dajusta Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Many things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevlach Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Indeed Except perhaps i'm laughing for nullifying your attempt to use a double negative inquiry and you two are laughing because you think you've struck a point. Ah, semantics, tis a barrel o' laughs indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 What do you believe in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Except while I understand atheism is the disbelief in god you still either have to believe he exists or not believe he exists. You can't just say I have no reason to believe or you are just an agnostic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 "Non-belief" is the label that atheists give to their belief that there is no God. It isn't special. Or unique. It's just another belief. This belief is preached by prominent atheists, followed by other atheists, and is now being converted into organized religion. (Speaking of converting, it's quite religious of a person to want to try to convert a person to their own belief systems.) Religion does not require a deity or any supernatural spirituality. All it requires is a common worldview and the steps needed to make it official. It has a belief system. An active one, where yes, it used to be inactive non-belief, but that has changed. Atheism today is VERY active and is seeking out those with common beliefs in order to be organized. And don't kid yourself, It is organized. Ritual would be the final one, and that is coming via your atheist church, coming soon to a town near you. Yes, yes, "if atheism is a religion then not playing hockey is a sport." That's not the issue though. The issue is that atheists are starting to preach that not playing hockey is just as valid a sport as playing hockey. Atheism might not be an "official" religion yet, but with religion being more loosely defined every year and with more and more atheist groups wanting to get their piece of the pie, i foresee it getting "official" status fairly quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Many things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Do you believe that god doesn't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I have no reason to believe the claim that one does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevlach Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I have no reason to believe the claim that one does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Do you believe that god doesn't exist? Look at how sad the discussion becomes for the atheist. Cannot even fully answer this basic question. As if the nature of any attributing belief would undermine the method of certainty for the atheist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevlach Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I can and do say I have no reason to disbelieve. The claim has not been evidenced in any credible way that allows me to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Just because a question is simple does not mean the answer is also simple. Dajusta, just about every post you make contains a logical fallacy that destroys your credibility, yet you mock others. I suggest you reread your posts and the responses. Far too often you accuse others of a folly you yourself are guilty of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajusta Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Sharpshooter what evidences do you have to believe that god doesn't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Then point out my logical fallacies and we can discuss them. I asked Sharpshooter what he believes in, an obvious attempt to see what he believes about God, the universe, and the reality of life, and he dodged twice. He's on the ropes, not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 So You do not believe God exists You do not believe God doesn't exist Is this correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Sharpshooter what evidences do you have to believe that god doesn't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 No. Biblical source is primary source material that has more textual criticism than the same ancient text scholars use to believe in such things as Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar. Primary source. You know what that is? Scholarly work includes historians, cultural anthropologists, sociologist, and professors of ancient Hebrew and Greek. Secular scholars are included in these researchers. You speak as if there is no peer to peer scholarly work in the religious sense. By saying this, it shows me that not only are you ignorant to the kind of scholarly work done on ancient manuscript, but also very ignorant in the means of current day discussion and the dialogue pulled out from these findings. I do watch debates on youtube, and seriously if I'm as crazy as you think I am, don't you think the whole world would be atheist at this point? 5 million people are all having the same delusion right? (BTW how much MORE improbable would that be?) I bolded this point - which is your problem (as is every atheists problem). The problem of certainty. Is it so foolish to believe something without empirical evidence? As a hockey fan, don't you have a faith and hope that your team will win the Stanley Cup? From a lack of empirical evidence, it's clear that some hockey teams may never win the cup. Is that the belief? Is it so foolish to believe in a God without empirical evidence that points to a God? I don't think so. The supernatural God requires something outside natural evidence - is that logical? Yes it is. So what is this supernatural requirement for the belief in God? It is something that is outside the naturalistic realm. Think about it. The real foolishness is requiring natural and reproducible evidence for the existence of a supernatural and extraordinary being. Following me? Such a supernatural and extraordinary being will require something unnatural for humans to do. To make a leap of faith and to do something irrational. To believe without seeing. This is faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevlach Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 The disbelief in the claim is reasoned because of the lack of evidence for the claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Well of course it is But if someone off the street came up to you and asked "do you believe in God?" You would probably say "No." That's all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 If it's laughable to believe in aliens but not God why is it OK to believe in God and not aliens?!? The evidence for both are equal. Both are potential higher powers and both are supported by whack jobs who utter mindless jibberish who make the others that share their view look complicit. Anyone who uses their belief in the unknowable as evidence for anything are doing a disservice to those that may have sympathetic leanings. Don't defend stupid people or ridiculous beliefs. It's stupid.... and makes you look ridiculous in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.