Atheists who become Christians

[Mister Agenda]

@Nope

Mister Agenda says that a good reason to believe that there is no reason that exists to believe in God is because he doesn't know of one.

I know of no reason why an elephant shouldn't be standing on my porch, so it must be there.

Not knowing is no good reason to doubt something. It's only a position of no knowledge.

When I talked about trying to say something dumber, I didn't mean it is a challenge.

It's stupid to believe something of which you have no knowledge.

[fr0d0]

When I talked about trying to say something dumber, I didn't mean it is a challenge.

It's stupid to believe something of which you have no knowledge.

lol I agree

x2

Indeed it is. Yet you say that you've done this?

[Mister Agenda]

When I talked about trying to say something dumber, I didn't mean it is a challenge.

It's stupid to believe something of which you have no knowledge.

lol I agree

x2

Indeed it is. Yet you say that you've done this?

Yes, I wasn't always reasonably skeptical. I developed it slowly. God was far from the first thing I had no knowledge of that I stopped believing.

[Nope]

@Nope

Mister Agenda says that a good reason to believe that there is no reason that exists to believe in God is because he doesn't know of one.

I know of no reason why an elephant shouldn't be standing on my porch, so it must be there.

Not knowing is no good reason to doubt something. It's only a position of no knowledge.

I think that your example of an elephant on the porch fails doesn't compare to Mister A's because he said that there was no reason to believe something doesn't exist. You are saying that there is no reason to disbelieve that something exists(the elephant on your porch) Those are opposite ways of looking at the world.

There is no reason to believe that there is an elephant on my front porch so I don't even need to check is different then I believe that an elephant is on my porch because I have no reason to disbelieve but no reason to believe either.

I don't believe there is an elephant on my porch because I live in the wrong region for wild elephants, my porch probably couldn't hold one(unless there are minielephants) and I didn't hear anything outside.

You believe in an elephanton your front porch just because you want to believe. Unless you have evidence to support such a strange claim, I am being reasonable in disbelieving that something huge is about to ring my doorbell

The same is true of god. There is no evidence that there is a deity so the burden is on the religious person to prove their claims.

[Silver]

Reason to believe is logical.

Except there is no reason to believe in that which there is no evidence to support its existence.

[fr0d0]

I agree Nope. But MA is asserting something positive: that there is no reason, when all he has is no information.

According to your explanation, which is correct to my understanding, he should be taking no position.

If anyone claimed existence of a deity, then indeed the burden of proof rests in them to demonstrate it. What I'm pointing out is that theists make no claim of existence, only of belief.

---

Reason to believe is logical.

Except there is no reason to believe in that which there is no evidence to support its existence.

What evidence do you think is possible?

Remember that the subject is immaterial, atemporal and supernatural.

[Silver]

What I'm pointing out is that theists make no claim of existence, only of belief.

Every theist I have ever met or talked to believes and claims to know that god exists.

---

What evidence do you think is possible?

It has been discussed numerous times on this forum, in threads relating to the subject matter of what kind of evidence atheists seek.

[abaris]

What I'm pointing out is that theists make no claim of existence, only of belief.

Don't they? GC, the prof and Drich make postive claims. They constantly say "know" not "believe". You on the other hand claimed reason leading to believe. Not a reason, but reason.

And I maintain what I said earlier, believing is emotional, not believing, since there is no evidence for the existence of any higher being, is a rational decision. It's not like throwing a fit and screaming, fuck you god. It's inspecting what's there and finding it wanting to put any confidence in something invisible and untouchable. It's the same standard I apply to fairies and gobblins.

[fr0d0]

It has been discussed numerous times on this forum, in threads relating to the subject matter of what kind of evidence atheists seek.

Yes. I saw. The impossible kind.

---

What I'm pointing out is that theists make no claim of existence, only of belief.

Don't they? GC, the prof and Drich make postive claims. They constantly say "know" not "believe". You on the other hand claimed reason leading to believe. Not a reason, but reason.

And I maintain what I said earlier, believing is emotional, not believing, since there is no evidence for the existence of any higher being, is a rational decision. It's not like throwing a fit and screaming, fuck you god. It's inspecting what's there and finding it wanting to put any confidence in something invisible and untouchable. It's the same standard I apply to fairies and gobblins.

Yes, I have a thousand reasons.

Not believing is rational as it would be delusional to believe without reason. We can know the difference between fiction and non fiction. We have minds capable of differentiating. We can also make up our minds on the meaning and purpose that underpins our outlook on everything. An entirely intellectual pursuit: rational.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I learned of information on the subject and assessed it critically over a long period of time. I scrutinised people and conflicting theories on the subject. I trusted the information to be true enough to act upon it. This has been the standard accepted path to belief for centuries. Nothing I believe hinders or opposes scientific fact. I remain as skeptical as ever on all subjects especially faith and belief, as I understand I must be.

Certainly you can lay out your actual reasoning and evidence ... or can you?