# The oppenent of Athesist and the Religious



## Thanatos (Mar 23, 2011)

_I am not articulate enough to have written this below, but it matches my beliefs completely. I wanted to share it with you guys. _

In my experience, I've noticed that those who think Christianity refutes science don't really know anything about Christianity; and those who think science refutes Christianity really don't know anything about science. The fact is that most people spouting off on this topic really don't know anything about either.

I find it ironic that atheists put so much faith in science. Having studied biology and chemistry (biochem, organic chem, etc.) in college, one major recurring theme is that very few things in science are actually proven. Most concepts simply have not been refuted, and there are scientists out there trying to do just that. One thing science continues to prove over and over again is how little we really know.

With Christianity, very few Christians and atheists who claim that they understand the Bible because they've read it, very few of these people actually understand that the Biblical books (technically, the Bible is not one book, but a collection of books) are written in different literary styles. These literary styles greatly influence how each book is to be interpreted, whether it is more literal or symbolic. This is an aspect which fundamentalists do not support, an interpretation which presents a Bible full of conflicts.

Another thing about religion is that most people who disagree with it don't really take the time to truly understand what religion (let's use Catholicism as a great example) really teaches. Many people still associate Catholicism with the fire and brimstone mentality, but that simply is not true. Most people *think* they understand the religion, but most have never picked up a Catechism in an effort to truly understand why Catholics do what they do. This includes most Catholics!

What I find really interesting is how many of you practice the same kind of hateful, close-minded, judgmental attitude that you complain about religion practicing. This is pretty hypocritical; but, of course, it is always a great challenge to take a cold, hard look at ourselves.

From a Christian standpoint, of course an atheist can have morals. From a Christian standpoint, God created everything, and everything God creates is good. It's what we do with it that is questionable.

Now, if a person chooses to be an atheist (whether it be simply because they do not have faith and they recognize it, or because they have taken this stance due to negative personal experiences), that is no one else's business. A person's belief, or non-belief, is between him and [the] God that he doesn't believe in.

Also, religion most certainly will not become extinct. Another interesting fact is that atheists are forming atheist churches. They are people who hold a set of beliefs (yes, non-belief in God is a belief, so is complete faith in science) and gather together to talk about their non-belief. Even though this is done with a non-belief in God, it still fits the definition of religion.

My take? God gave us free will. We are free to choose to believe or not to believe (although I don't think it's really a choice for most of us, because we seem to have either an inherent belief or disbelief). I do not agree with Christians who actively pursue the non-religious, or even people of other religions, and try to convert them. I find it insulting, and I also find it going against Christ's teachings. I also do not agree with atheists trying so hard to make other people not believe. For an atheist, belief has nothing to do with something as paramount as salvation to a believer. Therefore, the two schools of thought are not as important to one as to the other.

I don't believe that atheists have the "moral" right to remove the "liberty" of the religios to be who they are, to believe, to pray in public. Likewise, I don't believe the religious have a right to push their beliefs on other people -- note that there is a huge difference between pushing your beliefs on someone and freedom of expression, which is something that we have a right to do in public, but then we enter into the gray area of respect, which is something most people seem to have a problem putting into practice. From a religious point of view, it is not our right to condemn others.

In a nutshell, ;-) both sides have pushy people who can't accept those who think differently. As a result, these same people -- on both sides -- are equally as damaging, equally as dangerous. Both sides have produced equally-oppressive societies.

The problem is not one of religion, but one of the human condition.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

> non-belief in God is a belief



This is absolutely and undoubtedly false. And it doesn't make sense.

"A non-cat is a cat"

"A non-muslim is a muslim"

Atheism isn't a religion, and it isn't a set of 'beliefs' at all. The only thing that links a an atheist with another atheist is a 'lack of belief in deity or deities'. Do a political poll of the atheists in this forum to find out for yourself. 

I would also wager that there is a greater percentage of atheists that understand the bible than christians. 

As for religion's continued existence - the only religion that is growing with vigor remains Islam. Europe is becoming largely irreligious with each passing generation. The Far East has never been much religious. Lack of religion coincides with an educated population - I have no reason to think it won't continue.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 24, 2011)

Achilles Return said:


> This is absolutely and undoubtedly false. And it doesn't make sense.
> 
> "A non-cat is a cat"
> 
> ...


Do you believe there is no God? 




> As for religion's continued existence - the only religion that is growing with vigor remains Islam. Europe is becoming largely irreligious with each passing generation. The Far East has never been much religious. Lack of religion coincides with an educated population - I have no reason to think it won't continue.



Grow up in Pakistan, and then one day decide you do not follow Islam anymore, I'm sure you probably know what happens to someone who does this. Its the biggest forced religion in the world. 

"Your smart if your an Atheist, your stupid if your a Christian" This argument never gets old


----------



## pnome (Mar 24, 2011)

Who wrote it?  You should credit him or her.



> One thing science continues to prove over and over again is how little we really know.



