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.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Why Do Atheists Always Try To Disprove The Existence Of God?
It is seen that, atheists always try to disprove the existence of God. They do not hesitate to create fake accounts to get the numbers. Whatever may be, what is the reason behind it i.e. why they want to disprove the existence of God? Is it because they fear the spreading of Christianity or could it be – that it is prophecy in the Bible that says few people not believe in the existence of God, so a fulfillment of the Bible prophecy?
I've tried to point out the thing of "disproving god". It's a sort of presumption of gilt "he exists until you disprove it" which same way broken logic like... I can say that personally you are responsible for 9/11 until you disprove it.
did you get my point?
...the proper question is where is the evidence for gods (or that you are terrorist)?
Like any kind of belief choosing not to believe in God is a personal thing and if an Atheist wants to waste their time trying to prove God doesn't exist then they will have personal reasons for doing so. A lot of them probably dont bother cause what are they going to do their not going to convince many religous people because a lot of them dont believe anything unless its in the Bible or on Christian TV even when presented with facts and other Atheists will probably just say see told you so and not a lot will change in the broad scheme of things
If we could disprove god then we could get rid of many of these religions that are responsible for so much conflict in our world.
Think about how much time and money is spent worshipping god. What if all that energy went in to helping poor people directly or curing cancer?
Many people think evolution is not real and the earth is only 6000 years old. It's harder to make progress when you have so many people who don't believe in the basic science of how our natural world works.
The energy spent on religious people is spent on helping people directly, and possibly finding a cure for cancer; there are missionaries that are from many religions going to all parts of the world to help people in need; there are scientists and doctors whom are religious trying to find cures for many diseases.
Many people do believe evolution is not real and that the earth is 6000 years old. However, there are many believers that do believe in evolution and that the world is not 6000 years old. Really, who cares if evolution is true or have old the earth is? These questions are barely scratching the surface.
I'm not saying these questions are not good scientific questions, however the idea of natural progress (evolution) and the earth being 6000 years old is hardly relevant to people understand and hoping, and believing in this or that. These 2 things hardly define a particular character, or even characteristic.
Of course religious people do good things. But think of all the millionaire evangelists, mega churches, time spent listening to gospels or praying, etc. If god went away and all that "energy" went directly to charitable efforts that could be better.
I think believing in science is very important and you can't pick and choose what pieces you like. Not searching for answers because the bible already provides it or because "god made" it is detrimental to society. To get specific, it would be very hard to be a good geologist if you thought the world was only 6000 years old and geology is a very important physical science to our society.
One other point I forgot to mention is the whole faith thing. It worries me that people could make important decisions on "faith". What if "the faithful" people burned people at the stake for being witches? What if a president led America to war because his faith told him that Christians need to be victorious over Muslims? Of course bad things will happen without god/faith but we could eliminate one source of potential bad decision making (god/faith). No important decisions should be made based on stories in a very old book.
Again, you speak of christianity as a whole, in particular you speak of the corrupted assholes "up top" acting like they're running the show; those "men of faith" that use religion to go to war are the mother fuckers, not "faith" as a whole.
Not all people who are christians believe the earth is 6000 years old, anyways, that number is so skewed and "guesstimated", there is probably more to it than "the earth is 6000 years old"...at least I believe there is, and that's what they are thinking...who knows. Obviously the earth is not 6000 years old. However, I don't believe that scientists know exactly how many years old the earth is, nor how old the universe is, it's all guesstimation, in this case.
Faith comes in all shapes and sizes and is not particularly secular to just christians and the bible. So there are some believers in the bible that are good people, and follow the "guidelines" strictly, and there are some believers in the bible that are good people, and do not follow exactly everything in the bible. Further, there are people whom do not follow the bible and use their "executive decision", not based on religion, but perhaps on "faith of stopping a war"; for example when the United States used nuclear weaponry on Japan, for what? To "prevent further causalities?" The usage of nuclear weaponry was not used in the name of religion, whatsoever. The use of nuclear weaponry, in my opinion, is the most idiotic and irresponsible event in the history of mankind, not the establishments of religion.
Vietnam, what the fuck was the point in that war? Surely, it was not about this religion or that, it was about a people (vietnam) messing with their own people (vietnam) and other people (the united states) sent kids (!) over there to try and stop an enemy, on unfamiliar grounds, with inexperienced people (the united states' kids' military) < - - - - This was a horrible decision, I agree. However, I highly doubt and know that the decisions made were not because "the bible told me so".... C'mon now.
There are important decisions that can be made by people whom believe in the bible, and whom do not.
