What do atheists claim to know nothing about?

[Karras]

Well, I guess this is about as close as you get to actually engaging in a rationa debate. Can't sayas I'm all that impressed.

About there being many sects of Christians which are not uniform in their beliefs, I am saying that they all believe this proposition:

God is the creator of heaven and earth.

You deny that is their common belief about God notwithstanding some differences in particular matters of doctrines and observances, then it is your privilege of arbitrariety, but you are not knowledgeable and don't want to be knowledgeable about the common concept of God from the part of theists predominantly represented by Christians.

Like I said, damnation for not accepting your particular flavour sounds like a pretty big difference in concept to me. Just because a few buzz words or phrases may match up, that does not mean they are the same thing.

But OK then, substantiate the claim that a God exists who created Heaven and Earth.

What evidence do you have for his existence? What method did he use? Are we talking about him triggering the Big Bang, the literal account of Genesis or something in between?

You see, you still don't get it. You assert God exists, you substantiate that claim. This is not likely to go anywhere fast until you understand this incredibly simple premise.

[Yrreg]

You want me to prove to your satisfaction that God exists?

Please if I may, read the title of this thread, "What do atheists claim to know nothing about?"


Have I ever gone full time into proving the existence of God in this thread?

I am trying here to find out exactly what atheists know and what they don't know and what they don't care to know.

So that I can understand the way they think.


You see the proofs and disproofs of God have been going on and on and on for since when some men have come to the knowledge of God and accepted His existence, and subsequently also some men have come to the denial of God.

Can you or I say something more or newer than what has already been said for the last several millennia, and there are still just the same atheists against God and there are still theists for God.

Can you at least see the possibility of a new avenue to this conflict between atheists and theists, namely, to examine what atheists know to be the concept of God as believed in by theists, and perhaps you want to ask what theists think to be the essence of being atheist on the part of atheists, what is their common denominator?


Tell me in as far as concept is concerned you do not accept that the concept of God as creator of heaven and earth to be common among all theists today, predominantly represented by Christians, then tell me what is the common concept of God advocated by theists predominantly represented by Christians in the West, in particular in the US?

Okay, in brief what do you as an atheist insist to be the concept of God common among Christians, if it is not creator of heaven and earth?



Yrreg

[John09]

Okay, in brief what do you as an atheist insist to be the concept of God common among Christians, if it is not creator of heaven and earth?

Yrreg

The Apostle's Creed sums up the common concept of god among Western Christians. I know I don't need to write it out because you already know what it says.

[Karras]

I really do not fully understand what you are blathering on about.

I did not ask you to prove it, I merely asked to to provide evidence to support the notion that your god is even worthy of consideration. Despite your empty assertion tht the "proofs" have been available for a long time, they always seem to be conspicuously absent when a believer is asked to present one of them.

The title of your thread is so noted and I judge it to be nonsensical. You might as well ask what humans claim to know nothing about because you will get a similar range of answers (of any at all). Atheists as a whole have little in common other than the lack of belief in God. In just about every other respect, we exist in the same web of knowledge and ignorance as everyone else. What does a theist even know about God anyway? The operative word is "believe" not "know". You believe your version of God is correct. If you claim to know it is, you are simply not being honest with yourself. It is not like you can claim superior knowledge, you can only realistically claim that you believe something we do not, which is not in dispute. The very fact that you imply superior knowledge based on nothing more than the credulous  acceptance of empty assersions makes a mockery of your entire thread.

Can you at least see the possibility of a new avenue to this conflict between atheists and theists, namely, to examine what atheists know to be the concept of God as believed in by theists, and perhaps you want to ask what theists think to be the essence of being atheist on the part of atheists, what is their common denominator?

If you think that this conflict can be resolved by a better understanding of the concept of God (which I doubt), stop playing bloody games and increase our understanding of your concept of God but I will be asking for evidence to back up your inevitably empty assertions.

Tell me in as far as concept is concerned you do not accept that the concept of God as creator of heaven and earth to be common among all theists today, predominantly represented by Christians, then tell me what is the common concept of God advocated by theists predominantly represented by Christians in the West, in particular in the US?

I do not and would not deny that God is typically claimed to be the creator of life, the universe and everything. So what? Substantiate the claim that he is or stop banging on about it.

But then, like I have already tried to tell you, Christians do not have the monopoly on concepts of god(s). You have not even demonstrated that the case of theists deserves to be "predominantly represented by Christians" yet, nevermind about whether we should deem their position to be worthy of our time. Popularity is not enough. You must demostrate that Christians are more qualified to predominantly represent the cause of theists. Why not Jews, Muslims, Pagans or one of the other faiths? How is yours in any way more "right"?

Now, we are not going to get anywhere here until you stop playing games and trying to study us like some bloody science project. Ignoring the fact that you have not established the superior qualifications of Christianity, Try starting this great debate here and now. Try opening a dialogue but the first thing I personally am going to ask you to do is support your position with evidence.

If you actually try discussing it with us, you will get a hell of a lot further than you have by repeating the same nonsensical qustions over and over.

[Karras]

I'll tell you what Gerry/Yrreg, I'll give you my definition of God. God is something that lacks evidentiary support.

That is about all you need to say really. Quibbling about the attributes of a being that you have not even established exists is like arguing about the colour of UFOs, before you even have any reason to believe ET is popping down to Earth for a spot of buttsecks, cattle mutiliation and a cup of tea to begin with.

[McQ]

And since you've continued your usual pattern of posting, this is Strike 2. You've been given ample opportunity to clean up your act.

Are you McQ a moderator here or even one of the owners here?

What exactly are you warning me now for the second time about?


If I should be banned now for writing the way I do, then I am disappointed that this forum has to resort to banning me for what I don't know violations.

