Well, maybe we could start with the fact that your ugly pink avatar and questionable use of grammar are against my religion.
Fear of God plays an important role in Christianity, but it’s hardly the ultimate drive. I fear God and I fear the consequences of being a “fool” in God’s sight. You don’t seem to have such fear and I think that’s unfortunate.
Sage, you always seem to get hung up on this point of judgement and eternal punishment. I think your statement is a fairly accurate portrayal of the situation. But if you don’t like it, then you are free to make your choice to ignore it. In fact you keep saying that you have made a choice to ignore it. So I wonder why do you keep coming back to it. Does it affect you greatly if I choose to belive it? So why do you care?
No doubt I will die out one day. Great point.
[/quote]
The opening post link is best set aside as mere perspectivist conjecture.
As for the title of this thread “In Defense of Atheism” …
… Because God exists, atheism is a fantasy, and, thus, from reality’s persepctive, there is no adequate defense of atheism.
Those of us who have a relationship with God know that the premise is true.
Those who are mentally centered and don’t experience a heart-centered (the only kind) relationship with God at the conscious spirit level only know the premise is true at a mostly unconscious spirit level.
To those mentally centered in consciousness, and thereby limited in consciousness of spirit, the task is left to somehow objectively prove the existence of God (to them).
That might not be possible.
That doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist, as God most certainly does.
But to prove that reality to something (a limited consciousness) of someone that it (such limited consciousness) can’t possibly by “nature” accept, may border on the futile.
Still … either God created everything or God is the name of everything.
How else can one account for the infinite and eternal qualities of everything?
But if the atheist doesn’t think science, in its near-axiomatic theoretical presentation that everything is infinite and eternal, is telling the truth, well, then what possible argumentation basis of discussion could there possibly be on the matter?
I mean, if the atheist doesn’t believe in science, what kind of an atheist is he?! 
… 
Tautology. Because god exists, god doesn’t not exist. Wonderful logic there Jenny. Wonderful.
I fail to understand the philosophical relevance of that statement. There is no “grammar” section nor “ugly pink avatar” section of the bible.
My dare stands. Ned, I dare you to find a moral transgression done by one of these atheists. Prove that atheism has led them to do immoral things, go ahead, it should be easy.
You seem to have a mighty short attention span to be unable to remember the rest of that sentence, TZ18.
You must be quite bored waiting for Sesame Street to come on.
Oh, and by the way, anyone who would criticize your pretty pink avatar is really out of line – I think it’s cute and endearing. 
Okay, Jenny.
You said “from reality’s perspective”. You should have said, “from the perspective of a believer”. Basically this sentence reads: Because god exists, god doesn’t not exist, and thus, god doesn’t not exist.
Once again, wonderful.
Ad hominim. I would report you, but you have curried my favor so with your compliment about my avatar that I will ignore your violation of philosophical morals.[/code]
10.26.06.1621
Pardon my words not being specific enough to escape the grip of interpretation. Fear in religion is something ever-present in the subconciousness of those with faith in something. At the base of belief, it’s fear that drives you. You don’t want to die, right? There comes fear to motivate you to survive and live many years. At the very base, fear is the basis for instinct and survival, and so at the very base of a religious doctrine, fear exists to operate the conditions between what is good and what is bad. This is the sort of fear I was speaking of… I didn’t mean it in a concious physical sense; I didn’t mean it to be that you willfully know it is there as an “ultimate drive.” The so-called fear you speak of that you willfully accept as a condition in your choice of actions and thoughts (i.e. fear of a god) is “little fear,” while the fear I am talking about is globally pervading your being that you are unaware of. This I speak of, is “big fear.”
I don’t have the “small fear” that you have, true. Although I do have “small fears” pertaining to reality, but everyone has those. So when you come down to it, I’m something you’ll never be. A free spirit; and for you… that really is unfortunate.
I do? I haven’t noticed. Could it be perhaps because you have continued to bring it up? If I get hung up, perhaps it’s because you won’t talk about anything else other than your opinions as you feel they are the only ones with value.
Interesting conclusion…
You keep bringing it up… why do you keep coming back to it?
It doesn’t affect me at all Ned, and I don’t care really. To be honest, I find you fascinating. You are like a lab expirament to me… I find you an intriguing study. I’m curious about your psychology and your character… what it is that made you the person you are on ILP now. Perhaps because you remind me so much of PoR… you’re alot like him, except you appear more coherent than he.
Since neither point can be proven or disproven difinativly both sides hold validity, where the religions provide hope the athiests hold insight.
To beleive in something purely without proof is in a way foolish in that it is blinded by its own stigmas, but in that blind faith there lies a form of hope that proves nearly impossible to break.
To disbeleive something without proof is foolish in that it will often prevent the ability to read outside of context, however in doing so one can be freed from preset bias and can therefore seek their own answers.
both path’s are viable and accurate options for those who choose them, by bringing the two into conflict however, netither side can benafit. The religious will continue to regard athiests as fools for their lack celestial knowledge, while the athiests will continue to regard the religious as fools for their inability to ask why.