This is quite possibly the ONLY thing science can prove absolutely.  Everything else is just a matter of probabilities.  If Newton drops the apple 500 times and 500 times it falls to the ground.  Does this prove gravity?  There is a possibility that on the 501st time the apple will float into the sky.  We "believe" the apple will fall to the ground on the 501st try because that is, by a wide margin, the most likely thing to happen.

I wouldn't say that I have complete faith in any particular scientific finding, study, theory, or law.  What I have faith in is the _method_.


----------



## Sargent (Mar 24, 2011)

Achilles Return said:


> This is absolutely and undoubtedly false. And it doesn't make sense.
> 
> "A non-cat is a cat"
> 
> ...




A cat is a noun.
Belief is a verb.  Non-action still constitutes action.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

Sargent said:


> A cat is a noun.
> Belief is a verb.  Non-action still constitutes action.



Actually "belief" is also a noun because it is a thing.
"believe" is a verb, the act of believing is an action.
Non-action of an inanimate object or a corpse would not constitute an action.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Do you believe there is no God?



I do not have belief in any deity that has been presented to me. 




> Grow up in Pakistan, and then one day decide you do not follow Islam anymore, I'm sure you probably know what happens to someone who does this. Its the biggest forced religion in the world.



Right.



> "Your smart if your an Atheist, your stupid if your a Christian" This argument never gets old



That's not what I said. I said 'lack of religion coincides with an educated population'. This is an undeniable _fact_. 












Dots represent nations.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

Sargent said:


> A cat is a noun.
> Belief is a verb.  Non-action still constitutes action.



From dictionary.com



> be·liefâ€‚ â€‚
> [bih-leef]  Show IPA
> –noun
> 1.
> ...



Looks like a noun to me.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

Achilese sorry have to side against you on the Atheism is a belief.

Atheism is the belief that there is no god

That is a belief.

In this case the problem is that the statement that Atheism is a non- belief is a sloppy use of language.

To the OP I disagree with your author's position in a few areas.

1. Faith is belief based on non rational sources, sources of information that cannot be proven one way or the other. If the belief is based on reason and evidence it does not qualify as faith.
Gravity is not faith based, observed phenomenon with evidence proving it's existence over the entire history of man observing the universe. Most theories have at the very least been supported by multiple scientists observing the evidence and reaching the same conclusion and recording their findings with the expectation that others will test their conclusions and not take them on faith until the theory has been around so long that it becomes scientific LAW.


2. I'm not a Christian and I know that Catholicism is not a fire and brimstone kinda denomination, I have read many parts of their Catechism, along with Catechism material from the Episcopal Church. I will say that the Catholic Church retains dogma that I simply cannot find support for. I don't think I'm that special in that area and several recent studies (here we go again with evidence based on testing a theory) indicate that atheists have a pretty good command of the bible and religious dogma. a better command of it than many people who attend church regularly.



3. Formation of a "church" does not make atheism a religion.
A social club for the betterment of the members giving the members a sense of fellowship nothing in that set up a religious belief.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

Atheism is not a belief. It is a lack of belief. 

I do not have a belief in a deity. I do not 'believe there is no deity'. One is a position that is based on reason and logic, the other requires faith just like any other christian or muslim.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

A handy infographic.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

We have a semantic disagreement there Achilles. 
A belief in the negative answer to the proposition of God remains a belief.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

Except I don't have a 'belief in the negative answer to the proposition of God' -  I just lack a positive one. It's a subtle difference, but it exists and its an important one.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

Semantics, you find it important, I consider it a intellectual dodge.


----------



## Sargent (Mar 24, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Actually "belief" is also a noun because it is a thing.
> "believe" is a verb, the act of believing is an action.
> Non-action of an inanimate object or a corpse would not constitute an action.




Ok.... I am on cold meds this morning. 


To have a belief is to believe... You believe there is no God. That is an action.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

Sargent said:


> Ok.... I am on cold meds this morning.
> 
> 
> To have a belief is to believe... You believe there is no God. That is an action.



I hold no belief as to the contents of your guest bedroom closet.  I don't have any set belief in my mind as to what is actually in there.

If someone else expresses a belief that there is a green monster in your guest bedroom closet, does that necessarily make me believe something?  Does that force me to make a decision?

If I express that I believe that there is NOT a green monster in your guest bedroom closet, then yes, I have a belief.  I could be asked why I believe that there is no monster.

Is it possible though, for me to maintain that I have no belief either way?


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

The fact that you call it a closet indicates you have formulated a belief, that it is not a bedroom, a kitchen, a living room, a den, a dinning room, or a bathroom. 

If someone proposes a green monster is in there, and you spend even a second thinking about it and draw any conclusion about the potential for that being true you have formed a belief. 

