Why being an Atheist is wrong.

There is only one version of the idea that God doesn't exist, there are many many theories about how God could exist. By being atheist you are rejecting all theories, old and new, about God.

You don't know what you don't know, so how do you know that there isn't something out there?


@Pie_row,

Look at you, this is exactly what I meant by close mindedness. You already assume that I

1. Believe what I believe because someone told me it is "correct"
2. Explain everything with "god did it"
3. Care about anyone else following my beliefs
4. Believe in miracles

Do you even know what my religious beliefs are? Do you even realize that not all religions are the same? You are close minded indeed.

No one told me to believe what I believe right now, I came to it on my own.

No, I am saying that what you see is not all there is. Where did I say that it's wrong to experience and observe the world you live in now? You are the delusional one.

What is reality? If it is what you see/hear/smell/feel/taste then it is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain. That means reality exists in your mind, and without a brain to interpret these signals, by your definition of reality it simply wont exist.

Once again your delusions are taking over. I never said any of these things and you already think that I am trying to convert you to a belief that you don't even know the name of. This is the type of bullshit I hate. One mention of God and everyone thinks I'm trying to convert them.

atheism - n. a: a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

atheists have faith that the information their scientists give them is correct.

You just showed me a bunch of useless facts about what love is, nothing on that page explains why it happens and why we have it.

 

You have a very, very incorrect definition. See my earlier post. You're trying to force a dogmatic belief onto Atheism, and it just doesn't belong.


Atheists do not follow what scientists say. You're trying to imply there's a dogmatic element to Atheism, and that's dreadfully wrong. The only commonality Atheists share is they lack a belief in god(s).

 

Science rejects "theories" that defies the laws of physics and that have NO evidence supporting them. God does both.

No and I dont care. All religions are the same in the way that they think (either for themself or not) one "theory" on how the universe came to be and stick with it no matter what evidence says otherwise.

You have an opinion, great... Now what evidence and research do you have to support it?

You didnt creat the thread you idiot, So why assume I'm talking to you.

The world we live in. If we cannot sense it and cannot observe its exsistance from experiments we cannot say they exist.

Your delusions are taking over because you once again think you created this thread.

Bhahahahahaaha you have no idea what you are talking about. Science will find a question then look for the answer with experiments and evidence of its validity. If they find out its wrong, they scrap it and start again.

So you are saying that einstein just guessed the atomic theory? He just one day while playing runescape thought, i bet this is what happens, tested it and boom we have an atomic bomb?
ALOT of scientists, Including Einstein, have disproven there own theories. If they had "faith" in their theory, why would you disprove it?

 

Love can be explained with science (psychology). It's nothing more than a measure of the intensity of attraction. It's nothing more than "liking" someone.

 

The reply "love" was to a question asking for a thing that couldn't be explained by logic, not science. You just described what love is, tell me why there is love and why we have love for other people.

That is why you can't rely solely on science to explain the universe. In the words of Einstein, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Your closemindedness is it at it again. Look up deism and pantheism so you can understand how ignorant you are.

You ask me this with the assumption that I desire to convert you and everyone here, and I don't, and I never said I did. You are merely so delusional that you can't work around the idea of a religious person that doesn't care what anyone else believes in.

Um... because you were replying to my post? Delusional indeed...

Gravity is only observable in the fact that larger objects attract smaller objects in space, and because of this little fact you have absolute without a doubt belief in that a thing called gravity exists. Other than that, you don't even know what it looks like, you can only feel it's effects on your physical body.

In the same way I can say a thing called God exists because life is possible and it is possible for me to have feelings.

Let me repeat in more detail... unless you are the one conducting the experiments and making the observations, you must have faith that what they are telling you is true. There is no going about this fact.

The writer of the theory doesn't need faith because they are the ones writing it. If you read through the theory and completely understand it, then you don't need faith to accept the facts. If you haven't read the theory at all and you accept the propositions of the theory, then you need faith to do that.

