Hello there!

I'm an atheist. I enjoy discussing my views with theists (just Christians so far). I can never get them to see sense because their beliefs are so deep-seated due to parental influence in every case.

Anyway, there's this one slippery customer who refuses to be beaten down. He's a public speaker, and so knows exactly how to add spin to any situation, turning any bystanders well against me.

I briefly touched on a topic which definitely hit a nerve - the existence of Jesus. I proposed that he didn't exist. He told me that there are documents in some Bethlehem museum clearly stating that Pontius Pilate allowed the crucifixion of a Jesus Christ. I was deeply skeptical of his claims, yet I cannot find any impartial information on the internet. Does anyone know anything about said documents? I've already read "The Silence That Screams". If I can prove that he was lying to re-affirm his beliefs, I can expose a degree of irrationality.

What are your thoughts on Quantum Physics as related to holding a materialist position regarding the creation of the universe? It is my assumption that as an atheist you must hold a materialist view of our creation. Quantum physics shows us that at a sub atomic level there is actually no matter, just the illusion of it, and that everything is light vibrating at different speeds. Does this challenge the atheist position that our universe is the product of chance?

Thoughts?? 

I'm ready for the argument from meaning to go away. That is, the argument, "Atheists don't have any/have less meaning in their lives than theists." It comes in many forms:

*Without god, there is no meaning

*Without god, how do you get up in the morning?

*Without god, why don't you just kill yourself, since there's no meaning?

*Without god, there's no standard by which we can measure our lives.

etc...

Of course, you can substitute "spirituality" for "god" in any of them and it's still the same thing. This question has often been asked by theists, and I've been relatively happy with most of the replies, but I feel that there are still some aspects of this argument that need to be addressed.

Alright atheists, I have a question for you. What would you do if the rapture, as described in the Bible, did occur? This is more like a poll, but I don't know if you can make those here, so I'll ask the question in the forum instead. Now remember, all Christians (and only Christians) would disappear with no apparent reason.

Would you:

A. Try to account for this with something other than the rapture

B. Believe in the Bible and become a Christian knowing that you are living in the end times

C. Realize that the Bible is most likely true but refuse to believe because of something in the Bible that you don't like or something about God you don't like

Pascal's Wager fails miserably against today's arguments. Unfortunately for our good friend Blaise, there are more than two beliefs out there. The big three are Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim. Within these there are Reform Jews, Conservative Jews, and Orthodox Jews. Muslims have the Sunni and Shiite denominations. Christians? There are Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Baptists, Lutherans, Mormons, Christian Scientists, etc.

Unfortunately, this is just the big three. There are other plenty of other faiths such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism, Baha'i, Confucianism, Jainism, Shinto, Rastafarianism, Scientology, and more. So this leaves us even more confused as to how Pascal's Wager would work in this situation, if at all.

Hi everyone,

I was just reading a blog that I saw linked on this forum, written by greta christina. I instantly liked her I found all she said honest forthright and full of clarity and insight.

A Comment on one of her entries which was written by someone named Myk questions greta's idea that there are theists who "think atheists are cool, who get that you don't need religion to live a good, happy, meaningful life." saying that there probably aren't.

I know that there is at least one here

So i thought I'd put my hand up!! (Me)

For the past months I've been out of work because my dad, who I'm in business with is very ill, and with lot of bills piling up. The biggest thing was the loan on my car. I've been getting pretty close to having it repossessed. So my wife and I tried for weeks to sell the car, and in the area that I live in, there isn't much interest even though it's a pretty nice car. To add insult to injury, our son broke his arm jumping off of furniture and racked up a 10,000 bill at the hospital for that. anyway, yesterday, Just when the car was maybe a day or so away from getting repo'd, someone smashed into us at a stop sign, noone was hurt but the car is totaled.

I think this is one of the most interesting points that has been brought up recently and I've thought about it a lot thanks to Sam's AAI speech. I've heard Brian make the point that our group may be larger than any other group if we didn't divide ourselves so much. I think the term atheist does exactly this. An atheist can be a Buddhist, astrologer, holocaust-denier, or even someone who thinks the world is still flat. It is not necessarily a term that describes someone who advocates reason and intellectual honesty. A Unitarian Christian can be far more rational than an atheist if that atheist believes Elvis is still alive and spends her life searching for him. An atheist can be someone who commits a genocide of intellectuals for the sole purpose of bringing society back into the dark ages (Pol Pot). Not only is the term atheism highly misunderstood, but it does a poor job of describing who we really are. We advocate reason and intellectual honesty and we urge others to do the same. We don't just oppose belief in god but also the belief in reincarnation, homeopathy, divining, and the millions of other irrational things out there. I mean, why is "The Rational Response Squad" a much better name than "The Theism Busters" or "The Atheist Response Squad"?

Hypothetically

You've just seen you're doctor, you have a brain tumour, and you are going to die within four years, .......... but

If you have an operation to remove the tumour, you have a very good chance of a long and normal life .......... but

 If you have an operation to remove the tumour there's also a very good chance you will lose all of your memories, and your personality will probably change

What do you do ?  

 I have three questions:

1. Can atheism really produce an ethical model that can both explain ethics, and provide ethical norms?

I analized deludedgod's essay on ethics for this question. It effectively explains ethical activity, but it has a serious lack in applicability. As that it is caused by "neuroplasticity," it can either be applied to how individuals are raised or to whole society. The application of the one leads to all actions of any individual being by nature correct (and undermines clinical insanity, I might add.) The other leads to an absolute majority.