• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:1396] Questions that atheists are afraid to answer

The problem is, how can there be anything but the gods of men?
There can be many things not of men....most things actually. There are also many things humans are not aware of and so goes our curiosity and science in search of it. Think about all the things we have discovered in just the last 50 years and extrapolate on possibility. Hell 100 years ago we had no clue about relativity or quantum physics.
 
1. What is your process for evaluating evidence for God?
2. Do you even have a process for evaluating such evidence?
3. Are you willing to tell me, to describe this process?
4. If not why? why are you unwilling to describe a process yet eager for me to describe my evidence?
5. How can you claim you've never seen evidence for God when you do not have any way to evaluate evidence for God?
6 . Can you reassure me that you don't intend to reject anything and everything that I might show to you as evidence?

I've tried, I've asked several and all I get is evasion, waffling, prevarication.

What does it reveal to us when the atheist refuses to answer these? what can we infer from their stubborn refusals?

I put it to you that this means that these atheists actually already believe there is no God, they falsely claim to "withhold" belief because they want to masquerade as being rational, they do not want to admit that deep in their hearts they are convinced there is no God.

So when an atheist asks for evidence beware, they have no intention of honestly evaluating evidence, that's all just part of their game, their real process is to simply reject whatever is shown them, no need to evaluate when they already believe (but won't admit) that there is no God.

This is good old fashioned atheism: "an explicit belief that no gods exist" yet they are afraid too to even admit that and be honest.

1. I see no evidence of god to evaluate. Also you did not specify the god you mean.

2. What evidence? Which god?

3. Becoming an atheist took me 20 years of questioning my belief. The only way I can simplify it is this:

One too many little girls were raped. So I thought no all-knowing, all-powerful god exists, or if he does exist he has the morals of a rabid alley cat. What moral person would allow a little girl to be raped? I chose no god exists. I know no god exists. I researched the subject thoroughly.

4. You have no evidence, just faith. And I summed up 20 years of process the best I could.

5. I summed up the way I discounted evidence of god and concluded there is no evidence of any god.

6. No, the opposite. I already thought deeply about and rejected everything 20 years of parochial school, countless Sundays and Holy Days in churches, and reading the Bible threw at me. If you think you have something original go for it.
 
1. I see no evidence of god to evaluate. Also you did not specify the god you mean.

2. What evidence? Which god?

3. Becoming an atheist took me 20 years of questioning my belief. The only way I can simplify it is this:

One too many little girls were raped. So I thought no all-knowing, all-powerful god exists, or if he does exist he has the morals of a rabid alley cat. What moral person would allow a little girl to be raped? I chose no god exists. I know no god exists. I researched the subject thoroughly.

4. You have no evidence, just faith. And I summed up 20 years of process the best I could.

5. I summed up the way I discounted evidence of god and concluded there is no evidence of any god.

6. No, the opposite. I already thought deeply about and rejected everything 20 years of parochial school, countless Sundays and Holy Days in churches, and reading the Bible threw at me. If you think you have something original go for it.

Well that's certainly a line of reasoning but highly flawed, none of what you saw proves that God does not exist.

A child getting raped does not prove that God does not exist.
 
There can be many things not of men....most things actually. There are also many things humans are not aware of and so goes our curiosity and science in search of it. Think about all the things we have discovered in just the last 50 years and extrapolate on possibility. Hell 100 years ago we had no clue about relativity or quantum physics.

Not sure what you mean by not of men, when it comes to gods. There are things we don't know, but it doesn't mean there are things called gods, as gods is already a man made concept. What can man discover that will take the place of that concept without not fitting what we mean by gods?
 
Well that's certainly a line of reasoning but highly flawed, none of what you saw proves that God does not exist.

A child getting raped does not prove that God does not exist.
Not alone no. But it's pretty darned close. As I said, it took me 20 years to become an atheist.
 
It has everything to do with it. Your desperation to hold onto what you consider a Structure is just one more thing that is transient in human history. There was a Structure before Christianity and there will be one after it has faded away.

It means that clinging to cherished structures is a folly.
It's the absolute desperate 'clinging' of both @Alizia Tyler and @Sherlock Holmes that is so sad. They should be content and fulfilled in their beliefs on faith alone. But their uncertainty results in this epic overcompensation...acres and acres of pretentious, meaningless text and page after page of unjustified accusations and unfulfilled claims.

Theirs is not the way to share the Word of God. It makes people of belief look untrustworthy and full of baseless pride and exclusion (we're special!). Who joins a following with no credibility?
Devilish David, both Devil & Saint in my view, was said to have said:
This would fit with the general incoherency running through the entire non-discourse, or discombobulated discourse, of this interesting and dynamic intellect whose avatar is a comic-book character! Oy vey ist mir.
:LOL: :rolleyes: I rest my case.
 
Not sure what you mean by not of men, when it comes to gods. There are things we don't know, but it doesn't mean there are things called gods, as gods is already a man made concept. What can man discover that will take the place of that concept without not fitting what we mean by gods?
I do not know....pretty sure I already said that. Thus my Agnostic statement because I leave possibility open when I am not sure of something. I also stated I do not accept the Gods of men...maybe I should replace God with Universe or "That which Is".
 
