It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

PLZ READ OP FIRST! The Atheist Delusion

page: 18
8
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by c g henderson
reply to post by IamBoon
 


Let me ask you directly, who is this God person you are talking about?

Why should I believe in him?


I do not know god nor am I stating anyone should BELIEVE there is one.




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 


THat is what I am saying.... it IS a belief. No way around it.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by IamBoon
 


I'm sort of agnostic but I can't really decide.

If I can sum up my understading, you're saying that unless there's evidence for a belief mutually excluding another belief, that belief is still a belief. If the evidence doesn't mutually exclude the other belief but only supports the belief in question, the belief is still a belief.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
If I said, "I'm an Athiest. I don't believe in a god."

Isn't that really a double-negative?

If you don't believe in ANYTHING, that's still believing in something..



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benchwarmer
If you don't believe in ANYTHING, that's still believing in something..


I'd say that's an empty set of sorts. Disbelieving in EVERYTHING would still be believing something.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
reply to post by IamBoon
 


I'm sort of agnostic but I can't really decide.

If I can sum up my understading, you're saying that unless there's evidence for a belief mutually excluding another belief, that belief is still a belief. If the evidence doesn't mutually exclude the other belief but only supports the belief in question, the belief is still a belief.


Kinda but with this change.....

If I can sum up my understanding, you're saying that unless there's evidence for a belief mutually excluding another belief, that belief is still a belief. If the evidence doesn't mutually exclude the other belief "and can support either belief , the belief is still a belief even if the stance is a negative"



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamBoon
Anyone that asserts the god of the Jew, Christians , and Muslims to be the same needs to stop commenting on theology immediately !
[edit on 30-7-2010 by IamBoon]


Nope, the God of Abraham is the God of the Jews and the Muslims, and being the God of the Jews he is also the God of the Christians.

What they do with him after that point is irrelevant but the theological origins are one and the same. If you do not realise that perhaps you should not be commenting.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by IamBoon
 


Ah, ok. I misunderstood. Your pardon I beg good sir.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
What of men who are creating the will of god within their own existence?



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
When somebody states I do not believe in the existence of God, I lack belief in the existence of God, or I disbelieve in the existence of God, they mean there is not enough reason to persuade them to believe that God exists, or to persuade them that the probability of God's existence is high enough to warrant belief in His existence. This very stance asserts a belief that evidence and reason points to God not existing or that the existence of God is highly improbable, which is why they lack belief in God. Since assertions are inherent in their disbelief and since these assertions are made without certain knowledge of God's existence, then their stance is a belief.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by ChickenPie]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
This is interesting but way more complex than it needs to be. In fact its a meaningless argument of zero value.

The truth is always simple; in this case one side is simply defining a word differently. There simply is no flaw in saying either, I do not believe their is a God or saying, I do not believe in a God.

The difference is entirely meaningless and I assume everyone posting is having a boring day like I am?

A better thought would be to discuss why don't we just accept each other as we are. The only time this issue is of any relevance is between people not of reasonable sensitivities arguing for the sake of arguing.

In every instance where the radicals on either side start to complain, the focus is irrational. For instance, an Atheist claiming that a plaque on the wall of a courthouse containing the Ten Commandments does them harm as opposed to a Christian claiming a plaque containing the Ten Commandments not hanging on a courthouse wall does them harm. Both sides are being equally irrational, anger driven and intellectually dishonest. Both sides are wrong to even make it an issue. It is in reality meaningless to both sides other than as a tool to criticize and argue with each other. Its just a demonstration of a huge human flaw of directing hatred or venom at anyone we see as different.

The topic of this thread is equally as meaningless. It simply does not matter which way you use the word, the end meaning is the same. It is also just people arguing for the sake of arguing with no meaningful outcome or reason for it.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by IamBoon
I do not know god nor am I stating anyone should BELIEVE there is one.


You seem confused


THerefore it is a matter of opinion and is a belief regarding the SUBJECT of the idea.


You keep claiming that atheism is a belief and that you are an atheist. Well so am I but I do not know what god it is I have a belief there is none of yet.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benchwarmer
If I said, "I'm an Athiest. I don't believe in a god."

Isn't that really a double-negative?


No.


If you don't believe in ANYTHING, that's still believing in something..



What is your belief on the random deity that I just made up in my head?



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by PuterMan
 


That is like saying all shades of blue are the same. Something cannot be the same when it can be differentiated. If you want to argue that be my guest.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by IamBoon
 





I am an Atheist and I assert it is a belief.


Are you still going on? This is realy no discussion.. I'll make it as clear as i can, for the last time.



Do you believe in god?

Yes; your a theist.

No; your an atheist
I dont know; your an atheist



Theism:
"There is a god" = Belief

Atheism:
A) "There is no god" = Belief
B) "I dont know" = Not a belief



Is "not collecting stamps" a hobby?
Is "bald" a hair color?

Is Atheism A Belief?
Nope.
Atheism in general is a lack of belief in god(s), which is what babies and bushmen who's never heard of the concept of gods are. Only my example A) is a belief.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
For the original poster to be correct atheism needs to be:

"I believe there is no god."

Atheism, by definition, is in fact:

"I have no belief in god."

Try to pettle whatever pointless arguments you have, the entire thread is irrelevant based on the complete misunderstanding of the difference between believing something does not exist and the lack of belief in the existence of something.

There is no debate on this, it's rather basic English, nothing more.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Daniem
 


If we cannot even agree that a logical argument can establish whether or not atheism is a belief, agreement on the existence of a deity and what the evidence indicates is out of our league.

"I don't know" is a way to avoid one thinking they know too much about something that transcends ordinary understanding. Thus, this position isn't necessarily one of not affirming or denying the existence of a deity. It's not quite agnosticsm because it's one of "I neither affirm nor deny the exitence of the entire issue", at least for myself. I know nothing and my belief is irrelevent here.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by WolfofWar
 


So, now what atheism is is being thrown into doubt, we establish that there may be at least two sects: "I have no belief in God" and "I believe there is no God".



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ChickenPie
 




Since assertions are inherent in their disbelief and since these assertions are made without certain knowledge of God's existence, then their stance is a belief.


But many atheists openly admit that they do not have certain knowledge. That is agnostic atheism, its what best describes me. I lack belief in god(s) but I do not rule out their existence entirely.

As for whether they probably don't exist I usually leave that up to the specific sort of god we're discussing. For instance if we were to discuss Yahweh, the Biblical God, I would say Yahweh almost certainly does not exist and probably launch into my rationale as to why.

Other atheists, however, do go so far as to say there almost certainly are no Gods.

I prefer to wait until we get a better understanding of the life, the Universe, and everything before I make any assertions of certainty.



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 


As far as I know there is no group that exists that is about its belief in no god, that's sort of the point. There is either a belief, or a lack of. This is really simple, the argument is really pointless, and it's kind of sad this thread has gone on so many pages with people arguing back and forth about it.




top topics



 
8
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join