Atheism Is For The Weak

[InspectoGeneral]

You, sir, are a shining example of Christian love.

 

 

You wound me. That's it, I can't take it any more, I must leave this cruel forum, the persacushun is too much.(Notice I spelled 'too' correctly)

 

Pahleese. Save you condescension for someone else. This is a message board. A MESSAGE BOARD I tell you!!!!!!! Sorry that my posts don't jive with your posts. I will definitely have a talk with my posts.

[Guest JP]

You, sir, are a shining example of Christian love.

 

 

You wound me. That's it, I can't take it any more, I must leave this cruel forum, the persacushun is too much.(Notice I spelled 'too' correctly)

 

Pahleese. Save you condescension for someone else. This is a message board. A MESSAGE BOARD I tell you!!!!!!! Sorry that my posts don't jive with your posts. I will definitely have a talk with my posts.

 

Good job on spelling 'too' correctly. Too bad you couldn't do the same for 'your.'

[Lightbearer]

Hello InspectoGeneral,

 

 

You want to have a discussion about something first let me ask. What is it you want to discuss? I can assume you want to discuss atheism and your assertion that "it is for the weak"

 

First we need to define terms, what to you is weak? What does atheism mean to you?

 

Second, lets look at what you have already said.

 

They have no position to defend. This is great for debate. You can attack the other guys position, but he can't attack your position. After all when you believe in nothing(as far as God is concerned) you have nothing to defend.

 

The burden of proof rests on the one who asserts a claim of something. If you claim that you were raped by someone then you (or your lawyer) must present the evidence to back up that claim. It makes sense, so claiming that God exists, and God must too be defined, then you must present evidence of this. Athiests don't need to present anything because they say nothing is there, so nothing is there to be presented in the first place.

 

How much courage does it take to stand for nothing? None.

How much courage does it take to defend nothing? None.

How much intellect does it take to defend nothing? None.

 

Definitely for the weak.

 

Also, their attacks mainly consist of mocking the other side and asking stupid questions

 

Athiest logic.

 

I mock God, therefore there is no God.

 

Note: Mocking will follow this post, because its all they've got.

 

Also, they ask stupid questions like "Can you prove there is a God?"

 

Of course this is a stupid question along the line of "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

 

Why is it a stupid quesiton? A little geometry to illustrate. In geometry you have theorems and postulates. Postulates are accepted as fact, theorems are proven. If you reject the postulates, there is nothing to prove. You can't prove postulates, they must be accepted or rejected.

God's existence must be accepted or rejected.

 

Feel free to mock this post, since it's all you've got.

 

Your are making a logical fallacy because you don't understand what the arguement is. You are turning it into a belief/non-belief issue. You can't believe in nothing, it's an odd thing to say and odder still to believe in. The real question should be about how you gain knowledge... through faith or reason?

 

It, for me as a rational athiest, is not an issue of belief. I reject the very notion or concept of God as irrational. Faith is not a valid means of aquiring knowledge. Trying to proof the non-existance of God is a useless straw man, there is nothing to prove in the first place. Plus, proof would require reason... throwing out the faith required for the exist of God. You already lost the arguement.

 

The point is that you can't prove God. God is unprovable. I state this plainly. I do not intend to prove the existence of God.

 

BTW - I understand Atheistm quite well. I also understand that Atheists prefer to define Atheism to their own liking. The only commonality among Atheists is that they believe that there is no God. This is a negative belief. You cannot build upon a negative belief and therefore are required to belief nothing or anything you want.

 

Athesits can have morals if they want, or not have morals if they don't want. They can believe in evolution or believe they came from aliens. Atheism doesn't constrain you to hold to any other positions. That is why it is a position for the weak. You aren't required to defend what you believe becaue you aren't constrained to believe anything.

 

This board is about attacking and mocking people who believe in something so don't give me the lecture about serious discussion. Mocking God and the Bible and people who believe something doesn't qualify as serious discussion.

 

See what I mean? You said there is no proof of God. No proof, evidence or anything like that means it does not exist. You just said it yourself.

 

Again what is atheism? Athiests define themselves in many ways, that is true. But like I said about rational athiesm, anti-theism, anti-God, anti-fairies, anti-demons, anti-thetans... you get the picture. A basic reject of mysticism is what athiesm is traiditionally defined as.

