to the atheists on the board

Yes, some would say God is for real, is this a revelation to you?

And when you asked them how they came to that knowledge, they would likely tell you faith was their path.

This type of person is commonly known by theists, atheists, and agnostics as a believer in God.

Quote from stu:

No Again...please try again...nothing to do with BELIEF...I said some would say God IS for real.

I am not talking of theory of evolution, or who or why evolution would be so, I did not mention evolution, evolution has nothing to do with what I said.

It's not hard really.
More...
 
ARogueTrader:

It depends on what person you met on the street. Some might tell you that a plant is an atheist.

me
..or that God is for real.

ARogueTrader:
Yes, some will tell you that they believe in God, quite right.

me
No. Please try to read what I wrote....

that God IS for real...

ARogueTrader:
Yes, and some BELIEVE the theory of evolution is for real as an explanation of the truth of the origin of man.

This I think illustrates quite clearly the inability you display in perhaps understanding, but certainly in addressing, the most basic and straight forward of statements.

Is it a dogmatic and blinkered attitude toward a fixed mindset of religious indoctrination which causes an incapacity to notice the difference in the words IS as against BELIEVE.

Or just bloody mindedness

Forget I asked... you obviously do both really well
 
So here is a question for you:

The real expert in defining THEISM would be:

1) Theist philosophers, theists and theistic organizations
2) Atheistic authors of dictionaries


peace

axeman
 
Quote from ARogueTrader:

My point is this:

Without the ability to form a concept, there can be no belief. All beliefs have their basis in concept first. First you conceive, then, and only then can you choose to accept or reject that concept as true.

Once a concept is understood clearly, the mind will automatically accept or reject that concept based on previously accepted and rejected concepts.

Once someone has a concept of God in their mind, they necessarily must choose to reject or accept that concept as true. That is the logical response.

If they say, "I don't have enough information to reach a conclusion" they are in effect saying that they would know what information would be necessary to reach a conclusion!

They are saying they have a criteria to meet in order to accept the concept as true, which in essence is a rejection of the truth of that concept as they don't accept that concept as true.

If someone has no idea what they would need to reach a conclusion, they are in fact just a confused zero...and certainly not God.
More...

The logic you use is flawed due to a faulty premise.

One must not necessarily reject or accept. They can apprehend the concept without forming a belief in it.

Believe it or not, God is not a concern to some people.
 
I concur with you slamma but that non concerned person would not be an atheist as commonly used, and/or defined in a dictionary. They may be atheist per an atheist but they are not atheist per the standard definition of atheist. Atheist = a disbelief not a lack of belief. I cite dozens of dictionarys.

some atheist authors cited on atheists web sites agree.


The word `atheism', however, has in this contention to be construed unusally. Whereas nowadays the usual meaning of 'atheist' in English is 'someone who asserts there is no such being as God,' I want the word to be understood not positively but negatively. I want the originally Greek prefix 'a' to be read in the same way in 'atheist' as it customarily is read in such other Greco-English words as 'amoral,' 'atypical,' and 'asymmetrical'. In this interpretation an atheist becomes: someone who is simply not a theist. Let us, for future ready reference, introduce the labels 'positive atheist' for the former and 'negative atheist' for the latter.

[Antony G.N. Flew, "God, Freedom, and Immortality: A Critical Analysis", p. 14.
Prometheus, 1984
 
You can have a concept of something existing or not existing, but have no opinion on the existence of it?

I disagree. That is not a practical reality, nor the way the mind and intellect actually works.

Unless someone has no concept of what the term exist means, then one by nature of having formed and accepted a concept of what exists means necessarily has an opinion on whether any subsequent statement regarding a thing having existence is true or false.

Once some thing has been defined, it sets boundaries of what that that particular thing is.....what would have to exist in order to fulfill the definition beyond concept, beyond the abstract to the concrete.

If you have an understanding of the term being, and also have an understanding of the term perfect, the term perfect being has meaning.

Once the concept of perfect being is understood intellectually, once the concept is understood and intelligible, the acceptance or rejection of the concrete reality and the existence of a perfect being necessarily follows.

Someone might say, "I don't know a perfect being."

I would counter, "how would you know what a perfect being is? What would be your criteria and definition for knowing what a perfect being is such that you can say you do not know a perfect being?"

If they say they don't know what their criteria would be, then in effect they have no understanding of the concept or term perfect being, as contained within the definition of a thing is the concept of a thing, the understanding of what would constitute the concrete reality of a thing.

However, if they can define what a perfect being would be, then they automatically have an opinion on whether or not a perfect being exists, as they have a criteria upon which to measure their concept. It may not be in the forefront of their awareness, but a series of questions to them about what they believe constitutes reality for them would reveal their belief system as it relates to what a perfect being would be if a perfect being did in fact exist.

I do agree that many people do not have a concern about God one way or the other, but I contend that if they have a working concept of God as a supreme being, they also have a belief about the existence of God.


Quote from slammajamma:

The logic you use is flawed due to a faulty premise.

One must not necessarily reject or accept. They can apprehend the concept without forming a belief in it.

Believe it or not, God is not a concern to some people.
More...
 
I see a difference between religious indoctrination, and a belief in God as real.

Ontological arguments for the existence of God have nothing to do with religious indoctrination.

Intuition has nothing to do with religious indoctrination either.

"Or just bloody mindedness

Forget I asked... you obviously do both really well"

As usual, you appear incapable of a discussion of these issues without the practice of intellectual condescension.

If this intellectual condescension habit of yours serves some purpose to enhance your arguments, it escapes me.


Quote from stu:

ARogueTrader:

It depends on what person you met on the street. Some might tell you that a plant is an atheist.

me
..or that God is for real.

ARogueTrader:
Yes, some will tell you that they believe in God, quite right.

me
No. Please try to read what I wrote....

that God IS for real...

ARogueTrader:
Yes, and some BELIEVE the theory of evolution is for real as an explanation of the truth of the origin of man.

This I think illustrates quite clearly the inability you display in perhaps understanding, but certainly in addressing, the most basic and straight forward of statements.

Is it a dogmatic and blinkered attitude toward a fixed mindset of religious indoctrination which causes an incapacity to notice the difference in the words IS as against BELIEVE.

Or just bloody mindedness

Forget I asked... you obviously do both really well
More...
 
ART replies with long posts, but cant answer
a simple question :D


The real expert in defining THEISM would be:

1) Theist philosophers, theists and theistic organizations
2) Atheistic authors of dictionaries


peace

axeman
 
ART, your entire strategy revolves around evasion and obfuscation. I'm not suprised no one seems interested in playing your game.

If you would really like to test your views against people who are willing to take the time to respond to them -- God knows I truly cannot be bothered -- then I strongly urge you to visit a site called "Challenging Atheism".

(Theists, don't get your hopes up. The atheists there have kicked the stuffing out of the "challenges".)

 
Rules of classical logic don't apply well with matters of human faith, or human cognition.

I can know perfectly well what exist means, I can comprehend a definition of God - even the 6 billion different definitions - and not opine on the question of existence of God. Why not?

Question mark is rhetorical. Now THAT'S the end of story, and my last post on this threat - goddammit!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top