The last leg for Atheism - Page 5

Then why did you say it? Anything can be what if it's finding what is that's difficult.

What I mean by the statment "most atheists are actually agnostics" is the following.

An atheist is - 'One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods' To deny the existance of something you have to have infinite knowledge that it doesnt exist. for example to say there is absolutely no possibility of purple stones with yellow spots existing on planet earth, you would have to examine every stone on earth to be 100% sure.

An agnostic is - 'One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.'

When asked most atheists would deny they had infinite knowledge. hence my statement

quote:

---

do you need to know there is a god in order to be a christian?
no

---

What are you believing in then?

nothing. i am atheist.

To say that an atheist needs 100% assurance towards the question of God's existence doesn't make any more sense than saying that all Catholics need 100% assurance towards the proof of God's existence. With that said then everyone would be agnostic. Which is obviously not true. Therefore you don't need 100% assurance to be atheist. For instance all I need is the proof I posted on the previous page of this thread.

quote:

---

nothing. i am atheist.

---

Would you conceed that if I give you enough evidence that God does indeed exist, you would believe in him?

quote:

---

Would you conceed that if I give you enough evidence that God does indeed exist, you would believe in him?

---

What evidence? Atheists don't buy illogical reasoning. The ideology of 'God' completely lacks logical and evidential reasoning.

summit

Yes you are right. However what he is stateing is "if" he could give enough evidence. There is actually much "evidence" lacking in many philosophy's and theroies. That's why they are what they are. You and I can both agree there have been times when we post "opnions". Or what we prefer to call truths based on beleifs lacking in full evidence. He is proposeing a theroy which does what it is supposed to without have complete evidence. Yet (according to you indivdual beleifs) may be self sustaing in their right to be called truths. Simply except that he has made a point.

"Then why did you say it? Anything can be what if it's finding what is that's difficult."

You said a god who is outside of the universe is impossible, and I simply asked, what if God is inside the universe? Then you said anybody can ask What if.

no. i wouldnt.

I don't really remember talking about God's existence in relation to the universe. I simply put out a simple proof towards God's non existence. But still even with all that said what if has zero credibility.

do yall that atheists believe in love
romantic love
love of child
love of parent
love of friend or brother
can you prove it
can you show me your love
what color is it
what shape

i dont even know if its there or not. so no. i cant prove it. i dont know if its just a figmint of my imagination just to comfort myself, but i have faith that it is real.

its color is the plush red of a girls face.
its shape is the perfect curve two bodies make when joined together.

what about your god?

no. i cant prove it. but i dont have to.

I wouldn't even be able to grasp the possibility of love being fake. Like I know it's possible but I would never be able to accept that.

quote:

---

do yall that atheists believe in love
romantic love
love of child
love of parent
love of friend or brother
can you prove it
can you show me your love
what color is it
what shape

---

Yes it is easy to prove it. Its called an emotional state. When our brain is stimulated we evoke emotions- which is a natural mechanism to cope with a situation. Love is influenced by hormones (such as oxytocin) and pheromones. Love is either attraction or attachment.