 

You atheism is promotes moral irrelevancy? Man needs morals to survive, as a code for his existence, and morals based on what values enhance his life as opposed to what harms him. This is totally independent of God. Morals can exist without God.

 

You say atheism is weak? How is rejecting things that can not be observed by reason weak? Because they defend or stand for nothing? In the sense of a God then yeah, they might stand for nothing. But if you stand, as I do, for life, freedom, reason, reality, happiness, and morality. How is that weak? How is that nothing? If you defend these values, how is that defending nothing?

 

You stand for something you said you can not prove... is that nothing? Is that not the very definition of nothing? Something unprovable is non-existing. Existence exists. Nothing can change that.

 

You stand for nothing and your arguement is a worthless straw-man.

[RedPillAddict]

*Takes the bait and inserts defensive ramble about how he isnt weak and is amazed at how a true believer could be so brave and confront all these atheist cowards*

 

[InspectoGeneral]

It, for me as a rational athiest, is not an issue of belief. I reject the very notion or concept of God as irrational. Faith is not a valid means of aquiring knowledge.

 

Faith is neither rational or irrational. Love is neither rational or irrational. Faith exists outside the realm of logic.

 

Trying to proof the non-existance of God is a useless straw man, there is nothing to prove in the first place.

 

The existence of God is not something that is subject to being proved or disproved. If the existence of God could be proved or disproved, it wouldn't be faith. That is the nature of faith.

 

Plus, proof would require reason... throwing out the faith required for the exist of God. You already lost the arguement.

 

The existence of God doesn't depend on faith. If God exists, then God exists, whether we believe or not.

 

Logic and reason have limitations. To dismiss faith because logic and reason are unable to address it is to misunderstand what faith is.

[Guest JP]

Why would God give us logic and reason, and then expect us throw it out the window? It doesn't seem like he wants us to use the brains we've been 'given.'

[KT45]

Just a quick note. You say atheist don't have a leg to stand on cause they believe in nothing concerning gods or god or goddess. They merely believe it doesn't exist. Now if I as an atheist don't believe that there is a god and you come up to me saying there is a god, then to me you are defending nothing as well. let me explain

 

If you say "I believe in God"

and I personally believe god=nothing

then all you are saying to me is "I believe in nothing"

 

To me you are defending nothing just as I am defending nothing.

 

You can say my logic is flawed but let me ask you this. Do you believe Allah is the one true god?

If not then you believe that

Allah=nothing

So if someone comes up to u and says "I believe in Allah"

All you hear is "I believe in something that is fake and not true"

 

therefore you use the same logic as us. If you debate a person who believes in a different god then you and you reject it because in your mind it doesn't exist.

 

We are all atheist. I just take it one god further than you.

[LadyFeline]

See, Burnedout... That's a very painful story, and I feel for you and your wife...

 

Unfortunately, that's not going to move In-spec-to there. He doesn't care about you or your wife's plight, or how much she hurts, or your reasoning behind not believing. He's just here to insult you and every other nonbeliever, and basically be a retarded little troll who has nothing constructive to contribute.

[Lightbearer]

Faith is neither rational or irrational. Love is neither rational or irrational. Faith exists outside the realm of logic.

 

The existence of God is not something that is subject to being proved or disproved. If the existence of God could be proved or disproved, it wouldn't be faith. That is the nature of faith.

 

The existence of God doesn't depend on faith. If God exists, then God exists, whether we believe or not.

 

Logic and reason have limitations. To dismiss faith because logic and reason are unable to address it is to misunderstand what faith is.

 

Faith is the absence of reason. That's what faith is. It's understood perfectly. It's dismissed because it is not a valid form of aquiring knowledge. Things are either rational or irrational. Do you think there are absolutes? Love is rational because it benefits the one who loves.

 

If something is not proved or disproved then what revelancy does it's existence even have?

 

Faith exists outside of the realm of logic? So it's illogical?

 

Lets get this straight...

 

If the existence of God could be proved or disproved, it wouldn't be faith. That is the nature of faith.

 

So believing in God requires faith? But...

 

The existence of God doesn't depend on faith. If God exists, then God exists, whether we believe or not.

