Atheists vs Theists Thread

[Pancake]

Alright, this isn't necessarily a forum game, rather a indirect debate.

Here's what's going to happen.
I've signed up for a theist forum. I've created a topic similar to this one, except they will respond to your reasons why God isn't real (or religion is bad, etc.), and I will transfer them over here.
I will keep the theist forum name anonymous, and on the theist forum, this forum will be kept anonymous (so they won't know that "Happy Atheist Forum" is the one i'm sending their debates/reasons to.)

You will try to pretty prove a theist wrong, or give them good reasons why you think God doesn't exist. (Just reply and post them) Just start your post with "Transfer This:" and I will transfer it over to the theist forum, they will respond to your point, and I will copy/paste it over to here.

Your names will be kept anonymous.
If you don't understand what we're doing here, just lemme know.

Alright, so lets get started. Post your reasons/points/beliefs why you think God doesn't exist, Religion is bad, etc. Make sure not to start flaming, or try to express yourself by typing with the caps lock on.

Let's go!  

[templeboy]

God doesn't exist because...well any general god is cosmologically unnecessary as a god or other supernatural entity raises more questions than it answers....

However, particuar gods, for instance the god of christianity, cannot logically exist in the forms suggested by theists because of logical and textual inconsistencies and contradictions.

[Will]

It's not that I believe absolutely that god doesn't exist, it's just that I can't think of any reason to believe. Everything I believe in is based at least in some way on some form of evidence; it fits in with my developed understanding of the world. I understand basic science. I understand basic logic. I've got a relatively stable grasp on reality. I don't believe in ghosts or leprechauns, but I might consider it if I was presented with some evidence.

If someone came to me with a pot of gold and an un-doctored photograph of a very small man picking 4-leaf clovers, I'd be intrigued enough to go find the evidence myself. I've never seen that kind of evidence for anything supernatural, though. In fact, I'd go as far to say that I cannot be shown evidence for something that is supernatural because anything which has evidence is not supernatural. If there is evidence for godâ€"and that's a big ifâ€"god is not supernatural.

Does anyone out there on the internets have an equivalent of that pot of gold and undoctored picture of the small man? Can anyone provide verifiable evidence for the positive existence of a supreme creator (or however you choose to define "god")? If so, I'd be interested in seeing it.

[Heretical Rants]

Your names will be kept anonymous.

Doesn't mighty void that statement?

[AlP]

Do not transfer:

This is an interesting idea...

Doesn't mighty void that statement?

I think you're right. It might in the future be possible to find the source of the post using a search engine. Not immediately but once the original post had been crawled. But I think the intent here (and correct me if I'm wrong Pancake) is that withholding the source and board username might initiate discussions that might not otherwise take place.



I'm not sure if this is going to work though. I personally feel no desire to argue that Gods are not real. And if I did I would need more context. Like are the members of the other board predominantly of a particular religion? Maybe they're Muslims? Maybe they're Mormons? I don't know. Which Gods would I argue are not real? That's just one example of the context I might want.

The absence of posts leads me to think that others here (for preferences similar to my own or otherwise) haven't taken an interest. But we'll see...

[Jolly Sapper]

If pancake copy/pastes the exact post to the other board, it wouldn't be hard to search for the whole post in and find a hit on this board, directly to the original poster's ID.

[Whitney]

The absence of posts leads me to think that others here (for preferences similar to my own or otherwise) haven't taken an interest. But we'll see...

I like the idea, I figured a couple posts was enough to start...I doubt they want to get flooded with atheist questions anymore than we'd want to answer a flood of theist questions.

As far as is concerned...our posts would show up in the search within a couple days.  I know this because I was checking Perspective's post to make sure it wasn't a copy and it didn't come up with search the first time but I later decided a different part of the post needed to be checked and it was already showing up in search just a couple days after the OP was posted.  Yes...I do check all wall of type posts for copy paste if it is related to science, proofs, and other types of topics which are commonly 'borrowed' from others.

[Pancake]

Well, that didn't turn out too well.
Even if they did find this forum, what would they do?

[Whitney]

Well, that didn't turn out too well.
Even if they did find this forum, what would they do?

At worst, post here.  At the very worst, troll us and get banned.

[BadPoison]

Please explain how an all-loving god could allow evil (defined as suffering) into his creation. God can not be all-loving if his plan allows for evil. Evil is not merely the absence of an omniscient, omnipotent god. It is an inherent part of his creation.

Since you probably can't explain this, instead explain why a god that is either not real or is not all-loving or all-powerful or all-knowing is worthy of my belief.

[Mister Joy]

Oh, why bother? 'Well,' they'll say, 'suffering is there to enhance our appreciation of happiness, through contrast and comparison, ergo God would have been doing us a disservice in not making us suffer a little. Without bad, there can be no good. etc.' Ugly as it is, and as much as it misses the point, I haven't heard any believer give a better defence than that and once such inane silliness has been spoken by someone in sincerity, you know that they're probably too far gone for there to be any hope of getting through to them. Actually, since God is essentially a metaphysical and paternal figure, I wonder why no one has ever tried to use the same excuses to defend child abuse by material parents. "I knocked little Jimmy's teeth out of his head to help him better appreciate modern dentistry. Also, to give him a healthy awareness of his own fragile mortality. Both crucial parts of his intellectual development."

[BadPoison]

"I knocked little Jimmy's teeth out of his head to help him better appreciate modern dentistry. Also, to give him a healthy awareness of his own fragile mortality. Both crucial parts of his intellectual development." roflol

[bowmore]

I do not believe in any gods, since I have not yet come across a definition of a god that would have me believe it exists without empirical proof.

[Whitney]

So, Pancake, when do we get to see posts from the theist forum?

[jcm]

Babies die of sids. We are alone. Our bodies work well due to evolution, and many of us live a long and fulfilled life while others don't. some even say there are doing god's work, but what happened to children who are accidentally born with a severe mental or physical illness? These people are either unable to do god's work or die born they could. Why is that? Shouldn't we all start off and live fulfilled lives if we want to and not be plagued with problems that no one caused or neglected to prevent?  

And one other thing...if the earth is destroyed, the universe would not notice.