The Holy Trinity

Quote: Wizard

but my mind is pretty made up on the topic.

FrG thinks not believing in god is
a conscious decision. It's really
not, nobody decides to be an
atheist. You just realize one day
you are one.

This is different than religion.
In Xtionity, they make you give
declarative statements of belief.
They make you say you accept
Jesus. They make you get baptized.
The make you state your position
for all to hear.

Atheism isn't like that. It's not
a choice you make.

A problem with atheism is there is confusion about the definition. Looking at the etymology, the "a" means not, and "theism" a belief in some kind of god. So, it should mean somebody who isn't a theist. This could include people who have taken no position as well as those who specifically disbelieve in god.

However, the way the term is usually used is the latter, somebody who specifically says there is no god. Some people differentiate between the two types using a lower case A for people like me, who aren't theists, but neither disbelieve, they just don't know and are content with that. Those who specifically disbelieve in god are referred to with a capital A.

Quote: Wizard

Those who specifically disbelieve in god are referred to with a capital A.

That would be me. I find the idea of
a god totally alien and out of place
in the universe we live in. Such a
god would not be possible in the
physical universe we inhabit, except
in the imagination of believers.

God is more of a superhero figure,
like Aquaman or Batman or
Spiderman or Superman. Great
for comic books and pretend, but
unworkable in the real world.

In fact, Jesus is a good example of
a mythical superhero. His powers
are he can't be killed, he can
thwart physical laws and walk on
water and pull food out of thin air,
and save people from the clutches
of gods enemy, Satan. They even
have Jesus superhero action figures
hanging from a cross believers
wear around their necks.

I challenge anybody to show how
Jesus is any more credible than
Superman. They both defy every
argument of reason and logic.

Quote: Evenbob

That would be me. I find the idea of
a god totally alien and out of place
in the universe we live in. Such a
god would not be possible in the
physical universe we inhabit, except
in the imagination of believers.

I file it in the same folder as your invisible dinosaur -- I can neither prove it nor disprove it. Until I see some convincing evidence, I default to assuming it doesn't exist.

Quote:

... pull food out of thin air,

I think he could multiply food, especially bread and fish, but he never made some starting with nothing.

Quote: Wizard

I think he could multiply food, especially bread and fish, but he never made some starting with nothing.

Still can't be done under the laws
of this universe. A god person will
say, but god can circumvent the
laws. Yeah, no, a god could not. He
would have to obey the laws, he
would have no choice. Maybe in
some magical kingdom outside
this universe he could do as he liked.
But not here.

Sorry for the long post but I'm just catching up.

Quote: Aceofspades

Yup - but when I made the claim that an invisible, inaudible, undetectable dinosaur lived in my backyard - the Padre asked for proof

I did not ask for proof. I actually said that this dinosaur would need to provide proof before we believed it exists. I said only if this dinosaur roared, became visible, or left a footprint would I believe it existed.

Quote: Evenbob

Nope. That's why I always say I don't
collect stamps, but there is no way I
can prove I don't collect them. This
makes FrG mad every time I say it,
I don't know why. Go ahead, prove
I collect stamps, the way you
always tell me to prove there is no
god. Can't be done.

No I get frustrated because you don’t seem to see the difference between saying I don’t believe in God and there is no God.

I’m fine if you don’t collect stamps. I assume you mean that to say you don’t believe in God and don’t practice religion. But then you go further to say there is no God and anyone who believes in God is just believing in fairy tales. But wait you go further. You then say that my religion is evil and controlling and stupid and many other horrible things.

If your analogy to stamp collecting is about your beliefs why don’t you just say you don’t collect stamps? No you attack the stamp collector and say that my collecting stamps is a fairy tale and stupid and evil and that stamps don’t even exist. Do you see that your analogy is fine, but you make what you are doing seem harmless. What you are doing is anything but. It is hurtful and untrue about me and the millions and millions of other stamp collectors out there.

Quote: aceofspades

The existence of either god or an invisible, inaudible, undetectable dinosaur that lives in my backyard can neither be proven nor disproven.

While I can accept the Wizard’s statement of truce this version from ace shows how unreasonable he is being. Why is God not the same as his invisible dinosaur? Because God as commonly understood as the necessary first cause or unmoved mover of our universe is not some made up fiction. It is a philosophically sound requirement that every contingent thing that has a beginning needs to have a cause, just like it is a philosophically and scientifically sound argument that anything in motion has a cause or force for its motion. Finally, for anything to exist and for there to be such as thing as the present, past, or future there cannot be an actual infinite regress. Inserting a magic dinosaur into a sentence and equating it with God shows that you don’t seem to understand these differences. God is not something imperceptible. God is the source and sustainer of all that exists. This makes God not only real and necessary but very much visible, audible, and detectable if you are willing to look into the reason and cause of why you and I and everything around us exists. Maybe you are confused because I believe God to be equal to Jesus Christ, who also by the way is real. You don’t have to believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ to see that God or some supernatural and all-powerful force can be known through logic and reason.

