Many theists think that when we say we are not convinced that a God exist, we are saying that we believe there is no God.
2 Likes
Very true, and in another perversion of logic, many of those same theists believe that if they debunk and destroy atheism, that proves a god.
1 Like
I do not even understand how one thinks he/she can debunk anotherās inability to believe in a serious assertion that is backed with no evidence.
I do not hold my opinions to be a definition of my character. They are mine, but they are not permanent. I can change them, trade them for better ideas and opinions, they do not define me absolutely.
Since knowing what is considered to be true is more important to me than never being wrong, I do not mind learning.
I want to have an open mind, especially when it feels uncomfortable(When deeply personal ideas are shown to be wrong)
I sense that many people come onto this forum not to partake in healthy discourse with the aim of improving knowledge (to learn), but rather to tell others what to think. To preach.
3 Likes
@Kersvader I used to think that way, when I was a theist. What these theists forget, is that an atheists makes no claims, one way or the other, with respect to the existence or nonexistence of God
@David_Killens Correct. Disproving atheism does not prove the existence of God, as atheists do not make the claim or assertion, that God does not outright exist. They make no such claims at all.
@Kersvader That is correct. The same thing with the Facebook groups for atheists, as well as the comment section of Yahoo articles and YouTube videos. I am very much against evangelizing,
My speculation:
For some reason; people seem to think that atheists donāt believe anything, and that therefore they are ripe for recruitment into whatever someoneās pet project is (be it a religion, conspiracy theory, hate group, etc). Every atheist organization Iāve been a member of has been bombarded with such outside non-sense.
When they inevitably discover that people wonāt just take their word for their claims; they turn antisocial.
1 Like
Sometimes I watch televangalists. And I have often heard the message from them that atheists are lost souls who need to be led back to the glory of god.
@David_Killens I just noticed something, that theists keep missing about this forum:
āThis is a Civilized Place for Public Discussion Please treat this discussion forum with the same respect you would a public park.ā
I guess the theists forgot about thisā¦ā¦.conveniently.
Yes.
They do make it their personal business to try and spread their beliefs, and it smellsā¦like manure.
Reminds me of Mr. Hitchens who likened religion to toys.
You are welcome to play with it if you like, but do not expect me to play with it.
We should not make the same mistake some thiests make, of expecting the same behavior from a group they have identified. While we often have many fringe radical theists visit us, there are also many very decent, sane, and reasonable theists who are not crazy or abusive.
IMO most theists are good people, sane and upright citizens in their community. They just spend their time taking care of their families and donāt put much effort into spreading religious propaganda.
They are the silent majority and we should respect them.
3 Likes
I wanted to say something like that earlier in my speculation, but it just didnāt happen.
I think there is a huge selection bias in the theists we see here. If for no other reason: they have to seek us out; and jump through some hoops (like forum registration) before we get to read anything from them.
Iām suggesting the sane ones tend not to do this; so we donāt see them near as often.
3 Likes
@David_Killens I agree wholeheartedly. Not all theists like to go out and try to shove their beliefs down other peopleās throats, or even speak openly about their faith, which, to me, seems like bragging.
What I have observed, however, is that the more religious you are, the more you are likely to speak openly of your faith in public, or to try to convert others. So it seems like it is the highly religious is the group we need to worry about, and not theists or religious believers, as a whole.
1 Like
Me too. I find proselytising atheists as obnoxious as proselytising believers. They seem to have the same arrogant certitude.
Oh I think they can read a dictionary as easily as I can, itās just a handy lie they use to āfight the good fight.ā
Lies for Jesus are not lies see. Just as murder is wrong, unless god does it, or asks his followers to do it.
Youāll get the gist of it all after a while. 
1 Like
Well, one can always use the myths of pre-christian religions as basis of speculations. For example, in old greek mythology, the gods actively interfered with human comings and goings. Humans could pray to the gods and make a salient offering, like sweet wine, a prime cut of a newly sacrificed animal, or some such. If the offering was to the godās liking, the god would help the human. Or the god would actively pursue and hassle him(*). In the years of the Trojan war, the gods would take sides; some would side with the Trojans, others with the Greek, and they would alternate in giving advantages to their preferred side, depending on the intensity and eloquence of the prayers and how nice the offerings were.
Or like in the Odyssey, where Odysseus was helped by the goddess of wisdom and warfare, Athena. At the same time, Odysseus was being harassed and actively pursued by Poseidon, the ocean god and the earth mover, due to a lack of offerings from Odysseus and his men early on in his travel from Troy back to his home in Ithaca. Odysseus was even stranded for seven years on the Island Ogygia together with the goddess Calypso, where there was no lack of sex and love-making with the goddess.
And in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, the gods change into human shape and walk among men, interacting with them, and giving them advice, even helping them directly in war and battle, killing of the enemies. This is a much more interesting approach than the weird interactions of the god of the myths of the abrahamitic religions.
