I am also 100% sure that you are someday going to die, and be taxed until then...

I agree, this has developed into a great topic and I appreciate everyone giving deep thought to what they are writing.  To answer ProzacDeathWish I think it would be foolish not to have evidence to back what I believe or even look at the claims of other religions or philosophies.  I wouldn't be on here if I was one of the brainless adherents to a religion who just believed it because that's what I was taught.  In fact, in school what we are taught is completely opposite of what I believe. Here's the major problem I have with atheism as I wrote in another forum.

Let's say the you have a watch for example. You take apart the watch and lay all the pieces on the table. Now let's say that instead of a watchmaker, you have time, barometric pressure, wind, rain, sunlight. How long will it take the parts of a watch to evolve into a watch? It would never happen, not in an infinite amount of years. Now to make it more complex, instead of having the parts, you actually only have the raw materials to make the parts. So first the parts need to somehow form on their own and then somehow put themselvles together. This is how I picture evolution at the very beginning, because without life there can be no evolution. Ok, I took a very simple example of a watch, but life, even the most basic living thing is way more complex than a watch, yet you want me to believe that somehow, from the raw materials around us, that life was able to form itself? Now that is the most absurd thing that I have ever heard in my entire life! And to think, scientists cannot even replicate what time was able to do by chance. That is why I believe that there is an intellegent designer who created everything around us, one who is infinitely more intellegent than us.

Well I say NO in place of your yes and 

You and I are not God that is for sure.

That's right. I only believe in things for which I have evidence. So far, this Absolute Truth thing is a lot like Bigfoot. 

Without examining any arguments, we can say that my odds of being wrong are exactly the same as anyone else's. So if you try to defeat me by saying that there is a high chance that I am wrong, I can simply turn that around and say the same thing about you. So the point is moot. 

 However, I am not making a point about your argument about God, I am making a point about the actual existence of a real God (according to the most common claims). 

Because my belief that there is no God is supported by evidence and reason, the tools that everyone must use to make valid conclusions about the objective universe. Tools, by the way, that theists are very fond of deploying for their own purposes (as you are now) right up to the point where their precious fantasy is threatened.

God belief is not supported by reason, it is supported by faith. That is why it is irrational. 

 Rationality and certainty are not the same things. Look up the words if you don't understand them. Theists are irrational. They are also uncertain. I am uncertain too, but I try to be rational. That's the difference between me and a theist.

Nope. There's nothing absolute about it. Even if every single person on the planet holds that these are evil acts, all this points to is agreement between all humans, which isn't surprising given our shared genetic heritage. If we were evolved from certain species of insects, it would be highly normal to kill and eat your mother. Rape is not unusual even among some of our close primate relatives. We could expect an intelligent species that evolved on another planet to have even more bizarre behaviors that are, to them, entirely moral but, to us, constitute horrifying evils.

Before you get up on your high horse, I'll point out that I'm not a moral relativist. I think there is a code of moral and ethical behavior that all humans share by virtue of our shared humanity. But it is specific to humans, and was invented by us and applies only to us. 

And another thing, what the hell is a self-proclaimed atheist? Is there an atheist licensing board  that issue permits for legitimate atheists? How is one proclaimed an atheist? Is there a ceremony?

Meh. The OP looks to be a drive by, but I was just wondering. 

Before you can make this claim, you need to tell me how you measure complexity. Otherwise you are creating an arbitrary and unsubstantiated comparison. Another problem is that just because watches don't assemble themselves, this does not allow you to conclude that all complex things must be assembled. Snowflakes do a real good job of self assembly and they can be very complex.

Atheism is a default position. There are no "theories" to back it. Do you believe that unicorns exists? If not, then you could be called an a-unicornist. Are you going to claim that they certainly don't exists? If not, you are an agnostic a-unicornist. If you aren't going to believe in unicorns, do you need a theory to back your position? No, you need only find a lack of sufficient evidence that they exist.

Also, when you use the word "theory" are you using the scientific method's definition or the layman's definition?

If you have any evidence to prove your religion true, please present it. (Preferably in a separate thread entitled: "Proof of God's existence!" Make sure to define what you mean by "god".) But, before posting, please do some research to see if any claims you plan to make haven't been debunked already.

-Triften

snowflakes are water.  pretty, but not too complex.  no assembly required, just freezing temperatures.  you could argue however that there was a creator who designed water to have certain properties so that when it freezes it becomes less dense, unlike many other compounds allowing it to float on the top of our oceans and allowing sea life to exist in cold climates.  that's just one example of design in our complex world, but apparently no one here seems to care about that.  they just want to prove that God doesn't exist so they can go about their pointless lives and no have to worry about their actions having any reprocussions.

atheists, would you agree that there is at least one absolute truth, that being that there are no abosolute truths? 

So since you are sitting in the "default" position, does that me you don't have to support your stance?

 I just gave an example of evidence, and since it doesn't fit into your scientific box, you just dismiss it as though it doesn't exist.  Why don't you read Isaiah 53 and see for yourself.  It was written 700 years before Christ's death.  Can science do that?  I don't think so.  Science is just the study of what already exists.  It doesn't create things, and most of the time it can't even explain them.  Science is just on means of people trying to figure out what is going on in this world.  People trying to find meaning for life, or trying to remove meaning from life.

Why should I have to support a non-stance? You have the stance -  you support it.

You are right about Isaiah It was written before Christ was created. Several years later, the guys who wrote the Gospels helped Paul of Tarsus create a character name Jesus Christ. They wanted to convince people that this character was the Messiah. To do that that went back through Isaiah and found all the Messianic prophecies and wrote that their Christ fulfilled all of them.

It's like me making prophecies now about what happened last year. 

Nice try jcgadfly, but there is tons of evidence regarding the life of Christ. It's very well documented. Christ was not the figment of someone's imagination. He's talked about throughout history and not just in the Bible. That was an easy dismiss but I'm not accepting that. There is way too much evidence that says otherwise.

 BTW, be a man and take a stance, it's no fun talking to you if you don't believe anything.  So take a stance and try to back it up.  Your mind may grow because of it.

Can science predict things that are unpredictable? The examples you gave are not very persuasive. Those are things that can be calculated. Can you calculate the day you will die? Can you predict the value of the dollar in 10 years? That is why Isaiah 53 is remarkable, and shows that there is a power outside of our world that is not limited like we are. It predicts something that cannot be calculated.

Where? After the fact doesnt count.

And that still doesnt explain HOW a 9 to 14 year old girl got prengant. And it doesnt explain HOW  human flesh reconstitutes itself after rigor mortis after 3 days.

Even IF atheists conceeded that a human people called Jesus existed, it still would not be adiquite to explain the fantastic claims. Many historical humans made outragious claims. If George Washington claimed to be able to turn an apple POOF into Heidi Clume.....it is a fallacy to make the assertion because one can prove the existance of George Washington, that would make him physically capable of instantanously turning an apple into a woman.

There is no evidence outside the bible that is contemparary that a man named Jesus existed. The books that mention him by name WERE NOT written in the alleged claim of his time. 

His character was a culmination of multiple polytheist cultures as a attempt to politically and socially reject the set norms of the time. The old "cheer for the underdog" motif.

His immage, weither a real person inspired the story or not, is not a result of magic, but of mundain human behaivor in an an attempt to improve the future, but falsely assigning magic as the source, based on the social compitition of the time. In laymens terms, a person named "Jesus" preforming magic tricks is merely nothing more than the human ability to sell icecream to Eskimos.

The only differance between Christians and Muslims and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists is the flavor of icecream they are trying to sell. I do have to admit, the sales tactics are quite elaborate.