 

Okay, so which one is it? How does one obtain the knowledge of the existence of God? Not with faith you say but if you use reason then it disproves God his existence needs faith but it doesn't depend on it? You are going in contradictatory circles here.

 

If God existed, this knowledge would be as easy to obtain as looking up and seeing the sky is blue.

 

Logic and reason are used to explain the world around us and to understand this. So if they have limitations... then you are saying that the universe around us is not explainable? You can't observe and understand certain things? Like God, which you say is not provable, so not even understandable? Then what say you of the religions and God's Words? If God is not understandable, provable and knowledge of his existence or lack of is impossible to obtain how is this even revelent to daily life, or anything at all? Something exists or it does not. The universe is not contradictory and your arguments.

 

Do you have anything else to present? You still have not stated your terms or why you are here or what you are trying to say other then athiests are weak and as you can see, without your definition of this weakness, is blown away into uselessness.

[InspectoGeneral]

Other things that are neither logical or illogical-

 

Music. Is one song more logical or illogical than another? No. You like one kind of music and someone else like another. I have never met anyone who did not like music.

 

Art. Is one piece of art more logical than another? Is it more logical to like one piece of art more than another? No. Is the color red more logical than the color blue?

 

Is hope logical or illogical? Neither.

Is love logical or illogical? Niether.

is faith logical or illogical? Neither.

 

Logic and reason have their place, but they have limitations.

 

Burnedouts post isn't about logic. The pain he and his wife feel are very real, but have nothing to do with reason or logic. Unfortunately your logic can't address the pain, but it is real just the same.

 

 

This definitely veers from the original topic, but hey, the thread goes where it will.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, that's not going to move In-spec-to there. He doesn't care about you or your wife's plight, or how much she hurts, or your reasoning behind not believing. He's just here to insult you and every other nonbeliever, and basically be a retarded little troll who has nothing constructive to contribute.

 

You also wound my usename. I am hurt. My motives have been impugned. How can I continue under the weight of these attacks???????

 

(Notice the use of the word impugned)

[Onyx]

They have no position to defend. This is great for debate. You can attack the other guys position, but he can't attack your position. After all when you believe in nothing(as far as God is concerned) you have nothing to defend.

 

How much courage does it take to stand for nothing? None.

How much courage does it take to defend nothing? None.

How much intellect does it take to defend nothing? None.

 

If you think having a socially shunned philosophy doesn't take balls, you are sadly mistaken.

Nowadays, it take balls to say "I don't believe in jesus, God and holy spirit" than to say "I believe"

Which takes more courage to say?

 

 

Definitely for the weak.

 

Also, their attacks mainly consist of mocking the other side and asking stupid questions

 

Athiest logic.

 

Projection, man, I'm sorry but you're mocking atheists.

Some Christians asks stupid questions as well some atheists.

 

 

I mock God, therefore there is no God.

 

Note: Mocking will follow this post, because its all they've got.

 

Also, they ask stupid questions like "Can you prove there is a God?"

 

Of course this is a stupid question along the line of "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

 

"Can you prove there is a God" is not a stupid question. It's important to get proof from Christians this way. So far, there is no real answers on the existence of God.

 

Why is it a stupid quesiton? A little geometry to illustrate. In geometry you have theorems and postulates. Postulates are accepted as fact, theorems are proven. If you reject the postulates, there is nothing to prove. You can't prove postulates, they must be accepted or rejected.

God's existence must be accepted or rejected.

 

Geometry and God is different. Geometry is of itself absolute but religious faith is taken as either flexibly or absolute as you want it to be.

 

 

Feel free to mock this post, since it's all you've got.

 

Mocking people's thoughts without good reason is certainly a no-no...

[Asimov]

Hit and run??? Some of us have lives and can't spend all their time on message boards. My post was pretty self contained, nothing really to defend.

 

Atheism as a debate position is no position at all, you have nothing to defend. It is evident by this site that Christianity has much to defend.

 

Question - "So what do you believe concerning God?"

 

Athesist - "Nothing."

 

Question - "So you believe in nothing?"

 

Atheist - "That's right."

 

Question - "Is that a hard position to defend?"

 

Atheist - "Not at all. It's not hard to defend nothing. We just mock people who believe something. Since we have no position they can never attack us."

