In related news, is not believing in alien abductions really worth not knowing what the alien invaders are up to? Hmmm?

Of course not. Knowing what the alien invaders are up to is obviously extremely important, it can't possibly be worth giving up that knowledge just so you can not believe they exist.

Now... who can spot the flaw in the "logic" of this debate topic?

Many atheists believe that it is simply ludicrous to believe in something with no evidence or logic to back up the beliefs. So lets take this from a religious stand point. As hard as it is to believe, there IS evidence! For example the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt is a recorded, undeniable historic event that really happened anywhere between 1440B.C. and 1290B.C. Also other supporting information, like capturing of cities and political leaders, are accurate for the time they took place throughout the bible. If these facts are there, who's to say that the rest of the bible is not fact?

Atheism is illogical in the sense that any denial of God whether of the weak or strong variety inherently is an appeal to ignorance. What makes atheism/science more of an authority of truth over spirituality? Because it uses the scientific method? You see the logic is circular, because the only way to prove science is an authority of truth is to use the scientific method. That is also unscientific because its a value statement. The only place it gets its validation is from itself. There is archeological evidence supporting some of the claims in the Bible and other religious books. Also there are patterns in the universe, such as Fibonacci's code. You want to talk about probability? There far too many coincidences to assume this planet didnt simply originate in some cipher, and now it aimlessly rushes nowhere. In my opinion, that is illogical. How can an elaborate organism with trillions of microscopic interactive components come as the result of an accident? Now one of you atheists here may argue something along the lines of, "3.8 billion years of self replication and genetic mutation." But there is a problem with that. You see even if you flip a coin it is bound to land heads or tails but it still had a purpose. And the big bang is just bogus, we all know giant explosions and chaos dont create order, design, and complexity. Namaste.

Is ateism logical? I guess.... Is atheism wise? No, atheism is a very foolish stance.

define evil. we will go from there. I define it as something that is not as it ought to be. If something is as it shouldn't, or not as it ought to be, how do we know what should be?

Someone who subscribes to a religion does not know what happens after death, they only believe they do. As an atheist, I also have a belief concerning what happens after death: nothing. To me, this is the only logical conclusion, because nothing I have ever experienced has led me to believe otherwise.

However, as I have no proof of my beliefs, I would never try to argue that oblivion after death is a fact, or that oblivion is more valid than any other afterlife. I think it is only fair to ask for the same intellectual honesty from everyone. Evidence concerning life after death is impossible to attain, and people of all religions need to admit that to themselves and learn to distinguish belief from fact and faith from knowledge.

Even if so, where did this moral code come from? Can humans even comprehend the scope of evil? For example, there are two accepted types of evil. Gratuitous, and inscrutable evil.

Well, depends on our spectrum of logic.

If we look at it from a mathematical point of view, everything in existence is illogical for existence should have never happened in the first place. how we are here is incomprehensible. So Atheism vs. Theism doesn't apply here. Theism is ALWAYS illogical, and Atheism is a concept that shouldn't exist because nothing should exist because of my earlier statement.

If we're just going by a scientific term... than Atheism is completely logical. now, if you're an extreme Atheist who says that there is, without a doubt, no God, that's illogical. But if you're (as Dawkins says) a de facto Atheist, than you are simply not believing in something that has no evidence behind it. Perfectly logical.

Is Atheism really worth not knowing what happens after death?

Wow, I never thought of it that way ._.

Wait, let me try something.

"Is Christianity really worth not knowing what happens after death?"

See, I can do that too.

How is atheism logical? Is it do to atheist deeming themselves as superior thinkers? Arrogant, illogical, and wishing they were a god. Sounds logical to me.

