The Case for Atheism

[Jackalope]

I was wondering on what logical premise do you have to not believe in a God? I know that a lot of atheist have different opinions and arguments. I'm only asking to get a better understanding on the matter, and I'm not here to argue against Atheist (not yet that is) just inviting a friendly conversation.

When you figure out why you don't believe in the thousands of other gods mankind has proposed, perhaps you'll have your answer.

[AnaMejiaP]

I was wondering on what logical premise do you have to not believe in a God? I know that a lot of atheist have different opinions and arguments. I'm only asking to get a better understanding on the matter, and I'm not here to argue against Atheist (not yet that is) just inviting a friendly conversation.

There is insufficient demonstrable evidence, valid & sound logic, and reasoned argument to support the claim that a god exists.

In other words, the claim that a god exists has not met its burden of proof.

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.

Fair enough.

[CleanShavenJesus]

Yes, I do believe in the God of the Bible. Though it wasn't what I was asking, it doesn't matter whether it's my God or any other god. I was simply asking what's the logical reasoning not to believe in "A" God?
(You stated that you see no reason to start; what's that reason then?)
On the side note: "One less god?" I'm sorry but are we talking about the same atheist term? I thought (correct me if so) Atheist believe in (no) god for the lack of evidence for such a deity? In saying that, I can't be an "almost atheist" because I do believe in one and deny the others because they're false. (Well, that's my belief and I can understand you might find that silly, stupid, bigotted, ignorant etc etc)

Oh boy. Okay.

Though it wasn't what I was asking, it doesn't matter whether it's my God or any other god. I was simply asking what's the logical reasoning not to believe in "A" God?

No, it does matter. The fact that you don't believe in Allah is, for some atheists, proof that there's no reason for them to believe in Yahweh. What's so unreasonable about Greek mythology compared to Christianity or Islam that it's branded "mythology"? The fact that there are other beliefs, each with about as much proof as yours, deters many from believing because it opens the mind to the question: "Wait, what makes one religion correct and the others incorrect?"

In saying that, I can't be an "almost atheist" because I do believe in one and deny the others because they're false.

There's the point. How do you know that they're false? Religion is irrational for these reasons and more.

[AnaMejiaP]

I was wondering on what logical premise do you have to not believe in a God? I know that a lot of atheist have different opinions and arguments. I'm only asking to get a better understanding on the matter, and I'm not here to argue against Atheist (not yet that is) just inviting a friendly conversation.

When you figure out why you don't believe in the thousands of other gods mankind has proposed, perhaps you'll have your answer.

I might not believe in (correction) millions of other gods but I do believe in one. I was asking why (you) don't believe in a god?

---

I was wondering on what logical premise do you have to not believe in a God?

That the buden of proof for god's existence has not been met.

What type of burden of proof?

[The Reality Salesman01]

It's gonna start with an E...can you guess what he's gonna say?

[AnaMejiaP]

Yes, I do believe in the God of the Bible. Though it wasn't what I was asking, it doesn't matter whether it's my God or any other god. I was simply asking what's the logical reasoning not to believe in "A" God?
(You stated that you see no reason to start; what's that reason then?)
On the side note: "One less god?" I'm sorry but are we talking about the same atheist term? I thought (correct me if so) Atheist believe in (no) god for the lack of evidence for such a deity? In saying that, I can't be an "almost atheist" because I do believe in one and deny the others because they're false. (Well, that's my belief and I can understand you might find that silly, stupid, bigotted, ignorant etc etc)

Oh boy. Okay.

Though it wasn't what I was asking, it doesn't matter whether it's my God or any other god. I was simply asking what's the logical reasoning not to believe in "A" God?

No, it does matter. The fact that you don't believe in Allah is, for some atheists, proof that there's no reason for them to believe in Yahweh. What's so unreasonable about Greek mythology compared to Christianity or Islam that it's branded "mythology"? The fact that there are other beliefs, each with about as much proof as yours, deters many from believing because it opens the mind to the question: "Wait, what makes one religion correct and the others incorrect?"

In saying that, I can't be an "almost atheist" because I do believe in one and deny the others because they're false.

There's the point. How do you know that they're false? Religion is irrational for these reasons and more.

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?

[Simon Moon]

What type of burden of proof?

Its been stated several times: demonstrable evidence and valid/sound logic.

I'll bet there are many supernatural claims (alien abductions, existence of Jinn, crystal healing, shapeshifting, etc, etc) that you disbelieve for the exact same reason why we disbelieve that a god exists. Lack of demonstrable evidence and valid/sound logic.

[Mister Agenda]

Well, the main thing is lack of sufficient reason to think any of them are real. But some of us are curious to know by what criteria theists believe one or only some of them are real and the rest are not, but find some people not believing in any of them unfathomable.

We know why we (atheist rationalists) don't think they're real: lack of good evidence, lack of falsifiability, and lack of arguments in favor of at least one that are both sound and valid.

We don't know why you don't think the ones you agree with us aren't real, aren't real. Well, I personally think it's because that's what your religion teaches you, but a lot of theists don't seem to want to come right out and say that (understandably so, I think).

[AnaMejiaP]

Well, the main thing is lack of sufficient reason to think any of them are real. But some of us are curious to know by what criteria theists believe one or only some of them are real and the rest are not, but find some people not believing in any of them unfathomable.

We know why we (atheist rationalists) don't think they're real: lack of good evidence, lack of falsifiability, and lack of arguments in favor of at least one that are both sound and valid.

We don't know why you don't think the ones you agree with us aren't real, aren't real. Well, I personally think it's because that's what your religion teaches you, but a lot of theists don't seem to want to come right out and say that (understandably so, I think).

Actually I totally agree with you. I think a lot of theist today, or so-called theist just simply believe because they were either brought up in that environment, and like you said it's what our religion teaches us. You will be surprised how many "Christians" don't know why they believe in a God. I believe blind faith is utter bullshit.

---

What type of burden of proof?

Its been stated several times: demonstrable evidence and valid/sound logic.

I'll bet there are many supernatural claims (alien abductions, existence of Jinn, crystal healing, shapeshifting, etc, etc) that you disbelieve for the exact same reason why we disbelieve that a god exists. Lack of demonstrable evidence and valid/sound logic.

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?

[Minimalist]

I was wondering on what logical premise do you have to not believe in a God?

Wrong question. The right question is, why do believe something which has no empirical evidence for its existence?

I do not have to demonstrate that invisible pink unicorns do not exist because I am not making the claim that they do. You apparently believe in an invisible sky daddy. Evidence of same is required.