My path to atheism: Yours? Rebuttals?

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Dinosaur, Apr 1, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    To whom it may concern: if one lacks the belief that lacking belief is not believable, or believes the lack the lack of belief that others believe is lacking, is it true to say that lacking the lack of lack of belief, while not lacking the belief of lack of belief, is tantamount to lacking belief that belief can be lacked even though what you lack belief in doesn't actually exist? Or perhaps it is more accurate to say that, given the belief in the notion of believing that lack of belief is lacking, and that the notion of lacking belief is believed to be lacking, then lacking a lack of belief in being able to lack belief is just a notional position that one can believe to lack belief in? Or would that, too, not be lacking?

    Needless to say, I find the above far more understandable, supportable and honest than the crud that spouts from Jan's computer.

    At what point do others (and I'm looking mostly at you, Baldeee and JamesR) refrain from engaging in dialogue with someone whose mutual understanding of rather simple language you cannot honestly rely upon? You have both highlighted the inconsistencies and nonsense that Jan has spouted, so let's just move on, away from the semantic bovine excrement that he has crashed the thread with. Put him on ignore, at least.
    Or is that just a notion you lack belief in without actually lacking belief in it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Baldeee likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    ^^^
    Maybe he comes here when he is bored to get his kicks by screwing around with us.

    <>
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    We discussing atheism, and obviously theism. Nothing I've said is beyond rational discussion.
    But if you can point something out, I'll be glad to change or remove it.

    jan.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    So to get the thread back on track... "My path to atheism" by Sarkus.

    So, a devout believer in God, if not the rituals of religion, from as early an age as I can remember, when suddenly, aged about fourteen, there was a deep rumbling all around, and the skies grew dark, heavy, and foreboding. Suddenly a brightness burst through the clouds, showering me with the splendour of light, and a deific voice shook me to my knees.
    "I don't exist!" said the booming voice seemingly from the heavens.
    There was a pause as I wondered who was playing such an elaborate practical joke on me... realising that it was a step up from the drawing pin on the chair.
    The voice coughed slightly as if clearing their throat. "Well, maybe I don't exist," said the voice, clearly unsure. "No evidence, you see. My bad. I'll get it right next time, though."

    Been atheist ever since, and never looked back.

    True story, that.
    True story.
     
  8. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    No. Existence is not a status reserved for "objects".
    So God does not exist, in Jan's view. To exist would be to acquire the status of an object.

    Or as the guy put it: Miracles (and gods) are a materialist's way of escaping the consequences of their materialism.

    And so one path to atheism would be gaining perspective on materialism, coming to see its inadequacy.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2017
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    You are saying that existence itself is evidence of God, now?

    We're a long way from the man with the beard who lives in sky.

    Hey look! There's a rock on the ground! I conclude therefore that God is real.

    Nice try, Jan, but you're begging the question again. Here's your argument:

    1. Without God, there is no existence.
    2. Things exist.
    3. Therefore God IS.

    But premise 1 begs the question. You can't assume that existence requires God and go from there to prove God. You need to first establish God, then go on to argue for how God enables existence.

    That's just your assumption.

    Are we going to pull out our dictionaries now, so you can start attempting to redefine "exist"?

    This God of yours seems to have whatever properties are convenient for your argument of the moment.

    I'm starting to think that Jan's God is whatever Jan wants him to be.
     
  10. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Sarkus,

    At the point where I get bored, I guess.

    It's somewhat amusing to watch Jan tie himself in logical and rhetorical knots as he tries to redefine atheism for atheists. In the process, we uncover more and more gaps in his own arguments for God.

    I honestly don't know if Jan thinks he's successfully trolling the atheists here, or whether all of this is really how he goes about rationalising his own belief system. Given the amount of repetition of certain obscure catch phrases from Jan, either those catch phrases are deliberate attempts at obfuscation, or else they form a kind of mystical mantra for Jan. Perhaps he thinks that if his mantras don't make sense then they are impenetrable to objections - from himself or from others.
     
  11. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    The problem is we're talking about belief, or more accurately, lack of belief.
    We're not talking about proof of God's existence.

    It's not my assumption, that's what God does. If God is the creator original creator, then we exist because God exists.
    This follows on from the definition of God. Atheists won't accept that, because God does not exist. At least until they can find evidence that it does. Atheists assume God can be known through specific evidence. So it 1 all, in assumptions.

    jan.
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Your argument here is that nobody can believe or lack belief in anything unless God exists. Specifically, you say atheists can't be atheists unless God exists. But there, as well, you start by assuming that God exists.

    If.

    Ok.

    I can accept the argument. Can you show me that God exists, then?

    You're saying that knowledge of God comes in a different way to every other kind of knowledge we have about everything else that is known. Essentially, you claim there is a special God sense that we're supposed to have, that magically gives us a direct line to God, so that we don't have to bother about niceties like evidence. But, just like you can't prove that God exists, you also can't prove that your God sense exists.
     
  13. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    We can if you want.

    LORD, Thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations. Before the mountains were born, Or Thou didst give birth to the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God (Psalm 90:1-2).

    Here a muslim comments on God...

