Why are atheist...atheist?

[thebigfudge]

"and then I'm going to, reasonably respond " we don't know therefore God is possible" is true, as any rational person would agree to and also why atheist do not assert that God does not exist."

Except that God is a human creation. We created him to explain the unknown. That is the only basis we have for him, Nothing else. All the philosophical arguments in the world cant change that.

It is not reasonable to assume he exists because it cant be disproven. that where the numerous comparisons to spaghetti monsters, unicorns, fairies etc come in.

[Napoléon]

Next, I will make the suggestion I've made many times, now " if you don't understand the argument, ask to elaborated before asserting negative claims based on them"

How will using more words suddenly lead to whatever you're saying making sense.

[downbeatplumb]

How will using more words suddenly lead to whatever you're saying making sense.

I concur the fewer words the better

[Faith No More]

It should be clear by now that no negativity was intended as I, cleary, am trying to withhold my own negativity. I was only attempting to state what I felt is reasonably true of someone who would assert that God does not exist.

Perhaps in the future when trying to avoid displaying negativity, you should avoid words with negative connotations.

[krazedkat]

Far as i know, atheist choose to believe that God does not exist.

You're entire post already falls apart in the first sentence. Atheism is the lack of belief in any deity.

My question is why?

I lack said belief due to the fact that there is no evidence, whatsoever, that has been presented that leads me to the assumption that there is a deity. Further still, no peer review journal has ever published anything even hinting at the existence of a deity.

I, myself, am spiritual and am not really affiliated with any religion. I choose to believe God exist because I think the laws of physics just randomly or coincidently happenening the way they did out of the infinite other possible options is rediculously unlikely.

What leads you to this absurd conclusion? It's completely likely.

So unlikely that i choose to believe in some intelligent design instead. As far as what God is like don't know. Is he an individual, a collective, or more like a computer with no real consciousness as we might call it? I couldn't answer with as much conviction as believing in God, but I do have my beliefs about his nature.

Then you don't believe in god, simple as that. To believe in something you must have a working definition of what the hell it is you believe in!

But to just assert that God doesn't exist without any real supporting evidence is just as ignorant as religious people saying he does exist and describing what he's like.

Again, wrong definition...

To me, it sounds like Atheist choose not to believe in God simply because it makes them feel more sure of reality, same reason religious people choose to believe.

I choose to not believe because nothing supports it. And yes, it does make me more sure of reality, seeing as I, the non-blind one, can actually see it.

Why not simply admit one does not know instead taking a stance of certainty? That, to me, is inherently ignorant.

This whole post is using the wrong definition.

P.S
I asked this same question on yahoo answers and for some reason offended alot of people. I thought atheist weren't not as prone to respond like religious people when someone questions there beliefs. I'm just curious, not looking to convert anyone or anything like that.

Maybe they were offended at how atrocious your grammar and spelling were, rather than simply being offended by the proposed question. You must understand that atheism is a lack of belief, that'd probably be why people got so pissed at you, you didn't even know what you were arguing against.

[Alastor]

You're entire post already falls apart in the first sentence. Atheism is the lack of belief in any deity.

I applaud you for being the only one who was apparently able to recognize that from reading my first post. Although, as it appears you did not read the rest of this thread, that has already long since been established in later post.

What leads you to this absurd conclusion? It's completely likely.

I grew weary of this thread and stopped responding, but this statement has revived my interest. I've never known anyone to assert the claim that the laws of physics have always been likely to exist. I am curious as to why you reason this to be the case.

So unlikely that i choose to believe in some intelligent design instead. As far as what God is like don't know. Is he an individual, a collective, or more like a computer with no real consciousness as we might call it? I couldn't answer with as much conviction as believing in God, but I do have my beliefs about his nature.

Then you don't believe in god, simple as that. To believe in something you must have a working definition of what the hell it is you believe in!

I do believe in God, and I do have a working definition, read later post if your interested.

I choose to not believe because nothing supports it. And yes, it does make me more sure of reality, seeing as I, the non-blind one, can actually see it.

More accurately, we do not know enough about God, at least as I have defined him, to discern support from lack of support. Not believing in a God based on the lack of what you believe is support, does not make you any more sure of reality than anyone who asserts they do not know if God exists or not.

Maybe they were offended at how atrocious your grammar and spelling were, rather than simply being offended by the proposed question. You must understand that atheism is a lack of belief, that'd probably be why people got so pissed at you, you didn't even know what you were arguing against.

Again read later post if you are interested. My definition was based on one I read from a dictionary.

[weakagnostic]

Alastor says:

I choose to believe God exist because I think the laws of physics just randomly or coincidently happenening the way they did out of the infinite other possible options is rediculously unlikely. So unlikely that i choose to believe in some intelligent design instead.

So you choose to believe in something but then use logic and reason to argue for whatever you have chosen to believe in? You have of course no right to use logic and reason to argue about anything you haven't used logic and reason to arrive at. By doing so you have already discredited yourself.

This is my first post so please bear with me if I have made any mistakes.

[Epimethean]

Alastor cherry picks what and how he will respond for the very simple reason of a lack of ability for faith to confront disbelief.

[The Grand Nudger]

Still missing that critical first step.

[Frosty]

Far as i know, atheist choose to believe that God does not exist.

This is completely false.

No one chooses what they believe, an atheist couldn't choose to believe in god any more than you could choose not to believe in god.

You arrive at your beliefs through a path of analysing assertions of others, applying logic, reasoning, critical thinking and come to some conclusion as to the validity of the claim. Some people find the claim believable and others do not, but it's never a choice.