-Let It Be Known What Atheism Truly Is-

You certainly are free to call it that if you want...or to call it an argument only a dunce would make to someone like you if you wanted. I suggest, respectfully, that you are not at liberty to tell me that I must be part of that "we" in your final sentence.

I suggest that the assertion "one cannot prove a negative" is false...no matter what you call it.

One CAN prove a negative.

I've already done so here.

 

So can whine all you want.
I gave a link to the type discussion we are having.
I concur, you can prove a negative argument.

If neither side can prove a positive or negative claim, then according to the philosophy link I provided, it's an argument from ignorance.
Don't like, too bad.

 

No you can't...and haven't.

no it can't

A negative can no be proven

 

One can prove a negative. I am glad we agree.

One can also call anything...anything they want to.

I hope we can agree on that also.

But I object to you deciding what "WE" will do. Which is what I said. I attempted to do that respectfully...and without passion.

Okay?

Your "So can whine all you want" and "Don't like, too bad" were unnecessary.

In any case, I am not discussing arguments from ignorance or any of the other stuff brought up in that article. I am discussing the assertion, "one cannot prove a negative."

One CAN prove a negative.

We are now in agreement on that...although I suspect Rahl will disagree.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I can...and I have.

Yes, it truly can.

A negative can yes be proven.

 

nope

...

 

All l have said is correct.

Continue the childishness if you must.

 

nothing you said is correct. You can't prove a negative, and you haven't......because you can't.

you can stop responding to my posts whenever you wish. I will keep correcting you when you quote me though.

 

Everything I said about proving a negative is correct.

One can prove a negative...and I have.

I am going to leave for a while. Got two wakes to go to today. But when I get back, I will respond to any silliness you post...and will continue to do so until they shut us down.

You're easy!

 

nothing you said was correct, as you can't prove a negative.

I'm sorry for you loss.

I will continue pointing out you are incorrect.

 

Haven't left yet. Waiting for the wife to pick me up.

Not my family. The deceased are a friend of my brother, who I knew...and the mother of a friend of ours.

But thank you for the condolence.

You probably will continue to pretend I am incorrect. But I was not incorrect.

One CAN prove a negative. I've already done so.

 

No it is not. Since the vast majority of America claims to be religious it follows that the vast majority of crimes are committed by the religious. You fell into the most simple logical trap.

 

How can you expect the non-material to present itself in material attributes? In other words, just because there is no physical proof for God does not mean that God does not exist. Atheists operate under the presumption that the material world is the only means by which everything can be known. As said before, this mindset is yet another self-fulfilling belief system.

You will never- at least in this life- get the "evidence" that you desire. One must transcend the material self in order to see divine truth. This is something atheists have repeatedly failed to comprehend, and have thus repeatedly fallen into the cycle of disbelief:

Presume that everything is material; experience only the material; conclude that the material is all that exists. Rinse and repeat.

No, you demand proof that you know you aren't going to get. More so, you refuse to perceive the world differently that what you are currently used to. You only have yourself to blame if you don't perceive the divine.

 

God ordered the Hewbrews to slaughter all men, women, and children of any towns or villages that refused to bow to them. In other words, the Hebrews went around killing people and taking their land and called it "god's will" after the fact to justify it.

 

I didn't fall into anything, your statements are very ridiculous, and no relation to reality.

 

Of course they make sense. If the vast majority of Americans claim to be religious then it follows that more crimes are committed by relogios people than athiests. That is so simple even a third grader should be able to follow the logic.

 

So according to you if one claims to be superman, than they are.

 

If this sky-fairy interacts with this world then there should be evidence we can see that is real evidence especially if your basing this on events in history for example the Exodus. What is the issue if demons possess people and you can drive them out then fine do it under scientific observation and demonstrate para-natural abilities and events as you get rid of them and build up an evidence base. See here is my issue evidence is what we have in a clearly material world to study if your claiming its something else then how do we get evidence? If you saying we can't then I have nothing to base a position on the supernatural and god other than said things don't exist except as a fiction and in folklore which is fine I love Harry Potter-verse things but its made up, I enjoy Supernatural the television series but its only stories about fictional beings and I enjoy the movies with Thor in them done by Marvel in movie form but again its fiction. Now if I see a man with armor and a hammer, calling lightning and blasting other supernatural beings then fine its no fiction then is it.