To maintain no belief you have to not draw any conclusions and not even formulate the odds of any of the potential truths. Human nature makes that really tough to do.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> The fact that you call it a closet indicates you have formulated a belief, that it is not a bedroom, a kitchen, a living room, a den, a dinning room, or a bathroom.
> 
> If someone proposes a green monster is in there, and you spend even a second thinking about it and draw any conclusion about the potential for that being true you have formed a belief.
> 
> To maintain no belief you have to not draw any conclusions and not even formulate the odds of any of the potential truths. Human nature makes that really tough to do.



Well lets put that into practice then.  I believe that Achilles has a guest bedroom closet.  I've never seen it.  I've never even met Achilles.  I believe that there is a brown coat hanging on a black coat hanger in Achilles guest bedroom closet.

Now that you've spent a second thinking about it.  What are your beliefs regarding the brown coat on the black hanger in Achilles guest bedroom closet?

I'm told that you must either believe it is there or believe that it is not there.

If you believe that it is not there, you should be able to prove that it is not there, otherwise its just safer to believe that it is there.


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> The fact that you call it a closet indicates you have formulated a belief, that it is not a bedroom, a kitchen, a living room, a den, a dinning room, or a bathroom.
> 
> If someone proposes a green monster is in there, and you spend even a second thinking about it and draw any conclusion about the potential for that being true you have formed a belief.
> 
> To maintain no belief you have to not draw any conclusions and not even formulate the odds of any of the potential truths. Human nature makes that really tough to do.



An enjoyable mental exercise, gentlemen.  I concede that I have beliefs about the existence or non-existence of deities.  None of them are faith based.

Deists, don't even start about me having "faith" that my car will start.  It's the wrong word to use.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

I believe that it's really a bathroom off the guest bedroom and I have as much evidence to support my belief as you have for yours.


Your precepts don't match my arguments, so it leaves us in a quandary here. But I'll play along for fun and prizes.

On the proposal that there is a guest bedroom closet and that inside there is a brown coat on a black hanger I would have a 98% belief that your belief is false on at least one of the specifics, and a 1% belief that your beliefs were true. So my statement of belief would be.


I believe it is extremely unlikely that your belief is correct on all 5 points. Closet, coat, brown, on hanger, and hanger black.

edited to add that the math is not in error I left myself a 1% factor for the possibility that Achilles and his House have been removed from the universe by some angry deity from an obscure religion based in Antarctica worshiping  the Emperor penguin.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> I believe that it's really a bathroom off the guest bedroom



Do you honestly believe that?
Is that a belief strong enough to warrant the use of the word "faith"?
Do you have enough faith in your belief to bet your eternal soul on it?
Do you believe it so completely that you change your lifestyle and join together with other people who believe it also?
Do you share this belief with others so that they may know the truth?

Is it really a "belief" or more of an insignificant guess?


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

Who said faith? neither of us having been to his house, both of us have built our beliefs on nothing sound. Although I built my belief that your belief was incorrect on at least one of the 5 specifics on basic logic. (specificity and the opportunity for error are inversely related)

beliefs have a wide range of things they can be built on. Faith is only one of those things, evidence, logic, the scientific method....


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

CArefull HawgJowel you may be assuming things about my beliefs that are in error, better to ask than to assume.

I'm not anti atheist, I'm not anti agnostic, I spend far more of my time here arguing the same side of arguments you do. I'm not a christian, and I'm not a believer in a spiritual path that requires any evangelical actions.

I'm disagreeing with the idea that atheism is a non- belief as a mental and intellectual exercise.


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 24, 2011)

Atheism~the doctrine or belief that there is no god


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> Who said faith? neither of us having been to his house, both of us have built our beliefs on nothing sound. Although I built my belief that your belief was incorrect on at least one of the 5 specifics on basic logic. (specificity and the opportunity for error are inversely related)
> 
> beliefs have a wide range of things they can be built on. Faith is only one of those things, evidence, logic, the scientific method....



The word "believe" has varying degrees.  On one end of the spectrum, I might substitute the word "believe" for the word "think", such as "I believe I'm gonna go to the store this evening".  In this context, faith or risking a wager on it would be completely inappropriate.  On the opposite end of the spectrum, I might substitute the word "believe" for the word "know", such as "I believe that the force we call gravity exists".  In this context, I can calculate the probabilities and base my belief or my faith in my belief on evidence, logic, scientific method, life experiences, etc.

"I think I'm gonna go to the store this evening" is not the same as "I have calculated the probabilities and have determined that, based upon all available evidence and logic, I will be going to the store this evening and the possibility that this might not occur does not exist for me".

When you say that you believe that it is actually a bathroom instead of a closet, you should be saying that you "think" its a bathroom.  "Think" doesn't infer any level of certainty.

A person who states "I believe there is no god" is making a claim and is inferring a level of cetainty in a specific belief.

A person who states "I don't think there is a god" is making no claim and is not inferring any level of certainty in any belief.


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 24, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> Atheism~the doctrine or belief that there is no god



Source?


