Atheists believe....?

[Lon]

Theism is simply to hold a level of belief in at least one god while atheism is a level of disbelief, neither requires absolutes.

Disagree because it isn't logical, as I've shown.

Bald assertions don't win arguments Lon.

Glad you said that, works both ways as far as the observation, but not as far as demonstration. As I said, it doesn't matter if I came up with it, or a Muslim several centuries ago- it makes logical sense. Because it is logical, it doesn't require assertion, it is demonstrable whether you understand or accept it. The logical person will, the illogical person will not. A kid may argue with me regarding a mathematics solution. That doesn't mean a lot.

 

[glorydaz]

Nor is there evidence that this Creator notion is anything more than a man made concept.

Man can make a lot of things, but he can't make anything without using what God has made for him.

You have just described your Creator. I suspect we have a different idea of what is acceptable as evidence. And it's not mine to explain the mysteries of the universe. What may have caused the formation of the universe is not known. The nature of pre Big Bang existence is not known by anyone. Plenty of theoretical stuff no actual knowledge. So when I say "I don't know", I say it safe in the knowledge that you don't know either. Nothing wrong with that. It's an honest admission. The only question is, are you able to live with not knowing?

But I do know. I knew at the age of ten when I looked up into the sky and marveled at what I saw there. There is not a single one of those "may have caused" that has ever come close to being possible. I liken it to putting hundreds of thousands of letters into a big machine and spewing out the Webster's dictionary.

Well I see no creator. But even if you do, does it never cross your mind how this alleged being could just exist, with all that power, for no other reason than it just does. It's just superfluous and changes nothing. There are far better hobbies IMO.

I not only see my Creator in the world around me, but He resides inside me and has for the last forty plus years. He's my constant companion, I have proof of His being every single day...through answered prayer and a peace that does, indeed, pass all understanding.

Don't you ever wonder why mankind from the beginning of time has always sought God? It's built right into us. :thumb:

 

[alwight]

No. It just doesn't come up. For one, the proof means that some god exists, so the leap is a lot less. At that time, I doubted. That I don't any longer? It is about miracles and answers to prayer completely beyond my and any other's control, over time. It not only seems, but is actually answers that lead me to not doubt someone is there. I doubt my proofs are every Christian's proofs or that they need to be. We are each convinced on our own terms. A personal God could be expected to reveal Himself individually. I think there are universal kinds of proofs too, but some doubt, some don't. My doubt is more in my fallible self, than a god who more than likely exists, even for you. So no, I'm not at a point in my life where I doubt as I did when younger.

All this indicates Lon is that you have somehow been fully convinced by something that I am not in any way party to. I otoh claim the right to remain unconvinced by your own claimed unspecified "proofs" since they are not mine and that I cannot evaluate them.

 

[alwight]

Disagree because it isn't logical, as I've shown.

Clearly your "logic" has escaped me Lon.

Glad you said that, works both ways as far as the observation, but not as far as demonstration. As I said, it doesn't matter if I came up with it, or a Muslim several centuries ago- it makes logical sense. Because it is logical, it doesn't require assertion, it is demonstrable whether you understand or accept it. The logical person will, the illogical person will not. A kid may argue with me regarding a mathematics solution. That doesn't mean a lot.

Logic suggests that most devout Christians would undoubtedly have become devout Muslims and visa versa had they been raised in each others religious cultures.

 

[Hedshaker]

Man can make a lot of things, but he can't make anything without using what God has made for him.

Bald assertion and religious platitude.

But I do know. I knew at the age of ten when I looked up into the sky and marveled at what I saw there. There is not a single one of those "may have caused" that has ever come close to being possible. I liken it to putting hundreds of thousands of letters into a big machine and spewing out the Webster's dictionary.

Yet you believe a perfect being just popped into existence or always existed (same thing really) based on what you read in an ancient book. Interesting.

I not only see my Creator in the world around me, but He resides inside me and has for the last forty plus years. He's my constant companion, I have proof of His being every single day...through answered prayer and a peace that does, indeed, pass all understanding.

:yawn: And what of all the other mutually exclusive creator-gods that people believe in? You can't all be right.

Don't you ever wonder why mankind from the beginning of time has always sought God? It's built right into us. :thumb:

The crazy stuff people believe in never ceases to amaze me. It's changing though, slowly. I rather think people like me are born a few centuries too soon. I would like a more rational world for my grand kids to enjoy but I suspect it's going to take longer. But as night follows day, I'm sure change is coming.

 

[Lon]

All this indicates Lon is that you have somehow been fully convinced by something that I am not in any way party to. I otoh claim the right to remain unconvinced by your own claimed unspecified "proofs" since they are not mine and that I cannot evaluate them.

Agree. I'm just trying to help you understand why the doubt isn't there for me. It however was, I've just had too many of these and to specific to have much room for doubt any longer. The proof we talked about convinced me something made me and is my creator. Getting past that to a personal God was merely a matter of multiple specific answers.

Clearly your "logic" has escaped me Lon.

Well, me and William Lane Craig, and my atheist prof?

Logic suggests that most devout Christians would undoubtedly have become devout Muslims and visa versa had they been raised in each others religious cultures.

Simply think 'deist' at that point. Deism does make logical sense. I can address this bit further in an ensuing post, but I'm trying to just establish basics. You and I didn't create ourselves. You and I didn't come from nothing. Something has always existed and is eternal by necessity. The eternal something created us. We have a creator [god].

I'd only want to start with these basics because I think every one of them provable. A personal god proof is based on the veracity and embrace of these 5. You say you are open. If I can simply walk you through what is logically necessary, it will at least open the door to a personal god who does exist.

 

[Lon]

Yet you believe a perfect being just popped into existence or always existed (same thing really) based on what you read in an ancient book. Interesting.

