They claim the American left don’t believe in God.

[Jarod]

Oh no... You don't believe in Heaven? No Rainbow Bridge? No code necessary.... We are welcomed home.... I'm surprised as a follower of Kwanzaa principles you aren’t familiar with homegoing....

I do not think one can be a "follower of Kwanzaa". Silly.

 

[TOP]

I do not think one can be a "follower of Kwanzaa". Silly.

But you said you celebrate the "principal's" as I recall. So if you celebrate them , you would follow them...correct?

 

[Jarod]

But you said you celebrate the "principal's" as I recall. So if you celebrate them , you would follow them...correct?

Not necessarily. Two different things.

 

[Jarod]

Oh no... You don't believe in Heaven? No Rainbow Bridge? No code necessary.... We are welcomed home.... I'm surprised as a follower of Kwanzaa principles you aren’t familiar with homegoing....

Where did you draw that conclusion from? I asked two questions, which you saw but refused to answer.

Are you going to refuse to answer the two questions? I can certainly understand why you would run from them.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Where did you draw that conclusion from? I asked two questions, which you saw but refused to answer.

Are you going to refuse to answer the two questions? I can certainly understand why you would run from them.

She loves a man's attention. Jus' sayin'.

 

[QP!]

I disagree with you on this, QP.

Atheists use the self-descriptor "atheist" because they "believe" that there are no gods...or they "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one. Neither of those things can be substantiated any more than a "belief" that there is a God of some kind.

I don't use a descriptor. I simply state my position on the issue.

I do not know if any GOD (or gods) exist or not;
I see no reason to suspect that gods cannot exist…that the existence of a GOD or gods is impossible;
I see no reason to suspect that at least one GOD must exist...that the existence of at least one GOD is needed to explain existence;
I do not see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction on whether any gods exist or not...nor do I see enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess about which is more likely…so I do not guess on either of those things.

(When I use the word "GOD or gods" here, I mean "The entity (or entities) responsible for the creation of what we humans call 'the physical universe'...IF SUCH AN ENTITY OR ENTITIES ACTUALLY EXIST.)

Obviously it is an agnostic position, but I do not use a descriptor because of the definitional problems you mentioned.

If you google the definitions for atheist to agnostic, you will get countless different definitions including what you say above but most atheists i have spoken to, including myself, as one, subscribe to the definition i put above which i would call the most common.

The reason i do not subscribe to the "they believe that God X does not exist" definition is that it makes the least sense.

Holding an affirmative BELIEF that something you have no evidence on, either way, does or does not exist, is just illogical.

but it is pointless going around on this unless we get one agreed to definition of what an Atheist is and agnostic is, otherwise we are likely speaking to entirely different things.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

If you google the definitions for atheist to agnostic, you will get countless different definitions including what you say above but most atheists i have spoken to, including myself, as one, subscribe to the definition i put above which i would call the most common.

The reason i do not subscribe to the "they believe that God X does not exist" definition is that it makes the least sense.

Holding an affirmative BELIEF that something you have no evidence on, either way, does or does not exist, is just illogical.

but it is pointless going around on this unless we get one agreed to definition of what an Atheist is and agnostic is, otherwise we are likely speaking to entirely different things.

Yet there are atheists who say "there is no god" which is, indeed, an affirmative belief. The logical answer is, "I don't know. It's a mystery".

 

[TOP]

But you said you Follow the "principal's) as I recall.

Not necessarily. Two different things.

So how do you celebrate without following?

 

[T. A. Gardner]

That is not a proper definition of atheism.

Atheism/agnostic which have so many competing parses of their definition, all basically are formed on a foundation of them not believing in a deity without proof of that deity being presented.

So whether it is the Christian god, the Scientology god, the Mormon god, or the Spaghetti Monster as god, the atheist/Agnostic, says 'i won't believe in any of them without proof'.

The Christian/Scientologist/Mormon all say - i believe in my god without proof but do not believe in the other 3 without proof.
All of them including the Atheist do not believe in the Spaghetti monster god without proof.


Then each of the religious people point at the Atheist and try to label them differently despite the fact they all do believe in dozens and dozens of gods, without proof and only disagree over 1 single god. The one that religious person believes in.

All of that is just equivocating. It's weasel wording.

Atheist: Has a religious belief there is no god or gods.

Agnostic: Is unsure there is a god or gods. On the fence on that.

Secularist: Doesn't know if there's a god and doesn't care. Non-religious.

So, you can try some weasel definition or another, hair splitting and such, but it doesn't change the fundamental definition of each type with respect to religion.

The Atheist says "I don't believe in god so (fill in religion) is full of shit. There is no god, and their religion is bullshit too. They're wrong. God doesn't exist.

The Agnostic says "I'm not sure who's right on the idea of god, if any of them actually even are. I want more proof." That doesn't exclude the agnostic being open to the idea of a god or gods existing.

The Secularist says, "Whatever. I don't care if there's a god or not. I have no interest in religion. It's just a waste of my time."

 

[QP!]

Yet there are atheists who say "there is no god" which is, indeed, an affirmative belief. The logical answer is, "I don't know. It's a mystery".

Yes. The range, as i have said, is huge.

