Tooth Fairy Bullshit

[ApeNotKillApe]

They're important to you. Universe don't give a ha'penny toss.

Thank you. When I was an atheist I would have agreed with you entirely. There is no free lunch. The lack of belief in God may not be a positive claim* but that lack of belief creates a big gaping hole drawing into it lots of other beliefs. I don't think many AF members have taken atheism to its bleak logical extreme such as you apparently have. I respect your intellectual honesty.

*In one trivial sense I suppose that's true, but not in the sense that truly matters.

Didn't realise I inferred so much with offhand stating of the obvious. Glad you understand at least.

[Catholic_Lady]

Where is your evidence for personal identity?
Where is your evidence for human equality?
Where is your evidence that intentions exist?

Hmmm...suddenly doesn't seem so simple, does it?  

What does that have to do with evidence for gods?

Stay on point, Chad -- when you deflect, you demonstrate the weakness of your position; especially when you have to impute views, or make invalid comparisons, as you've done here.

It's perfectly simple to me: the Christian god completely and entirely lacks evidence.  Feel free to demonstrate this wrong by, uh, y'know, presenting evidence, rather than arguments.

He was referring to your comment about evidence. I think he means there isn't hard "evidence" for a lot of things, including the questions he asked above. It doesn't mean those aren't still valid questions to ponder, and that the answer to them is as simple as "there's no evidence for any of this therefore there's no reason to take this any further. Case closed."

[Edwardo Piet]

When the issue is "there's no evidence", it doesn't seem terribly complex.

Where is your evidence for personal identity?
Where is your evidence for human equality?
Where is your evidence that intentions exist?

Hmmm...suddenly doesn't seem so simple, does it?  

My bold.

Wait, what?

LMFAO!

[Asmodee]

I think most of us can agree it is intended to be insulting when spoken out loud.  However, it is how most of us actually feel.  Hell, even Christians have acknowledged knowing their beliefs are childish, though not directly.  Why do you think they are so desperate to get religious teachings into schools?  The children whose parents already hold those beliefs already teach their children these things.  But they want to teach all children these things.  Why?  Because they are well aware that you can only plant the idea of magical beliefs in the head of a child.  Any reasonable adult, hearing about God for the first time, is far more likely to reject the idea outright than to seriously consider it.  You have to plant magical ideas in the heads of children if you want them to stick.

Now, I can understand that most Christians here won't want to accept that, but think about it.  If I approached you on the street and told you about a magic guy who runs around healing people, predicting the future, raising people from the dead and the like, but these claims had nothing to do with what you already believe, would you even bother listening to it?  Even if they weren't in conflict with what you believe you wouldn't even consider it as possible because you weren't raised from childhood to accept such fantastical claims without question and proof.

In that respect a guess an atheist is really nothing more than someone who has rejected the propensity toward belief of certain fantastical claims without question planted in our brains during childhood.  If you really examine your own psyche you'll likely be amazed how many things you have been programmed simply to accept, either purposefully or accidentally.  In my life I have doubted climate change and vaccines and accepted, or at least entertained ideas of global conspiracies, alien visitation and ghosts.  For each one I had to do a thorough examination of why I believed or doubted and in each case I came to the same realization.  Like Fox Mulder, I wanted to believe.  But I had no reason to believe, so I rejected the belief.

[Thumpalumpacus]

He was referring to your comment about evidence. I think he means there isn't hard "evidence" for a lot of things, including the questions he asked above. It doesn't mean those aren't still valid questions to ponder, and that the answer to them is as simple as "there's no evidence for any of this therefore there's no reason to take this any further. Case closed."

I know what he was referring to, thanks; hence my reply.

[downbeatplumb]

I think most of us can agree it is intended to be insulting when spoken out loud.  However, it is how most of us actually feel.  Hell, even Christians have acknowledged knowing their beliefs are childish, though not directly.  Why do you think they are so desperate to get religious teachings into schools?  The children whose parents already hold those beliefs already teach their children these things.  But they want to teach all children these things.  Why?  Because they are well aware that you can only plant the idea of magical beliefs in the head of a child.  Any reasonable adult, hearing about God for the first time, is far more likely to reject the idea outright than to seriously consider it.  You have to plant magical ideas in the heads of children if you want them to stick.

Now, I can understand that most Christians here won't want to accept that, but think about it.  If I approached you on the street and told you about a magic guy who runs around healing people, predicting the future, raising people from the dead and the like, but these claims had nothing to do with what you already believe, would you even bother listening to it?  Even if they weren't in conflict with what you believe you wouldn't even consider it as possible because you weren't raised from childhood to accept such fantastical claims without question and proof.

In that respect a guess an atheist is really nothing more than someone who has rejected the propensity toward belief of certain fantastical claims without question planted in our brains during childhood.  If you really examine your own psyche you'll likely be amazed how many things you have been programmed simply to accept, either purposefully or accidentally.  In my life I have doubted climate change and vaccines and accepted, or at least entertained ideas of global conspiracies, alien visitation and ghosts.  For each one I had to do a thorough examination of why I believed or doubted and in each case I came to the same realization.  Like Fox Mulder, I wanted to believe.  But I had no reason to believe, so I rejected the belief.

