What Is The Positive Evidence For Atheism?

Homemade pumpkin pie and fresh ground hazelnut coffee for breakfast.Dinner today was a repeat of yesterday; tomorrow, turkey pot pie (I always make extra pastry dough when I make the pumpkin pie--after being fridged two days, it's incredibly flaky for pot pie).I'll use my left-over garlic smashed to make latkes for breakfast tomorrow.I want your salad recipe.

---

Real things always push back.
-William James Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------

You might as well pile on as well. I have no problem with that but when you say you don't know then presumably you are leaving open the possiblity of the supernatural. Basically there is no way. I did write in a post further up the thread about how I see science determining what things are and how they became that way but I don't see science as determining why things are the way they are. As I said genetics may explain how we experience emotion but I don't see it explaining why emotions exist.

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

Not at all. I have examined reports of "divine revelation" and found them all to be unreliable. I welcome any reports of true divine revelation. Just don't expect me to swallow them indiscriminately. That's just it. I can prove to you that the Eiffel Tower exists or that YouTube exists or even that love and hate exist. If you can't prove something exists and you know you can't prove it exists, why would you still believe it exists? How can something so fundamentally uncommunicable be so "real" to you?It may not be "positive evidence" but the abject inability of believers to communicate their "revelations" to unbelievers seems like a pretty good reason for atheism.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels

I don't. What would it take to convince you that an example of "divine revelation" was reliable? It isn't something that can be tested empirically. I could tell you about my own experience but that wouldn't cut it. I can't prove it in any way shape or form.I could use the example of St. Paul. He had a revelation that completely changed his life. Do you accept it. No. If it happened the way he said it did then it was a revelation from God. You presumably either believe he is lying or mistaken. Nothing I or anyone else can say will convince you otherwise as near as I can tell.

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

That's just the point. Why can't it be tested empirically? How do you tell the difference between something that "can't be tested" and something that failed every test? Why couldn't he be mistaken?

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels

The point is that we have a personal testimony of divine revelation. The evidence that it is true is that he completely devoted his life to Christian service and that as a result of what was largely his work the Christian church became established amongst the gentiles.You have personal testimony, you can see the change in his life, and you can see the impact of it. That however is not enough for you to be convinced that it was divine revelation. What would it take to convince you. Empirical evidence? There never will be any. We have a choice to make. Do we beleive it or not?

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

And then Loki laughed and laughed and laughed cause he had succeeded in tricking another gullible person into following a false god.

---

Live every week like it's Shark Week!
Just a monkey in a long line of kings.
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

That doesn't answer the question. Why couldn't Paul have been mistaken? People devote their lives to lost causes all the time - treasure hunters, UFO chasers, cryptozoologists.... How does devotion to an unsupported premise improve it? Of course not - no more than the story of Alladin convinces me of magic lamps. Why should it? That's a pretty poor basis for any belief.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels

I didn't say that he couldn't be mistaken. The results of his life's work are still very evident today though, so I'm just suggesting that might be an indication that he was on to something. What results do we see from anything Alladin did? It's either true or it isn't. The fact that you discount divine revelation is a pretty poor basis for disbelief.

---

Everybody is entitled to my opinion.

The same results we see from anything Paul did. In both cases, we have an unverified story. If some people attribute results to "what Paul did", that doesn't make it true. You're not paying attention. I don't discount divine revelation. I just don't swallow hook-line-and-sinker every unsupported account of divine revelation.Complete lack of any evidence is an excellent basis for disbelief.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels

What Is The Positive Evidence For Atheism?Is it even a reasonable question?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't think so. "A"theism is inherently negative.

---

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels

You're thinking of someone else. Like you, I believe firmly that we can know all kinds of things about god.For instance, I know that god is a myth. If you can't convince anybody else, isn't that reason to re-examine your own belief? When everybody else thinks that you're wrong, isn't that a reason to maybe wonder if you are?

quote:

---

I have no problem with that but when you say you don't know then presumably you are leaving open the possiblity of the supernatural.

---

Sure, anythings possible. However, the supernatural as the cause of anything has had a terrible track record over the millenia.What's possible isn't important. What's probable is.I mean, it is possible that any of the thousands of religious myths about the origins of anything are true. So what?

quote:

---

As I said genetics may explain how we experience emotion but I don't see it explaining why emotions exist.

---

Just becasue you can't think of a natural explanation for why emotions exist doesn't mean nobody has.Seriously, though, you really, truly can't think of any possible reproductive advantage to, say, jealousy, or love, or anger, or kindness?I can.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The point is that we have a personal testimony of divine revelation. The evidence that it is true is that he completely devoted his life to Christian service and that as a result of what was largely his work the Christian church became established amongst the gentiles.

---

David Koresh did something similar with his life, you know.As did the Buddah, Sun Myung Moon, and Joseph Smith.Did all of these people have real divine experiences? How can we tell?