Is Atheism a logical belief?

The universe was created from Nothing, which is hard to define because in our existence, there is always something. But Nothing, which we don't understand, evolves to form quantum foam and strings, which then produces elemental particles. The elemental particles continue to evolve until hydrogen atoms are created. Then, when there is enough hydrogen atoms they clump together under their own gravity and form huge balls that go nuclear, thereby producing a star. Over time the nuclear furnace cooks up new and heavier elements. Eventually the star explodes and the material clumps together to form planets. The planets cook up new elements in their cores and, if the conditions are right, those elements will form organic molecules that might evolve into a simple life form. As time passes the simple life form evolves into more complex and diverse life forms until one day one of those life forms will wonder where everything came from.

The main stumbling block is that we don't know what Nothing is and don't understand its properties. We also tend to forget that this process takes billions of years under ideal conditions. We also forget that all life forms are composed of dead atoms but that those dead atoms gain the power of life
and replication until their power is depleted. Remember, as a living being you can eat and digest assorted inorganic chemicals. And that the gases hydrogen and oxygen combine to form a clear, ordorless, tasteless liquid that can change into a solid white substance called ice and then evaporate into an invisible gas that we inhale to keep us alive.

The biblical Jesus character thought that the stars would fall to the Earth. Even the dumbest idiot of today knowns that will not happen. His mistake was in thinking that the stars were just tiny spots of light and when he saw meteors streaking through the night skies he thought that they were stars. You're smarter than Jesus on that subject, aren't you?

About 100 years ago smart people thought that the entire universe consisted of just the visible stars that they could see with their naked eyes. Now, we think that the universe extends out to about 14 billion light years distance. But, in reality, the universe could extend for 100 zillion light years or more. We will never know and humans will probably never know what the universe is. We might just be the equivalent of a grain of sand in the scheme of everything.

 

I'm pointing out being atheist isn't noteworthy...It's just bigotry against religion. Atheists are open minded about Bigfoot, or aliens visiting our world (or is that too much like a god-like visit?), or racism being the most heinous reason why blacks can't make it in America, for examples, - topics with no factual evidence for support - but atheists are closed minded when it comes to religion because there's no factual evidence to support the existence of god(s).

 

I agree with the first and second statements of your quoted post.

I disagree with the third statement of your quoted post. An atheist hates the thought of an existence of god(s) and will under no circumstances acknowledge the existence of god(s).

 

I'm agnostic. I was brought up in a Christian religion type of atmosphere.

 

You're right. We don't know squat about the existence of god(s) when it comes to the creation of the universe...Is it far-fetched to think god(s) created the universe?? On another note, do you think aliens (which presupposes aliens have more technology than us) have visited earth? Furthermore, could aliens be considered god(s)?

 

I see plenty of proof the dem party is racist against whites.

 

Not necessarily, no.

Not necessarily, no. Some atheists convert to theists. That could not happen if they were closed minded.

You err when you declare atheism itself to be anything more than not currently believing God(s) exist. What you are doing here is similar to if you said theists believe Vishnu exists, deplore homosexuality, are vegan, or don't eat pork.

Theism means believing God(s) exist. Atheism means not theism. Or, if you prefer Kokomojo's preferred definition, then atheism means believing God(s) don't exist. Anything more you add doesn't apply to all in the grouping.

 

Did you misread what you quoted and responded to here? His third statement is about theists, not atheists.

 

Nice contradiction! First you dance around claiming we cannot choose our beliefs using a biological analogy...(a 'no choice' gene), now you claim some atheists convert to theists. You are oviously very confused.

 

Yes. I misread the third sentence. I thought the third sentence referred to atheists.

 

agnostics are not atheist, agnostics reject atheism!
Agnostics are not theist they reject theism.
You are amazingly confused!
Sorry, "not theism" is nowhere to be found in the definition of atheism.
More incessant falsification by grammar/logic failure.

 

I never said there is a no choice gene. That is your own invention and obsession.

I never said "we" can not choose our beliefs. I said maybe you can choose to believe you are an elephant. I can not.

Having a belief change doesn't mean the believer chose to have the belief change by sheer force of will. They may have been compelled by evidence or argument.

 

I note that you have such extreme tunnel vision that you didn't even notice I wrote what I did using both your preferred definition and the other common definition you refuse to acknowledge. By that other definition of atheist, agnostics (meaning your preferred definition of agnostic) are atheists.

 

Your atheistic gravitas and bravado is hilarious.

 

thats why we have jury trials, everyone has preconceived beliefs before hear any evidence.
Do you have any idea how stupid the 'no choice' what you believe is?
being compelled is a choice for ****s sake!

 

another falsification of fact!
I have countered your demanded nonsense definition, and consequently proved it illogical.
Hell you cant even rationally frame the argument ffs
You either do not read or do not comprehend the references I provided that dirtectly address the matter proving you are totally WRONG

agnostics are NOT atheists, AGNOSTICS REJECT ATHEISM AS NONSENSE.

After reading some of the bat **** crazy that neoatheists post and 'believe' the last thing I would ever want to claim is atheist.

 

By compel I mean force. I am unable to believe what evidence or argument forces me not to, and I am compelled to believe what evidence or argument compels me to. For example, I can not make myself believe through sheer willpower I am an elephant. If you can do that then you have impressive powers of self-delusion that I lack.

 

sure by force of the 'choice' based upon your conclusion, oh damn it!
there we are right back to CHOICE in what you believe!

I cant believe you allow stubbornness to concede a failed argument present as looking the fool.

 

Stating something while accounting for multiple definitions of a word is not demanding a particular definition be used. You are the one demanding your preferred definitions be used, even the point of pretending other people use them when they don't. You should try to get over that.

Nobody ever said that your preferred definition of atheist includes agnostic. Everyone understands it does not.

Yes, we can see that. Yet it remains that by one commonly used definition of atheist you refuse to acknowledge, you are atheist. Unless of course you are actually theist pretending not to be, which I somewhat suspect may be the case.

 

I definitely acknowledge it as stupidity that lacks both grammar and logical skill.

Yes Im sure everyone is fully aware of your composition fallacy and demand to equivocate the meanings

 

Being forced to do something against your will is choice? Is it choice for you to fall if you are pushed off a cliff?

 

Great laughing stock recipe!

there you go! Demonize anyone who demands academic accuracy! I remind you that the universities are on my side of the equation not yours.

 

It is you who equivocates, when you pretend somebody meant your preferred definition when they explicitly stated they meant the other. Only you have been consistently doing that, not myself or anyone else here.

 

More stupidity, equivocation is when one goes from specific to broad, less ambiguous to more ambiguous, and its gets the label stupidity when it extends to the point of gross LEM and LNC violations as you have demanded and post, and as I have proven in the atheist a rational religion thread.

Try looking up a few of the words you post before you post them!