I find the "yo can't say that its insulting" tactic is just a way to stifle a constructive way to articulate a point.
Censorship by outrage.

If I were to say that I find mention of Thoamsd Aquinas and his five ways offensive it shuts down a vast amount of debate for no benefit other than to shut down the debate.

When I mention I think of god as the same as the toothfairy I am in no way meaning to offensive. It is a shorthand for how I think of their deity, They are being offended by how I feel!

[Neo-Scholastic]

If I approached you on the street and told you about a magic guy who runs around healing people, predicting the future, raising people from the dead and the like, but these claims had nothing to do with what you already believe, would you even bother listening to it?... Even if they weren't in conflict with what you believe you wouldn't even consider it as possible because you weren't raised from childhood to accept such fantastical claims without question and proof…In that respect a guess an atheist is really nothing more than someone who has rejected the propensity toward belief of certain fantastical claims without question planted in our brains during childhood.

It's unfair to castigate the average Christian in a mainstream denomination for having simplistic notions about theology. The most important thing about the Christian religion isn’t about what you intellectually believe. It’s about the heart. That’s why priests and preachers (in mainline churches) focus on teaching people about a God that cares for them personally and how to honor His loving-kindness. Laypeople don’t need to know the ins-and-outs of Theology or read biblical Hebrew. I do and I can. But that’s just me. For the average Christian, though, the executive summary is sufficient. Is that so wrong? I have a basic understanding of economics, physics, and art history, but I’m no expert by any means. Nevertheless I can balance my checkbook, mix paint mediums, and appreciate Van Gogh.

Now I wholeheartedly agree with you about street preachers. There is one on State Street (Chicago) who babbles endlessly about the Lake of Fire and who’s going to be cast into it. He is clearly insane. So what? It’s stupid to compare some random wacko’s beliefs and values with those of Wilberforce, Bonheoffer and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Yet many AF members feel quite comfortable doing so. I have no problem calling them douchebags. That's not shutting down discussion. It's shocking you to reflect on your own belief - the one that allows you to equate great people with psychopaths.

I became an atheist in part because our Elders would gather us in the church basement to tell us that Dungeons & Dragons was demon worship and that we’d be tools of Satan if we listened to Led Zeppelin. Some of my schoolmates were Jehovah Witnesses. My AP friends and I had a lot of laughs over their tracts on YEC. They weren’t bad people. They just had bad theology and a piss-poor grasp of science. They didn’t know any better.

It’s clear that a lot of AF members, like me, had the unfortunate luck grew up in repressive and/or intellectually bankrupt churches. That’s no excuse for going the other extreme. Just because you’re smart enough to know that biblical inerrancy is bullshit doesn’t make you a paragon of Reason capable of evaluating something like Plantinga’s ontological argument. I would bet money that 90% of people that put the words like logic or reason in their self-description haven’t even heard of modal logic. If all you've got is endlessly repeating "no evidence", can't see the obvious category error, even after it's been made obvious, then you're no better than Christians who quote the Bible to prove it's the Word of God.

[Minimalist]

That’s why priests and preachers (in mainline churches) focus on teaching people about a God that cares for them personally and how to honor His loving-kindness.

Without a shred of evidence that such a god exists.  THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

[downbeatplumb]

[quote pid='1493097' dateline='1485188774']


It’s clear that a lot of AF members, like me, had the unfortunate luck grew up in repressive and/or intellectually bankrupt churches. That’s no excuse for going the other extreme. Just because you’re smart enough to know that biblical inerrancy is bullshit doesn’t make you a paragon of Reason capable of evaluating something like Plantinga’s ontological argument. I would bet money that 90% of people that put the words like logic or reason in their self-description haven’t even heard of modal logic. If all you've got is endlessly repeat "no evidence", can't see the obvious category error, even after it's been made obvious, then you're no better than Christians who quote the Bible to prove it's the Word of God.

[/quote]

Firstly there is no evidence for god.
But the main reason I have never believed is simple.
Its a silly idea, an obvious old "just so" story told to shut people up so they continue to herd their goats rather search for answers.
I honestly have a hard time believing that people in this technological age believe it at all.

You, I think, grew up in a place where it is not unusual to believe in those sorts of things, but in Britain its an oddity.

[Cephus]

Nonsensical questions.

You mean like: Who am I? Why am I here? How should I live my life?

I don't know about you but those seem like the only questions that really matter. If there are no such things (no evidence, right?) as personal identity, purpose, or values  then I guess you're right.

Because those are all subjective questions.  There is no actual answer, it's all opinion.  But gods are supposedly objectively real.  They exist equally for everyone, regardless of your individual belief in them. Therefore, they require evidence.

Or didn't you know that?