Why I Don't Believe in Atheism

[The Valkyrie]

But it's always amazing how your god is exempt from the necessity of being created

I think you misunderstood the opening post.

The opening post shows nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, thus being uncreated.

When a person uses the term 'God' that's what they are referring to this proven 'uncreated Creator' that can't be nature.

Simple.

Ah, gotcha.

Nonsense.

[Thumpalumpacus]

So if anyone wants to try to challenge the proof you're welcome to do so.

It was done centuries ago. Perhaps you should read outside your own fishbowl?

[Bad Wolf]

So if anyone wants to try to challenge the proof you're welcome to do so.

Proof? What proof? Must have missed it.

[Foxaèr]

Referencing a deistic style God seems like a horrible reason to be a Christian.

There's a good reason to be one?

[MPCADF]

When you say 'I don't believe in atheism' you sound really stupid. You know why? Because all atheism is, is: 'a lack of belief in god'. So what you are effectively saying is 'I don't believe in you not believing in my god'. Atheism is a lack of a belief and therefore it is impossible to hold it as a belief.

You do believe in your lack of belief in God. To deny it would be really stupid.

I don't believe in 'a lack of belief in God' because that would be really stupid since the proof in the opening post proves having a lack of belief would be obviously wrong since nature proves the 'uncreated Creator' Whom we call God.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Referencing a deistic style God seems like a horrible reason to be a Christian.

There's a good reason to be one?

I'm told they sometimes serve wine and crackers at their services.

[Violet]

For me it is really simply why I don't believe in atheism, because the universe can't come from nothing, that is, non-existence, because that which does not exist can't cause anything, since it doesn't exist. We only have evidence of causation from 'something', no evidence to the contrary.

Okay... and what does that have to do with atheism?

Btw... nothing exists, but... it's got nothing to do with whatever you're trying to tell me.

And I don't believe in atheism because the universe(s) could not have always existed because if it (they) had then by definition there would have been an be an infinite regress of cause and effects, so you would have had an eternity to come into being before now, so you should have already happened. And self-contradictorily, you would never have existed because a past eternity would continue to go on for eternity, thus never reaching this point of existence now.

Everything exists. The last sentence is impossible if the first sentence is true, because you defined a universe that has been an infinite cycle of death and rebirth. Entropy and the rebirth cycle would then preclude an 'eternal existence disabling further existences'.

... You're not very good at this, are you?

Therefore, by this evidential reasoning, I conclude nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. This uncreated Creator is Whom I call God. Logical, since we know the uncreated Creator exist, it is incumbent upon us to find out where God reveals Himself personally. The initial caveat is that God is not self-contradictory so only one religion can be the correct one.

By... what?

* Violet laughs.

And this being doesn't need a cause, I'm guessing?

[CapnAwesome]

Referencing a deistic style God seems like a horrible reason to be a Christian.

There's a good reason to be one?

No, not really. but we hear this style of argument a lot and it just strikes me as important that the thread starter is a Christian (as are many people who make a similar argument) and yet the God that he is referring too in his opening post, the 'prime mover' style God of the ancient past, is not the one that he himself believes in. Instead he believes in a current active (and ridiculous) concept of God. So if what he says is true (and of course I reject it anyway) then Christianity has a worse standing than Atheism.

[Violet]

Referencing a deistic style God seems like a horrible reason to be a Christian.

There's a good reason to be one?

Salvation, MANG!

[Foxaèr]

the proof in the opening post proves having a lack of belief would be obviously wrong since nature proves the 'uncreated Creator' Whom we call God.

Your problem is that you already believe in god and are creating arguments to fit your belief. Arguments which are illogical. Show me the evidence that your god exists, and then we can have a proper debate.