I won't spend any more time satisfying your desire to troll this forum. You already know I'm a forum moderator. It is easily visible in my profile/avatar.

Read my post again. Don't pretend to be unaware of what it is you are doing. Comply with the directives I listed or receive a one week ban from the forum so you can rethink the way you are currently behaving here.

[Yrreg]

Dear McQ:

I really don't see what it is in your avatar which indicates that you are a moderator.

You always seem to accuse me of bad intentions here, but I still have to read exactly what are my bad intentions.

I just don't read everything that posters here write because as soon as I see that they are not into the topic of the thread, then I don't read any further.

In your case I see that you are giving me a warning then another one, and I could not really divine what my offenses are, except that people here accuse me of being a troll, being incoherent in English, and for baiting -- whatever I am baiting them about or on. and you say I have dishonest intentions.


Anyway, if you want to ban me or suspend me for one week according to your discretion, what can I do about it?

Perhaps you should ask the owners of this forum first, because I think they are after people who do express their thoughts and not call other people names which they themselves don't want to be called with.


Anyway, just tell me what rules of the agreement I have violated and am still continuing to violate?


And I am leaving this thread because things are getting overly emotional.

And if you do ban or suspend me for one week, do you have the rule that or the policy to at least pm me for my notice that I have been banned or suspended and why?

Or do I learn about it next time I try to log in in order to participate in writing messages here?



Yrreg

[Karras]

And I am leaving this thread because things are getting overly emotional.

Perhaps I can recommend comomile tea to calm your nerves?

[Whitney]

Dear McQ:

I really don't see what it is in your avatar which indicates that you are a moderator.

McQ's rank is very clearly displayed as "global moderator."  Just as mine is very clearly "admin."

You always seem to accuse me of bad intentions here, but I still have to read exactly what are my bad intentions.

I've been out of town and have been unable to keep up with posts from the last 4 or 5 days.  However, I did just read one post of yours where you asked  questions like do USA atheists want to kill all religious people.  That is hardly a civil question unless you have a reason to think that is the case...in which case a source would be necessary.  If a moderator has had to warn you about other things, I'm sure you were out of line in other instances as well.  If you don't want to follow the forum rules or wish to ignore the moderators, you will be booted from this forum.  We enjoy civil discussions, if you don't think you can approach the topics here in a civil manner there are plenty of other forums on the net you can bother.

[Yrreg]

Okay, now I see it, global mod and admin.


My sincere apologies, but if I may, I was looking into the picture.

You don't believe that? What can I do, you don't believe me; that's it, you don't believe me.


Again, if I may, suppose you display your global mod and your admin in conspicuously big font below your name.



Yrreg

[Yrreg]

About my asking atheists here whether they want to see all theists killed, all structures indicative of God demolished, all writings deleted, that is very unacceptable to you atheists?

Unacceptable, namely, the asking them such questions or the idea of killing of theists, destruction of structures, and excision of all writings?


In any case or both cases, just answer of course not!

Suppose you ask me in turn whether I want to see all atheists killed, all their structures destroyed, all their writings extinguished, how will I answer?

Here is my answer: Of course not!



Yrreg

[McQ]

Okay, now I see it, global mod and admin.

My sincere apologies, but if I may, I was looking into the picture.

You don't believe that? What can I do, you don't believe me; that's it, you don't believe me.

Again, if I may, suppose you display your global mod and your admin in conspicuously big font below your name.

Yrreg

Last chance, yrreg. Whether or not you saw it, the fact that I am one of the forum moderators is plainly visible without large font, as are the forum rules, which you need to read and comply with. Take the time to do that before you post again, even if your post is a response to me. At this point you have to prove to me that you are not here to preach, troll, bait, or cause any other form of trouble. I repeat my request/directive that you do not post again in this forum until you read and agree to abide by the forum rules.

[Whitney]

Some of us expect all decent human beings to answer "of course not"...

I mirror McQ's above post.

[i_am_i]

What I want to find out is what atheists do not believe in, and how they explain why they do not believe in the things they don't believe in.

I'm new here and this is my first post to an actual discussion. So, here goes, and I'm only speaking for myself, now, and definitely don't mean to come across as being antagonistic.
I don't believe in anything because I don't believe. To me belief is the opposite of thinking. If you believe in something to me that means that all you've done is bought something that someone's selling.
I am convinced of certain things, and have come to be so convinced by thinking and observation. Being convinced of something isn't the same thing, to me, as being persuaded. Only I can make myself convinced that something is true, as far as it's possible to know whether or not anything is true.
This gets into semantics, I know, and I'm being pretty subjective here, but I'm talking about believing something versus being convinced of something, not about knowing or not knowing something if this makes any sense, but anyway to me believing is the opposite of thinking so I don't do it, I just don't believe. Not believing frees up a lot of space in the mind for what the mind is intended for, which is thinking.
As far as knowing or not knowing something is concerned, I'm not convinced that it really is possible to know anything, but of course I could be wrong about that.

[Arctonyx]

Unacceptable, namely, the asking them such questions or the idea of killing of theists, destruction of structures, and excision of all writings?

Because I would hope most Atheists, and people in general find death and destruction sickening, and no something they'd want to carry out on any basis.

I mean, it should be clear to religious people by now, that many Atheists think badly of religion, particularly because it can drive people to kill other people, and destroy buildings, simply because they hold different beliefs. And I would hope most people would agree with me that the idea of killing people simply for holding different beliefs should be abhorred. We may not agree with those beliefs, but I personally will not kill someone simply because they have faith in a God and I don't.

If we asked you a similar question, you would most likely be offended that we thought you could carry out such actions (even though from an evidence basis most of the killings are perpetrated by those on the side of religion), so why would you even think that we would want to kill theists and destroy buildings?