I will say this (correct me if I am wrong), you do not believe in God but you continue to ask for proof of God. What to you is proof of God? — chiknsld

As an atheist, I hold the position that I have seen no reason to be convinced there is god/s - let alone people knowing what god/s want. So I am asking for theist's evidence. That should seem reasonable, surely?

The main role for an atheist in these conversations is to ask theists - 'why do you say that?'

I don't know what would be counted as 'proof', but I do know that nothing I have heard or seen so far works for me.

It's important because governments all around the world have harmful religious agendas, from killing gay people in Saudi, to working to overturn Roe versus Wade in the USA. We know religious nationalism is a huge problem all around the world (Putin anyone?) and all of these are folk who not only believe in god/s, but think they know what god/s wants.

So why do you make the claims you do?

It would seem the same applies to, say, anyone that disregards/dismisses ancient astronaut theories. :D

Good grief.

Suggested title of new post: "The Invalidity of A-Ancient-Astronautism"

It was created in response to the harsh reality of theism, to counteract a miracle-devoid universe to bring back a mystery-element, so badly needed.
— EugeneW

Here again. A typical tail would be that the New Age woo woo is 'ferry dust' sprinkle on the otherwise egolisciously satanic Mill of the world. To me we're all already 'born in scene' and this dream is exciting enough without angels and dragons. — lll

Hi! Here again too. The matter-only-tale was created as a woo theory because the theìst dream was devoid of wonder and miracles. It posits a ferry dust that operates autonomously. We're born in some woo-kind of eternal matter fields. This old-age woo is about to be supplanted. The angels and dragons of materialism are too much to bear.

As an atheist, I hold the position that I have seen no reason to be convinced there is god/ — Tom Storm

What about the existence of the universe? Why should the gods show themselves to us? Who says they don't lay back in their heavenly jungle fields, just watching their creation? Which gives me a wonderful idea for a short story!

As an atheist, I hold the position that I have seen no reason to be convinced there is god/s - let alone people knowing what god/s want. — Tom Storm

If it is not immediately evident to you that there is something going on, whilst living and breathing in a gigantic universe...then it's a safe assumption that you will probably never believe in God. It's kinda just one of those things. In all my incredible wisdom, I can say at least that much.

The main role for an atheist in these conversations is to ask theists - 'why do you say that?' — Tom Storm

Wouldn't it be so easy for you if everything was all natural? I mean, then you wouldn't even have to ask a theist why they believe in God right? Or for proof? But wait (here comes the justification)...

It's important because governments all around the world have harmful religious agendas, from killing gay people in Saudi, to working to overturn Roe versus Wade in the USA. We know religious nationalism is a huge problem all around the world (Putin anyone?) with all of these are folk who not only believe in god/s, but think they know what god/s wants. — Tom Storm

You've got to be kidding me. Haughtily asking for proof of God in the guise of sincere and genuine civic duty? Vladimir Putin? Gays in Saudi Arabia? You're making a mockery of atheism.

Religion does not have a monopoly on psychopathy, not to mention the fact that you are trying to veer the conversation towards the term "religion" rather than the far more neutral term "God".

The only reason I mention the word "theist" is out of respect for the thread (which is about atheism). Plenty of non-religious practicing people still believe in God. Nice try though.

You ask for proof of god. I give you the evidence: the universe.

Atheism preceeded the Bible by millennia and every religion that rejects worship all deities entails atheism with respect to those unworshipped deities. — 180 Proof

:up: I'm sure you know what Ietsisism/Somethingism/x-ism is, the vague intuition that there's more (to reality) than meets the eye. To me ietsism is proto-religion, and for the past 5k years, god(s) have been placeholders or assumed values of x in x-ism. What lies ahead is anyone's guess.

Sweet fuckin' Jeezus — 180 Proof

I wonder if the good boy ever got laid. Maria Magdalena? Are there Jesus ascendants alive today? Is the Jesus gene still around us?

Can we bring this thread back to the compound of sanity?

What kind of evidence do atheists ask? Scientific? Then, no. There's no scientific proof for the existence of god.