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> CArefull HawgJowel you may be assuming things about my beliefs that are in error, better to ask than to assume.
> 
> I'm not anti atheist, I'm not anti agnostic, I spend far more of my time here arguing the same side of arguments you do. I'm not a christian, and I'm not a believer in a spiritual path that requires any evangelical actions.
> 
> I'm disagreeing with the idea that atheism is a non- belief as a mental and intellectual exercise.





HawgJawl said:


> The word "believe" has varying degrees.  On one end of the spectrum, I might substitute the word "believe" for the word "think", such as "I believe I'm gonna go to the store this evening".  In this context, faith or risking a wager on it would be completely inappropriate.  On the opposite end of the spectrum, I might substitute the word "believe" for the word "know", such as "I believe that the force we call gravity exists".  In this context, I can calculate the probabilities and base my belief or my faith in my belief on evidence, logic, scientific method, life experiences, etc.
> 
> "I think I'm gonna go to the store this evening" is not the same as "I have calculated the probabilities and have determined that, based upon all available evidence and logic, I will be going to the store this evening and the possibility that this might not occur does not exist for me".
> 
> ...



This is invigorating!!!  Please, continue!


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 24, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> A person who states "I don't think there is a god" is making no claim and is not inferring any level of certainty in any belief.



Why argue an uncertainty?


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 24, 2011)

ambush80 said:


> Source?



http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 24, 2011)

My dad would say: "All that intelligence; what will it help you in He11?"


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

My problem is not with anything you mentioned in that last post Hawgjawls, my issue remains with the idea that you can maintain a level of zero belief.

You might believe the negative answer is correct
You might believe the positive answer is correct
You might be divided on the issue as to the potential for each option being correct. That division might be anywhere from .000001% in the belief in the affirmative and 99.999999% in the negative, to 99.999999% in the affirmative and 0.000001% in the negative. But that is a belief in any of those cases.

Once you have formed any opinion, either for or against, you believe something. The strength of your belief as you mentioned also has a range. It might be a belief worthy of killing or dieing for or it might be an opinion held so lightly that it barely registers as mattering to you while an entire world is fighting over the issue.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> Why argue an uncertainty?



The person who states "I don't think there is a god" is not arguing.  This person is not making a claim or trying to convince anyone of anything.  This person is mistakenly thrown into the same category as someone who is making the claim "There is no god".

If I state that I don't have a favorite color, I am not making any claim that needs to be supported by evidence.  I'm stating that I have a lack of a specific favorite color.  It would be incorrect for someone to interpret this as a claim that I love all colors equally.  I'm making no claim of loving any color.


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 24, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> The person who states "I don't think there is a god" is not arguing.  This person is not making a claim or trying to convince anyone of anything.  This person is mistakenly thrown into the same category as someone who is making the claim "There is no god".
> 
> If I state that I don't have a favorite color, I am not making any claim that needs to be supported by evidence.  I'm stating that I have a lack of a specific favorite color.  It would be incorrect for someone to interpret this as a claim that I love all colors equally.  I'm making no claim of loving any color.



Why post in the religious or atheist forums if you have no opinion?


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> Once you have formed any opinion, either for or against, you believe something.



I agree with you.
Is it possible to NOT form an opinion?


Also, I think you might be assuming that I'm an Athiest.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

"I don't think there is a God" is not a neutral (zero belief )position. I agree it is less sure than the definitive negative response of "There is no God" but it still indicates a negative leaning.

The continuum migth run like this: There is no God, I don't think there is a God, There might or might not be a God, I think there might be a God and There is a God.

Only a position that allows for an equal potential of each possibility can possibly be a zero belief.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> Why post in the religious or atheist forums if you have no opinion?



I never said that I have no opinion.  All I'm arguing is the possibility of someone else not having an opinion, and the lack of an opinion does not equate to an affirmative claim against something.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> "I don't think there is a God" is not a neutral (zero belief )position. I agree it is less sure than the definitive negative response of "There is no God" but it still indicates a negative leaning.
> 
> The continuum migth run like this: There is no God, I don't think there is a God, There might or might not be a God, I think there might be a God and There is a God.
> 
> Only a position that allows for an equal potential of each possibility can possibly be a zero belief.



There is a difference between "I don't think"  and  "I do think that there is no"

In the continuum, it should be stated "I think that there is no God", because that indicates a specific belief.

I don't think something indicates the lack of a belief.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

I disagree that it shows a lack of belief it shows a small inclination in the negative belief direction. 

I would agree it shows a lower level of strength of belief, it remains left of center on the graph and is thus not a zero belief.

To specifically answer the question of

Is it possible to NOT form an opinion?

The possibility exists, but this I would put in the far <1% range.
Human nature will work against not forming any opinion at all and remaining in the perfect center neutral position. I believe it would take an exceptionally vigilant mind to not slip one way or the other over time.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

If I walked up to a complete stranger and said "So, you think my wife is cheating on me, huh", it would be an accurate statement for them to say "No, I don't think your wife is cheating on you.  I never said she was.  I don't even know you or your wife.".

