Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 2

[VVilliam]

An Atheist isn't merely a "non-believer," D., he's a guy who thinks he knows there's no God.

This is not really the case. An atheist is someone who specifically lacks belief in gods. They don't think they know there are no gods. They just lack belief that there are gods.

That's implausible, because if somebody just "lacks belief in gods," it means he has no basis for an opinion...and certainly no basis upon which to tell other people what they can know or believe. But Atheists always seem to want to say, "You're wrong to believe in God."

Atheism is a position impelled by Theism. As such, one can lack belief in theist god-ideas once one has ben exposed to them.
If one then chooses to argue theists are wrong to believe in gods, then the atheist has changed his/her position to that of either non-theist or of anti-theist, [both subsets of atheism] depending on the nature of their arguments related to that statement.

But he admits he has no evidence sufficient to that claim, so collapses back into "I don't know," which makes him merely an agnostic, and diffuses any threat to Theism.

Agnosticism like atheism and theism, is a stand alone position. One can be an Agnostic atheist [open to evidence but lacking any belief in gods] or a agnostic theist [open to evidence but considers the evidence points to a creator more than to no creator]

An agnostic may come to that position from the atheist position of not believing there are gods, to the position of not knowing one way or the other.
An Agnostic may also come to that position from the theist position of believing there are gods, to the position of not knowing one way or the other.

[Walker]

Atheists are closet agnostics, they just won’t admit their uncertainty.

Yes. When they are dogmatic, and say, "There is no God," they have a level of rhetorical power, a kind of threat they try to pose to Theists..but no ability to justify their strong claim.

When they say, "I just disbelieve in God," they have no power to imply anything about anyone else, but their claim might be warranted, at least.

So a strong Atheist is irrational, and a weak one is an agnostic.

Like death, atheism is a concept rooted in what is not. The "A" added to theism, defines it.
The future, is not. Like the future, atheism is rooted in uncertainty.

Like life, God is a concept rooted in what is. Without the trappings of liturgy, Christians conceptually know via apprehension of reality that the glory of God realized now is realized forever, which cannot be intellectually contained by the conceptual, rooted in what is not.

[Dontaskme]

That's implausible, because if somebody just "lacks belief in gods," it means he has no basis for an opinion...and certainly no basis upon which to tell other people what they can know or believe. But Atheists always seem to want to say, "You're wrong to believe in God."

If they're happy to give that up, I'm happy to call them whatever they want.

But we are talking about an idea not a fact.

God is an idea, it's an abstract anecdotal character formed within an illusory mind. Might as well just call God a Unicorn.

People are allowed to have their opinions of artifically contructed characters.

There is a rumour going round that there is a real thing that exists and we are calling it God.

Who are you to suggest no one can have an opinion about a superstitious character that's rumored to exist that goes by the name of God.

Hey lets all talk about this idea that's been apparently flying around forever, come on everyone, have you heard about God? I have and he's real you know.

Oh, ok then, if you say so, but I don't agree that abstract ideas are real, but you are welcome to your belief ...just as I'm sharing my opinion on this God idea as well.



Are people wrong to believe in the idea of God? ...No

Are people wrong to not believe in the idea of God ...No



When you say ''Atheists always seem to want to say, "You're wrong to believe in God." That doesn't mean you have to believe that.
For the non-believer, it's right to not-believe. Doesn't mean they are wrong just because you believe they are wrong...and vice versa.

Opinions are just what they are. We've all got one including you. Your belief is based on faith and trust alone. A belief is like an opinion. They are not an absolute truth. And the non-believers already know that about beliefs. Like I said earlier, all truth claims are false, only appearing to be true to the self-bais belief within the believer. Humans have only got beliefs and opinions about abstract ideas...they are not the same as facts.

Ideas that are facts, we could maybe all agree upon..but a thing known as a unicorn or God existing for real...I think not.


IC... expressing ones opinion about a belief.... is not telling other people what they can know or believe.

It's just sharing ideas, in reality no one knows what is an idea, except what they believe or do not believe about it, and both would be their truth...albeit illusory, not fact.

[Walker]

Are people wrong to be wrong?

[Immanuel Can]

Atheism is a position impelled by Theism. As such, one can lack belief in theist god-ideas once one has ben exposed to them.

Same problem. "I don't know of God" does not mean "God doesn't exist." It just means "I don't know something."

The Atheist has no warrant for evangelizing for his disbelief. He can only say, "At the present moment, I happen to lack the experience that you Theists say you have." That's it. That's the limit.

But no Atheist seems to stop there. They become irrational, and insist: "I lack belief in gods, so you have to, too." The intellectual integrity of such a position, you can easily judge.

[Immanuel Can]

...rooted in what is not.

Yes, Atheism is a form of mere Nihilism. It has nothing to offer the world, not even ground for its disbelief. It's pure negativity, pure, gratuitous refusal to believe. That's all it's got. No basis for morals, no information about truth, no perspective on politics...nothing but its empty self.

[Immanuel Can]

God is an idea, it's an abstract anecdotal character formed within an illusory mind.

So you say. And so I deny.

Next?

[VVilliam]

Atheism is a position impelled by Theism. As such, one can lack belief in theist god-ideas once one has ben exposed to them.

Same problem. "I don't know of God" does not mean "God doesn't exist." It just means "I don't know something."

No. You are superimposing your particular belief in a particular idea of god. Lacking belief in all ideas of gods is the Atheist position.
Put another way, when it comes to other ideas of god, if you lack belief in those ideas, then you hold the Atheist position in regard to those other ideas of god.

