You need to look up the definition of atheism before you make claims about what atheism is. Not only that, but you should ask each individual atheist you meet what their personal stance on the existence of a deity is as their is no requirement of an atheist other than that they do not have a belief in a god or gods. Some may think it to be impossible, others may merely say they don't have a belief in one.

There is no attacking god as he doesn't exist. Religious people, however, do exist and they try to impose their belief system on the rest of the population through witnessing and attempting to legislate their beliefs into the laws of the state and are therefor more than deserving of having their beliefs attacked. Theists should have no special pass to being able to hold their irrational beliefs unchallenged..

Nice use of bold. That is always a convincing rational argument.

If they are exercising, punching at the air is completely rational.

There is no need to have a god belief to understand right and wrong. Take some time to look through the threads and you could probably learn where atheists get their ideas of right and wrong. It is the same place you get your idea of right and wrong.

I for one am very much anti-theist as theism is inherently a dangerous and unnecesssary platform by which serious wrong doing can be justified.

I would prefer to think of it as attacking someone's belief in a God rather than the character of God himself.  I wouldn't really care if people considered the idea of him as something like Zeus i.e. a nice bit of mythology from the past.

15:56:44

Wow, is Sapient the head anti-theist. I missed the election. He is certainly in charge of his own website but I don't think that makes him a leader of anti-theists or atheists just the owner of a place they happen to come together to share their views.

Well, don't be so hard so hard on yourself or your fellow Christians. The book your standard of right and wrong is derived from is after all a ridiculously confusing and cotradictory source of information. In all fairness to you and your Christian compadres, I think if you really tried to live up to what your book asked of you you would be a much worse lot than you  presently are. At least you use some of your naturally instilled secular morals to restrain yourselves from killing your disobedient children and such.

If there is no god then whether any given man preached about a god on the middle east countryside (which I'm sure many did) or not, none of them were a god in the flesh. It seems fairly simple to understand to me. No god = no god-in-the-flesh-man (whatever kind of freaky hybrid creature that is supposed to be).

True. They could have chosen to realize that belief in a god is unfounded and nothing short of delusional. Non-existent entities can not be responsible for bloodshed.  

It is so sad that you think so little of yourself. I imagine jihadies strapped with bombs consider themselves unworthy in just the same manner. So sad and scary what such a silly and unnecessary self image can cause otherwise good men to do. 

All interpretations of god are incorrect, therefor you are apologizing to everyone who has ever been shown an interpretation of a god. That's nice of you, but you are a victim of a false interpretation and victims should not be made to apologize as long as they don't victimize others.  

Man is inherently flawed as compared to what? Without a goid man is not flawed in the least. Man is simply man. It is only your belief in a god that gives you such a negative opinion of humanity. 

 Thanks but I'd prefer to try and do something that will make an actual beneficial difference for my fellow humans, like try and help to release people from their irrational and dangerous theistic beliefs.

Diosdato, I didn't leave Christianity because of how I was treated by other Christians. I left because I came to the realization that the Bible has errors in it.

Christians tend to always think that people like me left because of being mistreated. Why is this? I think you mean well, but could the motive be that you just don't want to admit we have good reasons for leaving? I would ask you to not jump to conclusions, and actually see what the other side says before you make your judgments.

First, let me say this. Why do you assume that because I am a Christian, I was one ever since birth. I wasn't raised in a Christian, Catholic or Muslim home. My parents weren't religious in the least. My parents don't claim to be atheists, yet they don't claim anything.  What makes you assume that I am judging you? What makes you assume that I didn't research every angle with a very open mind before I came to my conclusion?

