God vs psychiatrists

I think the psychiatrist could work on the premise of delusional behaviour, delving into the idea of unimportance, omnipresence, and omniscience. Asking "God" if they could produce an objects so substantial and dense that they were unable to lift it or be present within it, might be a good start.  

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis   Because in the replacement of spirituality-religion with athesism as their religion. They remain as petty and vindictive and narrowminded in the acceptance of counter as that in which they claim versus spiritualists and religion.

Really, CV, atheism as their religion, slightly a bit of a contradiction isn't it? Have to agree with the petty and vindictive and narrowminded comment though, seeing how those talked about are pushing forth their beliefs as facts, but are not even able to back what they say with evidence to show it as fact.

Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 25-Oct-2012 at 01:11

Originally posted by Centrix Vigilis That atheists remain in denial as to the adherence to their belief as a de facto if not actual religion is not new.   In fact.... it's as expected, as much as the defense of a fundamentalist christian or muslim or hindu or buddahist; in their professions regarding the superiority of their beliefs.

Again I've got to agree on your point about the denial to the adherence to the beliefs, due to lack of proof, although to cite it to be a de facto religion probably would have to be a bit of a leap of faith in regards to a logical conclusion. Btw, CV, to many to call them fundamentalist is not considered to be any more than to compliment them to be devout in their belief. That said, the nature of the fundamentalist atheist, as with the fundamentalist( religious devotee) I will have to also agree with you to be expected. But then it'd hardly unexpected for those taking what they believe on faith.

Originally posted by Baal Melqart Atheism is a religion my friend Alani and the proof is your adamant assertion that there is no God just the same way that a believer adamantly asserts that there is a God. The only difference between us is that we rely on spirituality, hope and belief to support our assertions whilst you rely solely on logical thinking. Agnosticism, for example, would not be a religion because it accepts the possibility of an existing deity and does not make judgements on the matter due to lack of proof in both directions (for and against God's existence).

Originally posted by TheAlaniDragonRising Originally posted by Baal Melqart Atheism is a religion my friend Alani and the proof is your adamant assertion that there is no God just the same way that a believer adamantly asserts that there is a God. The only difference between us is that we rely on spirituality, hope and belief to support our assertions whilst you rely solely on logical thinking. Agnosticism, for example, would not be a religion because it accepts the possibility of an existing deity and does not make judgements on the matter due to lack of proof in both directions (for and against God's existence).  A religion requires some to believe in, and worship, a superhuman controlling power, such as deities(gods), hence atheism not really qualifying for such a title. Once upon a time I considered myself to be an atheist, until enlightened by Descartes' evil genie, and its modern incarnation the brain in the vat. Now I consider myself an agnostic.

Wrong. Religion is NOT defined by the belief or worship of a deity, being or superpower. Case in point: Buddhism, Taoism, Confucianism, Shintoism...etc. Religion is the assertion of a group of opinions or beliefs pertaining to existential questions about life. Atheists answer to the question is that there is no controlling power and they assert this dogmatically, which is why they reject strongly the possibility of god's existence.