I will state again, "to claim to KNOW a god does not exist" (affirmative claim, Gnostic Atheist) requires proof that is impossible to provide. no one can prove there is no christian god nor spaghetti monster god while proving a god does exist is actually doable, with god presenting itself. Thus why i say the atheists (i have not met one) who claim to KNOW god does not exist are much rarer, imo as the very position to hold, is illogical.

AI Overview

 

[QP!]

All of that is just equivocating. It's weasel wording.

Atheist: Has a religious belief there is no god or gods.

Agnostic: Is unsure there is a god or gods. On the fence on that.

Secularist: Doesn't know if there's a god and doesn't care. Non-religious.

So, you can try some weasel definition or another, hair splitting and such, but it doesn't change the fundamental definition of each type with respect to religion.

The Atheist says "I don't believe in god so (fill in religion) is full of shit. There is no god, and their religion is bullshit too. They're wrong. God doesn't exist.

The Agnostic says "I'm not sure who's right on the idea of god, if any of them actually even are. I want more proof." That doesn't exclude the agnostic being open to the idea of a god or gods existing.

The Secularist says, "Whatever. I don't care if there's a god or not. I have no interest in religion. It's just a waste of my time."

False.

Words have meaning and to people who are not stupid, ie you, it matters.

See my prior post and educate yourself on the proper distinctions.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Yes. The range, as i have said, is huge.

I will state again, "to claim to KNOW a god does not exist" (affirmative claim, Gnostic Atheist) requires proof that is impossible to provide. no one can prove there is no christian god nor spaghetti monster god while proving a god does exist is actually doable, with god presenting itself. Thus why i say the atheists (i have not met one) who claim to KNOW god does not exist are much rarer, imo as the very position to hold, is illogical.

AI Overview



View attachment 69336

We're agreed there's a range of beliefs, all without proof. I have met such atheists. They're the "when you're dead, you're dead" type. I don't know where that fits on your scale. On the Richard Dawkins' "spectrum of theistic probability", it's a 7.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

False.

Words have meaning and to people who are not stupid, ie you, it matters.

See my prior post and educate yourself on the proper distinctions.

I am correct, you just posted more hair splitting, aka trivial objections.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

We're agreed there's a range of beliefs, all without proof. I have met such atheists. They're the "when you're dead, you're dead" type. I don't know where that fits on your scale. On the Richard Dawkins' "spectrum of theistic probability", it's a 7.

More hair splitting. It's like saying that the color of a Ford F 150 pick up makes a difference to the model of truck it is.

 

[Cypress]

We're agreed there's a range of beliefs, all without proof. I have met such atheists. They're the "when you're dead, you're dead" type. I don't know where that fits on your scale. On the Richard Dawkins' "spectrum of theistic probability", it's a 7.

Dawkins

Knowledge doesn't require proof. Proof means the certainty it cannot be any other way.

Knowledge is justified belief. It doesn't even necessarily have to be true. It just has to be reasonable or plausible on the basis of evidence or logical inference.

We couldn't function in life if all of our beliefs and knowledge required proof.

That's why nobody brings a chemistry kit to the pharmacy to make sure the pharmacist didn't screw up, lol. We have sufficient evidence to hold a justified belief the pharmacist should be reliable.

 

[QP!]

We're agreed there's a range of beliefs, all without proof. I have met such atheists. They're the "when you're dead, you're dead" type. I don't know where that fits on your scale. On the Richard Dawkins' "spectrum of theistic probability", it's a 7.

Agreed.

Point 1 & & are illogical as there can be no certainty without proof. Simply calling a belief (whether in 1 or 7) something 'you know for sure' is misusing the words. I have no issue with anyone saying they 'absolutely believe to their core and they do not doubt' but going a step beyond to 'know for sure' is both illogical and crosses into dumb.

I have not met anyone in bucket 7 and i have spoken to a ton of atheists, as i actually studied this and religions for a period, on my own personal voyage, but i am sure in a big world such illogical people exist.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Define God?

Does the PP behave like he believes in “God”?

I know he gives lip service to “God” but do you really believe that.

You believe Obama is god, don't you?

Do you follow democrat Jesus?

 

[Uncensored2008]

No need for you to confirm undersnding.

Who’s focused on material wealth? If you don’t have it, the PP has 0 respect for you.

He only works with the wealthy.

You Marxists have been running billions of dollars in fraud in Minnesota, Washington State, and California. Isn't the reason that you steal tens or hundreds of billions of dollars from taxpayers to pad your material wealth?

I have zero respect for you or your corrupt party. November will not be kind to you crooks.

 

[AProudLefty]

You believe Obama is god, don't you?

Do you follow democrat Jesus?

View attachment 69348

Hitler is your Republican Jesus.

 

[Uncensored2008]

If you paid attention, you would know it’s on a decline, churches are closing, others are having financial problems because attendance is down and young people aren’t embracing religion.

https://www.axios.com/2025/10/03/us-churches-close-religious-shift-christians

So Easter 2025 saw the highest church attendance in 25 years.

Perhaps your war on Christians isn't going as well as your rulers tell you? The biggest demographic is Gen Z.

You've lost the youth, Comrade.