Christians are often baffled as to how atheists could deny the existence of their god, Yahweh.

I don’t think they’re baffled because Yahweh is a god – but rather because they consider his existence to be obvious. (Just as they’d consider all these other gods to be obviously fake or false).

If I were to get into an discussion with someone who was apolitical, and ask them how they could have absolutely no interest in how the country is being run, their pointing out that I also reject all political philosophies except the one I hold wouldn’t strike me as a a particularly persuasive argument.

Just as the fact that I can’t stand bananas doesn’t count as an argument for starvation.

I think your analogy is slightly off. First, replace philosophy with ideology. Second, athiests still have an interest in running their life just as people with no political ideology have an interest in running their country.

As someone who subscribes to no political party I would point out that you reject others yet hold your own in high esteem. I reject all political parties because subscribing to an ideology is erroneous even if the ideology is correct at a point in time.

lukeprog wrote:

Fauna roman vegetation goddess

Faunus roman vegetation goddess

Fauna (Bona Dea) : Goddess of the Earth, Mother Goddess.

Faunus : God of the wilds and fertility. He is the protector of cattle also referred to as Lupercus. Festivals are Lupercalia on February 15 and Faunalia on December 5.

http://www.unrv.com/culture/minor-roman-god-list.php

Hesat egyptian goddess of birth

Hestia egyptian goddess of birth

I think you made a copy&paste error here. I only know Hestia as the greek goddess of the hearth.

Along the same lines, I suggest adding Murphy. I often tell my believer friends that the only supernatural force I accept as real is Murphy’s Law. (Again, with my tongue in my cheek.)

Why do Atheists deny god? Is it only because god can’t be seen or proven? That really isn’t a good reason. There are many things that can’t be seen or measured, one of which is the energy that makes all life possible. It’s there at the center of every cell of every object on earth but what is it and from where does it come? Science can’t come up with an explaination. I say that eneregy is God. The one and only God. Science is the study of God. The more you study the more amazing God is.  

While one could argue that scientists already can explain the energy that makes all life possible, I do not yet have the expertise in the area in order to fully explain it. So I will take a different route. Millenia ago, people didn’t know what lightning was. They theorized that is was an angry god chucking lightning bolts at the earth. Well, human technology and intelligence got better and they figured out what lightning was; an imbalance of charges in the atmosphere resulting in an immense and rapid discharge of electricity. No mystical explanation needed. Why now are you making the same mistake? Unless you believe that lightning is a work of god and has nothing to do with any scientific theory. I truly don’t think you do. The unexplainable now will not be the unexplainable of centuries, or even decades, from now. I find it acceptable and sufficient to simply say, “I don’t know” when confronted with something I do not understand. I have no need of a placeholder explanation consisting of an invisible man in the sky. No one considers me stupid, ignorant, etc. for saying “I don’t know,” either.

You call them deities but not gods? Of course I agree that the term ‘god’ can refer to a wide variety of beings.

All Celtic deities were people who actually lived. They are deified humans who were elevated to that status through the deeds they committed during their lifetime. They are not nor were they ever figments of the imagination. Several of them are even my ancestors, including the Dagda and Brighid.

since i was new to faith when i converted in 2007 (i had never believed in any god before that fateful day in august), i have found that the most wonderful thing about having faith is that i can now hold two contradictory ideas in my head and not have it explode! truly an epiphany.

i wish you all well.
may you be touched by his noodly appendage soon and often.
yours in pasta,
V

But you forgot Geoff the God of Biscuits from Eddie Izzard’s “Dress to Kill”, and Phil the Prince of Insufficient Light from Dilbert.

Trying to figure out how to fit all the atheist and libertarian stuff I’d like to say on one car bumper.

What argument? Who is making an argument?

So I don’t think this is a good philosophical argument, but it’s an excellent religious one.

BJ: I like the poster, but the argument isn’t just weak; it’s invalid. Just because all those other gods are false does nothing to address the truth value of the statement “Yahweh exists.” I’m not sure whether the fallacy committed here is a red herring fallacy or not. To me, the structure of the argument seems to follow:
(p1) Since some people worship Yahweh
(p2) and since all other gods throughout history are no longer worshipped(p3 implied) (and they are no longer worshipped because they are false)
————————————————
Therefore, it is highly probable that Yahweh is also false.
I have recently deconverted from Christianity, so I am very interested in making sure my arguments are sound and cogent. I have to admit, though, that I’m also very new to the whole logic thing.
I would love to receive some feedback on my observation.
- BJ
   

It’s not a logical argument, it’s a rhetorical one. A rhetorical reductio-ad-absurbum. The point you seem to be missing about it is that it is not saying because these are false, so is Yehweh or whatever. It’s saying that there’s no more reason to believe in Yehweh than in these others so if I, as an atheist, am going to believe in “God” I could just as easily pick any on this long list.

The poster doesn’t assert any argument at all. It merely intends to point out that disbelieving in gods is not so unusual a thing.