Hell and the Play Nice Christian

[KevinM1]

Do as he says. Not as he does. Except something he says some pretty horrible things, so just pick the parts you already agreed with before you picked up the bible, and go from there.

This is why I always get a good chuckle out of the proclamation of Christers saying they have a deep, personal relationship with god. It's really just them creating an artificial construct in their minds of what absolute goodness and kindness is out of cherry picked parts of the bible that align with their outlook.

I had a deep, personal relationship with my friend Billy. Then, I turned 4, and he stopped existing in my mind.

[robvalue]

Yeah. They are having a deep personal relationship with themselves. That's why god always agrees with them.

[dyresand]

Yeah. They are having a deep personal relationship with themselves. That's why god always agrees with them.

They need to go and spend alone time with them selves with tissues and love themselves. Because all god is pretty much apart of imagination and is not real.

[YGninja]

.... and yet you all want to defend that atheism is merely a "lack of belief", rather than a belief that there is no God..

Atleast, you do when you are asked for an argument.

[SteelCurtain]

.... and yet you all want to defend that atheism is merely a "lack of belief", rather than a belief that there is no God..

Lack of belief in the concept of god, but with respect to the gods created by man---belief that they are just stupid stories.

[The Reality Salesman01]

Not even as likely as it would be for a buffalo to be in the fridge.

---

.... and yet you all want to defend that atheism is merely a "lack of belief", rather than a belief that there is no God..

Atleast, you do when you are asked for an argument.

You're putting the cart before the horse think about it:

If we don't have a clue what constitutes the character "God"

We've never seen one.

Never heard one.

Never experienced the slightest inclination that such a thing exists.

How do we "believe" anything about it? There's no substance to form a belief around.

But there are a SHIT ton of people who are all too happy to tell you about what they BELIEVE God to be. And what they say can be rejected if what they say is self-contradicting, lacks demonstrable evidence, poorly defined etc. It's the things you say about God that allow us to do this.

[KevinM1]

.... and yet you all want to defend that atheism is merely a "lack of belief", rather than a belief that there is no God..

Atleast, you do when you are asked for an argument.

There could be a creator entity out there. I don't know. And really don't care.

But, no, I don't believe the version presented in the stories of Iron Age sheep fuckers is it. Apologies if that offends anyone's delicate sensibilities.

[robvalue]

.... and yet you all want to defend that atheism is merely a "lack of belief", rather than a belief that there is no God..

Atleast, you do when you are asked for an argument.

Tu quoque again I see.

Atheism is merely a lack of belief. It is not a belief that there is no God. That is an optional extra stance any atheist may take but is not obliged to.

Can you please try to understand the difference instead of telling us what we believe? I do admit this is a subtle distinction.

Disbelief in a claim does not require belief that the contrary is true. Otherwise, to disbelieve me when I claim I know a coin will come up heads would require you to believe it will actually come up tails. See the difference?

---

Your typical "agnostic" who dislikes being referred to as an atheist is still an atheist, one who doesn't believe there is a god, but doesn't believe there isn't a god either. You can reject both claims, and the middle ground is not seeing enough evidence for either statement to be true beyond reasonable doubt.

---

Another example, say I live with my brother and mother. My brother and I are out for a walk. I say to my brother, "Is mother in the house or is she not in the house?"

The correct answer is he doesn't know. Notice he doesn't accept the claim that mother is in the house, but he doesn't accept the claim that she is not either. He is in the middle ground. But if belief that mother is in the house is motherism, he is still an a-motherist. He is also an a-notmotherist.

Even though mother being and not being in the house cover all of the possibilities, I need not believe either possibility.

---

I need to put this shit on my blog :p

[The Reality Salesman01]

Ah, here we go. This old gem is is a classic. I think watching it should be a prerequisite for theists and agnostics on this forum.

[GrandizerII]

.... and yet you all want to defend that atheism is merely a "lack of belief", rather than a belief that there is no God..

Atleast, you do when you are asked for an argument.

Not me. I believe there is no God because of lack of evidence and because of a few logical arguments against the necessity for God.