The redneck strike again.

[Tobie]

Really? After all this time, people still try and use this? Agnostic, or weak, atheists are making no claim, so we have nothing to prove. Gnostic atheists and theists are making a claim, so do.

Wait a minute Tobie.
In this dictionary it say................Atheism........Critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or divine beings. Unlike agnosticism, which leaves open the question of whether there is a God, atheism is a positive denial.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism
.........so a positive denial require a positive evidence.
Oh, now you say that your understanding of atheism does not require any evidence so what shell i do?
Shell i tell the encyclopedia that they are talking bullshit?

Did you read the same thing I did? First non-archaic usage on the page; disbelief, i.e not a belief. Denial of beliefs is not a claim either. This is the most inclusive definition of atheism. Gnostic atheists have the same burden of proof as theists do, but gnostic atheists are not all atheists, or the majority. You are the one claiming there is a god therefore you have to prove it.

[Little Rik]

Simple, Rikky. Just read the rest of the entries for the meaning of atheism, not just the one that agrees with you. There will always be several uses for every word with slightly to greatly varied meaning. The fact of the matter is that while there are gnostic atheists on this site, the great majority of us hold no positive beliefs regarding gods and therefore have nothing to justify. QED

---

And here how the Oxford online dictionary defines "atheism":

Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/def...sh/atheism



I'm not used to seeing just one meaning per word like this. The good old paper versions always listed many. I imagine the alternative meanings are there but I'm not sure how to access them online.

You also choose the version that suit you best, don't you?
Philosophy is a way to understand how to get there.
There where the wisdom lie.
Now how the hell can you have a philosophy forum when you show no interest of whatsoever in getting where the wisdom lie?
What's the point?
How can you ask someone to prove whether God exist when you show no interest in understanding the road to wisdom?
I asked you you guys time and time again where the road of continually learning and improving your lives may eventually take you to but you show no interest.
You are expecting that someone put a red carpet that lead to the wisdom when you have no idea what wisdom is?
Do you ever ponder your thoughts to the fact that physical-material evidence and spiritual evidence are two different types of evidence?
Grow up whatever, moving with blinkers on your eyes wan't take you very far.

---

Denial of beliefs is not a claim either.

To deny something it need some sort of evidence.
You can say that you don't give a damn whether God exist or not but to deny something it obviously need some evidence.
How it is possible to deny something without understanding the issue?
It just doesn't make any sense.

[Tobie]

A denial of something is not the same as asserting it is not true.

[Cyberman]

You also choose the version that suit you best, don't you?

Or more accurately, the definition that describes us best. As an atheist, I have no belief in any gods. I am not attempting to prove anything, thus I have no burden of proof. Similarly and for much the same reason, I have no raspberry flavoured apples, thus I have no reason to offer you one.

Why not ask us what we believe, instead of telling us? You may find it funny to laugh at strawmen, but I for one just find it rude and arrogant in the extreme.

[Little Rik]

A denial of something is not the same as asserting it is not true.

Gee, you are raising the level of philosophy to such an extreme that like a ball full of air will eventually burst.
I need your help mister.
How it is possible to deny something when you haven't understood the issue?
As you assert that it is true or not by trying to understand the issue at the same time you deny something by understanding the issue.
At the primary i remember that one boy was always shaking his head when the teacher was explaining something in denial of what the teacher was saying.
The teacher got pissed off and asked that idiot guy.........do you understand what i am saying.........the idiot couldn't give any explanation, he just kept on shaking his head.
No, he didn't have a stiff neck, he just had some mental problem.

---

Why not ask us what we believe, instead of telling us?

After people in this forum come down with statements that deny the existence of God i challenge them to give evidence of their believes.
Is this wrong?
Why post in a forum when you are not interested in the issue?
I did asked how it is possible to get God manifested (as evidence of his existence) when you don't give a damn about him?
This would be a good starting point to discuss the issue but no one show any interest.
So what you do in a forum that deal with the existence or not of God when you have no interest in it?

[Mister Agenda]

Atheism establish that God does not exist so it is up to you to come down with positive proof that God is not there.

Atheism does NOT establish that God does not exist, nor does it claim to. Atheism is the state of not holding any belief in a supernatural deity, not a claim that no such deity exists. A claim that no such deity exists would resemble this: 'No such deity exists.'.

I understand that there are also people that don't give a damn whether God exist or not and there are also people that don't believe until proof of God existence are there so all depend where you are with your belief or not belief.

Good. Now you need to understand that many of the former are atheists, and all of the latter are.

If you say that God does not exist it is you that got to come down with proof if on the other hand you got different ideas then it is all up in the air.

Why don't you go find someone who says God does not exist, then? Exactly who here is making that claim?

My explanation that God exist is based on logic but again as God can not be expressed physically all proof lies on developing spirituality which of course is something far far away from physical-material evidence.

Your explanation is based on bad logic. Your evidence is indistinguishable from self-deception.

Ignorance it is like asking a plumber to fix a door that is a carpenter job.

It's also like claiming someone else being wrong makes you right.

In the same way you can not understand that to have evidence of God require spirituality and not a material-physical tool.
Until you will use the wrong tool it is obvious that you will not get anywhere in that sense.