The stranger is not making an affirmative claim that my wife is in fact not cheating on me.  The stranger is not even voicing an opinion on whether or not they believe my wife is cheating on me.  They are merely stating that the belief that my wife is cheating on me was not a thought in their mind.  They are speaking of the lack of the existence of a belief.


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

If they make the statement that they don't think she is they have been sloppy with their wording and have expressed an opinion. They may not have intended to but they have.

An accurate statement would be "I don't even know your wife, I have no idea if she is cheating or not, I never said she was. "

the wording "No I don't think she is cheating." does in fact express on opinion to the negative. Emphasis on different words would determine the strength of that opinion. (tone and emphasis is tough to translate to this format).


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

"No I don't think she's cheating"

No I don't think she's cheating. (but Jack down the road said she's a ho)

No I DONT think she's cheating. (Expresses a firm belief in the negative )

No I don't THINK she's cheating. (I Know for a fact she is cause it's with me)



That was kinda fun.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> If they make the statement that they don't think she is they have been sloppy with their wording and have expressed an opinion. They may not have intended to but they have.
> 
> An accurate statement would be "I don't even know your wife, I have no idea if she is cheating or not, I never said she was. "
> 
> the wording "No I don't think she is cheating." does in fact express on opinion to the negative. Emphasis on different words would determine the strength of that opinion. (tone and emphasis is tough to translate to this format).



I dissagree.
I see a tremendous difference between "I don't think"  and "I do think that she is not".

"I don't think she is cheating" indicates the lack of the existence of the thought in his mind.  It is no closer to believing that she is cheating than believing that she is not cheating.  It is not even a neutral response to the question because it is not an answer to the question.  A neutral answer would be "I don't know".

After some discussion with him about my specific concerns, he might then say, "based on what you've told me, I think that your wife is not cheating on you.".  In this scenerio, he is making an ascertion.  He is stating a "belief".


----------



## TTom (Mar 24, 2011)

We've narrowed this down to a pretty fine point here.
Nits have been picked and bundled and shipped off to market.

I'm pretty sure the remaining distance between our positions is not going to be further reduced.

But it has been fun


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 24, 2011)

TTom said:


> We've narrowed this down to a pretty fine point here.
> Nits have been picked and bundled and shipped off to market.
> 
> I'm pretty sure the remaining distance between our positions is not going to be further reduced.
> ...



I had to scroll back up to remember what the original topic was.  We did get a little off point.  I think we both agree that the typical Atheist does in fact have a belief and can usually tell you why.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/atheism



And the second line says 'the disbelief in the existence of god'. Which is exactly what we've been saying.


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 24, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> Why argue an uncertainty?



Because there are those that do argue with certainty and they try force it on the rest of us.


----------



## CAL (Mar 24, 2011)

If I might be so bold as to say.....This whole thread is about as useless as air brakes on a snail.Now ya'll jump on that one!


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 24, 2011)

CAL said:


> If I might be so bold as to say.....This whole thread is about as useless as air brakes on a snail.Now ya'll jump on that one!



I disagree. I loved reading the whole thing...even though it derailed the original thread like power going to a Japanese nuclear plant after an earth quake.


----------



## Thanatos (Mar 24, 2011)

pnome said:


> Who wrote it?  You should credit him or her.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dibear was his username on an article from the bbc.uk about several nations losing their faith in all deities like Achilles was alluding to.


----------



## vowell462 (Mar 24, 2011)

CAL said:


> If I might be so bold as to say.....This whole thread is about as useless as air brakes on a snail.Now ya'll jump on that one!



Air brakes on a snail? Now thats a good analogy. I will absolutley be stealing that one. However, I like the thread, even though its off topic.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 24, 2011)

What did the snail say when he rode on the turtles back?


Wheeeeeeeeeee!


----------



## Phoelix (Mar 24, 2011)

All I know is that it's wonderful to me to see God do his work in the springtime, how he spreads the seeds with the wind....


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 24, 2011)

Thanatos said:


> I disagree. I loved reading the whole thing...even though it derailed the original thread like power going to a Japanese nuclear plant after an earth quake.



you don't get that kind of civil exchange in the Political Forum.


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 24, 2011)

CAL said:


> If I might be so bold as to say.....This whole thread is about as useless as air brakes on a snail.Now ya'll jump on that one!



It's not everyone's cup of tea.


----------



## vowell462 (Mar 24, 2011)

b717doc said:


> All I know is that it's wonderful to me to see God do his work in the springtime, how he spreads the seeds with the wind....



You mean Pollen right? Thats all we can breath around here.


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 24, 2011)

Achilles Return said:


> And the second line says 'the disbelief in the existence of god'. Which is exactly what we've been saying.



I think you're trying to make it harder than it really is. You are simply applying the negative form to the statement "I believe God exists". You can either place the negative on "believe" (disbelief, do not believe) or "God exists". It is the same message, just a different way of wording it. Think of it this way. 5(-2)=-10, -2(5)=-10

I'm curious as to why it matters. We've debated some pretty well pointless stuff, but I think this takes the cake. Maybe we're runnin' out of stuff to argue about or something...


