Nice bait. Gonna get the whiny peeps riled up. Just to sprinkle my Christian thoughts in... You can't [u]prove[/u] that there [i]isn't[/i] a God, and honestly, vice versa, soooo... There's this thing called faith and the holy spirit that Christians can [i]feel[/i], but realistically, not physically [u]prove[/u]. (Besides the fact that we are alive, here, on Earth, but idk)
Do you know god doesn’t exist or do you just believe it?
If you know, let’s see your proof.
If you believe, what makes your faith any better than the theists faith?
"God isn't real".
----You.
"You aren't real".
----God.
What IS real...and what makes you think that you are a reasonable judge of it.
Five Blind Men and The Elephant.
I’ve observed two kinds of [i]vocal[/i] atheists, I refer to them as antagonists and agonists.
Antagonists antagonize those who don’t agree with them, turning atheism into a religion of it’s own with an affiliation. If you don’t agree with me, then you’re stupid. At this point, you are no different than a theist. This is an atheist’s equivalent to “holier than thou” behavior.
Agonists are those who try to convince people to agree with them to some degree. In atheism, this is basically the counterpart to theistic evangelicals. This once again makes atheism an affiliation.
You’re an antagonist.
I hate that not thinking a higher power exists has become a religion of it’s own. If you want to open the minds of other people, stop trying to get people to “join” atheism and stop antagonizing religion. Both of these will trigger the defense mechanisms of anyone who has beliefs.
I believe you need to pose critical questions, moral arguments, and objective evidence to have any effect on one’s beliefs. You’re approaching atheism as if it were a counterpart to Christianity, when instead you need to focus on getting people to question their sources. I believe you should try to get people to be critical of all teaching they receive.
I'm a little tired of people stating an opinion... and asking for others to disprove it...
All without giving any arguments of their own.
Debates require both sides to participate. And if you just want to state your opinion, without having a debate... fine. But don't ask for contrary proof when you haven't given any supporting arguments.
[i]the traveler happened to stumble upon the battered skull of a horse. He scraped away the spots of dirt covering it, only to slam his own fist into the brittle cranium of the dead creature.[/i]
[b][url=https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/weykipedia/images/7/76/Ugandan_Chungus.png/revision/latest?cb=20190101020540]If God isn't real, how can this exist?[/url][/b]
I don’t believe in god, but that’s no how burden of proof works. Asking for proof of a negative is unreasonable. The burden of proof will always be on the one making the positive claim.
The best anyone can do is say that they are unconvinced. That they see no good reason to assume something exists when there is no verifiable/demonstrable evidence to suggest that it does.