How Conversations with Atheists Pan Out



 Religions > Atheism > How Conversations with Atheists Pan Out

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1

 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Nerd Gerl"
Date: 28 Feb 2004 01:44:26 PM
Object: How Conversations with Atheists Pan Out
Brian Bilek wrote in message ...

On 28 Feb 2004 03:18:10 -0800,

(Nerd Gerl) wrote:

Brian Bilek wrote in message <7hs040prn67sj2g09bo83nh3tho0b4q3d6@4ax.com>...

Again, neither do you have evidence that God is not.


And I am not claiming that God does not exist, thus I require no
evidence. I am content to assume that those who claim God does

exist

are wrong, since they have presented no evidence to support that
claim.


This is f*ing stupid.

"You're wrong, because you don't have proof!"
"No, you don't have any proof - so you're wrong!"

Neither side has satisfactory proof - yet both sides are wrong.

What do they prove themselves wrong with? (Literally) Nothing????

What a joke.


Wow, we're having an intelligent conversation and all of a sudden it
degenerates to this? What happened here that pissed you off so much?

I don't appreciate being called *wrong* (not that I'm a Christian)
esp. when you have nothing to prove that I'm *wrong*. It's offensive
and reveals your biases, instead of an objective position (required
for an intelligent convo).

I, for one, believe that the Christians are wrong because throughout
history humans have given supernatural powers to powers of nature,
seeking to explain them, or deified them. There is no reason for me
to believe, without proof of the Christian claim, that the Christian
god is any different. That, and many of the key stories found in the
BIble can be shown to be false. There is no reason to believe that
any of them are true, except where other historical works corroborate
them.

I do not have to prove something does not exist to lack belief in it.
Do you understand what I'm saying?

I'll put it another way: I have a pet rock named Bob. Bob tells me
things about people. He tells me when they've been naughty, and when
they've been nice. Now Bob says that he will never speak to anyone
else. However, he does occasionally create food for me when I'm
hungry, but only when I'm alone. Bob has a preference for Charlize
Theron movies - don't ask me why.

Do you have any reason to believe that Bob exists? Can you prove

that

he does not? Given what we know to be the nature of rocks, even if I
were to point out a rock to you and say "There is Bob!" would you

have

any reason to think that he is any different from other rocks? Isn't
the most likely explanation that I am seeing and hearing things/my
mind is playing tricks on me? Or perhaps that I am deliberately
making it up?

-Brian

(Spam filter: Add my first initial to the forefront of my email

address to contact me directly.)
<snip>
.

User: "Brian Bilek"

Title: Re: How Conversations with Atheists Pan Out 28 Feb 2004 05:47:45 PM
On 28 Feb 2004 11:44:26 -0800,
(Nerd Gerl) wrote:

Brian Bilek wrote in message ...

On 28 Feb 2004 03:18:10 -0800,

(Nerd Gerl) wrote:

Brian Bilek wrote in message <7hs040prn67sj2g09bo83nh3tho0b4q3d6@4ax.com>...

Again, neither do you have evidence that God is not.


And I am not claiming that God does not exist, thus I require no
evidence. I am content to assume that those who claim God does

exist

are wrong, since they have presented no evidence to support that
claim.


This is f*ing stupid.

"You're wrong, because you don't have proof!"
"No, you don't have any proof - so you're wrong!"

Neither side has satisfactory proof - yet both sides are wrong.

What do they prove themselves wrong with? (Literally) Nothing????

What a joke.


Wow, we're having an intelligent conversation and all of a sudden it
degenerates to this? What happened here that pissed you off so much?


I don't appreciate being called *wrong* (not that I'm a Christian)
esp. when you have nothing to prove that I'm *wrong*. It's offensive
and reveals your biases, instead of an objective position (required
for an intelligent convo).

Where did I say you were wrong?
I am not telling you that God does not exist (i.e. stating that you
are wrong). I am telling you that based on my lack of belief in God,
I assume that those who do are simply incorrect in doing so. Does it
not stand to follow that if I assume that there is no Christian God,
that those who believe in it are mistaken? I assume the negative in
any claim for the existence of something supernatural until evidence
is produced to support its existence. That is the essence of lack of
belief in such things. Did you not know this?
By the very nature of being an atheist, it seems that I am taking a
position that offends you. Why bother discussing this at all if you
are going to be offended because I don't believe what you believe?
If you are looking for true objectivity you will not find it in any
conversation with a human. Why? Because all viewpoints are, by
definition, subjective. Everyone is biased based on their beliefs and
personal experience. This should not be a surprise to you.
If you want to take offense, take it where it is intended. There is
no need to go looking for it where it isn't to be found.
<snip>
-Brian
(Spam filter: Add my first initial to the forefront of my email address to contact me directly.)
.


  Page 1 of 1

1

 


Related Articles
 

NEWER

pg.3585     pg.2749     pg.2106     pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER