That's the standard line, isn't it? God doesn't make Himself known in an obvious way because He wants us to have faith in Him.
Can former atheists explain what atheism is?
- Thread starter Jan Ardena
- Start date
BlueSky
Registered Senior Member
I would respectfully disagree. Any worldview needs defence if one wants to assert its truth because they all cannot be truth simultaneously.
I consider atheism a religion. It fits the definition. In light of all the evidence I would say atheism is indefensible. The evidence for God is objective. The experience each Christians has is varied but similar so subjective to a degree.
All theists are former atheists. There are as many different kinds of atheistic belief, atheistic religion, atheistic culture and personality, as there are different kinds of these things. In Ireland the differences between a Protestant and Catholic atheist are familiar enough to be the source of many jokes.
So the answer is no.
So the answer is no.
The Abrahamic fundie two-step on a science forum - misrepresent, pivot on that to personal attack.
They all - all of them - do it. It's not just Jan. They are all dishonest posters, in bad faith at all times on a science forum. The only interesting question is why.
BlueSky
Registered Senior Member
Not really from my experience as a “standard line”. He makes himself known, in spades. I would say its very obvious, even scripture agrees. We don’t believe based on just nothing, he has proved much facts to pull the faith train.
19For what may beknown about God is plain to them, becauseGod has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse.…Romans 1
No they’re not.
Atheism is the result of a subconscious affirmation, that there is no God. That affirmation can also be the result of indoctrination as well. Otherworldly se there is absolutely no reason for one to become an atheist.
Jan
BlueSky
Registered Senior Member
“All of them?”
I would be open to being shown a post where I was dishonest, misrepresented or did a personal attack. Well-placed salt perhaps tho....
Last edited:
If it's obvious, you should be able to demonstrate it.
That doesn't really mean anything, does it? There is scripture that claims Long John Silver is real but we know he isn't.
Then show the facts.
The standard line (God doesn't show himself because He wants us to have faith) is from believers to non-believers - as an excuse for the believers not being able to demonstrate the existence of God.
BlueSky
Registered Senior Member
In what way would you consider acceptable? Call him down and demand he display himself for you and all to see?
Depends what you consider the Bible is. Love to see those verses.
Why not? That's how we determine the existence of anything else.
Are you under the impression that the Bible is the only "scripture"?Depends what you consider the Bible is. Love to see those verses.
And in any case, we can't take the Bible itself as evidence of God's existence. That would be circular.
BlueSky
Registered Senior Member
He already done this.
Are you under the impression that the Bible is the only "scripture"?[/QUOTE]
There are many “scriptures” but since they all say diametrically opposing truth claims, they all cannot be true truth. The only true scripture that describes what actually happened, ( big picture ) is the Bible. Yes I am sayin that.
Agree, but if it can be demonstrated that the Bible is more than just “another scritpure” then it carries with it a greater weight. Does other evidence agree with the Bible assertions? Yes.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
That's a big "if". Since it's the Bible that claims the Bible is the word of God, the argument is - as SSB points out - circular.
So, no evidence that is is more than just another scripture.
How?
And you're wrong. There are plenty of things in the Bible that are demonstrably false.
No.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Did you read all my post? I said "unless one wishes to assert it publicly as objective".
Then you do not understand how rational people think about things for which they ask for - and do not receive - evidence.
Most atheists don't believe God doesn't exist, they simply do not see convincing evidence that it does.
You - like anyone - hold the same idea. You don't believe in things without sufficient evidence every day. (Unless you believe in leprechauns).
But, by your logic, you belong to a leprechaun-disbelieving religion. It fits your definition.
????
As I said in my post, I was answering the thread title.
It has nothing to do with the OP.
I see nothing in the OP that alters the question in the thread title.
Hence I answered the thread title.
The Bible "says diametrically opposing truth claims".
(The characteristic inability to write grammatical English prose seems connected with the basic bad faith stance of the fundies who post on science forums)
So you wish to believe, anyway.
But then your view of what atheism is is pretty much irrelevant to anyone other than you.