 

We can only measure the material, so for all intents and purposes only the material can be known to be real. Anything beyond that is baseless conjecture and definitely not something to base your life upon. It could be some subclinical form of schizophrenia for all we know, hearing god voices. Or some psychological form of endorphin to avoid the difficult-to-accept realities of death.

 

My thought is, why is a magic pixie in the sky required for something to be moral or not?

I think the religious guilt people to control them. there's probably a good reason to be against drunkenness- alcohol is a poison that harms the body - but that isn't what religion is about. It's about controlling people.

Here's the thing. For centuries, Judeo-Christian thought was that slavery was morally acceptable. The Bible gave a ton of rules in the Old Testament on how to treat slaves, and in the New Testament, told slaves to suck it up, even if they believed in Jesus.

At no point did God say slavery was immoral. He didn't change his mind, we changed ours.

 

The fallacy of the OP is that it erroneously ASSUMES that there is a god in the first place and then tries to describe atheism as a "rejection" of this non existent deity.

Onus is entirely on the OP to first PROVE that this imaginary deity actually exists before they can use it to define atheism.

Since no one has ever been able to provide proof of any deity at all out of the thousands that have been worshiped throughout documented history it is extremely unlikely that the OP will succeed.

Therefore this OP is yet another abject failure on the part of theists to denigrate atheists.

 

Just as the OP went too far...so too have you.

You seem to be saying there are no gods...just as the OP is saying not only is there a god...but that the god has expectations of humans.

Fact is, we do not know if there are any gods...and we have no idea that if there are...whether they have expectations of humans or not.

We simply do not know.

 

Most of what you said here is correct...although if you are the kind of atheist who assert that no gods exist...the onus of proof for that assertion falls on you.

 

You clearly don't get it I said if we can't study it as rational human animals then it doesn't exist, at least as anything humans should be concerned with. See science is real and leads to benefits like modern medicine while faith leads to nothing in fact its been a divisive issue for much of human history and a massive waste of our human labor, resources and wealth when many other things would have been better uses. Such as libraries and schools of all kinds, artist colonies, scientific research and advancements in medicine and food production etc. We could even be colonizing other worlds by now if we channeled our resource for just the last millennia on things I noted.

You can live in your dream world of angels dancing on pinheads, magic spells tossed about by sky-fairies and angry lighting tossing father figures but I prefer REALITY.

 

Your acting a child. Christianity has never thought slavery was ok, Christian heritage was slaves. Christianity helped to free the slaves, and during slavery when law enforcement and others went house to house looking for them, Christians would hide them in their barns, cellars, attics, wherever they could, so they would not be taken. They risked their lives for slaves. Christianity is love thy neighbor as thyself, otherwise they are not Christians.

If someone murders another and get's caught, tells the law he/she is a Christian, then the media, law enforcement and pretty much everyone that hears the story, takes this murderer's word for it, and then proceed to dog on Christianity. If I claim to be superman, does that mean I am? Get over yourself.

 

Who are you to decide that?

If a thing exists...it exists whether human can study it or not.

You are allowed to think that...but religion has furnished all sorts of art, for example, for humans. And while I agree that humans have found divisiveness in religion (and fought wars over it) I suspect humans are perfectly capable of finding all sorts of other reasons to hate and scorn each other. (We seem to be feeling that way right now in this country...and it has nothing whatever to do with religion.)

Could be.

So what does that have to do with what I said?

I'll repeat it: "...if you are the kind of atheist who assert that no gods exist...the onus of proof for that assertion falls on you."

It does.

I do not know if gods exist or not. I am an agnostic.

If you actually were interested in REALITY...you would acknowledge that same thing.