TiredJim

I don't get it. Atheists didn't come up with the idea of an omnipotent God, theists did. The "trick" just shows that true omnipotence is impossible.

The triangle analogy is terrible, as triangles are defined to have 3 sides, not four. However, God is often defined to be omnipotent.

brighid

Christ,

Why don't you send your 'friend' and invitation to discuss his theory on atheists here! That should be fun

Brighid

rainbow walking

Yes...bring that lion here and let's feed him to the christians...and while you're at it christ...could I ask one small favor...(rw looks about furtively) can I see your hands and feet?

Spenser

Who ever wrote this (the OP) fully demonstrates the epitome of ignorance + arrogance.

Um, relativity? A singularity? Um, why is it even relevant???

Jinto

This is a strange assertion, how might you substantiate it? As well as this:

PS I agree, I like the screename Christ only I would put an explanation point after it so as to make it sound like it does when I say it: CHRIST! that hurt or CHRIST! she's got nice...

Shadowy Man

Biggest. Strawman. Ever.

braces_for_impact

The biggest problem with this shoddily written prose (dare I call it such) is that it makes broad sweeping generalizations.

This entire article can be deconstructed in one fell swoop. Look up the word atheist. An atheist is one who lacks a god belief. All atheists have this ONE thing in common. As a general rule there may be many other things that they agree on, but that is not necessarily the case. Since this article says 'atheists do this' and 'atheists think that' the entire article fails from it's very outset.

As some have mentioned, this is one big straw man.

stretch

The whole thing sounds like it was written by somebody who's never had a real conversation with an atheist. Let alone enough atheists to come to any conclusions about what 'atheists' think ...

Jinto

Somehow, I fail to see what's so inappropriate about pointing out a spelling error.

No, I understand those aren't your words.

Free will, as it seems to be commonly used, refers to the ability to choose apart from the material influences on the brain. I'm assuming that he's using this definition since he's talking about free will as being in defiance of the available and obvious evidence. Most atheists I know are materialists and therefore do not believe in "free will." Now if he's using some different definition, then you may disregard that statement.

That was sarcasm, plain and simple.

exnihilo

Why does the misconceptions about atheists persist, especially the bit about belief.
Atheism is not at all about belief, but the lack of it. I am so tired of people saying "prove god doesn't exist" to me when I say I am an Atheist--this is after the person I am talking with gets physically sick and throws up. A(without)Theist(god/s), which is to say that it is simply the non-belief of god or gods. It is not a claim of anything else or even an objective claim that god doesn't exist--although that is getting kinda agnostic--Atheism to me is simply the lack of belief in god for myself.
Obviously, for christians these answers never justify as they go against everything billy Graham, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, or their own local child molesting priest says.
Amen!
--exnihilo

TiredJim

Atheism is often defined as the belief God does not exist (check dictionary.com). Just because you don't define it that way doesn't mean you can legitimately get angry at others for using another of its defintions.