(July 6, 2015 at 12:45 pm)Cato Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 12:35 pm)pool Wrote: *So if god doesn't exist theism shouldn't exist either because the most basic element that was used to build theism is "God".So theists do not also exists.

No. No. No. No. No. Fucking NO!

How many times do I have to say it? The validity of a god claim has nothing to do with the fact that some people believe in god. These people are called theists. Theists exist.

The basic element to theism is the belief in god.
No god is required.

I realise you are not an English speaker so maybe this is just failing to translate.

Do people who believe in Karma exist I wonder? Or people who believe in fairies? Or Bigfoot? Or the boogey Man?

Is it illogical to not believe in those things?

I posted many, many pages ago that this guy was just being difficult in order to try and score points over atheists. He finally admitted he was doing exactly that. Not a great way to start a conversation.

No he was pretty clear in saying that theists don't really believe in god because god isn't real, therefore theists don't exist.

I know me more than you know me and i know i'm not a drama queen,i wouldn't be hesitant to admit if i were - those who know me personally can confirm,but i'm simply not.
What you saw here was a display of emotion from me which doesn't normally happen but when i think about my dad it suddenly makes me want to cry.

Give me an answer and give justification for your answer.

Quote:X=5;
Y=X;
It is proven that X was not initially 5 but rather non-existent.
What is the value of Y now?

(I reduced my idea to something that is THAT SIMPLE.I can't make it anymore simple!)

Pool, x=/=y just because you say it does. That's the problem with your argument, if you can call it that.

If there were no theists, everyone would be atheists, because nobody would believe in god. It's that simple. The evidence of atheism isn't dependent on theism, the term's existence is.

If there were no people who believe in fairies, nobody would believe in fairies. The only difference between the two situations is that in the first we have separate words for both kinds of people.

I don't know how to put it simpler.

(July 6, 2015 at 1:14 pm)pool Wrote: I know me more than you know me and i know i'm not a drama queen,i wouldn't be hesitant to admit if i were - those who know me will confirm,but i'm simply not.
What you saw here was a display of emotion from me which doesn't normally happen but when i think about my dad it suddenly makes me want to cry.

Give me an answer and give justification for your answer.

Quote:X=5;
Y=X;
It is proven that X was not initially 5 but rather non-existent.
What is the value of Y now?

(I reduced my idea to something that is THAT SIMPLE.I can't make it anymore simple!)

Your Dad? WTF? I already told you If theists don't exist, everyone adopts the atheist position by default. Problem is we have people who believe in god and you cant disprove the god that they believe in. The problem with your example is your defining x and y, where as in real life your not the one defining the god that people believe in, so you cant just equate it to not existing.

(July 6, 2015 at 1:17 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Pool, x=/=y just because you say it does. That's the problem with your argument, if you can call it that.

If there were no theists, everyone would be atheists, because nobody would believe in god. It's that simple. The evidence of atheism isn't dependent on theism, the term's existence is.

If there were no people who believe in fairies, nobody would believe in fairies. The only difference between the two situations is that in the first we have separate words for both kinds of people.

I don't know how to put it simpler.

But you wouldn't even be aware of the idea of a fairy - or that word for that matter if it didn't exist.
All you'd have is a void as far as fairy is concerned.How can you not believe in this void? This is the part that i can't seem to understand no matter in which angle i looked at it.

It's basically like how it is in time traveling :

If a women gave birth to a child in 1999 and i went back to 1998 and killed the women - then child that was born in 1999 would cease to exist but what you are saying is that the child does exist.
In bounds of the analogy,that is.

(July 6, 2015 at 1:34 pm)pool Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 1:17 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Pool, x=/=y just because you say it does. That's the problem with your argument, if you can call it that.

If there were no theists, everyone would be atheists, because nobody would believe in god. It's that simple. The evidence of atheism isn't dependent on theism, the term's existence is.

If there were no people who believe in fairies, nobody would believe in fairies. The only difference between the two situations is that in the first we have separate words for both kinds of people.

I don't know how to put it simpler.

But you wouldn't even be aware of the idea of a fairy - or that word for that matter if it didn't exist.
All you'd have is a void as far as fairy is concerned.How can you not believe in this void? This is the part that i can't seem to understand no matter in which angle how i looked at it.

It's basically like how it is in time traveling :

If a women gave birth to a child in 1999 and i went back to 1998 and killed the women - then child that was born in 1999 would cease to exist but what you are saying is that the child does exist.
In bounds of the analogy,that is.

No, for fuck's sake! Do you believe in things that you have never heard of?

(July 6, 2015 at 1:34 pm)pool Wrote: But you wouldn't even be aware of the idea of a fairy - or that word for that matter if it didn't exist.
All you'd have is a void as far as fairy is concerned.How can you not believe in this void? This is the part that i can't seem to understand no matter in which angle i looked at it.

It's basically like how it is in time traveling :

If a women gave birth to a child in 1999 and i went back to 1998 and killed the women - then child that was born in 1999 would cease to exist but what you are saying is that the child does exist.
In bounds of the analogy,that is.

Ghhhh -_-

A 2yo has no concept of heaven. That means they don't believe in heaven. Disbelief isn't active. It's the default position.

(July 6, 2015 at 1:21 pm)Mr.wizard Wrote:

(July 6, 2015 at 1:14 pm)pool Wrote: I know me more than you know me and i know i'm not a drama queen,i wouldn't be hesitant to admit if i were - those who know me will confirm,but i'm simply not.
What you saw here was a display of emotion from me which doesn't normally happen but when i think about my dad it suddenly makes me want to cry.

Give me an answer and give justification for your answer.

Your Dad? WTF? I already told you If theists don't exist, everyone adopts the atheist position by default. Problem is we have people who believe in god and you cant disprove the god that they believe in. The problem with your example is your defining x and y, where as in real life your not the one defining the god that people believe in, so you cant just equate it to not existing.

1. You'd have to be more specific that that.
2. Give me the answer to my question.