What does an atheist...

[fr0d0]

Well I thought the same hence my post. I'm an equal opportunity any-believer-or-not.

[theVOID]

Nor did I state you were. But I will have to do more reseach through these thread to see if you've actually tried. I assumed there and should have. I make no claims unless asked and am just here to get input. So from the above you do not equate God attributes, but if it exists would refrence them to nature?

God is not a falsifiable hypothesis, cannot be disproved, neither can unicorns, dragons or fairies - I hold them all in the same regard.

As for attributes i do not quite understand your question. I am assuming English is not your first language?

[tackattack]

No, basically, what I want is to hear what kind of god it is the theist believes in and why, and start from there. Not even theists agree on what a god is supposed to be, so arguing against my vision of a god and presuming that that is your idea of a god doesn't help at all.

Simply denying my question and presuming that I'm going to argue your view or presuming that I think that your idea of a God won't help me is incorrect.

What you are basically doing is something like asking a person who doesn't believe in pixies, what kind of pixies that person doesn't believe in.

I think you still are not quite grasping the concept of atheism. I don't sit around contemplating what god I would not believe in, I just don't believe in any god any theist has ever proposed. You are the one believing in a god, and I don't.

I am definately not grasping atheism adn that's why I'm asking. Citing your example lets suppose I believe in pixies and you don't. We could both reasonably assume that we are discussing the same thing when we define pixies. The color may vary but we'd probably reach a concensus that they're small things that have wings and fly and maybe that they carry sparkly dust around. This isn't some conspiracy to admit that you believe in God. It's like saying I'm not prejudiced because I treat all races the same. Prejudice is a degree to which we have preconceptions which form sub-consciously. I might see a pixie and while I try to treat them fairly subconsciouly I believe their pixie dust is poison and my eyes get wide when I see them. So I reiterrate my question: What is your preconception of God? Where do you think the notion comes from and why do you hold to that (if you do)? I understand that it doesn't matter to you because you don't believe in God, but I do and that's why I'm here.

[leo-rcc]

I am definately not grasping atheism adn that's why I'm asking.

Citing your example lets suppose I believe in pixies and you don't.

Okay

We could both reasonably assume that we are discussing the same thing when we define pixies. The color may vary but we'd probably reach a concensus that they're small things that have wings and fly and maybe that they carry sparkly dust around.

But here is another person that says that pixie dust is not sparkly at all, and I am just arguing against a version of pixies he doesn't believe in either. And another person believes in pixies with silk wings, while another believes in pixies with transparent wings. And every time I address a pixie from one belief, the other believers are like "Yes, but those are not my pixies".

That is why it is much more productive for the one believing in something to explain himself what he or she believes and why, and for those who do not believe to either accept or reject the existence claim of what is believed.

This isn't some conspiracy to admit that you believe in God. It's like saying I'm not prejudiced because I treat all races the same.

Not really, because we know races exist, and we also know that even people who are prejudice against certain races at least can see what they are rallying against. Their preconceptions of the race may be flawed, but they at least know those races are real.

So I reiterrate my question: What is your preconception of God? Where do you think the notion comes from and why do you hold to that (if you do)? I understand that it doesn't matter to you because you don't believe in God, but I do and that's why I'm here.

By the capitalization I suppose you mean the biblical god, so the supposed creator of the universe, who also put human beings on this earth as its special project, watches over them, and when they do something it doesn't like wipes them from the Earth except for some small delegation so mankind can try again. Then for some strange reason it feels the need to send itself to the Earth as a man called Jesus so it can be crucified so mankind can be forgiven for doing what humans do.

I don't believe in that one either.

[theVOID]

No, basically, what I want is to hear what kind of god it is the theist believes in and why, and start from there. Not even theists agree on what a god is supposed to be, so arguing against my vision of a god and presuming that that is your idea of a god doesn't help at all.

Simply denying my question and presuming that I'm going to argue your view or presuming that I think that your idea of a God won't help me is incorrect.

What you are basically doing is something like asking a person who doesn't believe in pixies, what kind of pixies that person doesn't believe in.

I think you still are not quite grasping the concept of atheism. I don't sit around contemplating what god I would not believe in, I just don't believe in any god any theist has ever proposed. You are the one believing in a god, and I don't.

I am definately not grasping atheism adn that's why I'm asking. Citing your example lets suppose I believe in pixies and you don't. We could both reasonably assume that we are discussing the same thing when we define pixies. The color may vary but we'd probably reach a concensus that they're small things that have wings and fly and maybe that they carry sparkly dust around. This isn't some conspiracy to admit that you believe in God. It's like saying I'm not prejudiced because I treat all races the same. Prejudice is a degree to which we have preconceptions which form sub-consciously. I might see a pixie and while I try to treat them fairly subconsciouly I believe their pixie dust is poison and my eyes get wide when I see them. So I reiterrate my question: What is your preconception of God? Where do you think the notion comes from and why do you hold to that (if you do)? I understand that it doesn't matter to you because you don't believe in God, but I do and that's why I'm here.

