist?

Is it possible or even plausible that you are simply deluded in your belief, in the presence of peers who do not share the same belief in the supernatural?

You said that you don't know the difference between fairy stories and rational beliefs. Therefore you have no reason to dismiss fairy tales. You said this.

Where did I say that? Can you provide a direct quote?

Again, please refrain from lying to make your points, it only shows how desperate you are, as what I actually said is recorded in this thread. I do not know who you believe such appeals are compelling to, as your penchant for lying, deliberately misrepresenting the posts of others, and a failure to engage in debate seem to be well known on this forum.

You defined your belief in God as a rational belief. To me, a belief without evidence, and where you claim evidence for said belief is non-transferrable, is indistinguishable from the imaginary.

Do you agree or disagree? Why?

What I said the first several times I asked you the question:

Way to miss the point and shift the burden of proof again.

So, before you launch into another lie-rade, do you think "aha! Gotcha! There is NO evidence anyone can present to support this claim!" Is a compelling argument?

You say repeatedly that your faith "is rational" then refuse to elaborate further. Why is your specific entity, not just "the supernatural" completely immune from necessary evidence, unlike any reasonable belief?

Do you then believe every reported encounter with ghosts, imps, Djinn, Leprechauns, Unicorns, Fairies, and other supernatural entities? If not, why not?

You said yourself the supernatural doesn't need transferable evidence to be believable.

Lying to make your points is wrong, and transparent on an internet forum. Perhaps you ought to read the following primer for parents to young teens to understand why lying is bad:

Lying doesn't always work out the way you think it will. Every time you lie, you are taking a chance of getting caught.

Sometimes lying is a symptom of a bigger problem. It makes me worry when you lie. Are you having thoughts about hurting yourself? (Tell your teen you are on their side if this is the case. If you feel your teen is lying to cover up harmful behavior - like cutting or thoughts of suicide - please seek outside help.)

Lying can cause you to second guess yourself, creating inner conflict and stress for you. This can affect your moods and make you angry, causing more problems.

Sometimes when you lie, you have to tell more lies to cover up the first one. This can escalate to a point where you will find yourself in the middle of so many lies, you don't know what the truth is anymore.

Lies will compound your problems, not make them go away. When you lie to get out of trouble, you end up in more trouble than you would have been if you had told the truth in the first place.

ttp://parentingteens.about.com/od/Teen-Lying/a/10-Reasons-To-Give-Your-Teen-Why-Lying-Is-Wrong.htm

I don't plead anything. I state that I believe in God and with good reason.

Yet again:

You keep saying that, and yet you never do. You restore to name-calling, accusations, and eventually sniveling that people are "being mean to you." We're now on the 3rd response in this thread alone where I have asked you to provide said evidence, yet all you have provided is "I can provide plenty [of] evidence."

What good reason?

Your unicorn example again proves your imbecilic understanding. Take a look at what your link says:
"In fact, a whole bunch of ‘mythical creatures’ in the King James Bible are simply additions by medieval translators who were more interested in being poetic than in making sure their creatures existed. The cockatrice, a rooster-headed dragon mentioned in the book of Isaiah, has been scaled down in more recent translations to ‘viper.’ Lilith, a female demon, has been downgraded to ‘screech owl’, and mentions of satyrs (half-man, half-goat creatures) have been changed to ‘goats.’ More linguistically accurate, maybe, but nowhere near as fun."

The question is why you are willing to believe in the same type of supernatural entity in what you have stated is the absence of possible transferrable evidence for said entity, when other such entities have been edited out of ancient texts as "mythological" creatures. What special pleading argument protects your deity from the same description?

How so?

I do not think that word means what you think it means. Perhaps you could give us the alternative definition you are using here.

If you're saying that skepticism = ignorance I have no quarrel with you. You confirmed what I said above.

Personally I need reason to dismiss something. Otherwise my opinion is neutral.

Apparently you were unable to understand the content of the definition provided. Many Community Colleges offer night classes in remedial english, where you would be able to ask for clarifications of words like "skepticism," which you seem unable to grasp the definition of. Alternatively, you could, as previously suggested, Google the word, and read until you understand the definition.

Similarly, what is your definition of "Reason?" The sense I see you use it in your arguments is "A statement Frodo repeats over and over again until he is convinced everyone believes him, even if they ask what Frodo's 'reasonable evidence for his beliefs' is, and Frodo is unable to provide any."

