Theists: What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?

[PETE_ROSE]

Better question is: what would dissuade you from your religion? If you're a Christian and let's say you somehow got in possession of time machine and you went into the past like 2000 years and you saw Jesus being crucified, but that he didn't resurrect and you see it with your eyes his disciples making it up, would you still believe?

Or if you went in the same time period and you saw bunch of guys claiming they're messiah, but they all look fake, so Jesus from the Bible never existed and you saw people making him up by mixing all sorts of mythologies, would you still believe?

Would I still believe? Of course not. Christianity's lynchpin is the resurrection of Christ. But I completely disagree that you posed a better question. I think the term found here most often is strawman argument.

I would flip the question to you sir and ask if in your time machine travels you observed the crucifixion and resurrection would you change your beliefs? I understand you would be forced to acknowledge the truth and evidence you would be confronted with; but would you change your worldview or faith or more specifically your relationship with God?

---

An argument for atheism? Hmmm…. I’ll go with divine hiddenness. When I was an atheist, I found the silence of God in response to earnest prayer troubling.

What? You sir, were an atheist? I thought all of us were indoctrinated and brainwashed as children. Surely you must be a desperate, emotionally clingy, special snowflake, science denying, math illiterate rube to have left enlightenment and come to the dark side. ?

I concur that divine hiddenness would be near the top of the list. Thank you for your input.

---

When I was a theist, the most compelling argument I ever heard for atheism was, "Read the bible fully."

I did. It worked.

What specifically stood out to you? Doesn't have to be anything comprehensive, just the top 5 or 6 things that come to mind?

[Simon Moon]

For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

When I was a theist, there was no "argument for atheism" that was convincing.

By that, I mean, I was not convinced by any atheist arguments. I was convinced by my own sincere search to see if my theistic beliefs were actually rational, supported by evidence and reasoned argument.

After a bit of research using history, philosophy, archeology, science, reading the Bible itself, that convinced me that my beliefs were not rationally justified. I was once in a long term relationship with a geologist (a deist), and she used to LOL when someone claimed the Bible was archaeologically accurate.

But of course (and I am not surprised), the initial question from the OP is completely flawed, and the OP does not understand: the atheism position, skepticism, Occam's razor, burden of proof, the null hypothesis.

What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?

Atheism does not require any arguments in favor of it. All that is required is that the case for theism has not met it's burden of proof.

Remember, atheism is not a positive claim, it is a response to a claim.

[PETE_ROSE]

For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

When I was a theist, there was no "argument for atheism" that was convincing.

By that, I mean, I was not convinced by any atheist arguments. I was convinced by my own sincere search to see if my theistic beliefs were actually rational, supported by evidence, and reasoned argument.

After a bit of research using history, philosophy, archeology, science, reading the Bible itself, that convinced me that my beliefs were not rationally justified. I was in a long term relationship with a geologist, and she used to LOL when someone claimed the Bible was archaeologically accurate.

But of course (and I am not surprised), the initial question from the OP is completely flawed, and the OP does not understand: the atheism position, skepticism, Occam's razor, burden of proof, the null hypothesis.

What is the most compelling argument you have heard for Atheism?

Atheism does not require any arguments in favor of it. All that is required is that the case for theism has not met it's burden of proof.

Remember, atheism is not a positive claim, it is a response to a claim.

I would be interested in hearing 4 or 5 of the archaeological refutations or inaccuracies that you are making reference to. Thank you in advance for sharing.

[Athene]

"Magic isn't real."

That one certainly nagged at me, as a theist.

[Jesster]

Ha. This should be good.

[Simon Moon]

I would be interested in hearing 4 or 5 of the archaeological refutations or inaccuracies that you are making reference to.  Thank you in advance for sharing.

No thanks.

First of all, I am not a geologist. I'm a lowly network engineer.

They've been talked to death. The fact that you might be able to come up with some ad hoc rationalization you get off some apologetic site, in order to explain them away, is meaningless.

