That’s why atheism has no legs it has no identity. Atheism presupposes atheism in its current state. Without the existence of a god no atheism is possible. It’s an ideology that relies upon the denial of another’s god. It is nothing without god.
Now I don’t know if god exists… But that’s the only honest thing I can say anything else would be either an opinion or a lie.
The reason I give atheists a hard time is because it’s the only way to assail rhetoric is with ridicule. Not because it is so strong it’s because it has nothing of substance to attack with knowledge. There is nothing to falsify because it is in and of itself nothing. Christianity is easy for atheists to attack because it has a 2000 year old book. But you can only attack the book… Theology is the study of god. Religion is the teaching of the bible.
Religions fight about whose story is right atheists chime in and say they are all wrong. And again I don’t know if any or all are right. And really I don’t give a shit. I bother no man about his religion.
God is like morals or conscience or love it’s an essence or an abstract concept an ideal. Not a person who can be proven or shown.
Yes Christians take a literal POV on this but so do most atheists. I think somebody believing in a talking snake is fucking bonkers too. But like I say if you read Aesop’s fables and not get the moral and start picking apart the talking turtle what’s the point?
Is it logical to assume a position of non-belief on god or is it just a prediction like a prophet would use?
If you state that you do not believe in god because you have no proof is the reverse any more logical? Is that a definitive reason for a non-belief or belief or are both just an argument from ignorance (Draws a conclusion based on lack of knowledge or evidence without accounting for all possibilities)
Logic is like mathematics it is consistent 1+1 always =2 not 1+1=2 99% of the time and 1+1=11 on 1% of special occasions or when it furthers an issue.
Stating there is or is not a god is just a prediction based on probabilities totally dependent on who is looking where and when neither opinion is valid or invalid and both are null and void. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own truth.
If anyone sees logical contradictions- which is the only case that i can think of that requires no biased assumptions -in believing in God, let he/she show them … they would certainly be remembered forever. (i.e. Deduction without assumption is not possible here)
Summary: in a heads-god/tails-no god, coin toss-where the probability of heads/tails is not known and cannot be known – each prediction of the outcome is as efficient as the other. It would be moronic to reticule some ones prediction over your own.
That much should be obvious!
I don’t really think that atheist fundies or theists are here to discuss they just want people to agree with them. They don’t care what your opinion is.