(*) because the grek myths were all about the dealings of men in a very patriarchical society.
Firstly I feel if people want to speculate without objective evidence, then they ought to pay themeselves and others the intellectual respect of accepting that the subject of their speculation, whatever it is, is not real until that sufficient objective evidence is found, and demonstrated for everyone to test to destruction.
The more we are emotionally invested in any belief, the less likely we are to see any flaws that it may have.
Faith, emotion, the weight of inheriting long held traditions from loved ones, and cultures we were born raised and live in, and a whole host of other baggage, are things we need to ignore if we want to know whether a belief claim or idea is objectively valid.
If we disbelieve even one unfalsifiable claim, then it is closed minded to believe any of them, and we must know at some level, if we really care to that any claim idea or belief based on an emotional attachment, rather than objective evidence, that despite being falsifiable, has amassed overwhelming evidence to support it, and none to falsify it, is not even remotely comparable. If faith can literally do anything, why hasnāt this been objectively demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt, instead of always relying on the inherent bias of anecdotal claims.
Sadly we are not taught this as children, or in our formative years, and while we struggle to find our place in the world, not offend our peers and those we love and to survive and support loved ones, the idea of critical thinking and skepticism, if itās considered at all, is not considered a useful toll to master.
Yet scepticism, which comes from a Greek word meaning to examine carefully, will help us in almost every aspect of our lives, to examine claims, and ideologies and beliefs that we and others hold, and to ultimately see if they are worthy of belief or respect, or are erroneous or pernicious.
How many people genuinely think it is moral to do or say things that are deeply pernicious? Yet how many good people, ostensibly well meaning, say and do things that either help perpetuate such pernicious beliefs, or even rashly say and do things that are directly harmful to others, for a whole raft of reasons stemming from an inability, or unwillingness to creatively examine them?
As a young man, I hated it when older people smiled knowingly and stopped talking, and often mistakenly perceived their reticence for smugness or arrogance, and only years later realised they were trying to avoid offending me by pointing out my naivety or ignoranceā¦
Itās ironic, but when Iām faced with young people now, I think I owe those people who held their tongue when they could have easily humiliated me, and try not to behave like the ones who did humiliate me, remembering how I felt when that happened.
Anonymity given by the internet may well make us all less inclined to be courteous, and patiently hold back on occasion, but surely itās far better to find out anonymously from strangers that we are being foolish or ignorant? And we can if we strive to, strain and challenge our own credulity in such exchanges, all it takes is an honest desire to pursue the objective evidence. If we are strident with others because we are sure, then owe it to ourselves to examine afterward that confidence.
What in the end do we have to lose, except ignorance and prejudice.
Sorry for the mental splurge, sometimes I find my uneducated and Iāll disciplined rationale running through exchanges and ideas I hope are representing objective evidence, and if not epistemological humility, ot thinking things over more than perhaps I need to as Iām not bright enough to express it in a concise and compelling way.
No harm done, and if Iāve offended anyone, especially ratty, then Iād just like to say sincerely, and from the heart (euphemism, itās a pump made of insentient muscle 
)ā¦
Man the fuck up, no one likes a cry babyā¦
Oh alright Iām sorry if you took offence, it is seldom my goal, and you can bet I will be sorry again, bank on it you fuckersā¦
Whilst this is true, I prefer when dealing with generic claims for a deity, which are usually unfalsifiable, to point out that we donāt accept other claims without any object evidence, and certainly not all unfalsifiable claims, which is absurd to even contemplate, and accepting some or one is biased, and by definition closed minded.
Iāve no problem with pointing out that the objective evidence we understand works without the need for any deity, or that adding a deity invokes Occamās razor, but we must be careful always IMHO, to point out that while this is a justifiable rational and epistemological reason to withhold belief, it does not in and of itself rationally indicate the belief is false. How could it if the belief is unfalsifiable.
Note here the evasion and mental cartwheels contrived by the credulous to avoid requests to accurately define that deity without simply resorting to parotting archaic unevidenced assumptions about its nature. As if these are justified by the length these assumptions have been held as true, or the number of people who believe it.
Anyway, I have no more objective reason to accept claims for an unfalsifiable deity, than I do for an unfalsifiable trip aboard an alien mother ship, to be scrutinised by super intelligent, but bashfully reticent intergalactic travelling, aliens. Who having travelled impossible distances, seem content to move on unannounced, pausing only to terrorise lonely cowboys and farmers, whose mental health has likely not benefitted from living too long in the most uninhabited parts of the world, like the wilds of Montana.
When they land in time square, make the technology that enabled them to get here available to everyone, and it is validated by that evidence being demonstrated as objectively valid by a global consensus, then Iāll be gobsmacked but will admit my incredulity is irrational as it flies in the face of overwhelming evidence.
Why set the bar low enough for a belief so that no objective evidence can be demonstrated, if not to hold onto a belief that we ought really to be disbelieve.
2 Likes