Atheism...........

  • Thread starter Thread starter A_Dancer_Whirls
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A_Dancer_Whirls said:
Here we see a fundamental error in reasoning, the burden of proof always lies on the one making the claim.

Do you believe everything you can’t disprove? If so you must believe a limitless amount of unfounded claims? You also must believe in every god ever proposed by man?

I’m sure this is not actually your position.

ADW.
Click to expand...
Actually, no you cannot prove a negative. But if you make a positive claim that there is no God you must give convincing reasons to support this claim.

So list you convincing arguments.
 
buffalo said:
Actually, no you cannot prove a negative. But if you make a positive claim that there is no God you must give convincing reasons to support this claim.

So list you convincing arguments.
Click to expand...
I don’t see where he ever claimed that.
 
buffalo said:
Actually, no you cannot prove a negative. But if you make a positive claim that there is no God you must give convincing reasons to support this claim.

So list you convincing arguments.
Click to expand...
  1. God is not self evident.
  2. Existing arguments for belief in God fail.
-TS
 
buffalo said:
Actually, no you cannot prove a negative. But if you make a positive claim that there is no God you must give convincing reasons to support this claim.

So list you convincing arguments.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but i have never made such a claim.
 
buffalo said:
Man has not and cannot create out of nothing. Anything man has done has been an adjustment to existing matter, already created by God.
Click to expand...
Bzzzzzzzzzzz! You failed. You just restated your previous assertion. “If not man, then God.”

I did say “prove”, not “state.”
 
wanstronian said:
Bzzzzzzzzzzz! You failed. You just restated your previous assertion. “If not man, then God.”

I did say “prove”, not “state.”
Click to expand...
OK, then if not man something other than man, that something most of us call God.

[34](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/34.htm’)😉 The world, and man, attest that they contain within themselves neither their first principle nor their final end, but rather that they participate in Being itself, which alone is without origin or end. Thus, in different ways, man can come to know that there exists a reality which is the first cause and final end of all things, a reality “that everyone calls God”.10
 
buffalo said:
OK, then if not man something other than man, that something most of us call God.
Click to expand...
I don’t call it God, I call it nature. Calling it God implies a sentient, omnipotent, omniscient being that created the world and listens to everybody’s thoughts. A somewhat disingenuous nomenclature, then.

Can I assume that when you say, “most of us” you mean, “most Christians?”
34 The world, and man, attest that they contain within themselves neither their first principle nor their final end, but rather that they participate in Being itself, which alone is without origin or end. Thus, in different ways, man can come to know that there exists a reality which is the first cause and final end of all things, a reality “that everyone calls God”.10
Click to expand...
I believe it is generally accepted that Aquinas intended that this should be read as, “… the theist will recognise this to be God.” It is rather over-confident to assume that everyone refers to nature as God, other than in a mock-pantheistic way.
 
wanstronian said:
I don’t call it God, I call it nature. Calling it God implies a sentient, omnipotent, omniscient being that created the world and listens to everybody’s thoughts. A somewhat disingenuous nomenclature, then.

Can I assume that when you say, “most of us” you mean, “most Christians?”
I believe it is generally accepted that Aquinas intended that this should be read as, “… the theist will recognise this to be God.” It is rather over-confident to assume that everyone refers to nature as God, other than in a mock-pantheistic way.
Click to expand...
So you have to believe nature created itself.
 
buffalo said:
So you have to believe nature created itself.
Click to expand...
No one says that in the atheist camp. Nature did not “create” anything, nature simply exists. It does not need justification, it does not need explanation, it is a brute fact. The very question of “why” is already loaded, it presumes some kind of external causative factor - which is what the “question” is supposed to establish. This is called begging the question - an ancient fallacy.
 
Nature needs no explanation? How very…limiting. I am glad that many, many highly intelligent people do not believe this. And no, saying that we should seek to expand our knowlegde and understanding is not incompatible with Catholic or Christian faith.
 
Spock said:
No one says that in the atheist camp. Nature did not “create” anything, nature simply exists. It does not need justification, it does not need explanation, it is a brute fact. The very question of “why” is already loaded, it presumes some kind of external causative factor - which is what the “question” is supposed to establish. This is called begging the question - an ancient fallacy.
Click to expand...
Wow! Talk about faith.
 
Well, you have to admit, this is really revealing “Atheism”. 😃

As long as you call it the preferred name, they are fine with with having faith in it. :o
 
James_S_Saint said:
Well, you have to admit, this is really revealing “Atheism”. 😃

As long as you call it the preferred name, they are fine with with having faith in it. :o
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with atheism, that is just one atheist’s opinion. If you asked me the same question would answer we don’t know the origin of the universe.

All atheism means is anyone with a theistic belief. It says nothing about ones belief regarding the origin of the universe.

ADW.
 
A_Dancer_Whirls said:
That has nothing to do with atheism, that is just one atheist’s opinion. If you asked me the same question would answer we don’t know the origin of the universe.

All atheism means is anyone with[out] a theistic belief. It says nothing about ones belief regarding the origin of the universe.

ADW.
Click to expand...
First, I wasn’t talking about “the origin of the universe” and don’t really know why you presumed that I was.

Second, Atheism means what it IS in real practice, not what it is supposed to mean.

You, being an Atheist, cannot know what Atheism really means until you humbly observe the truth of its reality and stop insisting that it is only what you prefer and what it is “supposed” to be.

Wake up to reality. Stop having faith that Atheism means only the idea that it was supposed to mean.

Christianity has the same problem, but at least Christianity has a doctrine so as to keep it more aligned with its original intent. It still wanders off to come to mean different things than its origin, but it has a means to recover, Atheism doesn’t.

As I said, if you want to know the real truth, just have a Christian (or pretend to be one yourself for a moment) and without forewarning, go to an Atheist site and propose this exact same thread concerning Christianity rather than Atheism. What you will see directly is Atheism in practice, not merely what it was supposed to be. You will witness directly that Atheism is a political party, not an idealism.
 
This is my first post in this forum. Hello everyone.

I have heard it said we were all born a-theist (a=without… theist=a belief in God). It is only through our parental or social indoctrination that people come to believe in one god or another. Whom of you out there can claim to have seen God come to you (direct revelation) and tell you it is He, She or It? If you had parents of a different religious orientation or lived in a social environment that supported something else you would likely be of that orientation.

I might also point out that everyone is an atheist to other people’s gods except their own.


a⋅the⋅ist
  /ˈeɪθiɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ey-thee-ist] Show IPA

–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Origin:
1565–75; < Gk áthe(os) godless + -ist

Synonyms:
Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine. Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity. A skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds.​

BTW I would consider myself a Catholic who is a skeptic, probably leaning toward a heretic in many people’s eyes.

I go to mass on Sunday, confession regularly, but I question ALOT. I guess that’s what happens when you read, think alot, and listen to lots of InfidelGuy podcasts. I just can’t believe predigested truth is all too truth containing. As Plato said, "The unexamined life is not worth living.

Summa8447
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top