The analysis of the GOD Theory, as in scriptures and the creation story we all have in part read and heard, as have another interpretation of the creation of all things. God makes things to be understood by all with no room for opinion or argument. The teacher, as Christ was said to be had put the question to his followers and to those that listened to him. To tell him what they understood about the creation story. They, as several people had replied to imply the same conclusion, “it shows the benevolence of God”, as another group of people replied “it shows the Lord built the heavens and earth within 7 days” and one had said “All things have the same master”. The teacher then asked. What is the name of who that has devotion written upon their heart and has said “that the Lord is the master of all things” to tell me his name. So it can be written in the book of life. The person replied, and told the teacher their name and the teacher made them a disciple. The followers and those who listened to the teacher were aggrieved that such a lowly beggar could be chosen to be a disciple and asked the teacher why he had chosen a lowly beggar over them. The teacher replied, that his answer is in accordance with that which you do not perceive, as then it will be easier for him to remember that which I am to teacher him, as to you. Is it not a mythical and wondrous thing that such a creation story would bemuse a man for the entire span of his life and he would not know the precise nature of its instruct. The people all replied, ”yes, teacher it is an amazing feat to contemplate its inception”, and the teacher asked the people “did you hear the lowly beggar reply”, and they replied with a no “that he did not speak”. So this is why he has been chosen, as he makes not a reply in agreement, as he truly knows that the almighty has created him to heed to remain silent in view of such contemplation. Some people then became violent, and some picked-up stones and threw them at the teacher, and the lowly beggar stood in front to take the blows of their anger. The teacher looked at the blood that ran down the lowly beggar face, and shouted in fury to the people. Is it not that the creation story shows to us that in all things there will be found a process in its construction. It is not the subject content of the creation story which is relevant to us. It is that in the making of all things there is a process in the making of it. Therefore, all things have the same master, and originate from the same root, as has its given construction procedure. It is the process of the creation of a thing that makes it what it is, and that process is the master over that thing, as you have misinterpreted and not understood the beggar’s reply. He has understood that all things are made in an orderly procedure and it is maintained by that procedure to be what it is. Therefore, were GOD has said, as to be illustrated by the creation story. It is not the how, what, and the when. It is that all things were created, and there is to be found the exact procedure that was used to create it. The teacher cannot teach to people a concept they do not have the ability to yet understand. As then it is pointless to teach the theory of quantum physics that is involved in the creation of things. To people that cannot even yet count beyond 10, but I can illustrate the existence of quantum physic in such a creation story, as then the underlining process of the construction of things can be illustrated. It is obvious now that the creation story seems so simple it has no relevant meaning to the people of today, as it is meant to be understood by the one, at a certain time, and at the will of the ALMIGHTY. Therefore, there will be a man that understands this better than I, and will explain it to you better than I could have, at such a time, as the LORD feels fit to permit. It is the teaching of the creation story that illustrates that if a person knows the construction procedure of a thing, you can manipulate, as control that thing. If mans wants to proceed in his evolutionary cycle he must be made to understand this, as to possibly why the Christ story was made, as he is said to have had walked on water and changed water into wine. You would have to have an acute knowledge of chemistry, and molecular construction to change water into wine, and you would have to understand a number of subjects to actually walk on water, but this is illustrated to us in such stories. It is not, it cannot be done, it is the how he had archived this, as what would you have to know to be able to walk on water. Or how can you obtain access to this information without actually learning it or knowing about it other than showing that it can be done with the consciousness of your person. It is to teach to someone, that they can walk on water, and they can change water into wine. It is only that you do not know, as possess the power to do it, not that it cannot be done. The Christ story is like a tale in history in relation to a truth that could have had been. That there was a people that could walk on water, as turn water into wine and do amazing things with the thoughts of their mind. We destroyed and enslaved those people, as now try to understand their precepts and how they had archived to be capable of such feats, but we conceal their very existence, as their true identity from themselves, for if they knew. It is as you can imagine, that a man knows not of that which he has no knowledge, as has never been told existed. You are what you are, but you can be forced to change by you being told something you did not know. This is that what you did not know and you have now been told will change who you previously were for the rest of your existence. I do not have to teach that you have been told not to believe hearsay, as something told by another, as then who do you believe and listen to, as consult. You must try and evaluate the correctness of the information you have been told, or given, as perceive and it does not matter what the subject is, as it applies to all things.

A MAN SHOULD NEVER JUDGE UPON THE EXISTENCE OF THINGS FOR WHAT HE/SHE HAS EXPERIENCED OR KNOWS. iN THIS WORLD IT IS WHAT YOU DO NOT KNOW WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN WHAT YOU DO KNOW, AS THAT WHICH YOU DO NOT OR HAVE NOT CONSIDERED. HUMAN LIFE SPAN IS 64 YEARS AND DEATH IS FOR AN ETERNITY (INFINITY + 1). IT IS THE SAME COMPUTATION THAT IS USED TO CALCULATE HOW MANY EARTH LIKE PLANETS ARE IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM. SO YOU DO THE MATH.

