(August 9, 2015 at 5:56 am)pool Wrote:(August 8, 2015 at 2:43 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: Pool, we've been through this. Unbelief is not an active stance, it is the default position. You either believe, or you don't. Since you don't comprehend what a god is, you don't believe in him; you are implicitly an atheist. End of story.
I don't understand what the Theory of relativity is,but that doesn't mean that i don't believe in it,neither does it mean that i believe in it.
Similarly,
I don't understand what a God is,but that doesn't mean that i don't believe in it,neither does it mean that i believe in it.
See,when someone is presented with an idea that they cannot understand and is asked whether they believe in it or not,it is extremely difficult to decide how to respond.
Can you tell me the appropriate response in that situation?
"I don't understand what a God is,but that doesn't mean that i don't believe in it,neither does it mean that i believe in it." If someone makes a claim and you don't know if they are telling you the truth then you do not believe them. In your own example with the candy you demonstrate this, the claim of the candy is not believed to be even until there is evidence to justify it. You cannot not believe the god claim and simultaneously believe the god claim, there are only two positions.