Funny. The existence of dreams works the same way -- you can't show scientifically what you dreamed of last night. If you dreamed of riding a giant quark, you couldn't show this scientifically, not in pictures, not in actuality. Yet, everyone on Earth had claimed at one time or another that they dreamed about something. And that dreams exist.

So, if I demand that you show me the proof that you dreamed of something last night, I am acting like the atheists.

every religion that rejects worship all deities entails atheism with respect to those unworshipped deities — 180 Proof

A fallicious entailment. You think I worship any of them? No way.

What kind of evidence do atheists ask? Scientific? Then, no. There's no scientific proof for the existence of god. — L'éléphant

L'elephant. The question should be: is there evidence they don't exist. No! So do they exist? Yes!

Immanentists (e.g. Deus, sive natura) have no use for "ietsism/somethingism/x-ism".

You need gods just like everyone else 180booze... Just to deny them...

Immantentists (like me) have no use for "somethingism". — 180 Proof

WYSIWYG? So, to you metaphysics is flights of fancy, fantasizing? Looking for the ideal partner is like vowing to be a lifelong bachelor/spinster?

You need gods just like everyone else 180booze... Just to deny them... — EugeneW

:chin: No, no, he has a point!

L'elephant. The question should be: is there evidence they don't exist. No! So do they exist? Yes! — EugeneW

Let's not use this. This is a fallacy.

It posits a ferry dust that operates autonomously. We're born in some woo-kind of eternal matter fields. This old-age woo is about to be supplanted. The angels and dragons of materialism are too much to bear. — EugeneW

OK, that helps. I can't speak for others, but here's my 'moderate' version of what's (to me) an atheistic scientific worldview: we mostly don't know what the fuck is going on. (But we tend to ignore stuff we don't understand and ignore that very ignorance.) Yet we have found a few exploitable patterns which have nevertheless already been enough to revolutionize life on earth. To me the existence of the whole shebang is unexplained and seemingly even inexplicable in principle, since there will always be something functioning as brute fact in any map or any orienting 'fairy tail' which we one-eyed men must cling to as a leash. I trust that state-of-the-art scientific models are pretty good, but they are just more mops and maps to me, not some Final Truth about that which is Most Real. Neither the priest nor the poet nor the physicist wear the crown (perhaps poets are quickest to say so?).

Can anyone explain why we readily claim that we dream, or that we readily accept that this or that person had a dream, when we can't provide evidence of it? Why does everyone talk about the scenery in dreams when they can't produce proof of it?
But if we do the same with the existence of god, people want evidence? If I can't produce proof that I dreamed I rode a sleigh pulled by reindeers, no one would say I didn't dream, or dreams don't exist.

Let's not use this. This is a fallacy — L'éléphant

Then what about the existence of the universe?

What about it?

There is evidence people dream. I dream you dream, everyone dreams. My dreaming is proof of your dreaming. If you say you dreamt I believe you.

Just like one needs crutches in order to deny one needs crutches, lil D-Ker. :roll:

Anyway, I do not "deny them". I claim that what believers say about "them" is demonstrably incoherent and not true.

Only cataphatic metaphysics; my speculative concerns move on from there to .

Proof of gods.

God belief is completely valid. IT'S A BELIEF. It purports no knowledge. Atheism, ditto, but the opposite.

Any arguments against beliefs that they should be supported by evidence is invalid. You can't demand evidence for something that is not knowledge.

This goes for both theists and atheists. It is futile to try to convince someone to discontinue his or her BELIEF.

Ergo, 45% of people alive today are 'pieces of shit'? — Theorem

A bit of an underestimate, I'd say... :razz:

There is evidence people dream. I dream you dream, everyone dreams. My dreaming is proof of your dreaming. If you say you dreamt I believe you. — EugeneW

This is not evidence! I knew you were gonna say this.
Look, if I said I dreamed I was floating, I would not be able to produce proof of me floating. What is YOUR evidence of MY claim?

do not "deny them". I claim that what believers say about "them" is demonstrably incoherent and not true — 180 Proof

That's denying them. Under the guise of "not true". Where is the evidence? You don't have it. Sorry booze...

This is not evidence! I — L'éléphant

You are a solipsist?

Stop it. You don't understand what a proof is.

That's denying them. — EugeneW

Trollish tantrum?! So pathetic. :lol: