Atheists-how do you explain why don't believe in God? (Savior, verse, devils)

[Roxolan]

Originally Posted by freedom

You clearly have a narrow view of ID. Like i said it's not about "God did it" there's nothing more to do. It has the same discovery process of observation and exploration, it just doesn't close it's eyes to and Intelligent Creator/s.

I'm starting to feel ignored .
What kind of research would one do in the "field" of Intelligent Design?

Originally Posted by freedom

I've observed creation by a creator everytime a building is built, or a loaf of bread is made. We are all creators, in science especially.
How did all of those Pharma drugs come about, if they were not created, and i'm sure there were witnesses to the process.

[repeat] And snowflakes are created in a snowflake factory, that's why they look so designed.

[Sizzly Friddle]

Originally Posted by iColt1

...thats a shocker... u mean atheists belive in nothing so it's like lets be a hater group and tell christians there is no god when u know there is...ok wow...i am calm... it's just not right to pick on us when other religious groups pretend to belive in something and it just a piece of metal.or such.

icolt1, I have a great idea. Why don't you take some time to read some of the earlier threads in this forum so you have a clue what atheists think and believe. Then you could have a conversation here that doesn't make you look like a raving fundie troll.

[esselcue]

Originally Posted by iColt1

...thats a shocker... u mean atheists belive in nothing so it's like lets be a hater group and tell christians there is no god when u know there is...ok wow...i am calm... it's just not right to pick on us when other religious groups pretend to belive in something and it just a piece of metal.or such.

Wow, Colt...you really have jumped into a forum you are not familiar with. Realize this is a "forum", a place for sharing thoughts and ideas and sometimes disagreements...but we also learn from each other and there is no hatred going on here.

[agnostic soldier]

If you ever listen to a believer in proofless things(believers in the supernatural), nine out of ten times what comes out of their head is simpleton ignorance. Believers in faith objects have never had a single thought of their own in their entire lives, irregardless of age. They don't even know what they actually believe is true and what is false. Since their faith tells them that a divine creator is necessary, then that's what they automactically believe and then reject any evidence that is contrary to their beliefs, and the evidence is contrary to their beliefs since all god talk is is bronze age delusion. Their beliefs are based on meaningless value judgements, which they pretend are true and that real science is false, since science bases its discoveries on reason and empirical observation. The faithful try and verify their unverifiable nonsensical beliefs by trying to persuade people with ridiculous myths and senseless blatherings. They will never accept that their beliefs are unverifiable by real science and simply fairytale hogwash, unless they take their heads out of the sand and read the definitiopn of how science actually works(since they know nothing of what real science is and isn't), although this will never happen, since if they start using critical thinking so they base their beliefs on demonstrative evidence, then they will no longer be able to logically accept that their beliefs are true.

[freedom]

Originally Posted by Roxolan

I'm starting to feel ignored .
What kind of research would one do in the "field" of Intelligent Design?

That is a good question, i could try to make something up but i really don't know what it would look like.
I think though that the scientists that have been censored from speaking about it could answer your question. I'd have to look at why they brought it up in their papers.
Off the top of my head, i think it would'nt be much different than what scientists do now, other than opening the mind to the possibility that it's not all by chance, but that there was thought and feeling and design behind the manifestation of matter and the elements and their offspring...Life. Kind of life reverse engineering. I think the pendulum has swung so far that some Scientists might even fear the eventual discovery of how life comes into being. What the force behind conscious awareness and intelligence looks like.

[repeat] And snowflakes are created in a snowflake factory, that's why they look so designed.

Factories are varied aren't they. Who's to say this whole system is not one big factory? I like to think it is.

BTW, was not ignoring you on purpose... there's only 1 of me in this thread.

godspeed,

freedom

[freedom]

Originally Posted by agnostic soldier

If you ever listen to a believer in proofless things(believers in the supernatural), nine out of ten times what comes out of their head is simpleton ignorance. Believers in faith objects have never had a single thought of their own in their entire lives, irregardless of age.

That is a pretty harsh assessment, especially since There have been more Believers in the Scientific community throughout history than Atheist. I'd like to think that they were lead in their discoveries through harmony with their faith.

They don't even know what they actually believe is true and what is false.

While there are surely some in the faith arena with this brainwash syndrome, you could say the same for those that believe nothing as well... so what's the difference?

Since their faith tells them that a divine creator is necessary, then that's what they automactically believe and then reject any evidence that is contrary to their beliefs, and the evidence is contrary to their beliefs since all god talk is is bronze age delusion.

Was not aware that there was actually proof that God doesn't exist. When did science conclude such a thing?

Their beliefs are based on meaningless value judgements, which they pretend are true and that real science is false, since science bases its discoveries on reason and empirical observation.

I don't think real science is false. There are conclusion that have been taught as absolute truth before all the facts are in, but Science has incredible victories in medicine, technology, energy, etc..

The faithful try and verify their unverifiable nonsensical beliefs by trying to persuade people with ridiculous myths and senseless blatherings. They will never accept that their beliefs are unverifiable by real science and simply fairytale hogwash, unless they take their heads out of the sand and read the definitiopn of how science actually works(since they know nothing of what real science is and isn't), although this will never happen, since if they start using critical thinking so they base their beliefs on demonstrative evidence, then they will no longer be able to logically accept that their beliefs are true.

Unverifiable? Say that to someone that has a miraculous healing that their Dr. has no Scientific explanation for, or the intuitions and promptings that allow one to avoid disaster.
Now if your saying replicable on demand like making aspirin, the you are right, but not all sciences are based on material. There are Scientific disciplines in Mind, Spirit and Light that are not limited to elementary Sciences. Or do we dismiss those as well?

godspeed,

freedom

[LogicIsYourFriend]

Originally Posted by freedom

Was not aware that there was actually proof that God doesn't exist. When did science conclude such a thing?

Unless you consider the studies on prayer, where prayer has no effect beyond that of chance and probability. It's more evidence against god than for...

"You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."
~Matthew 14:14

[freedom]

Originally Posted by LogicIsYourFriend

Unless you consider the studies on prayer, where prayer has no effect beyond that of chance and probability. It's more evidence against god than for...

"You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."
~Matthew 14:14

Is this the proof that God doesn't exist?

godspeed,


freedom

[LogicIsYourFriend]

Originally Posted by freedom

Is this the proof that God doesn't exist?

godspeed,


freedom

It's evidence against the Christian god at least, because of the scriptures.

Hypothesis: Since Jesus said a believer will receive whatever she asks for in prayer, then a believer should be able to receive answered prayers every time. (Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19 and James 5:15-16)

Test: Believers pray every day without getting whatever the ask for. Statistically it happens no more than chance.

Conclusion: Hypothesis fails because believers do not get whatever they ask for in prayer. Therefore, those verses about prayer in the bible are shown to be inaccurate.

A logical proof:
A. If the bible is the word of god, then it is 100% accurate. (Proverbs 30:5)
B. The test above shows the bible is not 100% accurate.
C. Therefore, the bible is not the word of god.

A. The bible describes god and says it is the word of god.
B. If god exists as specifically described in the bible, then the bible must be the word of god.
C. The bible is not the word of god (C, above)
D. Therefore, the god as specifically described in the bible does not exist.

Anyone want to proofread my proof? It's probably got some errors, I'm not infallible with logic despite my screen name. I've been having trouble expressing the premise that if the bible is not the word of god, then the god of the bible does not exist. Is there a fallacy I'm overlooking?

[DC at the Ridge]

Originally Posted by LogicIsYourFriend

It's evidence against the Christian god at least, because of the scriptures.

Hypothesis: Since Jesus said a believer will receive whatever she asks for in prayer, then a believer should be able to receive answered prayers every time. (Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19 and James 5:15-16)

Test: Believers pray every day without getting whatever the ask for. Statistically it happens no more than chance.

Conclusion: Hypothesis fails because believers do not get whatever they ask for in prayer. Therefore, those verses about prayer in the bible are shown to be inaccurate.

A logical proof:
A. If the bible is the word of god, then it is 100% accurate. (Proverbs 30:5)
B. The test above shows the bible is not 100% accurate.
C. Therefore, the bible is not the word of god.

A. The bible describes god and says it is the word of god.
B. If god exists as specifically described in the bible, then the bible must be the word of god.
C. The bible is not the word of god (C, above)
D. Therefore, the god as specifically described in the bible does not exist.

Anyone want to proofread my proof? It's probably got some errors, I'm not infallible with logic despite my screen name. I've been having trouble expressing the premise that if the bible is not the word of god, then the god of the bible does not exist. Is there a fallacy I'm overlooking?

Yes, if the bible is not the word of God, it cannot either prove or disprove the existence of God. If the bible is not the word of God, it becomes irrelevant to the proof.