Ignorance and the Bible

[gmark77]

Makes no sense.

Whatever your position is, I do not believe that you believe it.

I have not claimed to "believe" anything.

Yes you did. You believe I am incorrect on atheism despite my ability to support my position and show you that I'm not making it up.

This means that you want me to disbelieve what you say.

You are only playing wordgames.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Whatever your position is, I do not believe that you believe it.

I definitely DO NOT "believe" it. My position is:

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.)

I do not "believe" any of that...I KNOW EACH WORD IS SO.

Yes you did. You believe I am incorrect on atheism despite my ability to support my position and show you that I'm not making it up.

Quote what you see as me "believing" that you are incorrect.

This means that you want me to disbelieve what you say.

I do not want you to believe or disbelieve anything on this subject.

You should be able to know the truth...and that is: YOU DO NOT KNOW IF AT LEAST ONE GOD EXISTS...AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA AT ALL OF WHETHER IT IS MORE LIKELY THAT NO GODS EXIST OR AT LEAST ONE GOD DOES EXIST.

You are only playing wordgames.

I am not. I am seriously discussing a serious subject...and not getting a serious response.

 

[gmark77]

I definitely DO NOT "believe" it. My position is:

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.)

I do not "believe" any of that...I KNOW EACH WORD IS SO.


Quote what you see as me "believing" that you are incorrect.




I do not want you to believe or disbelieve anything on this subject.

You should be able to know the truth...and that is: YOU DO NOT KNOW IF AT LEAST ONE GOD EXISTS...AND YOU HAVE NO IDEA AT ALL OF WHETHER IT IS MORE LIKELY THAT NO GODS EXIST OR AT LEAST ONE GOD DOES EXIST.

I am not. I am seriously discussing a serious subject...and not getting a serious response.

I don't believe you.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I don't believe you.

Talk to me about that.

You do not "believe" that I do not know if any GOD (or gods) exist or not?

Why not?

You do not "believe" that I see no reason to suspect that gods cannot exist…that the existence of a GOD or gods is impossible?

Why on Earth not?

You do not "believe" that 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?

C'mon. Why not?

You do not "believe" that 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?

Why not?

 

[gmark77]

Talk to me about that.

You do not "believe" that I do not know if any GOD (or gods) exist or not?

I'm telling you your beliefs are ones you do not hold. That you don't understand your own belief system.

I am giving to you exactly what you gave to me.

If you don't like it, then perhaps the issue can be resolved from your end.

 

[Ross Dolan]

I'm telling you your beliefs are ones you do not hold. That you don't understand your own belief system.

I am giving to you exactly what you gave to me.

If you don't like it, then perhaps the issue can be resolved from your end.

Which of those things do you think are not so?

I am not talking about "beliefs" there at all. I am talking about what I do not know about the REALITY of existence.

You are allowing yourself to get out of hand. Get back to reasonable...and discuss this with me.

My wife has asked me to join her for about an hour so I will be gone for a while, but I will be back.

Final comment for now: Implicit atheism...is what I call atheism for cowards...people who "believe" there are no gods, but who do not have the balls to actually assert that. Some explicit atheists think that same thing.

I give implicit atheists credit for wisdom. They realize it would be stupid for them to assert the truth.

See you in about an hour.

 

[gmark77]

Which of those things do you think are not so?

I am not talking about "beliefs" there at all. I am talking about what I do not know about the REALITY of existence.

You are allowing yourself to get out of hand. Get back to reasonable...and discuss this with me.

My wife has asked me to join her for about an hour so I will be gone for a while, but I will be back.

Final comment for now: Implicit atheism...is what I call atheism for cowards...people who "believe" there are no gods, but who do not have the balls to actually assert that. Some explicit atheists think that same thing.

I give implicit atheists credit for wisdom. They realize it would be stupid for them to assert the truth.

See you in about an hour.

I honestly wish you were sharper and could get the point. I'll summarize it for you: you sit on here and have the balls to try to tell me what my philosophy is and what I do and do not believe. Regardless of how I explain it to you or tell you you are wrong you persist.

Which is fine. I reserve the right to make the exact same claims about your position. "It's all wordgames", you don't believe it. You don't even understand your own position.

It's called the Golden Rule: you want people to treat your position like shit, treat other people's position like shit.

 

[Cypress]

EXCEPT God, right?
That's it isn't it? YOUR hypothesis is God. Where did God come from?

You can't answer!

I am skeptical about the God of Abraham specifically, but this question is easy to answer. I have no idea why atheists think it's such a gotcha question.

If God created space and time, then God exists outside of time and is eternal. A supernatural entity that exists outside of time and space is not subject to Issac Newtons laws of cause and effect.

 

[gmark77]

I am skeptical about the God of Abraham specifically, but this question is easy to answer. I have no idea why atheists think it's such a gotcha question.