Peanut-gallery comment: :nono: this is illogical. Logically, something, has always existed, as I've said with Alwight in the proof set.
There is no logical escape that I've ever seen that does't necessitate that we come from something eternal. From all the philosophy and science classes I've read, all agree with this. I've only seen one try to claim something came from nothing, but they don't really mean nothing at that point, but that the something might not have been physical, which I already agree with. The bottom line? You just aren't thining deeply enough to assert otherwise. My proof set is not mine alone. I simply reinvented the wheel, and oddly, nearly the same as all other logical proofs of the same.

 

[George Affleck]

Bald assertion and religious platitude.

Bald assertion and humanistic platitude.

 

[Lon]

:yawn: And what of all the other mutually exclusive creator-gods that people believe in? You can't all be right.

The classic marginalizing atheist yawn. You like being obnoxious and antagonistic just because, like a few others then? Nice. :idunno:

The crazy stuff people believe in never ceases to amaze me. It's changing though, slowly. I rather think people like me are born a few centuries too soon. I would like a more rational world for my grand kids to enjoy but I suspect it's going to take longer. But as night follows day, I'm sure change is coming.

Awe, and here I thought GloryDaz was being really nice to you and didn't deserve a "yawn" or "crazy."
Here is your problem:

I think it more interesting to be a Rising Ape than a Falling Angel - Terry Pratchet

---Science is the poetry of reality---

Plenty of things happen after you die but none of them will involve you.

I've seen this over and over again and it is incredibly problematic. Science has never claimed it could explain everything, even given a million more years. This is rather a faulty perception that some atheists/agnostics fall under. Don't deny it, your sentence above if fraught with and dripping of the sentiment. If science is your god, you aren't getting enough out of existence. It contributes to my life, but hardly makes up much of it. If I didn't have a computer, I'm fully capable of writing a letter or going to a debate hall. Science is great, but it is not a replacement for much of life. It rather helps/enhances it only. A computer that can think or anticipate is nothing that can make me a better father or give back lost time not being one. None of it can help me love my wife better. I read a joke once: "I went outside once, the pixels were terrible!" Science is good, it ain't this good.

 

[gcthomas]

God 'logically' exists. This proves that.

No - it has YOU convinced, that's all. The logic, to you, indicates a solution, but that doesn't make your reasoning formal logic, just high-school debating society guff.

You are illogically jumping to conclusion before it was ever given in evidence. Ask yourself, again, why you did that. It is cognitive dissonance. Ask yourself why you insist a personal god doesn't exist at this point.

I have not at any time claimed that, so your point is moot. I disbelieve in gods, I don't consider myself to have proved it. I am, amongst other things, an agnostic atheist. It is only you who claims to have proved something about the world by 'logic', and that approach is where the Greeks came unstuck. They avoided empirical confirmation of their claims, which is why they got so much wrong, even with formal logic.

He gave me the A afterall.

Is there any discussion that doesn't end in you trying to tell us how clever you are?

 

[JosephR]

No - it has YOU convinced, that's all. The logic, to you, indicates a solution, but that doesn't make your reasoning formal logic, just high-school debating society guff.

You are illogically jumping to conclusion before it was ever given in evidence. Ask yourself, again, why you did that. It is cognitive dissonance. Ask yourself why you insist a personal god doesn't exist at this point.

I have not at any time claimed that, so your point is moot. I disbelieve in gods, I don't consider myself to have proved it. I am, amongst other things, an agnostic atheist. It is only you who claims to have proved something about the world by 'logic', and that approach is where the Greeks came unstuck. They avoided empirical confirmation of their claims, which is why they got so much wrong, even with formal logic.


Is there any discussion that doesn't end in you trying to tell us how clever you are?

why do you call yourself an agnostic atheist?

any form of atheist is just as closed minded as any form of theist..

 

[gcthomas]

why do you call yourself an agnostic atheist?

any form of atheist is just as closed minded as any form of theist..

I'm an atheist because I don't believe that there are any gods.
I'm agnostic, because I recognise that my belief is not a proven fact and may indeed be false, although I am convinced it is not.

Hence agnostic atheist.

 

[JosephR]

I'm an atheist because I don't believe that there are any gods.
I'm agnostic, because I recognise that my belief is not a proven fact and may indeed be false, although I am convinced it is not.

Hence agnostic atheist.

confusion...

I myself say I am Agnostic,as that is as Honest as I can be without personal belief...

once you add your personal,,feelings,,human emotion,,, then you are no better then the theist who claims Christ.. I am sure you can see this.

 

[JosephR]

hence you seem just as dishonest as the preacher,,

 

[gcthomas]

hence you seem just as dishonest as the preacher,,

What is dishonest about being clear about both my understanding of the evidence and my personal opinion? If you live your life only having opinions when you have conclusive evidence then you will have few opinions on anything. Making judgements in the absence of complete evidence is not dishonest - it is practical.

You can also be an agnostic theist - not all theists are economical with the actualité.

 

[JosephR]

What is dishonest about being clear about both my understanding of the evidence and my personal opinion? If you live your life only having opinions when you have conclusive evidence then you will have few opinions on anything. Making judgements in the absence of complete evidence is not dishonest - it is practical.

You can also be an agnostic theist - not all theists are economical with the actualité.

there are many fancy names for people who cannot make up their minds.

 

[musterion]

Making judgements in the absence of complete evidence is not dishonest - it is practical.

Except that's exactly what you deride Christians for allegedly doing.

 

[JosephR]

Except that's exactly what you deride Christians for allegedly doing.

dont pick apart my conversations without addressing the point.

 

[gcthomas]

there are many fancy names for people who cannot make up their minds.

Agnostic is one of them

 

[JosephR]

Agnostic is one of them

it seems to be the most honest one I can find.