I am currious if such pointless conflicts are inherit to humanity or if they were created by socioty, But I suppose I may never truely know, Peace
The simial base insinct involved with things such as commercial power-struggles, also exists within ideological power-struggles.
That’s why they have “such pointless conflicts”. Because each is compulsively imperialistic about almost anything.
Your bias is showing.
Remember, the premise “God exists” is previously accepted to be true.
So the phrase “Because God exists” is merely the presentation of a true premise connected from the previous by a reminder.
Thus the rest of the statement follows logically.
Your biased modification implies that the existence of God is a fantasy in the mind, and that God exists nowhere else.
Your implication is false.
Great going, TZ18.
Wonderful. 
Ha!
If that’s an ad hominem, Mr. Pretty-in-Pink Avatared, you’re a monkey’s uncle!
Seriously, though, do they teach logic on Sesame Street?
(j/k )
I went back through the thread. The first mention of punishment was this one…
Thus, you were the one to bring up the subject of punishment in this thread. As I already said, you seem to be hung up on this issue for some reason. But maybe it’s subconscious and you don’t even realise that you’re doing it.
I’m flattered that you find me so interesting and coherent. I can assure you that there are many more interesting and coherent Christians outside your front door. Maybe you should take a visit to your local church and meet some in person.
Perhaps, but I still wonder why they exsist in the first place, I have often found that the majority of my own conflicts are formed when I ignore my instincts in favor of thought, or visa versa.
I have often felt that socioty was built by restraining human nature, but so far the only person I have found who has agreed with this concept was frued, and saddly he is long since dead.
Really? What about…
Deuteronomy 35:2
Do not fashion for yourself a foreign God, or graven image in liliac, pink, or turquoise.
Job 43:7
Job said "I thought in my heart that when communicating with my fellow man, good grammar and diction are essential. “You have judged correctly”, said the LORD.
By biblical standards atheism IS immoral.
10.27.06.1624
So if I brought it up first, so what? I don’t get why you think I’m “hung up” on the whole punishment thing if it’s only been mentioned once. In your last couple posts, you seem pretty adamant about pointing it out, bringing it back into the discussion after I brought it up out of casual necessity as a corollary to the discussion of fear. So, it looks more like you’re the one who has a subconscious problem with punishment rather than I.
So, if you want to continue browsing on with that pointless topic, don’t include me in your obsession about it please.
I believe you misinterpretted my words again. Have you ever read any of PoR’s (pinnacle of reason) threads? If you have, then you would see how you are obviously more coherent than he. As for your other comments, spare me your proselytizing efforts. They degrade your credibility and apperance on ILP. I would just as soon call you a fool, but that would be harsh, although I’m sure you wouldn’t hesitate to call me one. However, there is a Christian which I believe you would love to meet and become friends with: Perrin. She’s so much like you Ned… it’s amazing! The similarity of hypocrisy between you two is outstanding…
Wow, let’s rewind shall we. Our conversation went something like this.
Me: blah, blah, blah
You: blah, blah, blah, God’s punishment, blah, blah
Me: Why do you keep bring up the issue of punishment?
You: “Could it be perhaps because you have continued to bring it up?”
Me: (head scratching) Eh,…but you’re the one who just brought it up here.
You: Yeah, so what if I did?
I don’t quite know how to respond to that question. I fear we may have slipped over the edge of a reasonably coherent conversation into the realm of irrelevant babbling.
I’ve already noted my very conscious fear of God so why do you feel the need to invoke additional subconcious fear for me? You’re not making much sense today.
Point duely noted O wise one. You yourself brought up a topic that you now say is pointless and that I’m obsessed with. If you have any other pointless topics that you feel I’m obsessed with, then by all means feel free to raise them at any time, and then you can scold me once again for replying.
As an orthodox Christian who believes completely in the bible, I doubt I have much credibility with most of the crowd around here anyway. If I had any concern about that issue I wouldn’t still be here, would I? And I actually would hesitate to call you a fool, but I have a feeling God might have something to say on that topic one day.
10.27.06.1626
I don’t understand your confusion, you’ve pretty much laid it out. I’ll elaborate. I brought up the topic in the first place, that much is obvious. However, this is where things get strange because you ask why I keep bringing the topic up. Now, that would be a perfectly reasonable question if I had made two and not one separate instances where I brought the topic into the discussion. However, this is not the case, I only spoke of it once, and you brought it up a second time, apparently thinking that I had brought it up more than once. Is this clear now? That is why I stated that you “continued” to bring it up… your reference marks the second, not third or fourth… so there. I hope I’ve explained it for you.
You “fear we have?” If you check back a number of posts, this already happened quite some time ago. It happened when we stopped talking about anything related to the video; I’d say the post where you brought up the whole “me bringing up punishment.” That whole post had no real relevance. From there, we’ve been babbling off topic.
Don’t worry about it Ned, it’s okay if you don’t understand. However, for the record, I wasn’t invoking anything.
Interesting… I presume the reasoning behind that is because I’m agnostic? After all, if I haven’t accepted your religion, it doesn’t necessarily mean that I’ve denied it; unless you view it that way.