The number of people that think the earth is 6000 years old is somewhat irrelevant. The point is no one should make "decisions" about science or anything else "important" based on an "old book" or "faith" alone. Everyone should use critical thought, evidence, etc when making important decisions. If your critical thought ends with (or starts with) "because the bible says so" or "because pastor Joe says so" that is bad. The same is true in the secular world.
There are people that believe they will be "raptured" within a few years. Their children are scared because they want to grow up, have a family, etc. before they are raptured. Seems almost like a form of child abuse for a parent to tell their children these stories? Think of all the cults, etc, where members drink the koolaid and are dead because of it. "Faith" instead of critical thinking is very dangerous.
To your points about the secular world: Absolutely, they will make mistakes. I agree that dropping atom bombs on Japan was one of the worst thing in history. If "faith" was used in the decision making process that was a mistake.
I did not say that all bad decisions are made by theists or that theists only make bad decisions. Of course people who believe in the bible can make good and important decisions. It's only decisions that "intersect" with the persons faith where the problems can occur.
To recap my main argument: organized "faith" is bad for society because it erodes critical thinking.
Corrupt organized "faith" is bad for society, not general organized religion. It's like you're being judgmental and stating "Any and all religions that are organized stump critical thinking and reasoning and should not be condoned..." That is false, bias and judgmental.
Many peoples, of many backgrounds of many beliefs can and are critical thinkers.
Only the fucktard corruption (people) of organized religion need to leave, not the entirety of ones whom follow or have faith AND are critical thinkers and reasoners.
People have been believing in X, Y, Z god(s) since the history of man.
How do you disprove that?
It's proven, that X, Y, Z people believe in X, Y, Z GOD(S).
AND SO, you claim something cannot be disproven that hasn't been proven in the first place.
AND SO, I claim it's OBVIOUS that people have "proven" to themselves and to the worlds that they believe in X, Y, Z GOD(S).
AND SO, you might claim, "Well, the content of the 'proven'...where is the PHYSICAL representation of that? I have not SEEN (senses) this GOD."
AND SO, I claim, "Well, are we not considering the WHOLE of the situation, not just a 'belief or a feeling'?"
AND SO, your claim is AS fucking ridiculous as the ones whom believe.
AND I, personal believe that if someone who does not "believe" and says "there is no point in disproving something that haven't been proven in the first place", I say "That's idiotic and LIKE SAYING 'There is nothing, there is no truth, there is no moral, there is nothing....
When there is OBVIOUSLY something there, something felt, and something believes by X, Y, Z persons. And with this belief, something is true, yet we all have our ways going about believing and understanding these truths.
SO what you are saying that all empirical methods of proving we know somehow does not apply on specific class of bronze age myths and that's because they say so?
No, what I'm saying is what has been proven to be "fact" from the past does not prove that what a person believes in now (and from the history of time) that has not been disproven, cannot be said to be "a fact".
There very might well be "things and events" in this universe that science will never understand and claim to be fact.
With that said, a bunch of beliefs that people have been believing in, could very well be true WITHOUT science having to "claim it to be true".
I do not believe "TRUTH" requires science to understand, it.
Truth is gained and achieved by people, in general.
Science is not the end all.
I cannot say religion is the end all.
I say all of mankind should consider both sides of the spectrum to obtain a natural and fully comprehensible belief, for themselves.
Dark Energy - Unexplained and not understood by science.
Dark Matter - Unexplained and not understood by science.
The over 90-percent-of-the-so-called-"100 percent"-of-knowledge, unexplained and not understood by science.* (This being the clear cut culprit, in my opinion)
Why "miracles" are unexplained and not understood by science.
Deja Vu - Unexplained and not understood by science.
Synesthesia - Unexplained and not understood by science.
If everyone believed in one ideology, it would be extremely dangerous. The more followers a religion has, the more cohersive power it has. I call it the sweih, and the more emotionally vulnerable or unaware you are, the more likely that this religion is to claim you.
Well, if you have evidence to the contrary of something that is popularly believed, why would you want to sit still and let people keep believing it if you have evidence that points to it not being true?
This is a childish way to be empathetic, of course, but it still makes sense.
I'm not an atheist, but I think, that they try to disprove God because they just don't see any rational or scientific explanations on why people say He exists. They want to look for a proof that He does exist, and yet, one cannot find one. Maybe, some are scared that Christianity would spread, because spreading something illogical about a thing is really kind of scary.
Yes, but still, many people are converted to Christianity and other religions nowadays. Atheism is growing fast, and we just cant do anything about it but to accept it as part of life. We cant blame other people for not believing in what we believe.