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> I think you're trying to make it harder than it really is. You are simply applying the negative form to the statement "I believe God exists". You can either place the negative on "believe" (disbelief, do not believe) or "God exists". It is the same message, just a different way of wording it. Think of it this way. 5(-2)=-10, -2(5)=-10
> 
> I'm curious as to why it matters. We've debated some pretty well pointless stuff, but I think this takes the cake. Maybe we're runnin' out of stuff to argue about or something...



Sorry for the derail.  If it helps any, feel free to derail any of my threads.  They always get derailed anyway, usually by me.

I thought I was done, but I guess I don't know when to quit.

The phrase "I don't think" has become a slang that is commonly accepted to mean something other than what it says.  Kinda like the phrase "how come?" is commonly accepted as a question of "why?" but it doesn't ask why, it asks how did something come to be or how did something happen.  Asking "how" is different than asking "why".

Stating "I don't think something" is commonly accepted as a slang for "I do think the opposite or negative of something".  However, that's not what it actually says.  It refers to the lack of a thought.  

If you consider a man in a coma with absolutely no brain activity, it would be a correct statement to say "He does not think the Falcons will win the superbowl".  It is incorrect to interpret that statement in the slang manner to mean that he believes that the Falcons will NOT win the superbowl.  The statement simply indicates the lack of any thought regarding the subject.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Sorry for the derail.  If it helps any, feel free to derail any of my threads.  They always get derailed anyway, usually by me.
> 
> I thought I was done, but I guess I don't know when to quit.
> 
> ...


If one gets asked the question, do they not have to put _some_ thought into the answer?


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> If one gets asked the question, do they not have to put _some_ thought into the answer?



The question must be clearly asking what specifically you DO believe.  And the answer must be clearly stating what you DO believe.

If the question is ambiguous, the reply may not be an answer to the question you think you are asking.

"Do you have the belief that God does not exist?" is asking a different question than "Do you entertain any thoughts regarding the existence of God?"


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> The question must be clearly asking what specifically you DO believe.  And the answer must be clearly stating what you DO believe.
> 
> If the question is ambiguous, the reply may not be an answer to the question you think you are asking.
> 
> "Do you have the belief that God does not exist?" is asking a different question than "Do you entertain any thoughts regarding the existence of God?"



Do you think both answers would have the same logic behind them? When the word God is thrown into the sentence, one must think of alot of things to come to a conclusion dont they? My point is, once you hear the word God and what God is, you have formed an opinion, whether you want to or not.


----------



## atlashunter (Mar 25, 2011)

Saying that someone who doesn't believe in something has "faith" is just making a cheap play on words to put them on the same level of irrationality as those who believe without evidence.

You don't have faith that bigfoot doesn't exist. You simply don't believe in bigfoot because the evidence supporting his existence is lacking or in the case of the God of the bible the evidence actually points in the other direction.


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 25, 2011)

atlashunter said:


> in the case of the God of the bible the hypothetical phenomena actually points in the other direction.



Fixed it for you...


----------



## Achilles Return (Mar 25, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> I think you're trying to make it harder than it really is. You are simply applying the negative form to the statement "I believe God exists". You can either place the negative on "believe" (disbelief, do not believe) or "God exists". It is the same message, just a different way of wording it. Think of it this way. 5(-2)=-10, -2(5)=-10
> 
> I'm curious as to why it matters. We've debated some pretty well pointless stuff, but I think this takes the cake. Maybe we're runnin' out of stuff to argue about or something...



Because the distinction is important. If I say that I believe no God exists, I'm making a statement that shows certainty beyond what the evidence shows. While there is absolutely a lack of evidence involving deities, reason doesn't allow me to extend my position from one of skepticism to one of knowledge. It's why my full position is "agnostic atheist" and not simply atheist.  I do not know if a god exists or not, and because I do not know, I don't have a belief in a god. I'm not ruling out the possibility, but none of the suggested deities are remotely believable beyond anything further than deism. 

If I was to say "No gods exist", I'm making a statement on faith. I've promised to myself and others not to use faith. I do not want to be hypocritical.


----------



## atlashunter (Mar 25, 2011)

Achilles Return said:


> Because the distinction is important. If I say that I believe no God exists, I'm making a statement that shows certainty beyond what the evidence shows. While there is absolutely a lack of evidence involving deities, reason doesn't allow me to extend my position from one of skepticism to one of knowledge. It's why my full position is "agnostic atheist" and not simply atheist.  I do not know if a god exists or not, and because I do not know, I don't have a belief in a god. I'm not ruling out the possibility, but none of the suggested deities are remotely believable beyond anything further than deism.
> 
> If I was to say "No gods exist", I'm making a statement on faith. I've promised to myself and others not to use faith. I do not want to be hypocritical.