So maybe you might ask why would I agree with the Wizard’s first statement of truce? Because I nor anyone can prove in a mathematical way the existence of God as any one of us might define Him/her/it. Our understanding of God requires faith just like so much of our lives and decisions every day depend on faith. Not a blind faith, but a faith that requires the accumulation of evidence and experiences.

Quote: Evenbob

That would be me. I find the idea of
a god totally alien and out of place
in the universe we live in. Such a
god would not be possible in the
physical universe we inhabit, except
in the imagination of believers.

It is precisely the physical universe we inhabit that makes God necessary and required. Far from being out of place or alien, God is reality and the source of all that is real. Please see above for explanation.

Quote: Evenbob

I challenge anybody to show how
Jesus is any more credible than
Superman. They both defy every
argument of reason and logic.

Well for one thing Jesus exists. He lived on Earth and made an impact greater than even the fictional Superman could never do. He is the most important historical figure that has or ever will live. What defies your every argument and your faulty logic is this fact. You try to say it is just stupid superstitious people who lived in the past or who live today. But this is not true and you know it. Some of the greatest civilizations, inventions, thoughts and ideas that we still depend on today were given to us from the men and women of the ancient past, to dismiss them as foolish is just foolishness. I challenge you or anybody to show how Jesus could have had the impact He had if He was not who He said He said He was and did the things that were said of Him. Just please don’t continue to say it is because people back then were stupid, try something else.

Quote: Wizard

A problem with atheism is there is confusion about the definition. Looking at the etymology, the "a" means not, and "theism" a belief in some kind of god. So, it should mean somebody who isn't a theist. This could include people who have taken no position as well as those who specifically disbelieve in god.

However, the way the term is usually used is the latter, somebody who specifically says there is no god. Some people differentiate between the two types using a lower case A for people like me, who aren't theists, but neither disbelieve, they just don't know and are content with that. Those who specifically disbelieve in god are referred to with a capital A.

Interesting take on the definition.

I always thought that an "Atheist" was someone who specifically believed with the same fervor as the religious, that there is no god, and an "Agnostic" was someone who just didn't know.

But I could see that the meaning of the words are not that clear.

Quote: Etymonline

atheist (n.)
1570s, "godless person, one who denies the existence of a supreme, intelligent being to whom moral obligation is due," from French athéiste (16c.), from Greek atheos "without god, denying the gods; abandoned of the gods; godless, ungodly," from a- "without" (see a- (3)) + theos "a god" (from PIE root *dhes-, forming words for religious concepts).
=======================

atheism (n.)
"the doctrine that there is no God;" "disbelief in any regularity in the universe to which man must conform himself under penalties" [J.R. Seeley, "Natural Religion," 1882], 1580s, from French athéisme (16c.), with -ism + Greek atheos "without a god, denying the gods," from a- "without" (see a- (3)) + theos "a god" (from PIE root *dhes-, forming words for religious concepts). A slightly earlier form is represented by atheonism (1530s) which is perhaps from Italian atheo "atheist." The ancient Greek noun was atheotes "ungodliness."

In late 19c. sometimes further distinguished into secondary senses "The denial of theism, that is, of the doctrine that the great first cause is a supreme, intelligent, righteous person" [Century Dictionary, 1897] and "practical indifference to and disregard of God, godlessness."

In the first sense above given, atheism is to be discriminated from pantheism, which denies the personality of God, and from agnosticism, which denies the possibility of positive knowledge concerning him. In the second sense, atheism includes both pantheism and agnosticism. [Century Dictionary]

=======================
agnostic (n.)
1870, "one who professes that the existence of a First Cause and the essential nature of things are not and cannot be known" [Klein]; coined by T.H. Huxley, supposedly in September 1869, from Greek agnostos "unknown, unknowable," from a- "not" (see a- (3)) + gnostos "(to be) known," from PIE root *gno- "to know." Sometimes said to be a reference to Paul's mention of the altar to "the Unknown God" in Acts, but according to Huxley it was coined with reference to the early Church movement known as Gnosticism. The adjective also is first recorded 1870.