I'll tell you my story: As I already stated, my parents were not religious people, nor did they force feed religion indoctrination down my throat. As a matter of fact, my dad has a master's degree in Philosophy and my mom a masters in counseling. They are both very free thinkers and always said that it was important for them not to impose any particular belief system on me, but to let me form my own opinion. So please don't assume I'm a fundamental Christian and don't "understand" you. I went to a Methodist church sporadically growing up, but never really thought too much about God either way. When I went to college I took a speech class and was given the topic of evolution vs. creationism to write and deliver a speech on. I had been curious about it before because, as a very analytical person, I always felt that the truth would always be rooted in scientific fact. During the course of my research, I studied several texts on the subject and I found something interesting about experiments to recreate life from what evolutionists have determined to be the "primordial soup" that covered the earth billions of years ago. The scientist took into account all of the scientific data available about the different atmospheric conditions that evolutionists have said were present and was never able to get the proper amino acids to bond together. He used heat, electricity, cold, chemicals, anything that could have been a possible factor at the time. The trouble was, you needed 8 amino acids present to maintain any form of life, yet, the early atmosphere only contained 6 of 8. It takes an enzymatic reaction between 4 of the 6 to make all 8. Easy enough, but the enzyme is created by having all 8 amino acids present at one time!! Which came first, the enzyme or the amino acids?? Funny, you have to have all 8 amino acids to create the enzyme that produces more of the amino acids to ........you get the picture. That cleared up part of the picture for me, but when I read the statistical analysis of evolutionists  data and saw that even evolutionists agree that the statistical probability of evolution to occur the way they say is 10 to the 64,000th power!! By the way, I think scientific improbability is something like 1 to the 20th power.

 Also, scientists agree that entropy is occuring all around us and has forever. (entropy is the constant disintegration of atoms and molecules outward) Somehow, these same scientists say that random molecules went against this law (immutable laws of nature cannot possibly be wrong or they wouldn't be laws, only theories) and formed a living organism. That's like saying that if you poured out a jar of marbles in a room somewhere, they would gather in the shape of a jar somewhere else in the room. The Law of Entropy says that the marbles will scatter to the nearest place of least resistance. Scientists don't realize that science reveals God when done objectively, not refutes His existence.

Anyway, I still wasn't completely sure about this whole God the Creator deal, because quite frankly, it meant that I would have to change my life. If God existed, then I would obviously want to align my life to his will. Not out of fear, but admiration for his creation. My relationship with God is a personal thing, I don't expect anyone to understand it or like it. I'm not here to please men, but God.

I don't think that people leave Christianity because they are mistreated. I think that some people never come to Christ for that reason. I don't know why people leave, maybe because the idea of Religion  hinders them somehow. I would like to know what supposed errors in the Bible you are talking about. I've researched several supposed errors, but when I go to the source, the person claiming the error was taking something out of context or re-translating the text then forming their own interpretation to draw their inconsistency. I would welcome a discussion on any error you say you've found. I highly doubt you found it, more than likely you read an atheists opinion of the text.

May your eyes be opened so you can see the Truth.

So, it was just you pointing out that he is one of the owners of the site. Thanks, I'm sure those who didn't know will be greatful for your assistance.

The Bible. 

Neither did I. ? 

No problem and I am glad to hear you are looking forward to being delivered from ignorance. You know what is right and wrong by your nature as a human being. It is instilled in us naturally via evolution. Every moral concept can be reduced to a basis of survival. Not survival of the individual as this is not how evolution works but survival of the population. We have as natural human traits both altruistic and selfish tendencies and it is the necessary balance between the two that allows us to survive a social animals. This is what we call morals. 

Because crooked and straight don't apply only to roads. I think I lost brain cells from reading that question. 

How can anything be more poerfect than anything? Aside from the fact that perfection is a concept with no practical application, 'more perfect' defies the abilities of the concept regardless of application. 

His idea of morallity may not be moral. That has no affect on morallity, however. A child's idea of an alligator may include wings. That does not mean alligators have wings. And again 'less perfect' is non-sensical.

He might not even understand morallity at all. Or he might understand what is right and wrong but justify wrong doing for what he considers right outcomes. That however does not affect morallity. 

