Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

[Hedonist]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Have you devised a way to test for deities?
If so, what are you holding back on? Get that tester out & let's test for God!

In order to determine whether an object exists or not, the properties of that object have to be clear enough to allow some sort of judgment based on the evidence.

When it comes to the question of gods, there is little to no agreement about the properties, so no determination of existence can be possible and the question is, strictly speaking, meaningless.

It make absolutely no sense to say that something exists when there no possible way of testing its existence?

Have you defined a set of testable properties for a deity yet?

[Hedonist]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Eh?
God can't make something too heavy for Him to lift because He could lift anything He wants.
You think that's the GOTCHA logic?
LOL

No, that's not "gotcha" logic. It's called a paradox.

There is no way to satisfy both parts of the question, either deity can make an object he can't life an therefore is not omnipotent, or he cannot make such an object and is not omnipotent.

A paradoxical property cannot exist for any entity, neither in reality nor in the imagination.

What you are experiencing is called cognitive dissonance.

[RiversideRedneck]

Hedonist wrote:

In order to determine whether an object exists or not, the properties of that object have to be clear enough to allow some sort of judgment based on the evidence.
When it comes to the question of gods, there is little to no agreement about the properties, so no determination of existence can be possible and the question is, strictly speaking, meaningless.
It make absolutely no sense to say that something exists when there no possible way of testing its existence?

OK, so you have no way of testing deities. So you have no logical way of determining that they do't exist.

Got it.

Have you defined a set of testable properties for a deity yet?

Don't need to. God proved Himself to me long ago

[RiversideRedneck]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
No, that's not "gotcha" logic. It's called a paradox.
There is no way to satisfy both parts of the question, either deity can make an object he can't life an therefore is not omnipotent, or he cannot make such an object and is not omnipotent.
A paradoxical property cannot exist for any entity, neither in reality nor in the imagination.
What you are experiencing is called cognitive dissonance.

The term cognitive dissonance is used to describe the feeling of discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs.

I am feeling no discomfort of conflicting beliefs.

There is nothing God can create that He could not lift.

[Aerobatty]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Eh?
God can't make something too heavy for Him to lift because He could lift anything He wants.
You think that's the GOTCHA logic?
LOL
There are things that God can't do.
He can't lie.
He can't sin.
He can't hate.
he can't learn anything new.

That's a lot of "can't"s for an omnipotent being.

That last one would seem to apply to you as well.

[Hedonist]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
OK, so you have no way of testing deities. So you have no logical way of determining that they do't exist.
Got it.

Same holds true for faries, gnomes, Easter Bunnies, etc.

What if I said there was an invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage?

According to your [il]logic, all of these things should be considered to exist if you can't prove they don't.

(ref: "Dragon on My Garage", Carl Sagan - " http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm&... ;)

[Catcher1]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
You’re too busy playing multiple roles as women.
You are weird dude.

Careful Eagle.

For all you know, I may be God.

[Tide with Beach]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

The term cognitive dissonance is used to describe the feeling of discomfort that results from holding two conflicting beliefs.
I am feeling no discomfort of conflicting beliefs.
There is nothing God can create that He could not lift.

Cognitive Dissonance: The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, esp. as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.

You don't necessarily feel discomfort when you have cognitive dissonance.

[Tide with Beach]

Catcher1 wrote:

Careful Eagle.
For all you know, I may be God.

You don't want to take on that kind of liability.

[Eagle12]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Careful Eagle.
For all you know, I may be God.

I have nothing against you Catcher with the exception you weird out this site with your role playing as women.

Why do you do that?

If you want to fantasize write a romance novel. At least you could make some money at it.

[Aura Mytha]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
In order to determine whether an object exists or not, the properties of that object have to be clear enough to allow some sort of judgment based on the evidence.
When it comes to the question of gods, there is little to no agreement about the properties, so no determination of existence can be possible and the question is, strictly speaking, meaningless.
It make absolutely no sense to say that something exists when there no possible way of testing its existence?
Have you defined a set of testable properties for a deity yet?

It has been done , the only physical existence of god proven is in the brain. God is a condition of the brain. So is it an entity?
Doubtful , but there's no doubt it exists in abstract.
But far from omnipotent and has a very limited existence.
God is imprisoned in the minds of those who believe.

Hard to say if that is "real" but it is for them.

Some would call it a brain disorder , I will call it a condition of the mind.

[Aura Mytha]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>
Careful Eagle.
For all you know, I may be God.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[Tide with Beach]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

...
Don't need to. God proved Himself to me long ago

You credited the god you believe in, like believers do.

It's reasonable to expect this to happen.

It's how superstitions work.