 

Not hard to defend nothing. I was just pointing out that you have no position. A debate with somone that has no position isn't a debate.

 

Way to strawman the position.

 

I'm a Randian Objectivist, that is what I defend.

 

You seem to ignore anything that doesn't support your whacked out presupposition.

[InspectoGeneral]

Asimov-

 

You dare to question my superior logic and challenge my debating skills!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You're wrong, so there.

 

 

You seem to ignore anything that doesn't support your whacked out presupposition.

 

As you have ignored my posts???

 

If you aren't an Atheist, then my comments don't apply to you.

[Ouroboros]

But InspectoGeneral you are an Atheist too, because you don't believe in Allah!

 

Someone that dare to call themselves an Atheist are the ones that have rejected just one more god than you have.

[Lightbearer]

Other things that are neither logical or illogical-

 

Music. Is one song more logical or illogical than another? No. You like one kind of music and someone else like another. I have never met anyone who did not like music.

 

Opinions are different then facts of reality. Music is logical in the sense that it serves it's own purpose. Reality is not subjective. Logic is based on reasoning based on facts and evidence. So is music logical? Sure, it depends what context you are talking about. It needs a basis for objective measurement. Certain notes make sense in certain orders so it comes out in a way that is logical and non-contradictory.

 

Art. Is one piece of art more logical than another? Is it more logical to like one piece of art more than another? No. Is the color red more logical than the color blue?

 

Yes because some are is really nothing at all, just something someone called art. Once again, you need objective measurement on what's art or whats not. Illogical art or music would be something that should not be considered art or music in the first place.

 

Once again you fail to state your terms or provide any definition of your concepts.

 

Is hope logical or illogical? Neither.

Is love logical or illogical? Niether.

is faith logical or illogical? Neither.

 

Context please? If you hope for a cloud to become a penguin and poop out golden televisions then you can say your hope is illogical because it has no basis in reality. If you hope that your favorite team will win a game it is logical because thier is a chance that it might happen.

 

I told you why love is logical. It is an emotion and can be measured, thought of, expressed and proven to exist. You fail to define love, leaving it to us to do that. So i'll say love is logical if it is based within reality and reason. Love is illogical when applied as a whim or to something non-existing, for example God.

 

Faith is illogical because it is the belief in something that there is no proof of what-so-ever. Basically an evasion of reality, going against reality is illogical because it contradicts itself.

 

Logic and reason have their place, but they have limitations.

 

You failed to present evidence of the limitations of logic in reason within your agruement. Well, we might have to consider you to be the limitation of anything logic, sound, and reasonable.

 

Burnedouts post isn't about logic. The pain he and his wife feel are very real, but have nothing to do with reason or logic. Unfortunately your logic can't address the pain, but it is real just the same.

 

Nothing to do with reason or logic? Pain just comes out of no where and exists without reason? Can not be explained logically? A disease is a reason for the pain. The logic here is the the disease is the source of the pain, and with science and medically advancements based on reason and logic. That's how logic addresses pain. If you read this you just witnessed it. Your baseless assertions can not address anything. Your contradictary faith can not address the pain that Burnedout's wife feels, which is why he made the comments he made.

 

This definitely veers from the original topic, but hey, the thread goes where it will.

 

I keep asking you to define your terms, state your motives and make an arguement for your assertion that athiesm is weak. You continue to avoid, evade and make irrational baseless assertions and throw out straw man arguements.

 

 

 

You also wound my usename. I am hurt. My motives have been impugned. How can I continue under the weight of these attacks???????

 

(Notice the use of the word impugned)

 

You impugn yourself.

[Astreja]

(Zen valkyrie comes wandering in, reads thread, scratches head as she sips from a large mug of Canadian lager)

 

Awright, what the Sam Hill is this conversation supposed to be about, anyway? IG, 'splain yourself. What did you hope to accomplish here, besides making yourself look like a complete and utter dickhead? Come on. For someone who claims to represent the moral high ground, you're doing a fine job of pooping all over it.

 

Show us -- Atheists, heiðinn and nice Christians alike all want to know.

[Asimov]

Music. Is one song more logical or illogical than another? No. You like one kind of music and someone else like another. I have never met anyone who did not like music.

 

Depends on what you are using it for.