That's why you need to state what you believe and then we can straight away know what we are talking about.

I reject all god claims due to absolute lack of evidence historical, scientific, biological, cosmological or otherwise. There is nothing about these claims that any of it's believers have any honest way of true, they just accept at face value the testimony of bronze age sand dwellers, primitive, uneducated, superstitious people who knew absolutely noting of the world around them and had nothing to go on apart from their fairly primitive human existence, and guess what... They made a human like god responsible and vanished away explanations for everything. Belief in god has never given us any knowledge, no explanatory power - just the speculation of primitive humans.

The religious look at the universe wrong, they look from the top down, they have to assume the existence of god in step 1! This is why it fails - you can't know for sure there is a god, and believing there is has had absolutely no benefit for our species. There is a better way to look at the universe, the scientific method, it has let us look at the universe, life, our minds, our very existence and find out incomparably more in a few hundred years than belief in god has for thousands of years.

So until you provide me some reason to believe in a god, the idea is just as credible as David Icke's Reptilian master species, which is to say Nil credibility.

So why don't you answer this question: Can you explain what you believe and why you believe it?

[LEDO]

This thread is confusing. I didn't know Dodge made a car call "Atheism." I thought the ultimate Dodge would have been Charger or Road Runner.

And Tackattack wants to know about the atheist concept of God. WTF. Okay, I will start but excuse the fuck out of me if I don't take this thread serious either: God has big tits which attracks a lot of suckers.

I need my bong.

[theVOID]

This thread is confusing. I didn't know Dodge made a car call "Atheism." I thought the ultimate Dodge would have been Charger or Road Runner.

And Tackattack wants to know about the atheist concept of God. WTF. Okay, I will start but excuse the fuck out of me if I don't take this thread serious either: God has big tits which attracks a lot of suckers.

I need my bong.

Stoners are raiding this place We're not alone!

[littlegrimlin1]

Have all of you stoned before? lol

I don't have a concept of a god. I can kinda have a concept of a god if you first tell me which religion we are talking about... but that's all I have to go on, I don't have my own version.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[tackattack]

But here is another person that says that pixie dust is not sparkly at all, and I am just arguing against a version of pixies he doesn't believe in either. And another person believes in pixies with silk wings, while another believes in pixies with transparent wings. And every time I address a pixie from one belief, the other believers are like "Yes, but those are not my pixies".

That is why it is much more productive for the one believing in something to explain himself what he or she believes and why, and for those who do not believe to either accept or reject the existence claim of what is believed.

I don't really care which pixies you don't believe in, just that you have a concept of a pixie. Agreed it's easier if I just state my beliefs and you accept or reject them. I'll hope for impartial fairness, but let's not kid ourselves it doesn't really exist. I'll answer that further down then.

Not really, because we know races exist, and we also know that even people who are prejudice against certain races at least can see what they are rallying against. Their preconceptions of the race may be flawed, but they at least know those races are real.

They're real because they're percievable, even though they're social notions created by people to explain inconsistencies?

By the capitalization I suppose you mean the biblical god, so the supposed creator of the universe, who also put human beings on this earth as its special project, watches over them, and when they do something it doesn't like wipes them from the Earth except for some small delegation so mankind can try again. Then for some strange reason it feels the need to send itself to the Earth as a man called Jesus so it can be crucified so mankind can be forgiven for doing what humans do.

I don't believe in that one either.

That answers my question. Thank you.

I reject all god claims due to absolute lack of evidence historical, scientific, biological, cosmological or otherwise. There is nothing about these claims that any of it's believers have any honest way of true, they just accept at face value the testimony of bronze age sand dwellers, primitive, uneducated, superstitious people who knew absolutely noting of the world around them and had nothing to go on apart from their fairly primitive human existence, and guess what... They made a human like god responsible and vanished away explanations for everything. Belief in god has never given us any knowledge, no explanatory power - just the speculation of primitive humans.

I'll accept the human like answer and the chip that goes with it. Thank you

The religious look at the universe wrong, they look from the top down, they have to assume the existence of god in step 1! This is why it fails - you can't know for sure there is a god,

You're going to have to extrapolate on my "top down view" before I can agree with all of that statement.

and believing there is has had absolutely no benefit for our species. There is a better way to look at the universe, the scientific method, it has let us look at the universe, life, our minds, our very existence and find out incomparably more in a few hundred years than belief in god has for thousands of years.

Agreed I love what science has done for mankind and in no way want to impede that progress.

So until you provide me some reason to believe in a god, the idea is just as credible as David Icke's Reptilian master species, which is to say Nil credibility.

I'll take that as your concept if you had one.

So why don't you answer this question: Can you explain what you believe and why you believe it?

God to me is a force that created and set into motion the known universe. I don't feel he acts on our behalf or intercedes but is omniviscent and omnipotent. God is unknowable therefore it doesn't follow that it's sentient. If I had to visualize God it would be a huge ball of energy sitting outside the universe with photons shooting out from it.
I believe this because I can not explain what created the universe with science. Even though historical documents are steeped in contradictions, mytos and warped perspectives they convey a similar hope and parables that make sense to me. I believe science is wonderful and opens our eyes to a myriad of possibilities. There will always be unexplainable things that need explaining. Frankly I don't have the energy to debunk all of them and I have a great repsect for those who do. I feel it's easier to prove what's real to me than disprove what other's feel is real. While I enjoy looking at things from an increasing perspective, it gets tedious at times and I invariably come beck to what's real to me. I don't believe in fate. I do believe in karma. Every action, thought and belief of one affects the others around them, then other's around them and so on. I see a balance on a moralistic scale, on a scientific scale and on a physical scale that leads me to believe that the randomeness of the human condition is not a singularity. I'd like to hope that perfection is love. I'd like to hope that a God is that love and he shares it with us like photons from the sun. I'd like not to sit under an umbrella with my shades.

And Tackattack wants to know about the atheist concept of God. WTF. Okay, I will start but excuse the fuck out of me if I don't take this thread serious either: God has big tits which attracks a lot of suckers.

I need my bong.

Great answer I don't believe in that God either.

I don't have a concept of a god. I can kinda have a concept of a god if you first tell me which religion we are talking about... but that's all I have to go on, I don't have my own version.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

If you've never had a concept then simply defining the word god will suffice.

[theVOID]

So why don't you answer this question: Can you explain what you believe and why you believe it?

God to me is a force that created and set into motion the known universe.

Got any evidence to back up that claim?

I don't feel he acts on our behalf or intercedes

That is directly contradictory to the Christian belief in which God sends himself to earth as his own son, born of a virgin on earth, to directly intervene in human affairs. How can you call yourself a christian and still hold that God does not interfere?

but is omniviscent and omnipotent.

Prove it

God is unknowable

So you admit you actually have no idea what you are talking about...

therefore it doesn't follow that it's sentient.

If it's non-sentient it isn't intelligent at all, so why call it god?

If I had to visualize God it would be a huge ball of energy sitting outside the universe with photons shooting out from it.

Oh, i think we have a testable hypothesis emerging here! So if god sits outside the universe and shoots photons into the universe then there should be a measurable excess of light in the universe that would be unaccounted for in observations. As far as i am aware there is no such light in the universe, therefore your claim is disproved until you can provide evidence to the contrary.

And of course finding the light alone is not comprehensive proof of anything, but it does give your idea falsifiability which is a good thing because it means it can actually be tested.

I believe this because I can not explain what created the universe with science.

This is known as the god of the gaps argument, for example "I can't explain something, therefore god did it". As you can see from that statement you have simply assumed the answer you want is the correct one without taking any steps to verify it as true.

Even though historical documents are steeped in contradictions, mytos and warped perspectives they convey a similar hope and parables that make sense to me.

People don't organise their lives around contradictory historical documents.

I believe science is wonderful and opens our eyes to a myriad of possibilities

Then why don't you start using it? Where is the evidence to support your claim that god is a big ball of energy outside the universe shooting in photons? At the moment you are not doing science, so your claiming to support it is irrelevant in argument when you can't demonstrate actually using it.

There will always be unexplainable things that need explaining.

That does not mean you just pick your favorite answer

Frankly I don't have the energy to debunk all of them and I have a great repsect for those who do. I feel it's easier to prove what's real to me than disprove what other's feel is real.

It's impossible to disprove most of the supernatural claims people make because they are not testable, you obviously don't get how this works.

While I enjoy looking at things from an increasing perspective, it gets tedious at times and I invariably come beck to what's real to me. I don't believe in fate. I do believe in karma. Every action, thought and belief of one affects the others around them, then other's around them and so on. I see a balance on a moralistic scale, on a scientific scale and on a physical scale that leads me to believe that the randomeness of the human condition is not a singularity. I'd like to hope that perfection is love. I'd like to hope that a God is that love and he shares it with us like photons from the sun. I'd like not to sit under an umbrella with my shades.

Whether you like it or not the truth of the universe has nothing to do with man kind or what any one of us wants, it is something entirely external to our very existence. To me it sounds like you have picked a completely conceptual ideal that appeals to you and stuck with it regardless of whether of not it's true.