Mister Agenda,
My response was to the claim that scientists debunked the notion of gods such as the god of rain or earthquakes and such. In reality theists did long before scientists got around to it.
Argumentus Classificatious. In case you don't know that means its the fallacy that merely classifying an argument nullifies it or debunks it.
If in fact an argument is fallacious. Many atheists seem to think the fact it merely falls into a category qualifies it.
Argumentus Classificatious.
Presumably not because you're ticked off at God but because you don't think God exists. I'll speak for myself, to be intellectually satisfied that we are not the result of a personal agent who caused and designed the universe and our existence I would want to have reason to believe some other non-God cause is as feasible and as likely to account for our existence. Therein lies the problem, neither you or other atheists will cough up some more likely or probable cause or explanation for our existence. Tell me, are you as skeptical of naturalistic in the gaps explanations as you are of the God explanation? If not then make your case for why those alternate explanations are better.
They do all kinds of things in the universe we live in when confined by very specific laws of nature. As for incredulity it's laughable that word is even in the bag of atheist arguments. It can be said of any argument atheists make against the existence of God is an argument from personal incredulity. There have been several atheists on this very board that have said they don't categorically deny Gods existence, they simply lack that belief. If atheists themselves claim God may exist what's their beef with theists who do think God exists?
in·cre·du·li·ty
[in-kri-doo-li-tee, -dyoo-] Show IPA
noun
the quality or state of being incredulous; inability or unwillingness to believe.
Origin:
1400–50; late Middle English incredulite < Latin incrēdulitās. See incredulous, -ity
Synonyms
disbelief, skepticism, doubt.
Antonyms
faith.
Notice the antonym for incredulity is faith. So when you say I am incredulous of the claims that mindess forces can bootstrap themselves into existence, create a universe with specific laws of nature that create life and mind from non-life and non mind why shouldn't I lack faith barring evidence such could and did happen? Its not as if any atheists I know of are making a case from facts. None in here are.
If atheists only lack belief God exists then as far as they are concerned God may well exist and be a viable explanation that accounts for the existence of the universe and humans, it's just not one they share. So if atheists themselves concede God may exist what gripe can they have with theists who do believe God exists? Considering you as an atheist don't deny God exists you should say to the theist its very reasonable that you believe in God I just don't share your belief. However if what you really think is that its unreasonable to believe in the existence of God then you should have at least as good or better alternative explanation that I don't need to accept on faith.
Atheists promote the thought in the market place of ideas that God doesn't exist.
You're living in a dream world if you think the majority of atheists sites, leaflets and promotions don't depict belief in God as absurd bizarre, crazy, fanciful, foolish, insane, nonsensical, preposterous and unreal. Many atheists have an agenda to remove the notion of God from society. Sure in a debate most atheists go to the failsafe mode of claiming its just a lack of belief but not elsewhere.
It only stands to reason if you don't believe God caused our existence that you believe natural forces without plan or intent did. I mean be honest...that is what you think. Why? On what basis? Make your case! This is the atheist forum is it not?
ra·tion·al·ism
[rash-uh-nl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the principle or habit of accepting reason as the supreme authority in matters of opinion, belief, or conduct.
Fine then provide me with the rationalist basis for believing that mindless forces somehow came into existence with the right characteristics and laws of nature to produce intelligent human beings rather than telling me I'm incredulous if I don't agree.
Quote:Um, it was theists who believed in the 'small gods' too. Theism isn't just your version of things, it's merely the belief that some sort of God or gods exist. All their theisms are belong to you if you're not going to be more specific. Disproving other people's theism isn't favorable to theism.
My response was to the claim that scientists debunked the notion of gods such as the god of rain or earthquakes and such. In reality theists did long before scientists got around to it.
Quote:Ad hom fallacy.
Argumentus Classificatious. In case you don't know that means its the fallacy that merely classifying an argument nullifies it or debunks it.
Quote:What makes an argument fallacious is it containing or being based on a fallacy.
If in fact an argument is fallacious. Many atheists seem to think the fact it merely falls into a category qualifies it.
Quote:Fallacy of appeal to ridicule.
Argumentus Classificatious.
Quote:Our claim is that we don't believe in God. We actually don't believe in God. Q.E.D.
Presumably not because you're ticked off at God but because you don't think God exists. I'll speak for myself, to be intellectually satisfied that we are not the result of a personal agent who caused and designed the universe and our existence I would want to have reason to believe some other non-God cause is as feasible and as likely to account for our existence. Therein lies the problem, neither you or other atheists will cough up some more likely or probable cause or explanation for our existence. Tell me, are you as skeptical of naturalistic in the gaps explanations as you are of the God explanation? If not then make your case for why those alternate explanations are better.
Quote:Mindless forces do all kinds of things. All you've got for thinking they can't is the fallacy of argument from incredulity.
They do all kinds of things in the universe we live in when confined by very specific laws of nature. As for incredulity it's laughable that word is even in the bag of atheist arguments. It can be said of any argument atheists make against the existence of God is an argument from personal incredulity. There have been several atheists on this very board that have said they don't categorically deny Gods existence, they simply lack that belief. If atheists themselves claim God may exist what's their beef with theists who do think God exists?
in·cre·du·li·ty
[in-kri-doo-li-tee, -dyoo-] Show IPA
noun
the quality or state of being incredulous; inability or unwillingness to believe.
Origin:
1400–50; late Middle English incredulite < Latin incrēdulitās. See incredulous, -ity
Synonyms
disbelief, skepticism, doubt.
Antonyms
faith.
Notice the antonym for incredulity is faith. So when you say I am incredulous of the claims that mindess forces can bootstrap themselves into existence, create a universe with specific laws of nature that create life and mind from non-life and non mind why shouldn't I lack faith barring evidence such could and did happen? Its not as if any atheists I know of are making a case from facts. None in here are.
Quote:It's not the belief God doesn't exist. It's the lack of the belief that God does exist. It's the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis holds until it is disproved, else, to be consistent, one would have to believe every proposal heard.
If atheists only lack belief God exists then as far as they are concerned God may well exist and be a viable explanation that accounts for the existence of the universe and humans, it's just not one they share. So if atheists themselves concede God may exist what gripe can they have with theists who do believe God exists? Considering you as an atheist don't deny God exists you should say to the theist its very reasonable that you believe in God I just don't share your belief. However if what you really think is that its unreasonable to believe in the existence of God then you should have at least as good or better alternative explanation that I don't need to accept on faith.
Atheists promote the thought in the market place of ideas that God doesn't exist.
Quote:Only if you're really determined not to hear what we're actually saying.
You're living in a dream world if you think the majority of atheists sites, leaflets and promotions don't depict belief in God as absurd bizarre, crazy, fanciful, foolish, insane, nonsensical, preposterous and unreal. Many atheists have an agenda to remove the notion of God from society. Sure in a debate most atheists go to the failsafe mode of claiming its just a lack of belief but not elsewhere.
It only stands to reason if you don't believe God caused our existence that you believe natural forces without plan or intent did. I mean be honest...that is what you think. Why? On what basis? Make your case! This is the atheist forum is it not?
Quote:That's what I personally think, but not because I'm an atheist, because I'm a rationalist.
ra·tion·al·ism
[rash-uh-nl-iz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
the principle or habit of accepting reason as the supreme authority in matters of opinion, belief, or conduct.
Fine then provide me with the rationalist basis for believing that mindless forces somehow came into existence with the right characteristics and laws of nature to produce intelligent human beings rather than telling me I'm incredulous if I don't agree.