Do you take that same position on all mythical creatures and other claims made without evidence? I'm thinking Russell's Teapot here.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Do you think both answers would have the same logic behind them? When the word God is thrown into the sentence, one must think of alot of things to come to a conclusion dont they? My point is, once you hear the word God and what God is, you have formed an opinion, whether you want to or not.



Your premise is based upon the assumption that the person being questioned has any knowledge of God.  Suppose you visit an isolated, primitive tribe.  You ask the interpreter if they believe in the God of Abraham, and the answer given by the interpreter is "No".  More than one meaning could be inferred by this answer.

On one extreme, it could mean that in the past, they have been fully indoctrinated by Christian missionaries and since that time they have intentionally turned against the Christian faith and hold a firm belief that the God of Abraham does not exist at all.

On the other extreme, it could mean that they do not actively hold any belief in the God of Abraham because they've never been told about Him.  Perhaps with some more information, they might believe in Him.

In between these extremes, they might hold beliefs that are similar but not exactly the same.

Other possibilities exist for the answer of "No".


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Your premise is based upon the assumption that the person being questioned has any knowledge of God.  Suppose you visit an isolated, primitive tribe.  You ask the interpreter if they believe in the God of Abraham, and the answer given by the interpreter is "No".  More than one meaning could be inferred by this answer.
> 
> On one extreme, it could mean that in the past, they have been fully indoctrinated by Christian missionaries and since that time they have intentionally turned against the Christian faith and hold a firm belief that the God of Abraham does not exist at all.
> 
> ...


That is the reason I posted this.


stringmusic said:


> Do you think both answers would have the same logic behind them? When the word God is thrown into the sentence, one must think of alot of things to come to a conclusion dont they? My point is, once you* hear the word God and what God is*, you have formed an opinion, whether you want to or not.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> That is the reason I posted this.



The word "believe" has varying degrees of substance.  On the affirmative (Christian) half of the spectrum, this can be illustrated by replacing "believe" with "trust".  Every Christian has their own place on the spectrum of just how completely they trust God.  Yes, I trust God, but not quite enough to sell all I own and give to the poor.

So, it's not a black and white issue of complete belief (trust) in God, nor to the contrary is it a black and white issue of belief (trust) that God does not exist.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> The word "believe" has varying degrees of substance.  On the affirmative (Christian) half of the spectrum, this can be illustrated by replacing "believe" with "trust".  Every Christian has their own place on the spectrum of just how completely they trust God.  Yes, I trust God, but not quite enough to sell all I own and give to the poor.
> 
> So, it's not a black and white issue of complete belief (trust) in God, nor to the contrary is it a black and white issue of belief (trust) that God does not exist.



I agree, but a belief is a belief however you want to slice it. If you believe in God then you have a belief, if you are an Atheist, then you believe there is no God, however big or small that belief is, is for another topic.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> The word "believe" has varying degrees of substance.  On the affirmative (Christian) half of the spectrum, this can be illustrated by replacing "believe" with "trust".  Every Christian has their own place on the spectrum of just how completely they trust God.  Yes, I trust God, but not quite enough to sell all I own and give to the poor.
> 
> So, it's not a black and white issue of complete belief (trust) in God, nor to the contrary is it a black and white issue of belief (trust) that God does not exist.



If you draw straight line to symbolize belief in God.  On the extreme right end of this line is the position of complete and perfect belief, trust, and faith that God exists.  On the extreme left end of this line is the position of complete and perfect belief, trust, and faith that God does not exist.  No human can truly place himself on either extreme because it would require that no amount of doubt could ever possibly be placed into your mind by God or the devil, and even Jesus was tempted.

Somewhere on this line is a position of belief that is no closer to the left than to the right.  It is the place where the left turns into the right and vice versa.  This place is on the line of belief but is not the opposite of either end.  This place on the line can not be attributed to positive belief or negative belief.  Just because it is not on the positive side does not mean it is on the negative side and vice versa.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If you draw straight line to symbolize belief in God.  On the extreme right end of this line is the position of complete and perfect belief, trust, and faith that God exists.  On the extreme left end of this line is the position of complete and perfect belief, trust, and faith that God does not exist.  No human can truly place himself on either extreme because it would require that no amount of doubt could ever possibly be placed into your mind by God or the devil, and even Jesus was tempted.
> 
> Somewhere on this line is a position of belief that is no closer to the left than to the right.  It is the place where the left turns into the right and vice versa.  This place is on the line of belief but is not the opposite of either end.  This place on the line can not be attributed to positive belief or negative belief.  Just because it is not on the positive side does not mean it is on the negative side and vice versa.



Correct, except no human being that has ever thought about or heard about God is on this line.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Correct, except no human being that has ever thought about or heard about God is on this line.



If I said that I was on that line, would that prove your statement to be false?


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> If I said that I was on that line, would that prove your statement to be false?



Have you heard about God?


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> Have you heard about God?