 

You don't understand at all what I said. Love isn't some separate feeling. There is only one feeling of attraction. I used for arguments sake "like". There are different intensities of how much you "like" a person.


attraction (like) chart

hate...............................................love
...|-------|-------------|--------------|
..............^....................................^
............friend........................Willing to give your life

It's the same feeling. It's not logic, it's science. If you don't understand this then you need to look into psychology.

 

Once again, I don't care WHAT love is and WHAT it's effects are. I want to know WHY there is love and WHY we have this attraction for other beings. Being seperate beings shouldn't we only care about ourselves?

 

Here's a logical explanation for you: Evolution.

The creatures who feel "love" and fuck each other carry on their genes through the resulting offspring. The ones who would rather live all alone in a cave, disappear from the gene pool. Therefore, it is likely that a majority of creatures are genetically inclined to love, because the ones who do not are less likely to pass on their genes. Logical, no?

 

Stop. Almost every post contains the word fallacy. Mind-numbingly repetitive.
To base decisions on their moral worth is meaningless and idealistic.

 

Your whole approach seems to be extremely pragmatic. Perhaps what is right is not what always "rationally" works?

 

I'm an atheist because what sick son of a bitch would get on their knees to worship two men?
I mean, sounds like a bukake trap to me.


With all seriousness though, I just don't see how if there is a super-being in heaven why:

There was a holocaust ( Slaughter of millions of jews like his "Son", jesus. )
Why there is famine, death, murder, and crimes. Thousands daily.

 

kind of fail logic... ive never been attacked for being atheist. does that mean im in the right when others are in the wrong? this is saying any and all differences are wrong, so in the end every human being is extremely wrong. although human beings create our own sense of right or wrong and obviously we wouldnt blame every single person for being different, therefore wrong.

 

That's not logic, that's simply showing how love helps the evolutionary process. Sacrificing something for a loved one is completely illogical, yet people do it because of love.

And what exactly does that have to do with logic? I love how people give me answers like these thinking they know everything.

 

Sacrificing something for a loved one makes you feel good about yourself, therefore you do it. How is that not logical?

 

Urgh. What you're doing is putting everyone on earth into a single subset of people who get the same pleasure out of the same things. What if someone likes being questioned and argued with more than ignored or accepted?

Also, even though it works out in your little math equation, that's not human nature. If you want me to give an example, let's say, every mistake any human being has ever made. I don't think we're able to calculate perfectly what will ultimately give us the most pleasure, at least most of us. So that's probably why people aren't the same.

Anyway to the person above me, what if it involved killing yourself to save them? You wouldn't exactly feel good about yourself.

 

Without pain there is no love?

Or would an idyllic love-only world be the best thing around?

 

Uh... lol. Wow. Let me ask you a question, have YOU ever done anything that wasn't out of selfishness? If not then there really is no point in trying to talk to you about love.

This is with the assumption that humans are in some way special or important to god. This is assumed out of arrogance that humans are in some way better than the other living and nonliving things on earth, and the universe. Since god would probably have a different perception of time and the universe, our lives and the human race would probably be of no significance to him. This is of course my view of god, if you are talking about the mainstream religion view of god then I completely agree with you.

 

Funny. Creating a figure to "make life easier" is in no way, shape, or form rational. Its more irrational than anything.
As always, fantasy <> fiction. In reality, there is no God. In ones own mind, God exists only as a form of comfort.

 

Sorry for the double post, but I find this important.
As I was reading this thread, I began to ponder about different realities. Then I began to ask myself about reality, and what can alter reality, such as drugs. Then I came to the question of "what is reality?" Of course, I was simply waiting for someone to argue against the perception side of reality vs the "realness" (lame, I know) of reality by quoting the Matrix.
This isn't the movie. If you can prove otherwise that actuality and existence are something other than electrical signals (as to re-quote), then go ahead. If not, dont use unsupported claims and come up with a new argument.