RE: The Case for Atheism
August 13, 2013 at 6:42 pm
(This post was last modified: August 13, 2013 at 6:50 pm by AnaMejiaP.)
(August 13, 2013 at 4:07 pm)Chas Wrote:(August 13, 2013 at 3:30 pm)AnaMejiaP Wrote: I see your point. Basically, you don't believe in a god because our ideology is either believing in a monotheistic or polytheistic religion when we reject the other?
No and no.
No, you are not seeing the point.
No, I don't believe in any god not because of different theologies, but because there is no evidence for any god.
The point about there being different theologies is to draw your attention to the fact that there are. You believe one but not all of the others.
Why don't you believe any of the others? They're silly? There's no evidence? They're somehow wrong? If you think critically about the others, it would be intellectually dishonest not to think critically about your own.
(August 13, 2013 at 3:56 pm)AnaMejiaP Wrote: So here's another question: I have atheist friends who claim if God demonstrated he was real they will believe? Others have said that they will still not believe...what if you were given that demonstrable evidence and valid reasoning to believe?
If there were good evidence for the existence of a god, I would be forced to take that seriously. I haven't seen any yet.
Okay, sorry for not seeing your point. I believe in the Bible because I have found (as others have) that the Bible is not just a fairy tale that was written by men and claimed their was a God, just so they can keep people in check. (In fact there are many instances in the Bible that the people of Israel rebelled constantly.) Most people don't understand the Bible is not just a book to read cover-cover and simply understand it. No, the Bible is to be taken in a exegesis way. Historically, culturally, literary criticism, finding the origin of text, the intent of the author, prophetic verses either to authenticate it or not. In all my findings I found that the Bible is the only book that is authentic; whether it's that every name and city were authenticated by archaeologist, even the places were found to be true. The prophecy in the Bible were even true. Such The Book of Daniel prophesied the coming of Pedo-Persia, Greek, The Roman Empire, Alexander The Great and other military battles. There was a prophesy that Jerusalem was going to be rebuilt after the Babylonians destroyed it years earlier. Which was fulfilled in 445 BC a full century AFTER Daniel had prophesied it was going to happen (Daniel 9). There are other hundreds of prophesies that were fulfilled. How can that happen from supposed men writing The Bible without any divine help? Now to answer why I believe in this specific religion than other religions is because by doing so, you have to look into the historical events and the foundation that other religion are held onto. Whether it's Mormonism, Jehovah Witnesses, Muslims, Hindu etc they hold no evidence like The Bible has done. In the Quran (I have nothing against Muslim, I love them and I have Muslim friends) but its foundation is based on Abraham son Ishmael throughout history the Quran has gone through revisions, after revisions, contradicting its statements from its first few copies. There's no historical places that are mentioned in the Quran to ever had existed. In point, it can't be trusted. There's also the historical events that happened in Mormonism and Jehovah that are very contradicting. Or about Hinduism, Mythology? Simple, if I hold True that the Bible is as authenticated as I discovered it to be, then verses such as "There has no God before me, not one that I know" and the like, then Hinduism, and Mythology hold no merit in my faith. I'm only a truth seeker. If I ever find or am proven wrong about The Bible, I will in fact renounce my faith. I see no logic in believing in something that holds no truth.
(August 13, 2013 at 4:42 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(August 13, 2013 at 3:56 pm)AnaMejiaP Wrote: So here's another question: I have atheist friends who claim if God demonstrated he was real they will believe? Others have said that they will still not believe...what if you were given that demonstrable evidence and valid reasoning to believe?
I guess you are not fully reading or comprehending some of the responses to you.
In my first response to you I stated, "My disbelief in a god is a provisional position, not a dogmatic one. My atheism will continue as long as the claim that a god exists does not meet the above criteria." [edit: By the 'above criteria', I mean demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument[
To which you responded, "Fair enough."
Which I took to mean that you understood what I said.
I guess I was wrong.
If I was presented with demonstrable evidence and reasoned argument to support the claim that a god exists, I would be compelled to believe. Worship is an entirely different proposition, however.
I did understand. That question wasn't meant for you?