Yes, I have thought about and heard about God.
And, yes, I am a human being.


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Yes, I have thought about and heard about God.
> And, yes, I am a human being.



then I would say you are not on that line.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> then I would say you are not on that line.



Oh... yes I am!

"No you're not!"

Am too done it!




I make the best Brunswick Stew known to mankind.  Someone reading this thread, has just now heard about my Brunswick Stew.  Must they immediately make a decision as to their belief regarding my claim?  Must they decide whether they believe that I make the best Brunswick Stew or that I do not make the best Brunswick Stew.  If they have no idea of just how delicious and wonderful my Brunswick Stew is, then wouldn't it be a correct statement that "they don't hold the BELIEF that my Brunswick Stew is the best known to mankind?  That isn't saying that they think that it is or it isn't.  They just hold no belief either way, due to lack of evidence.


----------



## fishinbub (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> I make the best Brunswick Stew known to mankind.  Someone reading this thread, has just now heard about my Brunswick Stew.  Must they immediately make a decision as to their belief regarding my claim?  Must they decide whether they believe that I make the best Brunswick Stew or that I do not make the best Brunswick Stew.  If they have no idea of just how delicious and wonderful my Brunswick Stew is, then wouldn't it be a correct statement that "they don't hold the BELIEF that my Brunswick Stew is the best known to mankind?  That isn't saying that they think that it is or it isn't.  They just hold no belief either way, due to lack of evidence.



Good point. Assuming that person has no opinion, would they take the time out of their day, everyday, to dispute the idea that you make the best Brunswick Stew?


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

fishinbub said:


> Good point. Assuming that person has no opinion, would they take the time out of their day, everyday, to dispute the idea that you make the best Brunswick Stew?



Probably not.  I stated earlier that I think that most Athiests do in fact have a belief and can tell you why they believe as they do.

And I never indicated that I'm an Athiest.  I just like to debate.  

All I'm arguing here is this; "Not endorsing a particular belief does not automatically equate to endorsing the opposite of the belief".


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Oh... yes I am!
> 
> "No you're not!"
> 
> ...



We are not talking about what God does, we are talking about if there is a God or not. If you said, "I make brunswick stew" removing the adverbs, I would make a decision on whether I thought you really did make brunswick stew or not. Whether you make the best brunswick stew or not is subjective. NOBODY could be totally objective about whether you make the best brunswick stew or not, even the person that just read this thread probably said "yea right, my paw-in-laws brunswick stew is better'n his" which is still an opinion on the matter.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> We are not talking about what God does, we are talking about if there is a God or not. If you said, "I make brunswick stew" removing the adverbs, I would make a decision on whether I thought you really did make brunswick stew or not. Whether you make the best brunswick stew or not is subjective. NOBODY could be totally objective about whether you make the best brunswick stew or not, even the person that just read this thread probably said "yea right, my paw-in-laws brunswick stew is better'n his" which is still an opinion on the matter.



Without the adjectives, isn't that kinda like saying "Ok, I do believe that God exists but Zeus is much more powerful".


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Without the adjectives, isn't that kinda like saying "Ok, I do believe that God exists but Zeus is much more powerful".



We are talking about belief in God. Not which God is the best.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> We are talking about belief in God. Not which God is the best.



Are you sure that you don't need to be a little more specific than that in defining what constitutes a Deist or an Atheist?  Or maybe a little more specific on which God a person should believe in?  Or how many other Gods a person can believe in?

If someone believes that the God of Abraham did exist long ago but no longer exists, which category would they fit into?


----------



## stringmusic (Mar 25, 2011)

HawgJawl said:


> Are you sure that you don't need to be a little more specific than that in defining what constitutes a Deist or an Atheist?  Or maybe a little more specific on which God a person should believe in?  Or how many other Gods a person can believe in?
> 
> If someone believes that the God of Abraham did exist long ago but no longer exists, which category would they fit into?



I thought we were talking about if an Atheist had a belief there was not God or not. I dont know, I am probably confused. Either way, my mind is to focused on what happens after I blow the owl call at about 7:10 in the morning to think hard any more today. Enjoyed the conversation and if your going in the a.m. good luck.


----------



## HawgJawl (Mar 25, 2011)

stringmusic said:


> I thought we were talking about if an Atheist had a belief there was not God or not. I dont know, I am probably confused. Either way, my mind is to focused on what happens after I blow the owl call at about 7:10 in the morning to think hard any more today. Enjoyed the conversation and if your going in the a.m. good luck.



Thanks and good luck to you.  Hope you get a big one.


----------



## vowell462 (Mar 25, 2011)

I want some of that Brunswick Stew.


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 25, 2011)

vowell462 said:


> I want some of that Brunswick Stew.



Well then, you're ripe for the pickin's.  You're the "sheaves" they speak of in that song.  This here is a man of faith.  

You can't possibly know how good it is until you try it.  Once you've tried it, you'll never want any other again.  If you don't like it, then you must not have tried it the right way.


----------