Not to mention, that even though the Bible gets some things right, does not negate the fact that it gets many things wrong. And that is the problem.

[Pat Mustard]

For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

From my talking with other atheists the most common road to deconversion is a read of the bible. Most christians don't read the book (remember for the first 1,300 years it was verboten for all laypeople to read it), only listen to the bits the priest/minister/reverend/pastor reads out on a Sunday.

The actual contents is like a bucket of ice water to the face.

---

When I was a theist, there was no "argument for atheism" that was convincing.

By that, I mean, I was not convinced by any atheist arguments. I was convinced by my own sincere search to see if my theistic beliefs were actually rational, supported by evidence, and reasoned argument.

After a bit of research using history, philosophy, archeology, science, reading the Bible itself, that convinced me that my beliefs were not rationally justified. I was in a long term relationship with a geologist, and she used to LOL when someone claimed the Bible was archaeologically accurate.

But of course (and I am not surprised), the initial question from the OP is completely flawed, and the OP does not understand: the atheism position, skepticism, Occam's razor, burden of proof, the null hypothesis.


Atheism does not require any arguments in favor of it. All that is required is that the case for theism has not met it's burden of proof.

Remember, atheism is not a positive claim, it is a response to a claim.

I would be interested in hearing 4 or 5 of the archaeological refutations or inaccuracies that you are making reference to.  Thank you in advance for sharing.

The town mentioned in the Legion myth is thirty miles east of where it needs to be for that one to work. Jews were never mass enslaved in Egypt, in fact they never left Iudea (they were a sub tribe of the Canaanites, in fact the most reliable way to find the earliest recorded passages of the OT is to look at which ones still depict yhwh as part of the Canaanite pantheon, hence genesis 2 is oder than Genesis 1). A corollorary to that is the forty years in the desert, an arthritic granny sucking an oxygen tank will walk the Sinai in a couple of weeks. The fossil records refutes both creation myths, the observed shape of the earth refutes the shape in the bible (i.e. it's not flat). Nazareth wasn't a town or village between c250 BCE and 400 CE.

That's six off the top of my head.

[Simon Moon]

For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

From my talking with other atheists the most common road to deconversion is a read of the bible. Most christians don't read the book (remember for the first 1,300 years it was verboten for all laypeople to read it), only listen to the bits the priest/minister/reverend/pastor reads out on a Sunday.

The actual contents is like a bucket of ice water to the face.

---

I would be interested in hearing 4 or 5 of the archaeological refutations or inaccuracies that you are making reference to.  Thank you in advance for sharing.

The town mentioned in the Legion myth is thirty miles east of where it needs to be for that one to work. Jews were never mass enslaved in Egypt, in fact they never left Iudea (they were a sub tribe of the Canaanites, in fact the most reliable way to find the earliest recorded passages of the OT is to look at which ones still depict yhwh as part of the Canaanite pantheon, hence genesis 2 is oder than Genesis 1). A corollorary to that is the forty years in the desert, an arthritic granny sucking an oxygen tank will walk the Sinai in a couple of weeks. The fossil records refutes both creation myths, the observed shape of the earth refutes the shape in the bible (i.e. it's not flat). Nazareth wasn't a town or village between c250 BCE and 400 CE.

That's six off the top of my head.

Okay, you got me sucked in.

Archeologists are able to find older remnants of smaller groups of people in harsher conditions than those the Bible reports of the Exodus, yet nothing from the Sinai.

The Bible says there were 600,000 able bodied men. Then there were about equal number of women of the same age. Then the elderly, the children, and "the multitudes" that were not Hebrews. That has got to be at least 2 million.

Funny thing is, there were only about 3 to 3.5 million total population in Egypt at the time. 2 million leaving would have caused a financial collapse of Egypt. Nope, nothing, nada, zilch, zip. Egypt did just fine without 2/3 of their population leaving at one time.