Theirs is not the way to share the Word of God.

That's right, all posted scripture must meet with your personal approval, recall how I was dragged over the coals by you for posting this recently (I was even publicly accused by you of being a misogynist simply because I posted something that you didn't like)

1617824669503.png

These words have authority, these inspired epistles are the Word of God.
 
I do not know....pretty sure I already said that. Thus my Agnostic statement because I leave possibility open when I am not sure of something. I also stated I do not accept the Gods of men...maybe I should replace God with Universe or "That which Is".

God has too much meaning attached to it. If we find something that is physical, we wouldn't call it god. It would be another scientific discovery. Universe is physical, as is "That which is". Why do we even need to find anything like the concept of god at all? What is it that we aren't sure of that requires a god?
 
That's right, all posted scripture must meet with your personal approval, recall how I was dragged over the coals by you for posting this recently (I was even publicly accused by you of being a misogynist simply because I posted something that you didn't like)

View attachment 67327236

These words have authority, these inspired epistles are the Word of God.
LMAO! Oh thank you! That's great! You are telling me to shut up (again) because I'm a woman and have made you look bad. Not only have I proven you wrong and pointed out your gross sin, I am a woman! You have been corrected and your sin brought to light by a woman! Sad but apparently this means you believe you are 'less than a woman,' since I've out-thought and out-taught you.

Ah poor Sherlock, the wages of sin are truly painful.
 
God has too much meaning attached to it. If we find something that is physical, we wouldn't call it god. It would be another scientific discovery. Universe is physical, as is "That which is". Why do we even need to find anything like the concept of god at all? What is it that we aren't sure of that requires a god?
Nothing really, I just bow to the theists and say I leave it open rather than argue with them.
 
That's right, all posted scripture must meet with your personal approval, recall how I was dragged over the coals by you for posting this recently (I was even publicly accused by you of being a misogynist simply because I posted something that you didn't like)

View attachment 67327236

These words have authority, these inspired epistles are the Word of God.

"Word of God" but ACTUALLY written by a HUMAN male chauvinist in a time when women were subjugated as a matter of culture and "tradition". "Word of God". *L*
 
Well that's certainly a line of reasoning but highly flawed, none of what you saw proves that God does not exist.

A child getting raped does not prove that God does not exist.

That's really not the proper question, which does is what you have seen prove that God DOES exist, and can that evidence be used to show others?
 
LMAO! Oh thank you! That's great! You are telling me to shut up (again) because I'm a woman and have made you look bad. Not only have I proven you wrong and pointed out your gross sin, I am a woman! You have been corrected and your sin brought to light by a woman! Sad but apparently this means you believe you are 'less than a woman,' since I've out-thought and out-taught you.

Ah poor Sherlock, the wages of sin are truly painful.

1617827659007.png

That's the real reason my quoting Timothy upset you so much "it Judges the thoughts and attitudes" - your thoughts and attitudes; if you read something in scripture that upsets you then you must look inward, at yourself, not outward, not at me, not at others.
 
Last edited:
No it isn't.



The question is why even go there? Why name it something? Why give a name to some supernatural belief and why give a name to a disbelief in that belief? Both are pointless. Just live in the present moment.

Why go there? Um, once again, because I AM an atheist.
 
God has too much meaning attached to it. If we find something that is physical, we wouldn't call it god. It would be another scientific discovery. Universe is physical, as is "That which is". Why do we even need to find anything like the concept of god at all? What is it that we aren't sure of that requires a god?
Let's substitute quantum physics for god. Suddenly things more sense.
 
Let's substitute quantum physics for god. Suddenly things more sense.

Or not. Why not just call quantum physics...."quantum physics". Throwing in an irrelevant name doesn't prove anything.
 
Its an excuse to avoid embarrassment because you have an ego that makes it hard for you to be honest, that's what's really going on David, no word games.



Imaginary things are very very real, the world is filled with imagined and imaginary things, these things exist, they must exist in order for us to name them, refer to them, talk about them, share them.



Yes of course, I imagined it, the imagined thing existed within my imagination, I then took steps to materialize it and ordered it from Amazon.



At one point yes, of course, it was just in my head, that real phenomenon, that real experience preceded me materializing the imagined thing, the imagined thing existed in the machine that is my brain, just as much as it existing on a chip or floppy disk.

There could never be a shelf on a wall or a piece of software without them being imagined first, so on that basis imagined things must be pretty f*****g important and pretty f*****g important things can't be not real - unless it's you who wants to start word games.

:ROFLMAO:
Nobody just imagined them into existence. Keep digging watson.
 
That's right, all posted scripture must meet with your personal approval, recall how I was dragged over the coals by you for posting this recently (I was even publicly accused by you of being a misogynist simply because I posted something that you didn't like)

View attachment 67327236

These words have authority, these inspired epistles are the Word of God.
Your response is shut up woman! Ya killed your own thread way to go!
 
Back
Top Bottom