I ... invented what I conceived to be the appropriate title of 'agnostic,' ... antithetic to the 'Gnostic' of Church history who professed to know so much about the very things of which I was ignorant. [T.H. Huxley, "Science and Christian Tradition," 1889]

The agnostic does not simply say, "I do not know." He goes another step, and he says, with great emphasis, that you do not know. [Robert G. Ingersoll, "Reply to Dr. Lyman Abbott," 1890]

Quote: FrGamble

It is hurtful and untrue about me and the millions and millions of other stamp collectors out there.

An analogy is a device
to make a point, it's not meant
to be analyzed into the ground
and dismantled word for word
for every way it doesn't mesh
with what's it's being compared
to.

Quote:

Because God as commonly understood.. is not some made up fiction.

You hope. You wish. Or so you've been told.
If you were to state this in court, under oath,
it would be taken as your opinion only, you
have no evidence or proof to back up your claim.
The 'evidence' you claim is evidence has been
shown again and again to be opinion. If it were
real, there would be no atheists, only believers.

"evidence: The available body of facts indicating whether a belief or proposition is true"

You have no facts for a god existing. Just
because you say what you do have is
evidence, doesn't make it real evidence.

Quote:

Our understanding of God requires faith just like so much of our lives and decisions every day depend on faith.

So you really think the faith that
my brakes will work, or that the
can of stew isn't poisoned, or the
plane will fly, you think that faith
is exactly the same as a religious
faith that's based on nothing except
myth and opinion, you think all
those kinds of faith are exactly equal?
They are so far apart in concept,
they actually have nothing to do with
each other.

Quote:

Well for one thing Jesus exists. .

Existed, past tense. Like every historical
figure existed at one time or another.
Jesus exists today as a religious historical
figure, that's all. Nor can you show even
the tiniest smidgeon of evidence that
he exists in any other way than a long
dead man written about in a series
of sketchy chapters in a book that was
gotten from orally told stories that were
repeated over and over for decades before
they were finally written down. That is the
the extent of the Jesus reality in the modern
world.

Quote: Evenbob

An analogy is a device
to make a point,

And you point is that as an "atheist" you want me to believe that you simply don't believe in God just like you simply don't collect stamps. Fine. Then why in the world to you insist on attacking my faith in God calling me and silly and evil. Atheism is not the disbelief in God for lack of evidence it is the rejection of God and the proclamation that there is definitely no God, something you have said many times. This is akin to saying there are no stamps. Do you really want to say such a thing. If this analogy was meant to make a point it doesn't match up with your rhetoric, chose a better one.

Quote:

You hope. You wish. Or so you've been told.
If you were to state this in court, under oath,
it would be taken as your opinion only, you
have no evidence or proof to back up your claim.
The 'evidence' you claim is evidence has been
shown again and again to be opinion. If it were
real, there would be no atheists, only believers.

Is it true or not that things are in motion, that our entire universe is expanding and in motion? Is it not then true that something that is moving has a cause for it motion? Are any of these things opinions or are they facts?

The reason there are so few atheists instead of no atheists is partly because many people don't understand what atheism means (see above). They are not convinced that there is any one God or that we can know anything of a "God", but they would not be so unwise to say that there is absolutely no God. I do think there are a few true atheists out there, an perhaps you are one of them, but I believe in is totally naive and devoid of any reason or evidence to hold such a position. It takes far greater faith to hold to true atheism that I would ever be comfortable with.

Quote:

So you really think the faith that
my brakes will work, or that the
can of stew isn't poisoned, or the
plane will fly, you think that faith
is exactly the same as a religious
faith that's based on nothing except
myth and opinion, you think all
those kinds of faith are exactly equal?

This is a perfect example of begging the question and doesn't deserve an answer. Let me instead ask you if having faith your stew is not poisoned is based on nothing but myth and opinion?

Quote:

Existed, past tense. Like every historical
figure existed at one time or another.
Jesus exists today as a religious historical
figure, that's all. Nor can you show even
the tiniest smidgeon of evidence that
he exists in any other way than a long
dead man written about in a series
of sketchy chapters in a book that was
gotten from orally told stories that were
repeated over and over for decades before
they were finally written down. That is the
the extent of the Jesus reality in the modern
world.

Exists, present tense. Here I can only tell you from my personal experience that He is more alive and real and present to me than anyone else in my life. Believe me or not, make fun of me if you want, but it is true. As it is true to countless others who have lived and do live today.

If everyone, henceforth, was raised in a bubble, without being told by "believers" growing up that there is an all powerful being (aka "God") - there would be no future believers in "God" -- "God" only continues to "exist" got believers because they were indoctrinated

What about villages in remote parts of the world still untouched by the Bible/Torah/Q'uran - never having heard stories of Abraham, Jesus, Mohammed -- what would you say to them to get them to all of a sudden believe in those stories?