Athiesm religion in drag?

[former athiest]

It seems to me that Athiesm is just religion in drag.
It's not founded on science.
Science is the pursuit of understanding.
Athiesm is founded on faith. Faith in the nonexistance of god.
Athiesm is not founded on any scientific facts. Only theories.
Athiesm perverts science to promote it's own agendas just like christianity.
Athiesm is no more factual than christianity.

[Beto]

It is just a position without evidence,

It's the position of not assuming positions without satisfactory evidence. This is tricky stuff.

I'd agree with you, although some atheists have a positive belief that there is no god. These people would be in a position with no evidence. I don't agree with this position. I'm rather what you explain; in the position of not assuming positions without satisfactory evidence. As a result, I lack belief in a god.

I was once in that exact position, until I found enough science to back up the assumption of intelligent design behind the universe. It's a strange position that I can't quite label. Not that the "label" really matters to me.

[Goat]

It is just a position without evidence,

It's the position of not assuming positions without satisfactory evidence. This is tricky stuff.

I'd agree with you, although some atheists have a positive belief that there is no god. These people would be in a position with no evidence. I don't agree with this position. I'm rather what you explain; in the position of not assuming positions without satisfactory evidence. As a result, I lack belief in a god.

I was once in that exact position, until I found enough science to back up the assumption of intelligent design behind the universe. It's a strange position that I can't quite label. Not that the "label" really matters to me.

Unfortunately for you, science DOESN'T back up intelligent design in the universe. There might be, but science does not back it up. The use of illogic, and a misunderstanding of probabilities is not evidence of intelligent design.

[Beto]

It is just a position without evidence,

It's the position of not assuming positions without satisfactory evidence. This is tricky stuff.

I'd agree with you, although some atheists have a positive belief that there is no god. These people would be in a position with no evidence. I don't agree with this position. I'm rather what you explain; in the position of not assuming positions without satisfactory evidence. As a result, I lack belief in a god.

I was once in that exact position, until I found enough science to back up the assumption of intelligent design behind the universe. It's a strange position that I can't quite label. Not that the "label" really matters to me.

Unfortunately for you, science DOESN'T back up intelligent design in the universe. There might be, but science does not back it up. The use of illogic, and a misunderstanding of probabilities is not evidence of intelligent design.

Did you miss that little word there called "assumption"? Means a lot...

And we've come a long way since Schrödinger wouldn't you say?

[QED]

I'd agree with you, although some atheists have a positive belief that there is no god. These people would be in a position with no evidence.

I wouldn't say no evidence. If a believer in God says their belief is founded on something evidential, we can usually take that evidence and reinterpret it in a way which denies any divine intervention. If we consistently counter every belief in this way we have effectively erased the existence of God on the basis of a body of evidence. It is true however that such a tactic tends to lead to accusations of Atheism being a religion because there are always assumptions that must be made in order to arrive at any interpretation. How reasonable the underlying assumptions are is another matter altogether.

[Darren]

It seems to me that Athiesm is just religion in drag.
It's not founded on science.
Science is the pursuit of understanding.
Athiesm is founded on faith. Faith in the nonexistance of god.
Athiesm is not founded on any scientific facts. Only theories.
Athiesm perverts science to promote it's own agendas just like christianity.
Athiesm is no more factual than christianity.

You yourself are still an atheist.
When you understand that, you will understand why I don't believe in your god.

[Bart007]

Show me Valid concrete undisputable absolute scientific evidence to undeniably prove the none existance of god.

There is no such thing. Case closed.

Former Atheist: Being skeptical of a belief someone else holds does not take faith. The chronology here is very simple. Some people like to have faith in supernatural ideas. After this becomes apparant, some people protest this through being skeptical and lacking a common belief in said supernatural ideas.

The initial position takes faith. The skeptic's position does not and rather insists those who take the initial position give them something stronger than faith to grasp.

Let's be objective about this - The skeptical atheists position was a generalisation on my part. There are some atheists designated 'strong atheists' who assert that 'there is definately no god' with as little evidence as those who assert that there is a god. These strong atheists have arguably just as much faith as theists.

I'd argue, and this is only specualtion, that most atheists are so for the most part because they are skeptical of others ideas regarding supernatural entities and not because they simply believe that 'there is definately no god.'

Undertow, from reading your remarks, it seems you are more agnostic than atheist.

Still, our former atheist here does have a point that atheists need science to be on their side in order for their worldview to be a satisfying legitimate worldview.

Without sound evidence to back ones materialitic worldview, it may be possible that the atheist is not just simply wrong, but they may be robbing people of the an important relationship with God that may transform them into humans who will do the good that God created us to do. Not only that, but it may be that atheist are not only 'not entering' through the door of eternal life, but that they are actually actively blocking others from entering.

If the atheists are correct in their views, I suppose it would not matter much what they say or do. But if they are wrong in their preaching of a godless materialistic universe, they well may be causing many great harm.

[Darren]

If the atheists are correct in their views, I suppose it would not matter much what they say or do. But if they are wrong in their preaching of a godless materialistic universe, they well may be causing many great harm.

You are mistaken.
If the christian view is correct, Yahweh is the one causing great harm.

[Bart007]

If the atheists are correct in their views, I suppose it would not matter much what they say or do. But if they are wrong in their preaching of a godless materialistic universe, they well may be causing many great harm.

You are mistaken.
If the christian view is correct, Yahweh is the one causing great harm.

By all means, share why you believe this is so.

[Darren]

If the atheists are correct in their views, I suppose it would not matter much what they say or do. But if they are wrong in their preaching of a godless materialistic universe, they well may be causing many great harm.

You are mistaken.
If the christian view is correct, Yahweh is the one causing great harm.

By all means, share why you believe this is so.

If Yahweh created everything, he created pain and suffering. The suffering was his idea, not mine.

[Undertow]

Show me Valid concrete undisputable absolute scientific evidence to undeniably prove the none existance of god.

There is no such thing. Case closed.

Former Atheist: Being skeptical of a belief someone else holds does not take faith. The chronology here is very simple. Some people like to have faith in supernatural ideas. After this becomes apparant, some people protest this through being skeptical and lacking a common belief in said supernatural ideas.

The initial position takes faith. The skeptic's position does not and rather insists those who take the initial position give them something stronger than faith to grasp.

Let's be objective about this - The skeptical atheists position was a generalisation on my part. There are some atheists designated 'strong atheists' who assert that 'there is definately no god' with as little evidence as those who assert that there is a god. These strong atheists have arguably just as much faith as theists.

I'd argue, and this is only specualtion, that most atheists are so for the most part because they are skeptical of others ideas regarding supernatural entities and not because they simply believe that 'there is definately no god.'

Undertow, from reading your remarks, it seems you are more agnostic than atheist.

Still, our former atheist here does have a point that atheists need science to be on their side in order for their worldview to be a satisfying legitimate worldview.

Without sound evidence to back ones materialitic worldview, it may be possible that the atheist is not just simply wrong, but they may be robbing people of the an important relationship with God that may transform them into humans who will do the good that God created us to do. Not only that, but it may be that atheist are not only 'not entering' through the door of eternal life, but that they are actually actively blocking others from entering.

If the atheists are correct in their views, I suppose it would not matter much what they say or do. But if they are wrong in their preaching of a godless materialistic universe, they well may be causing many great harm.

I am an atheist first and formost because I'm not a theist. By the way your depiction of atheists and thier 'preaching' causing harm could just as easily be turned against you. Indeed, if atheists are right and there is no life after death, the preaching of theists could be actively robbing others of precious time here in this life.