[FascistDictator]

I'm a Salvationist, a branch of the protestant church. The chuch name you might have heard of its the Salvation Army it's both a charitable organization and a church. It is "quasi-military based" meaning that the leaders have a hierarchy (Captains, Majors, Lt. Colonel, Colonel, Commissioner, and the General), and that we are fiting sin and trying to save souls for god. It was founded by General Booth in the 1860's, and is currently led by General Larsson.

[Ixa]

I'm a Salvationist, a branch of the protestant church. The chuch name you might have heard of its the Salvation Army it's both a charitable organization and a church. It is "quasi-military based" meaning that the leaders have a hierarchy (Captains, Majors, Lt. Colonel, Colonel, Commissioner, and the General), and that we are fiting sin and trying to save souls for god. It was founded by General Booth in the 1860's, and is currently led by General Larsson.

Your religious beliefs are most amusing. You are a laughable person.

[SpiderMonkey]

Highly skeptical agnostic. By skeptical I don't mean skeptical of the existence of god (anymore than other agnostics) but I am extremely skeptical of religion.

It's funny how, when people say they hear the voice of god, it's telling them to do what they want to do anyway

[Ixa]

Highly skeptical agnostic. By skeptical I don't mean skeptical of the existence of god (anymore than other agnostics) but I am extremely skeptical of religion.

It's funny how, when people say they hear the voice of god, it's telling them to do what they want to do anyway

Nothing funnier than a "wannabe" sceptic. Thanks for the laugh.

[SpiderMonkey]

Highly skeptical agnostic. By skeptical I don't mean skeptical of the existence of god (anymore than other agnostics) but I am extremely skeptical of religion.

It's funny how, when people say they hear the voice of god, it's telling them to do what they want to do anyway

Nothing funnier than a "wannabe" sceptic. Thanks for the laugh.

Can you prove god doesn't exist?

I doubt there is a god, but I can't prove it so I'm not going to start absolutely denying his existence. I'm just as skeptical of atheism as I am of religion.

[Ixa]

Can you prove god doesn't exist?

Yes, but you do not have to believe that there is no God to be an atheist: you merely have to lack a belief in God.

I doubt there is a god, but I can't prove

I can.

it so I'm not going to start absolutely denying his existence.

Most Atheists do not deny His existence; they lack a belief in His existence.

I'm just as skeptical of atheism as I am of religion.

You are sceptical of a lack of belief in God as opposed to the conception of God Himself? Absurd.

By definition you yourself are an Atheist: for evidently you lack a belief in God.

[smashthestate]

Actually I'd say SpiderMonkey is more accurately classified as an agnostic.

And Hunzington, if you can prove that God doesn't exist, please do so.

(P.S. If you use a logic table, you may as well not even make a post, because those are the most idiot things ever devised.)

[Ixa]

Actually I'd say SpiderMonkey is more accurately classified as an agnostic.

False. An atheist is someone who denies or disbelieves in the existence of God. Disbelief is a lack of belief and not a belief. Spider is by definition an atheist.

And Hunzington, if you can prove that God doesn't exist, please do so.

From the Absolute (the absolute.net): "To see the importance of being atheist we should first establish the truth of atheism and then establish the importance of being truthful. The importance of truth is one thing very few people have ever considered. To understand why it is impossible for a God to exist we need to understand what we mean by existence. The only sensible definition for existence is that a thing is said to exist if it relates in some way to some other thing. That is, things exist in relation to each other. A thing must exist relative to an observer at the very least. Now, God is defined to be infinite, in which case it is not possible for there to be anything other than God because "infinite" is all-inclusive. But if there is nothing other than God then God cannot be said to exist for the reason just explained. God is simply another word for Nature, and Nature certainly does not "exist" - it just is."

From Tektonics.org

1.If a claim is extraordinary, then in the absence of extraordinarily strong evidence in its favor, the claim may be considered false.
2.The claim that a god exists is an extraordinary claim.
3.Therefore, in the absence of extraordinarily strong evidence in its favor, the claim that a god exists may be considered false.
4.There is no extraordinarily strong evidence for the claim that a god exists.
5.Therefore, the claim that a god exists may be considered false.