When I see people using the same 'truth-finding' tools and coming up with contradictory answers, it's reasonable to conclude that they're using the wrong tools for the job. What people find on their 'spiritual journeys' seems to always match their expectations closely.

Again by not using the correct tool to understand how spirituality works you will not get anywhere.

How do you know you're using the correct tool?

How do you know that i don't know what i am talking about?

It's not the sort of thing that's knowable. 'Guessable' is closer to the mark. Every mystic thinks their 'tool' works, even if it's different from what other mystics use and even if it leads them to different conclusions. There's a personality type that lends itself to being a mystic: fantasy-prone.

It is rather you that pretend to understand something using the wrong tool.

There's no way of knowing whether the tool you're using is right or not. 'It leading me to the conclusions I already want to reach' is definitely a bad sign.

Keep on holding your breath.

That would likely result in my demise, so no thank you. And I advise against making such suggestions.

Maybe one day in the next 1000 lives someone will put a red carpet so you may walk straight to God without first having to go through the hard work.
Sometime people get the free manna from the sky.

Maybe the sun will be covered in blue and purple check marks tomorrow. You can 'maybe' anything.

Rather than trying to convince anyone i try to reason so the challenge make me feel good.
It is like doing physical exercise to keep fit.

If you exercise incorrectly, it will make you less fit in the long run.

I heard that before and then i see people that after they struggle to buy a new car they wish they could have waited few more days and get instead a new model that just came out after they already bought a car.
Anyone saying that they are not interested in something infinite lie to themselves.

Anyone who assumes their interlocuters are dishonest in their disagreements is dishonest at heart. As a rule, it's liars who are the first to think someone is lying.

The point is that you can not dismiss that God is at the end of human evolution until you got clear evidence.

I can dismiss any positive claim that isnt't supported by evidence and sound logic on the grounds that it isn't supported by evidence and sound logic.

There is the conscious mind and the unconscious mind.
Your conscious mind hasn't yet reach the stage in which there is enough spiritual understanding but your unconscious mind has that is why you are continually motivated to go ahead even if you don't know yet where it will bring you.

Are your magical powers of spiritual awakening good for anything other than making things up to reassure you of your superiority?

---

After people in this forum come down with statements that deny the existence of God i challenge them to give evidence of their believes.
Is this wrong?

If it's not true, it's wrong. Who came forth with statements that deny the existence of God? Which forum contributors are you talking about?

Why post in a forum when you are not interested in the issue?

Why post in a forum when you don't understand the issue?

I did asked how it is possible to get God manifested (as evidence of his existence) when you don't give a damn about him?

How is it possible for anyone to know that? One would have to know the properties of God prior to being able to answer the question. You seem to think God can't manifest to people who don't care if God exists, but why couldn't it? Not much of a God that isn't able to show itself to people who don't already believe in it.

This would be a good starting point to discuss the issue but no one show any interest.

It was a nearly unfathomably horrible starting point. We don't believe the God you're talking about is real. What's the point of asking us questions about your particular version of God? We don't think it's real and most of us don't think faith or wishing or meditation is a way to get information about anything except what's in your own brain. There's not much more for us to say about YOUR version of God. It's YOUR version, YOU make up stuff about it.

So what you do in a forum that deal with the existence or not of God when you have no interest in it?

I have no idea, as that is not really the purpose of this forum. It's a community. We talk about all kinds of stuff. If there's a philosophy most of us hold in common, it's rational empiricism. Many of us are interested in whether there's evidence for the existence of a deity which it would be rational to believe. That's the kind of thing the deifically curious among us are interested in, not claims that can't be distinguished from imagination.

[Little Rik]

Many of us are interested in whether there's evidence for the existence of a deity which it would be rational to believe.

What is rational mister?
What can be explained by physical-material means or something else?

[Cyberman]

After people in this forum come down with statements that deny the existence of God i challenge them to give evidence of their believes.
Is this wrong?

Yes, for the simple reason (you'll like this - simple is right up your street) that having beliefs and not having beliefs are not the same.

Why post in a forum when you are not interested in the issue?

Whoever said I/we are not interested in the issue? Other than you, of course.

I did asked how it is possible to get God manifested (as evidence of his existence) when you don't give a damn about him?

Again, who apart from you ever said I/we don't give a damn? It does pique my curiosity when people attribute masculine personal pronouns to the god concept, though. It makes me wonder why they do.

This would be a good starting point to discuss the issue but no one show any interest.

That may be more to do with the intellectual quality of the debater, rather than disinterest in the subject. I make it a point never to make even eye contact with the nutter on the bus, however much sense he might accidentally make.

So what you do in a forum that deal with the existence or not of God when you have no interest in it?

I remind you of the statement of purpose in the forum rules: "These forums were created for the purpose of providing friendly discussion and debate between atheists and other like-minded individuals, as well as theists."

Please take your strawman outside. It's setting off my hayfever.

[Mister Agenda]

Many of us are interested in whether there's evidence for the existence of a deity which it would be rational to believe.

What is rational mister?
What can be explained by physical-material means or something else?

What is based on facts and reason rather than desires, emotions, feelings, or wishes.

[TaraJo]

*Looks around*

Wow. This is a really long thread. Anyone want to clue me in on what's been going on? Or does nobody else seem to understand it, either?