YOU CANNOT GIVE UP BELIEVING IN ALIEN ABDUCTION AS YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT IT DOES EXIST. IT IS ONLY YOU CHOSE NOT TO BELIEVE IT THAN TO BELIEVE IT. IT IS THE SAME FOR OLD WORKS OF LITERATURE AND SCRIPTURE THERE MAYBE A TRUTH HIDDEN IN AN ACCOUNT GIVEN ABOUT HISTORY OR IT IS MEANT TO CONCEAL THE TRUTH BY USING ELEMENTS OF THE TRUTH. AS THEN QRITTEN WITH SUCH INTENT BY WHOM AND FOR WHAT POSSIBLE REASON AND PURPOSE. BUT GOD DOES EXIST

The analysis of the GOD Theory, as in scriptures and the creation story we all have in part read and heard, as have another interpretation of the creation of all things. God makes things to be understood by all with no room for opinion or argument. The teacher, as Christ was said to be had put the question to his followers and to those that listened to him. To tell him what they understood about the creation story. They, as several people had replied to imply the same conclusion, “it shows the benevolence of God”, as another group of people replied “it shows the Lord built the heavens and earth within 7 days” and one had said “All things have the same master”. The teacher then asked. What is the name of who that has devotion written upon their heart and has said “that the Lord is the master of all things” to tell me his name. So it can be written in the book of life. The person replied, and told the teacher their name and the teacher made them a disciple. The followers and those who listened to the teacher were aggrieved that such a lowly beggar could be chosen to be a disciple and asked the teacher why he had chosen a lowly beggar over them. The teacher replied, that his answer is in accordance with that which you do not perceive, as then it will be easier for him to remember that which I am to teacher him, as to you. Is it not a mythical and wondrous thing that such a creation story would bemuse a man for the entire span of his life and he would not know the precise nature of its instruct. The people all replied, ”yes, teacher it is an amazing feat to contemplate its inception”, and the teacher asked the people “did you hear the lowly beggar reply”, and they replied with a no “that he did not speak”. So this is why he has been chosen, as he makes not a reply in agreement, as he truly knows that the almighty has created him to heed to remain silent in view of such contemplation. Some people then became violent, and some picked-up stones and threw them at the teacher, and the lowly beggar stood in front of the teacher to take the blows of their anger. The teacher looked at the blood that ran down the lowly beggar’s face, and shouted in fury to the people. Is it not that the creation story shows to us that in all things there will be found a process in its construction. It is not the subject content of the creation story which is relevant to us. It is that in the making of all things there is a process in the making of it. Therefore, all things have the same master, and originate from the same root, as has its given construction procedure. It is the process of the creation of a thing that makes it what it is, and that process is the master over that thing, as you have misinterpreted and not understood the beggar’s reply. He has understood that all things are made in an orderly procedure and it is maintained by that procedure to be what it is. Therefore, were GOD has said, as to be illustrated by the creation story. It is not the how, what, and the when. It is that all things were created, and there is to be found the exact procedure that was used to create it. The teacher cannot teach to people a concept they do not have the ability to yet understand. As then it is pointless to teach the theory of quantum physics that is involved in the creation of things. To people that cannot even yet count beyond 10, but I can illustrate the existence of quantum physic in such a creation story, as then the underlining process of the construction of things can be illustrated. It is obvious now that the creation story seems so simple it has no relevant meaning to the people of today, as it is meant to be understood by the one, at a certain time, and at the will of the ALMIGHTY. Therefore, there will be a man that understands this better than I, and will explain it to you better than I could have, at such a time, as the LORD feels fit to permit. It is the teaching of the creation story that illustrates that if a person knows the construction procedure of a thing, you can manipulate, as control that thing. If mans wants to proceed in his evolutionary cycle he must be made to understand this, as to possibly why the Christ story was made, as he is said to have had walked on water and changed water into wine. You would have to have an acute knowledge of chemistry, and molecular construction to change water into wine, and you would have to understand a number of subjects to actually walk on water, but this is illustrated to us in such stories. It is not, it cannot be done, it is the how he had archived this, as what would you have to know to be able to walk on water. Or how can you obtain access to this information without actually learning it or knowing about it other than showing that it can be done with the consciousness of your person. It is to teach to someone, that they can walk on water, and they can change water into wine. It is only that you do not know, as possess the power to do it, not that it cannot be done. The Christ story is like a tale in history in relation to a truth that could have had been. That there was a people that could walk on water, as turn water into wine and do amazing things with the thoughts of their mind. We destroyed and enslaved those people, as now try to understand their precepts and how they had archived to be capable of such feats, but we conceal their very existence, as their true identity from themselves, for if they knew. It is as you can imagine, that a man knows not of that which he has no knowledge, as has never been told existed. You are what you are, but you can be forced to change by you being told something you did not know. This is that what you did not know and you have now been told will change who you previously were for the rest of your existence. I do not have to teach that you have been told not to believe hearsay, as something told by another, as then who do you believe and listen to, as consult. You must try and evaluate the correctness of the information you have been told, or given, as perceive and it does not matter what the subject is, as it applies to all things. It is written in scripture that such people possessed such supernatural powers by Nezarbuchazar the King of Babylon. That he had captured some people when he had conquered a part of Egypt and the province of in and about JUDEAH and tried to have them worship his GOD. When they refused he tried to burn them alive and they did not burn. So he made them governs over his people, and then the truth of who they were, is not the point. We have an accurate account that they had existed for whatever reason he could not burn them alive by throwing them into the fire. Which then can lead to mean that by whatever method that he used he could not kill them, but he could enslave them, and these people had existed who had been found to have extraordinary supernatural powers. Nezarbuchazar, said this as witnessed by his own eyes, and he said he saw another person amongst them in the flames, and then asked them to come out of the fire, read it. They also go on to narrate that he had grew his hair long and his finger nails and he went into the wilderness to try and obtain the knowledge that they had possessed. If you were a king, and had found a people who possessed such a power, which you could not kill. Would you not throw await all that you possessed in search of such power which could be found and obtained by you, as a king that could not be killed. That is why to some degree I have my doubts about the accuracy of the Christ story, as I do not believe that they could kill such a person, as man does not possess the power to kill him. This is if you are a man that can control the elements other men cannot kill you, but they can try, as claim that they did and or they thought that they did, but they did not. He healed his own injuries, as he was said to have the power of healing. So this story can be said to be true, but it is that it just has been misinterpreted. If you believe Christ had healing powers, someone with healing powers can heal their own injuries, it is logic to adduce that he could heal himself not actually raise from the dead. It can be said that they believed he was dead, but in fact he was not dead, and he had healed his injuries and returned to the disciples, and into history. They people in ancient time were not learned in medical diagnosis, as to be medically sure that a person was dead. They just believed that that person must be dead, as there was no sign of life, as perceived by them. Therefore, you must look at these accounts from a different perspective, and look for the underlining principle possible cause of the accounts written concerning this person.