 

Donkey is neither logical or illogical, but to say "Donkey's fly" is illogical.

 

Art. Is one piece of art more logical than another? Is it more logical to like one piece of art more than another? No. Is the color red more logical than the color blue?

 

Is hope logical or illogical? Neither.

Is love logical or illogical? Niether.

is faith logical or illogical? Neither.

 

Logic and reason have their place, but they have limitations.

 

Uh...dude, you're applying a inapplicable analogy here. Using one word and then applying logic to it is irrational. Logic applies to ARGUMENTS.

 

Rationality applies to uncontradictory and logical belief!

[Lightbearer]

Asimov-

 

You dare to question my superior logic and challenge my debating skills!!!!!!!!!!!

 

You're wrong, so there.

 

 

You seem to ignore anything that doesn't support your whacked out presupposition.

 

As you have ignored my posts???

 

If you aren't an Atheist, then my comments don't apply to you.

 

Did you notice the "group: Atheist" under Asimov's name or the giant picture of an "A" with the word "Athiest" written inside of it?

[Asimov]

But InspectoGeneral you are an Atheist too, because you don't believe in Allah!

 

Someone that dare to call themselves an Atheist are the ones that have rejected just one more god than you have.

 

 

 

As you have ignored my posts???

 

If you aren't an Atheist, then my comments don't apply to you.

 

See? You're a fucking retard. An Atheist is one simple negative lable.

 

I have a positive label. Objectivism. It has specific beliefs regarding epistemology, politics, ethics, aesthetics, and metaphysics.

[Lightbearer]

I am with Asimov, i'm an Objectivist as well. Athiesm is a consequence of my philosophy.

 

 

 

But InspectoGeneral you are an Atheist too, because you don't believe in Allah!

 

Someone that dare to call themselves an Atheist are the ones that have rejected just one more god than you have.

 

 

 

As you have ignored my posts???

 

If you aren't an Atheist, then my comments don't apply to you.

 

See? You're a fucking retard. An Atheist is one simple negative lable.

 

I have a positive label. Objectivism. It has specific beliefs regarding epistemology, politics, ethics, aesthetics, and metaphysics.

 

I lol'd when I read "You're a fucking retard"

 

I agree with the rest.

[Ouroboros]

But InspectoGeneral you are an Atheist too, because you don't believe in Allah!

 

Someone that dare to call themselves an Atheist are the ones that have rejected just one more god than you have.

 

You don't agree?

[KT45]

I'm confused exactly what the argument is. Atheism is for the weak? There are some weak-minded atheist so atheism can be for the weak. But there are also strong-minded atheist as well so it can be for the strong. Isn't christianity for the weak and strong as well?

 

IO can you define weak?

[Lightbearer]

I'm confused exactly what the argument is. Atheism is for the weak? There are some weak-minded atheist so atheism can be for the weak. But there are also strong-minded atheist as well so it can be for the strong. Isn't christianity for the weak and strong as well?

 

IO can you define weak?

 

 

I have been asking him that all night.

[Asimov]

But InspectoGeneral you are an Atheist too, because you don't believe in Allah!

 

Someone that dare to call themselves an Atheist are the ones that have rejected just one more god than you have.

 

You don't agree?

 

No, I don't. I think the label that IG applies to everyone (that we are all heathens of some sort) is accurate.

 

"But InspectoGeneral you are an Atheist too, because you don't believe in Allah!"

 

That is what I disagree with. He's an islamic heathen because he doesn't believe in Allah....not an atheist.

 

Don't insult my label, Hans.

[Guest bdp]

"If there is no connection, then why do they simply mock? Is it logic or insecurity?"

 

No it's just fun - you're being toyed with, period.

 

I will freely say I believe in nothing - life is for living.

 

bdp

 

You, sir, are a shining example of Christian love.

 

 

You wound me. That's it, I can't take it any more, I must leave this cruel forum, the persacushun is too much.(Notice I spelled 'too' correctly)

 

Pahleese. Save you condescension for someone else. This is a message board. A MESSAGE BOARD I tell you!!!!!!! Sorry that my posts don't jive with your posts. I will definitely have a talk with my posts.

 

Okay, this settles it - Inspecto is a spoof. Someone fess up!

 

bdp