Kenny wrote: No; the idea that Atheists believe God doesn’t exist is what theists believe about atheists. If you really wanna know what atheists believe, talk to an actual atheist. And you’re in luck today my friend! I’m an atheist; so just listen to me. Forget about all that stuff (propaganda) they have been telling you about us; just take my word for it. Okay???
The point I was trying to make was that there is a big difference between not believing what people say about “X” vs the claim that “X” doesn’t exist. Now can you see the difference in that? Or do I need to explain further.
More like:Mallz wrote: Jan says the sun is God. Jim says Jan is a liar and the sun isn't God. Jim also says God doesn't exist. This is what I see you putting forward, yeah?
Jan says the Sun is God. Jim recognizes the Sun fits Jan’s description of what qualifies as God, but it does not qualify for what he would call God; thus Jim only sees the Sun as the biggest star in our solar system. Jim has an idea of what would qualify as God in his eyes and says such a being does not exist thus Jim does not believe in any God’s/God.
Do you see a difference between disbelieving a claim vs remaining skeptical of a claim? IOW is there a difference between “you are wrong” vs “I don’t believe you”? Or are they one and the same in your view and both require faith?Mallz wrote: Yeah, I talk with atheists and used to be one. The whole point has been it doesn't matter what peoples opinions are, only what is real (not peoples claims). Believing in the non-existence of God is the same as believing God doesn't exist. Both takes belief, which takes your rational consent, which takes personal faith to come to a conclusion (or you don't and your agnostic :-p).
If we assume “X is the atheists idea of what would qualify as God; then yes.Mallz wrote: We are still talking past each other here; trying to figure out how to bring us both to the table. I see that you put theistic claims into the 'what people say about X' category and you see that atheism is instead dealing with 'X doesn't exist' category. Is this right to say? I hold saying anything further here for a response.
Kenny wrote: Well I understand there is NO God, but there are plenty of people who will swear up and down that there is. Ya see; when a theists ask me about God they usually want to know my opinion on not just what THEY call God, but what others may call God as well. This is what I was addressing, because you weren't very clear with your questions and claims. But hence fourth; for the sake of this conversation I will assume you mean the God of the Bible. Okay?
In order to have a conversation about the existence of anything, an identity of what is being discussed must be agreed upon.Mallz wrote: Don't assume! knowing the existence vs non existence of God is not the same as the identity of God. In our discussion, I'm pretty sure I've been clear (?) we are addressing the existence of God.
Mallz wrote: Propaganda? Where are you getting that from? There's a philosophy with everything, that shouldn't be news.. Are you going to say atheism has no philosophy!?
Kenny wrote:Yes. If you think there is, please explain.
The reason I am suggesting that is because I believe it to be true. If you disagree, I invite you to explain what it is.Mallz wrote: It's impossible to separate philosophy from.. anything.. If you think there's no philosophy to atheism then you're claiming atheism isn't a branch of knowledge or an experience. So I'm not quit sure why you're suggesting that?
Kenny wrote:Some things require faith, others things don’t. From my experience; where there is adequate evidence no one speaks of faith. Nobody speaks of faith when it comes to math, or if the Sun will rise; they only speak of faith when there is a lack of evidence.
When is the last time you heard someone say they have faith that 1+1=2, or any other math equation? The reality is; nobody speaks that way. However, if you want to define faith as synonymous with trust/confidence, that’s fine; however I don’t. I also believe when you define the word that way, it actually takes away from the meaning of the word.Mallz wrote: Everything requires faith. We're not using the same term and I don't know where you're getting your definition from. Faith is synonymous with trust/confidence. You have complete faith that 1+1=2. Evidence backs up faith, there's no negative correlation. We both have faith the sun will rise the next day, but that faith isn't as strong as 1+1=2 as a solar system catastrophe potentially could happen resulting in the 'sun not rising' in our perspective. But even if the sun were destroyed, 1+1=2.
Kenny wrote: Are you sure about that? Because for someone who doesn’t get to say who God is, just a few posts ago; you sure spent an awful lot of time saying who God is, what God is, and what he is not! Might wanna rethink that one my friend!
Below are some of the claims you’ve made:Mallz wrote: Have I? I'm pretty sure I've been trying to avoid the discussion of the identity of God because we need to figure out the existence of God, first. Which we do through our reasoning. If God exists, God will be revealed as God exists. What God is and not is part of reasoning the existence of God. Remember, I never got into 'Who' God is, or as I've been saying, His Identity (oops just did it) beyond grudgingly giving you a response out of courtesy to questions that really shouldn't be a part of this topic (until we get there).
Or does anyone else see me moving the goal posts in this thread?
IF there is a God, it is a God of EVERYTHING and EVERYONE.
(Who God is)
In my view, Got is the 'something' that always had to exist which everything sprouted from
(What God is)
Is the Sun God Kenny? No.
(What God is not)