For the fourth time:
What reason do you have to dismiss the belief in Unicorns, Leprechauns and Fairies, and why do these reasons not apply to your deity?

Why yes, many people have asked you to provide the argument or other support rational belief in your specific deity you continually claim to have. I myself have asked you multiple times to produce it. So yes, you are indeed rather late on the delivery.

I provide reasoning every time it is requested. Address something and I'll respond. Take cheap shots with meaningless bullshit and you'll get the response that you deserve. In your case that's probably for the best.

Where is it?

What did I fail to address? Please outline what you would like addressed, and if it isn't too much trouble, perhaps you could address some of the points raised instead of pooh poohing them and repeating "my beliefs are rational, I can provide evidence" and actually make an argument, support a claim, or at least keep both hands on the keyboard long enough to directly address any of the above posts directly.

How can I make an argument in response to nothing? From what I can see, you have nothing.

I've asked you 3 times to stump up and every time you've failed.

stump up - definition
View thesaurus entry for stump up
What are red words?
Using the thesaurus
PHRASAL VERB [INTRANSITIVE/TRANSITIVE] BRITISHWord Forms
to give money, often without wanting to give it
Thesaurus entry for this meaning of stump up

Perhaps this means something to you in this context. It's meaningless to me.

I'm not about to cast my pearls before swine. You offer nothing and I offer you nothing in return.

So you admit you cannot or will not respond to anything in the post, for fear of your arguments getting trampled on?

This is an example of what to avoid. Please try to participate, and provide more compelling arguments in the future.

Do you ever take your own advice?

Yes. I have repeated the questions you have failed to address, yet again. Are you able to address them at this time?

[fr0d0]

How about the claim: my dog has encountered dingos?

Now I'm beyond caring so that's a neutral

[Rampant.A.I.]

How about the claim: my dog has encountered dingos?

Now I'm beyond caring so that's a neutral

Haha you chickened out again.

[fr0d0]

?

I've removed everything that it wasn't worth responding to.

Now is there anything you'd like to ask?

[Rampant.A.I.]

?

I've removed everything that it wasn't worth responding to.

Now is there anything you'd like to ask?

Seems as if you're incapable of responding to even a single simple question, and

Haha you chickened out again.

For the fifth time:
What reason do you have to dismiss the belief in Unicorns, Leprechauns and Fairies, and why do these reasons not apply to your deity?

For the umpteenth time:
What are your rational reasons for a belief in your deity?

Do you believe your lack of argument is particularly compelling support of your deity to anyone on this forum but yourself?

[Neo-Scholastic]

You imply that faith has no rational basis. That's not true. Religious faith is based on specific revelation. We rationally evaluate the credibility of the subject and reliability of the witness.

Perhaps one needs to have a coherent mind before one voluntarily steps aside to make room for faith. But no I don't think you can rationally argue for faith. Faith always requires a leap.

Reasonable people can disagree about the data without insults.

For sure but I still say there is no justification for bringing the bible into it. It is a hedging of faith. It is like someone who can make no use of their intuition without taking out a deck of Tarot cards. A bible may serve the same function but there is no justification for choosing between tarot cards, the bible or tea leaves. Whatever gets you in touch with the mystery will do, but all will fuck with you if you mistake the medium for the message.

I'm not talking about tarot cards or using the bible as an intuitive focus. People can use reason to compare a revealed text with other sources, like archeological artifacts and other documents, to decide whether to trust the revelation or not. You cannot say there is no evidence, but it is fair to question the evidence presented. As for me, I wish there were earlier records, more gospel accounts, and independent contemporary supporting documents. There aren't, but I consider what we do have sufficient to make Judeism and Christianity religions in which reasonable and intelligent people can follow. I have no opinion about Islam since I know to little about it. The Muslims I know are thoughtful and intelligent so I give that tradition the benefit of the doubt. In my own case I can accept the visionary experiences of Swedenborg because he was by all accounts highly respected by his peers, very intelligent, and his revelatory experiences were not accompanied by any known symptoms of mental illness. I can accept that others can come to a different conclusion.

[truthBtold]

Why haven't u seeked other gods before making a decision??

[Silver]

Why haven't u seeked other gods before making a decision??

One has to understand that one's religious beliefs most often hinges upon the culture where the individual was born and raised. Chances are that if an individual is born in America, s/he is going to believe in God over Allah. The indoctrination of the family and culture are what will ultimately decide the person's religious beliefs, especially if the individual is weak-minded enough to be conned into believing the mythologies as fact.