But you clearly believe some "intelligence" created the order of the universe. Which means you overcame the hump of something coming from nothing.

Unless you have an explanation for where this "intelligence" came from.

 

[Into the Night]

I think mocking Christianity does happen frequently, and I've been guilty of it myself.

When you mock Christianity on the internet, the odds almost certain you are going to acquire the habit of mocking it in public. I participate in a public discussion group where Christians are routinely the butt of jokes, and Christianity is openly mocked.

The accumulation of that kind of attitude over the years and decades is ultimately going to cause liberalism a reputation of intolerance towards religion.

You might not care about winning elections. But I am dead certain Democrats are now losing socially conservative states they should be winning because of the perception a vocal minority has hijacked the party into a type of uncompromising secularism and moral relativism that just doesn't sell in formerly blue and purple flyover and rust belt states like Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, West Virginia, Michigan, Pennsylvania

Why should Democrats be winning socially conservatives States?

 

[Into the Night]

But you clearly believe some "intelligence" created the order of the universe. Which means you overcame the hump of something coming from nothing.

Unless you have an explanation for where this "intelligence" came from.

The Universe has order??

 

[Into the Night]

I never claimed superiority to anyone.

Blatant lie.

 

[Into the Night]

I flirted with atheism about 20 years ago, but after thinking a lot about it I decided I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.

Atheism doesn't require faith.

 

[Cypress]

I don't really care that you dismiss a bunch of people just because you don't like their philosophy. It isn't a word game.

So you cannot provide any convincing arguments that physical materialism is the ultimate explanation for life, the universe, and everything.

That is precisely why I ultimately had to back away from atheism. It has no convincing explanatory value.

Let me prove it to you:

I can see the future and I know with perfect knowledge what is going to happen in the future.​

Do you BELIEVE me? Or do you simply have no way to assess whether I'm telling the truth or not?

Or do you simply NOT believe me?

There's no such thing as proof, except arguably in mathematical theorems.

I endeavor to base my beliefs on evidence.
There is no empirical, rational, or circumstantial evidence that yyou have the power to know the future.

The reason I don't believe you is that you have provided no reason or evidence to suggest you have perfect knowledge of the future, and the most reasonable explanation is that you are lying.

 

[Into the Night]

I never claimed superiority to anyone. Regardless of what Stalin did.

Blatant lie.

 

[Into the Night]

I don't really care that you dismiss a bunch of people just because you don't like their philosophy. It isn't a word game.

It is a word game. Philosophy is not a word game.

No they do not.

I can prove it to you. YOU do the exact same thing with claims every single day. I know it 100% correctly. If you reject implicit atheism then you reject how you work on a daily basis.

Let me prove it to you:

I can see the future and I know with perfect knowledge what is going to happen in the future.​

Do you BELIEVE me? Or do you simply have no way to assess whether I'm telling the truth or not?

Or do you simply NOT believe me?

Again, quod erat demonstrandum.

Attempted proof by contrivance.

 

[gmark77]

There is no empirical, rational, or circumstantial evidence that yyou have the power to know the future.

So you BELIEVE I cannot see into the future?

The reason I don't believe you is that you have provided no reason or evidence to suggest you have perfect knowledge of the future, and the most reasonable explanation is that you are lying.

So it is your personal faith that I cannot see into the future. Got it.

 

[gmark77]

If God created space and time, then God exists outside of time and is eternal. A supernatural entity that exists outside of time and space is not subject to Issac Newtons laws of cause and effect.

It's rare to see a case of 'special pleading' that is so obviously special pleading.

 

[domer76]

I just couldn't get over the hump of believing something can come from nothing; design and order comes from random chance; that physical matter and energy can explain all about life, the universe, and everything.

Who has ever made a claim that there was nothing?

 

[Ross Dolan]

I honestly wish you were sharper and could get the point.

I am more than sharp enough...and it appears I am much more sharp than you.

I'll summarize it for you: you sit on here and have the balls to try to tell me what my philosophy is

I do not. I was not even talking about your "philosophy." I originally was talking about why you use "atheist" as a self descriptor. You claim it has nothing to do with "beliefs." I say you are full of shit about that. AND YOU ARE.

You use "atheist" as a descriptor because you either "believe" there are no gods...or you "believe" it is more likely that there are no gods than that there is at least one.

DENY, IF YOU CAN, THAT YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THERE ARE NO GODS...OR BELIEVE THAT IT IS MORE LIKELY THAT THERE ARE NO GODS THAN THAT THERE IS AT LEAST ONE.

Let's start from there. Deny that. Tell me you think it is possible there is at least one god...and that it is just as likely that there is a god as that there are none.

Good point to start. Great one, in fact.

So...?

We'll get on to that other stuff after you deal with this.