Atheism = self defeating. (page 32)

Caedes

Oh, missed that he has had his day! I wonder if he was a real believer or if he was just trying to make theists look bad?

Anony Mous

So here is the gist of this conversation: towerwatchman posits a viewpoint about information in biology, then rejects the notion that chemistry or physics has anything to do with it.

He posits (wrongly) that there is continuous "creation" of new energy only within biological processes on earth independent from the rest of the Universe but when asked to define what this "life" or "energy/information" that is created he refuses to answer with "what's the point". He also claims that a set of a mere 3 items can be arranged in trillions of combinations.

He is ignoring all of: elementary school physics, elementary math, high school chemistry and high school biology just to prop up what he postulated.

John_Mann

Empirically speaking, theism could never be totally refuted since, as you pointed out, no one is omniscient.
However, putting that aside for a moment, there are certain logical reasons that the theist God could not exist. Some of the attributes of this alleged being are impossible. Take omnipotence as an example. Is God able to create something indestructible, that not even he could destroy or uncreate? Whether you answer yes or no, his omnipotence is refuted.
Or what about his omniscience? Can the theist God ask a question that even he can't answer? If he can, he is not omniscient. If he cannot, he is not omnipotent.
Is God omnibenevolent; a being of pure love? But who could he have loved before he created the Son and with him everyone else? More importantly, if this God was all alone in the beginning, how could he have developed a language that would have allowed him to conceptualize, reason and so be capable of creating a universe? Language is a social phenomena. A single, eternal God could not develop a language and without language, conceptual thought, reasoning, mathematics - everything this God would need to create anything - would be impossible for him.
Did God create the Universe - the universe being defined mathematically as the set of all things existing in space-time? But space-time itself defines existence. A being that that created space-time would have to exist outside of it and therefore, would ipso facto not exist.
You see, even though I may never be able to disprove theism using the scientific/empirical method, I can easily refute it using logic alone. The theistic version of God is no more possible than two and three adding up to six. That said, there could be a deist version of God or an entire pantheon of polytheist gods. I guess it all depends on how strongly someone defines their atheism.

I think molinism explain all your (good) points.

Are you familiar with molinism?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molinism

NathanM.

Towerwatchman really likes spamming the internet with his beloved Meyer copy-paste. But it does not seem that he understands the biology enough to assess whether or not what Meyer wrote has merit.

Typical.

freeflyingfaerie

Technically, you make a point. For practical purposes, though, "atheism" makes sense in the world we live in...because it is a world dominated by religions and 'believers'. It would seem that the 'burden of proof', unfairly, lies on the 'unbelievers' in much of society...

There almost seems to be no room for neutral. Most of humanity is born into a pool of one god-belief system or another...and we either learn to absorb it and swim in it...or we shed the thinking and become a minority, or an "a"thiest. If the world were neutral on the subject, or 'nonbelievers' were the majority, I believe people wouldn't be as inclined to call themselves "anti" or "a".... anything

So, my opinion is that using the word 'athiesm' is appropriate, in this backwards, religious/god dominated world...it helps people put into context the person's beliefs. It is a quick way to describe that a person doesn't believe like most, that is, in a sky daddy of some sort.

Ideally, a person wouldn't have to explain that they don't believe in an unproven 'god'...we just aren't there...yet, anyway...

waton

More importantly, if this God was all alone in the beginning, how could he have developed a language that would have allowed him to--

JM: a deist creator would speak Createse, or Makeish. in a monologue.

Our universe started in a point of time, a point in larger field. energy is thought by some to be fundamental also.

That creator would not have to be all-knowing, just intelligent enough to create the universe, a few points higher than the scientist that explain it us.

Atheism = self defeating.