The Atheist has no warrant for evangelizing for his disbelief. He can only say, "At the present moment, I happen to lack the experience that you Theists say you have." That's it. That's the limit.

If one then chooses to argue theists are wrong to believe in gods, then the atheist has changed his/her position to that of either non-theist or of anti-theist, [both subsets of atheism] depending on the nature of their arguments related to that statement.

But no Atheist seems to stop there. They become irrational, and insist: "I lack belief in gods, so you have to, too."

Those are arguments which derive from the subset positions I mentioned.

The intellectual integrity of such a position, you can easily judge.

Which is faulty judgment on the part of those who misunderstand the varying positions...what you are doing is no different that someone who lumps all Christians into the same category. There are different positions Christians take on all matters relating to biblical interpretation...and that is why they sort themselves into subsets [denominations]

[VVilliam]

...rooted in what is not.

Yes, Atheism is a form of mere Nihilism. It has nothing to offer the world, not even ground for its disbelief. It's pure negativity, pure, gratuitous refusal to believe. That's all it's got. No basis for morals, no information about truth, no perspective on politics...nothing but its empty self.

A good example of how mistaken you are is that I do not believe in your particular idea of god, but you cannot call me an "Atheist" simply because of that. I am not an "Atheist".

[VVilliam]

But we are talking about an idea not a fact.

God is an idea, it's an abstract anecdotal character formed within an illusory mind. Might as well just call God a Unicorn.

People are allowed to have their opinions of artifically contructed characters.

There is a rumour going round that there is a real thing that exists and we are calling it God.

Who are you to suggest no one can have an opinion about a superstitious character that's rumored to exist that goes by the name of God.

Hey lets all talk about this idea that's been apparently flying around forever, come on everyone, have you heard about God? I have and he's real you know.

Oh, ok then, if you say so, but I don't agree that abstract ideas are real, but you are welcome to your belief ...just as I'm sharing my opinion on this God idea as well.



Are people wrong to believe in the idea of God? ...No

Are people wrong to not believe in the idea of God ...No



When you say ''Atheists always seem to want to say, "You're wrong to believe in God." That doesn't mean you have to believe that.
For the non-believer, it's right to not-believe. Doesn't mean they are wrong just because you believe they are wrong...and vice versa.

Opinions are just what they are. We've all got one including you. Your belief is based on faith and trust alone. A belief is like an opinion. They are not an absolute truth. And the non-believers already know that about beliefs. Like I said earlier, all truth claims are false, only appearing to be true to the self-bais belief within the believer. Humans have only got beliefs and opinions about abstract ideas...they are not the same as facts.

Ideas that are facts, we could maybe all agree upon..but a thing known as a unicorn or God existing for real...I think not.


IC... expressing ones opinion about a belief.... is not telling other people what they can know or believe.

It's just sharing ideas, in reality no one knows what is an idea, except what they believe or do not believe about it, and both would be their truth...albeit illusory, not fact.

So you say. And so I deny.

Next?

The above is not an argument. Denying something by hand waving it away with the words "I deny" does not win an argument. Worse, you cut out most of what others argue [so in that you are refusing to listen] and simply take a small part of their argument and make empty comment about that. As a tactic, it does not bode well for Christianity in general. It make Christians look desperate ...

[Immanuel Can]

Atheism is a position impelled by Theism. As such, one can lack belief in theist god-ideas once one has ben exposed to them.

Same problem. "I don't know of God" does not mean "God doesn't exist." It just means "I don't know something."

No. You are superimposing your particular belief in a particular idea of god. Lacking belief in all ideas of gods is the Atheist position.

Heh. That's a big goofy. I've only used the word "God," not anybody's particular idea of Him. As for Atheists, they can't believe in ANY god(s), so it doesn't matter if you pin some particular view on them or leave it general; they have to deny it anyway.

non-theist or of anti-theist

That's a meaningless distinction. A mere "non-theist" is obviously only rationally entitled to be an agnostic. An "anti-theist" is an Atheist, but lacks rational entitlement for being it.

There are different positions Christians take on all matters relating to biblical interpretation

Sure. But there's only one kind of "disbelief in all god(s)." It admits of no other possibilities.

[Immanuel Can]

I do not believe in your particular idea of god, but you cannot call me an "Atheist" simply because of that.

I didn't.

I said nothing about you personally. I do not know what you believe, I freely admit. I've been talking strictly about the Atheist position, and not even with you about it, but with Walker, whom I also do not suspect of being an Atheist.

[Immanuel Can]

So you say. And so I deny.

Next?

The above is not an argument.

It was not intended to be. It was merely a response on the same level of what was offered me.

"God is [just]an idea," isn't an argument; so why would my response to DAM's claim be?

[Dontaskme]

God is an idea, it's an abstract anecdotal character formed within an illusory mind.

So you say. And so I deny.

Next?

God is an idea, it's an abstract anecdotal character formed within an illusory mind.

[Dontaskme]

"God is an idea," isn't an argument; so why would my response to DAM's claim be?

God is an idea is a FACT.

And why would you want to argue your religious belief in God. When you already know you are going to win the argument.

Seriously, winners only exist because they are able to make losers.

I concede, you don't owe me any response. I've figured out my origins, I came from a dna replicating molecule. From source to source an endless spring, game over, no need to keep flogging a dead horse.