The Bible claims the Exodus happened in one day. How did all the Hebrews get notified, packed, and make their way to one location, from all over Egypt in one day?

There is so much more wrong about the Exodus story.

And that is only one story in the Bible.

[The Valkyrie]

Better question is: what would dissuade you from your religion? If you're a Christian and let's say you somehow got in possession of time machine and you went into the past like 2000 years and you saw Jesus being crucified, but that he didn't resurrect and you see it with your eyes his disciples making it up, would you still believe?

Or if you went in the same time period and you saw bunch of guys claiming they're messiah, but they all look fake, so Jesus from the Bible never existed and you saw people making him up by mixing all sorts of mythologies, would you still believe?

Would I still believe?  Of course not.  Christianity's lynchpin is the resurrection of Christ.  But I completely disagree that you posed a better question.   I think the term found here most often is strawman argument.  

I would flip the question to you sir and ask if in your time machine travels you observed the crucifixion and resurrection would you change your beliefs?   I understand you would be forced to acknowledge the truth and evidence you would be confronted with; but would you change your worldview or faith or more specifically your relationship with God?

---

An argument for atheism? Hmmm…. I’ll go with divine hiddenness. When I was an atheist, I found the silence of God in response to earnest prayer troubling.

What?  You sir, were an atheist?   I thought all of us were indoctrinated and brainwashed as children.  Surely you must be a desperate, emotionally clingy, special snowflake, science denying, math illiterate rube to have left enlightenment and come to the dark side.  ?

I concur that divine hiddenness would be near the top of the list.  Thank you for your input.

---

When I was a theist, the most compelling argument I ever heard for atheism was, "Read the bible fully."

I did.  It worked.

What specifically stood out to you?  Doesn't have to be anything comprehensive, just the top 5 or 6 things that come to mind?

Genesis

The Flood (Absolutely NO evidence for a global flood).  Yes, I know the flood was likely regional and that,  to humans at the time, a large flood might see to encompass their entire world, but their are just too many similarities with other, older, stories.

Exodus (40 years to cross the Sinai?  Alexander travelled to India and back in 8, fighting battles along the way).

Incest required to populate the earth, not once, but twice.

Sodom and Gomorrah:  The only good person who could be found was a man who would willingly let his daughters get gang raped by a mob to save two strangers.  But an all knowing god wouldn't require someone else to locate a good person in these cities because he's supposed to know what goes on in a person's thoughts, right?

Millions of Jewish slaves in Egypt?  There's no indication that there ever were millions, or even hundreds of thousands of slaves in Egypt at any time, ever.

Adam and Eve: an all-knowing god who creates the entire universe happens to put the one tree humans aren't allowed to eat from in the garden those humans are in, and then can't keep a serpent (the devil) out?

And, for that matter, Satan himself.  Only humans have free will, but a third of the angels are able to rebel?  That's an indication of free will right there.

Abraham and Isaac:  God, who again knows all, wants to test the man's faith so demands he sacrifice his son.  Only to have an angel go, "oh, Just kidding!"  Not, god, but an angel.

Jesus, supposedly also all-knowing, all at least divine, cursing a fig tree for not producing fruit out of season.

Just a few.

This isn't to mention the contradictions, bad editing, etc. throughout the book.  Or the fact that out of all the various gospels, HUMANS, supposedly representing the deity, chose which books should and should not be included in it.  God couldn't step in and have them all added?  After all, the bible we have today is a mere shadow of what it would be if it was complete.

It would be like whole chapters missing from a popular novel

[Amarok]

For this thread let us lump all denominations of atheism, agnosticism, and soft non deistic worldviews into one.

Feel free to state your  best argument or  compelling reasons.

Well this tread instant fail there is no such thing as an atheist denominations and deism can't be atheistic

Atheism doesn't need to convince theists . The fact there is no substance to theism stands on it's own

---

90% of archeology directly contradicts any consistent reading of the bible