CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
"Measuring 46 meters in all, the tower represents the age of the earth, with each centimetre equating to 1 million years and with, at the tower’s base, a tiny band of gold a mere millimetre thick standing for mankind’s time on earth.The Temple is dedicated to the idea of perspective, which is something we’re prone to lose in the midst of our busy modern lives."
I actually find the idea in itself interesting, but I also find it extremely peculiar. I have no problem with a building which represents Atheism within itself, but it just for some reason reminds me of George Orwell's 1984.
Atheism has always been a religion. Our country even declared it was one. They believe by faith that the claims they make are true. Many atheists organize and they promote their worldview in many ways.
? atheists disagree on many things. Their only point of agreement is a lack of belief in god, however that is defined. I challenge you to do this 3 or 4 times: Pick any two atheists on this site, at random, and see what their world view is and how similar it is. Actually, you can even make a new debate about it, asking the atheists to describe their world view; chances are it'll become a clusterfuck of disagreement.
They believe by faith that the claims they make are true.
No, they are convinced through scientific evidence and rational thought, that the claims that theists make are untrue.
It's not that an atheist believes that a god (or gods) doesn't exist. It's that they have no reason to believe they do. That, and they are skeptical of the 'evidence' or 'rationale' that theists use to support their claims.
The default position in the 'god vs. no god' debate is 'lack of belief' due to the lack of evidence. Until sufficient evidence or reasoning proves the claim that 'there is a god' to be true, the position of 'lack of belief,' remains the most valid.
For the record, I am able to acknowledge and understand an atheist’s rationale, even though I myself am a theist. To see otherwise would be by fault of ignorance or pride.
Atheism makes the claim…..there is NO GOD. First of all this is a factual statement that no one can make. To make it would require all the knowledge in the universe…and no atheists can do this. Religion is a point of view it is a belief system. Atheism is the same…it takes faith to believe that there is no God.
It is a claim that there is no God. This however can't be proven so it is a statement of faith. It is a claim. What is rational about believing something can come from nothing?
"a" == lack of, "theist" == believer in god, "atheist" == a nonbeliever in god.
The word "god" in and of itself means almost nothing due to it meaning nearly anything. Once one starts to name the specifics of a god, one can analyze those specific claims for internal consistency and consistency with the world. No positive claims need be made. I doubt you'll find very many atheists who will claim that the god of pantheism doesn't exist, although they may contest whether its a god or not. The same can be said for numerous other religions and their gods or god like concepts.
Perhaps the most common thing with atheists is the understanding that if something is supernatural, than it is equivalent to not existing. Although it might technically exist, the detail is a minor one for our lives and is often shorted to the "not existent category".
You are sort of an Atheist too. (As I've said in a previous argument-) you have a lack of belief in the Norse Gods, The Greek Gods, The Islamic God, The Pagan Gods, The Roman Gods, etc.
That means you are practicing a form of Atheism. It is the default position lacking a belief of a God.
How in any way does an atheists claim differ to that of a theists claim, that there is a God? I agree, both are impossible to prove, but I am agnostic, I admit that it's not something I can prove, but I have met many more gnostic theists than atheists (yes, and that's considering for a smaller total number of atheists).
Theist position: The truth to whether or not there is a god is knowable. The truth is that there is a god.
Agnostic position: The truth to whether or not there is a god is unknowable by anyone.
Ignostic position: A precise and coherent definition of a thing must first be given in order for one to make a claim regarding the truth value of its existence. (What do you mean by “god?”)
Atheist position: The truth to whether or not there is a god is uncertain. Evidence presented has been shown to be false and/or further sufficient evidence has yet to be shown. Maintaining a belief in something not yet proven or tested is illogical. Likewise, maintaining a belief in something where the evidence has been shown to be false is irrational.
Of all the presented positions, Theism is the only one that requires proof to support its claim within a debate. Although lack of evidence is not evidence lack, the rule in debate is that an affirmative position is the one that holds the burden of proof and that until evidence is shown, the negative position is the most valid.
But it was conceived by atheists for atheists. Are you saying that atheists are annoying, irrational and all around foolish? Because if you are..., I'm sure there are many who will side with you and many who will beg to differ ;)
Aside from the fact that I myself am atheist, no I am not. I'm calling this one numb-nut all of the prior things. It was made by An atheist supposedly for atheists, not by atheists for atheists. =P
Totally ignoring that the article itself states that Dawkins and Hitchens, two of the most prominent modern atheists, are/were opposed to this project. I don't think it would be too hard to track down a bunch more.
Because we are only united by a lack of belief in God or Gods. It is not a lifestyle, it is a lack of a stance on a particular issue, except for those strong atheists (who do have a stance), who are nearly as foreign to me as theists.
Besides, that building is more like a tribute to scientific discovery, not atheism.
Atheism is defined as being nonreligious. Religion is the belief of a supernatural entity, power, or leader. Atheism states that there is NO supernatural entity, power and leader governing the universe. Atheists don't believe anything.
I suppose you could say that atheists are non-religious, but that is not the definition of atheist.
Religion is the belief of a supernatural entity, power, or leader.
Religion is not "the belief of a supernatural entity, power, or leader." It is simply an institutionalized set of beliefs. People can believe in things like god or miracles and still be considered non-religious.
Atheism states that there is NO supernatural entity, power and leader governing the universe.
Some atheists may state this, but atheism is simply the suspension of belief in the truth value of a god until sufficient proof is provided. It is illogical to believe something is true when it has not been proven to be true and atheists, for the most part, understand this.
Atheists don't believe anything.
Sure they do, they just don’t use faith as a reason to believe in the existence of a god.
Theism and atheism are two sides of a spectrum to only one belief, so it would be a pretty weak claim to say they don’t believe in anything just because they don’t believe a god exists.
The fact of the matter is that nothing thus far has given the atheist community a reason to believe in the existence of a god. If you can offer proof that is observable, demonstrable, and falsifiable that there is a god, then not only will your belief be justified, but you will also convert many atheists to a theistic point of view.
yes, the amount of atheists has made atheism part of the UNs declared religion, but legitimately, seeing as atheism i the belief of no god or goddess i is impossible to be religion, bhudism has not god but it has Bhuda
Neither of those matter to me it's definitely not about science because that is lies from lost men theories and the knowledge part is not about that neither it is about having a strong relationship with the one true God Jesus Christ.
That does not even make much sense. A temple is for is visited when you have to worship someone/something. The religion/belief of 'Atheism' is specifically for those who do not worship anything. what would they do at a temple???? The temple would be empty anyway.