Evidence that "Atheism" is not a sound belief

I can alway count on you MARIS!

Would you consider yourself a "true atheist"?

 

I abhor labels since they mean something different to each and every person, as has been demonstrated about the label atheist in this very thread.

I know there are no god(s).

I also know it's unlikely that anyone who has ever truly "believed" in god can be convinced otherwise, as they lack the basic powers of reason, logic and common sense that are required to make rational decisions.

 

How did I know you were going to say this? But read the beginning part of the thread and you were arguing with fellow Atheists that true atheism isn't what you just wrote. Would you like me to link or quote them for you? Why the change of heart?

 

Well, there's belief, and there's historical fact. There's a difference, but I guess believing in facts, and believing in a belief somehow are the same to you. That's fine.

As for not trying to prove anything, then you're confused. Evidence is provided to show proof. definiton: that which tends to prove or disprove. Something that furnishes proof. legal definition:Any matter of fact that a party to a lawsuit offers to prove or disprove an issue in the case.

You showing evidence is you attempting to prove.

 

historians would laugh at someone who claimed there was more evidence for jesus then julius ceasar. feel free to research this anywhere else than the propaganda you are getting that notion from.

 

That's a rather myopic viewpoint, in my opinion.

I, for example, have personally witnessed God's power and providence on many, many occasions. Reality trumps so-called rationality. Trust me, I was a God ignorer for the bulk portion of my life. That said, I had an amazing conversion experience over 20 years ago....alone, in my kitchen....followed by confirmation upon confirmation. Nobody can take that affirmation from me. Nobody.

 

No you are dead wrong. Evidence is not to show proof. An innocent man could be found guilty because the prosecutor has more compelling evidence he is guilty. Also, a guilty man could be found innocent because the defense has more compelling evidence that he is innocent.

Everyone in this thread is the jury. You take in the evidence and make your own judgement. This is why I keep saying "the burden of proof" is on the Atheist that God doesn't exist. It actually makes a lot of sense. So far, I am providing evidence and the atheists are just trying to discredit that evidence. The Atheist hasn't provided a shred of evidence to show God doesn't exist. This is just a one way highway here.

The term "Proof" and "Evidence" are different in this context.

 

Really? I hate to bring up this link again, but I think it does apply. The historian is one of the leading and respective historians today. Plus he's agnostic too.

[video=youtube;u9CC7qNZkOE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9CC7qNZkOE[/video]

 

Thank you for supporting my contention so admirably.

 

Not a problem. I would imagine your circle of Christian friends might offer similar testimonies.....that is, if you were willing to listen.

 

Oops you wrote this probably before you watched the you tube video. :MARIS61:

 

Evidence is to show proof. What are you talking about. An innocent man can be found guilty if the prosecutor has more apparent proof he committed a crime. Likewise, a guilty man can get off because of a lack of evidence. Or a lack of proof. In both cases, by presenting EVIDENCE to a jury, the prosecutor or defense are attempting to PROVE guilt or innocence. Using EVIDENCE to PROVE.

 

That's a gross misrepresentation of my posts, or a reading comprehension error on your part. I was arguing with agnostics who call themselves atheists, and posted a link from the American Atheists website which fully supported my post.

And I don't have any "fellow atheists". I'm not into clubs and there is little for me to learn by hanging out with people who share my views.

 

Well then, I am showing proof.

 

You are showing evidence, in an attempt to prove.

 

I wanted to briefly address your newly posted 4th point about the toothpicks. Your example has one flaw, in that you assume that all of the toothpicks spell out the name. A more accurate example would be empty 500 boxes of toothpicks with 500 toothpicks in each box. Please find a 4 toothpicks that make a perfect square. It will be very very difficult, but not impossible. And keep in mind, once you get one version, it's not that far to imagine that one version creating many, many more clones leaving room for slight variations and competition.

 

[video=youtube;9N5S_H5A4r8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N5S_H5A4r8&feature=related[/video]

And this is a negative spin on Jesus; but still doesn't refute Jesus's existence. You guys do know that this getting off topic, because I'm not trying to give evidence my God exists.

 

Awesome. I hope and pray that you'll be hanging out with your Christian friends more often. Ya never know, MARIS, ya never know.

 

What defines him as one of the leading and respected historians today?