Attn: Theists - What would it take to prove you wrong?

[Locke]

[quote='Chas' pid='490599' dateline='1376078379']

[quote]You assert that God exists, without providing evidence. I will dismiss your assertion.[/quote]

K that's cool

[quote]You leap from 'no morals' to 'might makes right' morals without even blushing. Remarkable.
Morals are arrived at by reason and emotion - by people making judgements, trying out ideas, criticizing those ideas, and make progress.
Don't you see that ethics and morality are better today than those described in the Bible?[/quote]

Thrasymachus argued that without a standard to dictate morals, the strongest will decide what's right. While you can argue this is the definition of moral, I think you will find that investigating some of those examples I listed might find you less certain, because in those cases the concept of God was thrown away. Take Cambodia for example, where people as educated as we are would of been hunted and slaughtered, because our intelligence was considered a threat to the authority of the government. Decide for yourself if you'd argue for that case - I was simply stating that I wouldn't.

In addition, the ethics and morals today and in Bible times are equally terrible, because few people actually follow a high standard. If ever you step foot outside the 1st world countries you might wake up, but again, I'm only stating my stance on these things and why.

[quote]Again, you make an unsupported assertion. We each find meaning as we may - I'm sorry that you don't have the courage to do so, that you are so afraid that you have to have meaning and morals given to you.[/quote]

I think you confuse distraction with meaning. Perhaps its too deep for you.. or maybe it just doesn't work for me? Either way, carry on as you will.

[quote]Now you are just being ignorant or stupid. Atheism makes no claims - there is nothing to verify. Burden of proof is on you who claim some god exists. The one for which there is no evidence.[/quote]

You're attacking me as a scapegoat. I don't care what you believe, nor do I have an obligation as a Christian to convince you. Upon examining what I said more thoroughly, you'll find that was not my intent, nor is that what this thread is about.

[quote]Atheism is not a philosophy - it answers no questions.[/quote]

You're right - it doesn't answer any of my questions. Therefore, I decided I have no use for it.

[quote]Actually, not so. There may well be objective morality. It may be evolutionary at its base. But morality does not come from books written and assembled by ignorant, pre-Enlightenment people.[/quote]

Morals: Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior.

Principle: A fundamental truth or proposition that serves as the foundation for a system of belief or behavior or for a chain of reasoning.

Fundamental: A central or primary rule or principle on which something is based.

Ignorant, pre-enlightenment people.. unlike yourself, to be sure. /joke

[quote]Yes, there is no designer required. The 'Laws' of science are descriptions of observed behavior in mathematical terms.
Are you really dragging out Paley's argument dressed up for the computer age?[/quote]

No.. I was just clarifying that using a different word to describe the same thing isn't good enough verbal kung-fu to convince me of anything. It seems plain to me (as I'm an engineer) that design and engineering are the exact same thing.

Design:

1a : a particular purpose held in view by an individual or group <he has ambitious designs for his son>

b : deliberate purposive planning

2: a mental project or scheme in which means to an end are laid down

4: a preliminary sketch or outline showing the main features of something to be executed

Engineering:
1: the activities or function of an engineer

2a : the application of science and mathematics by which the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made useful to people

b : the design and manufacture of complex products

Engineer: a designer or builder of ______

[quote]Evolution by natural selection is not chance. You need to understand evolution before you disagree. [/quote]

I know evolution is not chance, in fact I said that.

Scapegoat: one that is the object of irrational hostility (/joke... but really, that's the definition)

[quote]
Fourth reason: While I have seen this very infrequently on these forums, some Atheists will use circumlocutions to try to get around using the word 'God'. They will say things like, 'Mother Nature', creation, fate, 'Gaia', or or other all-powerful entities. Going back to neopaganism only weakens the argument...
[/quote]

[quote]Who does that? Certainly not me.[/quote]

Nope.. actually its very infrequent in these forums. I may or may not have said that...

[quote]
Fifth: Ecology. I mentioned this previously, but it also contributes to inconsistency. I will add, though, that responding to ill-informed theists' stance that we are above nature does not mean we are only a part of it.. why not both, as the Bible teaches? After all, it is clear that we share certain aspects of nature, but it is also clear that we have dominion over other species on earth at this point.
[/quote]

[quote]We are part of nature. However, we are the only organism that understands evolution and can therefore get outside of the game.[/quote]

Yup, said that. Thanks for reiterating though

[quote]I judge theism as without basis because it has no evidence.[/quote]

K.

[quote]Well, I live a full and rich life. I don't squander my time, money, love, or attention on imaginary friends. I love this - my only - life, and shall be sorry when it ends.

I feel sad that you waste so much of yours on fantasy.[/quote]

That's good. It would be weird if you did.. I actually gave up fantasy, for the most part. I've barely played any video games in years, and I mostly read productive books. Not that I don't enjoy a good story here and there, but I tend to stick to reality.