    While everything on this earth is mortal and temporary, God is eternal and ever living. It is God who sustains everyone and everything. The Living, i.e., the Eternal, who has no beginning and who will have no end. In other words, this is His Attribute and not the quality of He being alive (in the sense in which we understand life). All things worshipped besides God are neither ever-living, nor does creation depend on them. Rather, they themselves depend upon God for their existence and sustenance.

    From Bhagavad Gita...

    .I am the goal, the sustainer, the master, the witness, the abode, the refuge and the most dear friend. I am the creation and the annihilation, the basis of everything, the resting place and the eternal seed.

    You see James, it's not my assumption. It's something that some people can understand.
    And this understanding has been around a mighty long time.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    jan.
     
  14. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    I didn't say that. Now you see why I repeat myself.

    I said as far as atheists are aware, God does not exist, which is why they don't believe in God.
    The only thing you know about belief in God, is what you hear, or read, but as yet there is no comprehension of this God.
    So you ask for evidence.

    You seem to have a problem with the implication of God's existence, in the definitions of atheism.
    It seems you're stuck with it. Oh! Well!

    Well. I am on a predominantly, atheist forum, talking to an atheist, for whom God doesn't exist.

    No. It doesn't work like that.

    No. I'm saying atheist want to accept God on their terms.
    Before we can gain knowledge, we have to surrender to the experience in order to accept it.
    If you don't accept something (via denial, rejection, etc..), you can't know it properly, only as a concept.
    But then all the information you receive will go through the filteration process, of denial, rejection, non-acceptance, and so on.

    This is why I have to repeat myself. We are all born with the capacity to accept, or not accept God, there's nothing magical about it.

    I'm comfortable with the idea that I can't prove God to you, because it's not about proving God, or you proving that you need evidence to know God.

    jan.
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,397
    Or maybe God doesn't exist, and that's why.
    Or maybe there's no evidence that God exists, and that's why.

    Eureka! Finally you understand!

    You continue to be as wrong as when you started this discussion. You're stuck with being wrong. Oh! Well!

    What is needed for knowledge is justification, among other things. Before we can gain knowledge, it must be possible to justify our beliefs or suspicions.

    Of what does this capacity consist? Are you talking about physical brain structures, evolutionary predispositions, etc.? Or something else? I get the impression you're talking about a special God sense that you can't prove the existence of any more than you can prove the existence of God.

    You're comfortable with the idea that you can't prove God to yourself. It's not about that.
     
  16. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    Actually you did say it:

    Post #204: "If Zarg doesn't exist, then there is nothing to believe, or lack belief in."
    Thus, logically, you are saying that one can only believe, or lack belief, in Zarg if Zarg actually exists.
    Thus you are arguing that one can only believe in, or lack belief in, God if God actually exists. And because you define atheism as "lack of belief in God" you have concluded that the term atheism must assume that God exists.
    But given that your starting point (italicised above) is flawed (as previously explained), the conclusion you reach is not sound.

    The reason you repeat yourself so often is because you continually get caught out with your inconsistencies, and repeating yourself is your mechanism to ride roughshod over any criticism, thinking that if you repeat yourself then the issues raised will eventually be forgotten,

    And here you're repeating something that doesn't actually address the issue that JamesR raised. You have said what you did (post #204 for example), and then you say you haven't said it, and by way of proof you repeat something else that you may have said.

    Dishonest much?
     
  17. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,226
    Moth to a bulb, I'm afraid.
    But this latest path, this semantic line Jan has taken, is now boring, so thank you for making me pause and consider.
    If/when Jan comes up with anything I think is honest I may rejoin.

    Nice story, btw.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Therefore, since your God doesn't exist - you said that - your God cannot be an original creator.

    Which is consistent - nothing that "is", without existing, can create (that would imply a limitation).
     
  19. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    That is, your position already.

    In what sense?

    The human being.

    I get the impression you're trying to mock.

    What makes you think you need to prove God yourself, or anyone else?


    jan.
     
  20. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    Can't keep away can you?

    James didn't say that, he said; "Your argument here is that nobody can believe or lack belief in anything unless God exists.''

    Of course it is only possible to believe in something that exists, or at least you think exists.
    Lacking belief in something, is not, not believing in that thing. It is lacking belief, in that thing.
    You lack belief in the claims of belief in God, because God doesn't exist for you. Simples.

    The italicised part is not flawed, for reasons given in earlier post.

    No, it's because specific atheists always distort what I say, to suit their weak arguments and explanations.
    So that I can always go back to a relatively recent thread to make sure I'm not mistaken.

    The issue JamesR raised, doesn't actually address the issue.

    1- ''If Zarg doesn't exist, then there is nothing to believe, or lack belief in. ''
    2=''As atheists are aware, God does not exist, which is why they don't believe in God.''

    From where I'm sitting, these two statements essentially say the same thing.

    jan.
     
  21. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    I didn't say God doesn't exist, I said God doesn't exist in the way we exist.
    God just IS.

    Read above.

    jan.
     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Hear hear.

    And I'd like to see the rules about preaching brought into play somewhere. ("I alone just 'know' the truth. Others don't have the ability to perceive it, let alone the vocabulary to discuss it ")
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2017
  23. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    I personally vote we go the "Victor Esperenza" route and simply condense all the word salad into a single thread in Alt Theories to contain the crazy there...

    ...

    But that's just me

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page