What are the strongest arguments for atheism?

[harvey1]

You know, come to think of it. I haven't seen any arguments that support the atheist claim that God doesn't exist. Why is that? So, let's turn the tables for a second, and ask, what are the strongest arguments in support of atheism?

Btw, don't bother answering if you either don't have an argument or don't feel that you are required to support your philosophical position.

[Beto]

Many animals feel accountable to their own community. How elephants shield their young comes to mind. It's rather instinctive to us as well. No God required. It's an evolutionary trait.

[bernee51]

Oh by the way Atheist. Without 100 percent complete knowledge of this world and universe and everything in, on, around and above it, how can you be 100 percent sure there is no God. It seems if there are still things to be known you cant possibly know everything.

I think you're all really closet Agnostic's.

Hollow laughter...

You failed to address my logical proof that the creator deity is an impossibility. The usual response is a special plead...instead you shrugged it off with a non comment.

The creator deity has the same probability of existing as married bachelors or square circles.

That fact does not require 100% knoweledge of the universe.

[servant]

You failed to address my logical proof that the creator deity is an impossibility.

Tell me again I dont remember.

[realthinker]

Oh by the way Atheist. Without 100 percent complete knowledge of this world and universe and everything in, on, around and above it, how can you be 100 percent sure there is no God. It seems if there are still things to be known you cant possibly know everything.

I think you're all really closet Agnostic's.

Hollow laughter...

You failed to address my logical proof that the creator deity is an impossibility. The usual response is a special plead...instead you shrugged it off with a non comment.

The creator deity has the same probability of existing as married bachelors or square circles.

That fact does not require 100% knoweledge of the universe.

I think you try to make too much of your creator deity issue. From what I recall you've addressed god as described in particular religious instances. I don't think that covers the spectrum of the creator deity idea. Suppose the true creator deity has nothing to do with religion, but simply created everything and set it in motion and has yet to give us any specifics with regard to his intent or capabilities? Maybe he's laughing at it all, waiting to give us the real scoop in another thousand years? I think you've likely done fine with a spec argument, but I don't think you've taken out the concept entirely. Perhaps the creator deity, as you've described it, is as probable as circles with corners, but the human imagination is vast.

[bernee51]

You failed to address my logical proof that the creator deity is an impossibility.

Tell me again I dont remember.

here

You claimed in response that logic is not reality...an unsupported opinion.

[bernee51]

I think you try to make too much of your creator deity issue. From what I recall you've addressed god as described in particular religious instances. I don't think that covers the spectrum of the creator deity idea.

I address both the 'religious' description of god(s) and the logical requirewments for a deity tio be described as a 'creator;.

Suppose the true creator deity has nothing to do with religion, but simply created everything and set it in motion and has yet to give us any specifics with regard to his intent or capabilities?

Indeed...it may have destroyed itself in th act of creation.

Maybe he's laughing at it all, waiting to give us the real scoop in another thousand years? I think you've likely done fine with a spec argument, but I don't think you've taken out the concept entirely. Perhaps the creator deity, as you've described it, is as probable as circles with corners, but the human imagination is vast.

The human imagination is vast enough to have created the god concept - and consciousness is vast enough to see through the nature of the delusion.

[McCulloch]

I think you're all really closet Agnostic's.

Even the arch atheists Bertrand Russell and Richard Dawkins admit that in a technical sense they are both agnostic. We admit to not having 100% certainty about all of the possible ideas that could be called God. There is nothing new or earth shattering in this admission. Move on.

[QED]

I think you're all really closet Agnostic's.

Even the arch atheists Bertrand Russell and Richard Dawkins admit that in a technical sense they are both agnostic. We admit to not having 100% certainty about all of the possible ideas that could be called God. There is nothing new or earth shattering in this admission. Move on.

Harvey might have done better to ask what the strongest reasons are to doubt that there was any intent behind the occurrence of the Big-Bang. Pretty much everyone agrees that the universe is some kind of ongoing process -- some processes, like weathering, are unintentional while most human initiated ones are intentional (except for unintended side-effects). I'm pretty certain that the universe itself should fall into one of these two categories.

Nothing about the universe shows unequivocal evidence of intent so there seem to be no good reasons to suppose it was created deliberately. Why, when we understand so much of its content to be natural (unlike many of our pre-scientific opinions) should we assume the whole to be unnatural in any way?

[McCulloch]

There is Hope. You just have to believe.

Yes, the METS CAN win the world series..

The Leafs can win the Stanley Cup too.

[DamarisE]

I was actually really excited when I saw the title of this post, as I thought it would give me a glimpse into the atheist mind, but I was truly disappointed.

As far as I know, atheism (by definition) is the belief that there is no God. So if I were to ask an atheist why they don't believe there is a God...I would certainly not expect them to respond "what god are you asking about?" One could argue that they may have different reasons for not believing in any one interpretation of God...but that would imply that they may believe in another and if that is the case that person needs put himmselves in a different category. I think the original poster was asking what makes an atheist say "There is no God" and if you have the word atheist under your screenname you should have a straightforward answer for that. Somehow the thread turned into a defense for atheism without really answering why you're an atheist in the first place. One argument against religion is that they each have a different interpretation of God, it seems that atheists can't agree on one interpretation of atheism either. So in an effort to bring everyone back to the original question I say:

State your case, give me your strongest argument for the denial of God's existence. What proof beyond reasonable doubt did you find to bring you to the conclusion that there is no god?

Thanks in advance.