Proof that atheism falls on the illogical, there are women that believe this way. Ever met a logical woman.

The questions seems kind of silly to me. Not knowing what happens after death (if anything) is something all human beings share regardless of belief. Believing that something happens after death is not the same as knowing something happens after death. So the question is moot.

Atheism is illogical. Based on my experinces with talking to strong supporters of a no god belief, i have come to understand how arrogant the argument for athesium really is. It is so hard to even talk without being constantly attacked. I try to be very pieceful and calm and loving, and what do i get! I get constant attack. I ask people questions about their belief reggarding atheism and none can be answered. The belieff provides no explantion for the purpose of life. They can not explain a purpose for a beggining or an end. It is so frustrating! I mean what is the purpose of even talking about anything if we have no purpose in life! And then there are those who refuse to talk at all. Everything happens for a purpose. We can see it in our world. Each animal is created special and everything on this planet is made so that life moves on. Every little small microscopic detail is made for a purpose, and each purpose is significant. If we have no purpose in life then we have to say for that everything that breaths life on this planet has no purpose! So a power has to be behind a world of such brilliance, such detail. Such knoweldge can not come from nothing. Nothing can not create nothing. Because if there is nothing then why am i speaking and why does evil and good exist.

Get backed to me, anyone wether it is fellow beleivers or someone who feels unsure or would like to piecfully and lovingly debate with me. *Piece to all

However you do look at it, we don't 100% know what happens after death. You can't. Even if heaven and hell does exist, you don't really know what is going to happen.

Also, atheism is probably the most logical religion out there. And they do have their own theory about life after death - that there isn't life after life. Simple.

P.S. Not an atheist, but used to be.

This whole debate is dependent on the definition of 'God.' I am actually a person who is not sure if Christianity is true or not (I have reasons to believe and not to believe). But as for me being a theist, on that I am 100% because of the absurd degree of organization and complexity of the universe. I am a theist BECAUSE of science just like Einstein was a theist, and many other brilliant scientist who simply marveled at the how it is impossible that all of these amazing variables that make up the universe are simply impossible without some kind of organizer. Then you look at us, our DNA is more complex and organized than any computer program in the world and that is a comment from Bill Gates. Obviously people in here are Christian but I think the arguement of atheism vs theism is a more broad arguement than quoting Bible passages. Christianity is a more narrower agruement after you've gotten past atheism vs theism

You state that atheism is arguable, but you do not tell how it is illogical. Should you not provide some sort of reason WHY it is illogical. How is it illogical not to believe in something that is not backed up by evidence. Wouldn't going with the evidence be more logical than going against it with only Faith on your side. In my opinion, atheism is one of the most logical ways of thinking.

Atheism implies that God, a fictional character of whom there is as much evidence as there is of lord Voldemort, is not real. I have never seen him, heard him or smelled him, nor has any evidence of his existence been presented. On what compulsion must I therefore believe in him?

Unless you can make god show himself, or prove god in a manner that isn't reduced to guy feeling or desperate hope, then atheism is the best position to take.