Whether it is moral or not is not changed by what anyone thinks about it. Morallity is not dependent on people opinions. 

All social animals have behaviors which allow them to thrive in groups. However, morality is the word we use to describe this behavior in humans so to say they have morality would not be the correct term. 

From the fact that all living things must necessarily develop in a nature that is beneficial to survival. All life must have survival as its 'goal'. 

Yes. 

Animlas don't do that. Apes share food as do wolves and lions. Animals in packs do not kill each other when they will kill others. Putting your needs before others is not always the best way for a social animal to survive. 

Aim to babies at the same nipple and watch the same behavior. 

No but they normally aren't competing for food. There is also the fact that family groups are highly beneficial for the survival of humans. We are naturally inclined to look after our families. 

Explain to me what you understand to be the the theory of evolution and how it works and let's see how much of your claim is based on analyzing the data and how much is blind ignorance. 

My heart pumps blood. It never tells me anything. My brain, however, knows that morals are natural and there is no good reason to believe in the existence of any god.

Wow, people can name things after a god. Well had I realized that I would have believed long ago. ? And there is no reason to think that the Jesus character is based on one person. It could easily be a compilation of wandering preachers, or a completely fictitious character to whoim magic was attributed by the authors of the gospels. Personally, I couldn't care less which it is as the whole story is non-sensical.  

Why? Just because you think it?

How so? 

I rely on lots of things. Food, oxygen, family, friends. I have no idea what you are rambling about. 

Evidence? Oh, no. I'm sorry you don't believe in that do you. Evidence is for us irrational types.

Hmm. Yes, of course, your irrational belief is right and theirs is wrong. Again, simply because you say so. And you should take credit for your own good deeds. I don't see Christ down here in Southern  Mississippi swinging a hammer for Habitat for Humanity with me.

I am not asserting that anything in particualr exists. I am making no positive claim. the statements I have made I have backed up with reason.   

What is that a flaw as compared to? Man can not be inherently flawed as compared to man, that makes no sense. These things are things that men do. They they are a are immoral but apparently they are things that humans do sometimes. To call them flaws makes no sense. 

I have never been to a Sunday school. Why would I go to such a thing? You know nothing about me so your opinion of why I am an atheist is wholly unimportant and as unsupported as the rest of your assertions in this thread. You continue to show yourself to be more and more irrational. 

I hope my heart is the right softness as it is an important organ, and unless I'm a much better typist than I think, my eyes are open. 

I never assumed you were a Christian since birth. How do you get this from what I said? Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word "judgment." I just don't think many serious atheist are atheist because a Christian mistreated them. To you're credit that's not all you claim, I should have read more closely.

I'm glad you weren't force fed religion. I was.

This is a little off your initial topics, and others are better at arguing this. But let me point out there's a lot of planets in the universe. The odds of life developing on any specific planet are indeed small. But the odds of life developing on some planet somewhere are good, simply because there's so many of them. Besides evolution and abiogensis are two different things.

I would say your not up to speed on terminology. I've never heard your definition of entropy. I don't think scientist mean it that way. Your usage of "laws" and "theories" is not the way scientist use them. I'm sure you just need to read around the site to learn how to use them.

Well, I'm glad you belief is not out of fear. You're at least a lot more thoughtful about these matters than most Christians.

Ok... I'm not getting that from your earlier posts. What do you mean by religion hindering? Do you mean they want to do whatever they want, e.g. sleep around? I'd say that's a bad reason to be an atheist.

There's a whole section on this. It would fit better over there. But briefly, the universe, and the Earth, are much older than a literal reading of the Bible gives. I don't like the "old earth" creationist position because I think there's theological problems with it, namely death before Adam's sin.

I only hope for the truth.

I think we can agree on that, and much more.  I don't have the time to look it up right now, but I believe it was Ghandi who said "I like your Christ, I dislike your Christians."  I agree.