1.Any being with contradictory properties cannot exist.
2.God is a being with contradictory properties.
3.Therefore, god cannot exist.


God is transcendent (outside space and time).
God is omnipresent, i.e., existing everywhere in space.
So god is not in space and time and god is everywhere in space and time.


God is transcendent (i.e., outside of space and time).
All movement, by definition, is within space and time.
Therefore, god cannot move.
If god cannot move, then god cannot perform any physical actions.
If god cannot perform any physical actions, then god has limited power.
God is all-powerful.
If god is all-powerful, then god does not have limited power.
Therefore, god has limited power and does not have limited power.


1.There is needless suffering in the world.
2.If god were to exist, then there would be no needless suffering in the world.
3.Therefore, god does not exist.


Let set P be defined as the set of the following propositions:
(a)There exists the god of theism.
(b)The god of theism loves humanity, and
(c)This being wants each person to be saved by having certain beliefs sufficient for salvation, such as beliefs P1?Pn.

1.If god exists, then god wants what is best for each person.
2.What is best for each person is that he or she is saved.
3.Therefore, if god exists, then god wants each person to be saved by having the beliefs of set P.
4.If god wants everyone to be saved by having the beliefs of set P, then everyone would have the beliefs of set P.
5.Not everyone has the beliefs of set P.
6.Therefore, god does not want everyone to be saved by having the beliefs of set P.
7.Therefore, god does not exist.


1. If God exists, then he is immutable.
2. If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
3. An immutable being cannot at one time have an intention and then at a later time not have that intention.
4. For any being to create anything, prior to the creation he must have had the intention to create it, but at a later time, after the creation, no longer have the intention to create it.
5. Thus, it is impossible for an immutable being to have created anything (from 3 and 4).
6. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist (from 1, 2, and 5)

For a more thorogh refutation of the existence of God, see http://www.tektonics.org/dkr1.html

[Truth-a-naut]

Religious faith
Atheist faith

Faith is faith.

I am a nihilist, so both sides arguments IMHO (and thats all that matters)seem inane and animalistic.

Huzington's faith in there being no existance of anything relatively
ecclesiastical or what not is pretty concrete; as concrete as Buck and Smashthestate's belief in the aforementioned.

Both sides share a lot in common, your faith just doesn't let you see that!

AHAHAHAHAHA

[Ixa]

Religious faith
Atheist faith

Faith is faith.

I am a nihilist, so both sides arguments IMHO (and thats all that matters)seem inane and animalistic.

Huzington's faith in there being no existance of anything relatively
ecclesiastical or what not is pretty concrete; as concrete as Buck and Smashthestate's belief in the aforementioned.

Both sides share a lot in common, your faith just doesn't let you see that!

AHAHAHAHAHA

Ah the old, "If you can't disprove it, it is reasonable to believe in" fallacy.

[Truth-a-naut]

Ah the old, "If you can't disprove it, it is reasonable to believe in" fallacy.

No.
It was a simple "Who cares."

Atheists should be the first to realize that everything is quite pointless, if not then the atheist in question would be helping perpetuate the mythos of the western world (Atheism seems to be hevaily centralized in the west), which is a religion in itself.

So who cares?

['Cesca]

Of non religious persuasion.

Reason. I found basing on Christianity. The bible was inaccurate and plagiarised other older religions. On that note I found I could not support a religion based upon lies. I also do not need to believe in a god. I am happy with the fact that we may only be the only living things in the whole universe and a freak accident involving a bowl of primordial soup and a stray asteroids created us.


Agnosticism Is based on the philosophical view that it is impossible to know whether or not God exists.

Atheism Is a disbelief or denial of the existence of god.

I am neither of them.

[Vivisekt]

As I already know from reading from this forum, there are alot of athiests here. But just to make sure I would like to ask you people what religion you are. I myself am Protestant.

I'm... i guess the terminology is "agnostic"? Correct me if i'm wrong on that.

I can not confirm, nor deny the existance of a God or Gods. There is no concrete proof either for or against the argument, and so i do not think that it would be logical to make a decision either way.


That being said, I am strongly against Organized Religion. I believe that it is entirely detrimental to human intellectual evolution (and thereby being detrimental to biological and social evolution as well) to organize religious beliefs, and to teach them to children from birth.