We are all trained in various ways of interpreting reality. Rational skepticism has been demonstrated to be the best way to do this so far. The scientific method may have even saved mankind from extinction already. If there's a better way of using our minds to navigate reality, I don't know of it.

Anything that CAN be interpreted to support your beliefs, probably WILL be interpreted to support your beliefs. Faith is probably the least rigorous way of knowing anything. As a methodology, it isn't internally or externally consistent. It's performance is similar to guessing. It's been demonstrated to be dangerous, while only offering benefits equal to the placebo effect.

Technological advancements have allowed humans to get the same things accomplished with less risk. We strive to make things more efficient and safer. Faith and religion are already seen by skeptics as outdated, dangerous, and unnecessary. Sooner or later, everyone will know it. I just hope it happens before the Rapture.

[Hedonist]

Aura Mytha wrote:

<quoted text>
It has been done , the only physical existence of god proven is in the brain. God is a condition of the brain. So is it an entity?
Doubtful , but there's no doubt it exists in abstract.
But far from omnipotent and has a very limited existence.
God is imprisoned in the minds of those who believe.
Hard to say if that is "real" but it is for them.
Some would call it a brain disorder , I will call it a condition of the mind.

And, according to at least 1 study, it's only in one side of the brain. So if you get a split brain operation, does 1/2 go to heaven and the other go to hell?

" http://www.youtube.com/watch... ;

[Aura Mytha]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
And, according to at least 1 study, it's only in one side of the brain. So if you get a split brain operation, does 1/2 go to heaven and the other go to hell?
" http://www.youtube.com/watch... ;

WOW I know about split brain stuff but never about that question. I should have guessed it was a right brain function though. He doesn't state if it were a right of left handed person which has a huge impact on understanding it. That makes me want to inquire further.

[Catcher1]

Eagle12 wrote:

<quoted text>
I have nothing against you Catcher with the exception you weird out this site with your role playing as women.
Why do you do that?
If you want to fantasize write a romance novel. At least you could make some money at it.

Which "women" would those be, chief?

[RiversideRedneck]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
Same holds true for faries, gnomes, Easter Bunnies, etc.
What if I said there was an invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage?
According to your [il]logic, all of these things should be considered to exist if you can't prove they don't.
(ref: "Dragon on My Garage", Carl Sagan - " http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm&... ;)

Don't post no Carl Sagan gibberish. That dude is out of his mind. And you people worship him like the pope.

What about fairies, gnomes & dragons? Because you can't test for them you seem them unreal?

Not very scientific...

[Aerobatty]

Catcher1 wrote:

<quoted text>Which "women" would those be, chief?

Egret is wishful thinking again.

[Aura Mytha]

RiversideRedneck wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't post no Carl Sagan gibberish. That dude is out of his mind. And you people worship him like the pope.
What about fairies, gnomes & dragons? Because you can't test for them you seem them unreal?
Not very scientific...

Dude you seriously do not want to attempt to trash that name.

He is legendary and honorable.

[RiversideRedneck]

Tide with Beach wrote:

You credited the god you believe in, like believers do.
It's reasonable to expect this to happen.
It's how superstitions work.
We are all trained in various ways of interpreting reality. Rational skepticism has been demonstrated to be the best way to do this so far. The scientific method may have even saved mankind from extinction already. If there's a better way of using our minds to navigate reality, I don't know of it.

The scientific method is not perfect. It depends on who is interpreting the data & how they perceive it.

Personal and cultural beliefs influence both our perceptions and our interpretations of natural phenomena.

Theories that can't be tested - like a particle that is unobservable (or God)- are not scientific theories, they are speculation and conjecture.

Anything that CAN be interpreted to support your beliefs, probably WILL be interpreted to support your beliefs. Faith is probably the least rigorous way of knowing anything. As a methodology, it isn't internally or externally consistent. It's performance is similar to guessing. It's been demonstrated to be dangerous, while only offering benefits equal to the placebo effect.

I've had much more than a placebo effect because of my faith.

Anything that CAN be interpreted or supported by my beliefs probably will NOT support my beliefs.

Due to scientific advancements, I've had to re-think everything I was taught. Yes, I kept it in the back of my mind that this is all God's will. But that doesn't mean I don't look at things objectively.

Technological advancements have allowed humans to get the same things accomplished with less risk. We strive to make things more efficient and safer. Faith and religion are already seen by skeptics as outdated, dangerous, and unnecessary. Sooner or later, everyone will know it. I just hope it happens before the Rapture.

Of course religion seems outdated to a skeptic. Why wouldn't it?

But to most of the world, faith & religion is in the forefront of their being.

You have to accept that.