Atheism is a belief (Why Atheists don't believe part 2)

I'll let you in on a little secret CK. Its called the gospel. Now it, and not my arguments are the the power of God unto salvation.Of course I cannot prove this insurance policy over another.
Of course I cannot prove someones sin is actually sin.
Nor Gods existance
Nor life after death
Nor any other such thing... (for good reason as it happens)And you cannot prove anything to the contrary. And we both know this. Yet we both persist. Me presenting the gospel in any number of ways and you denying it in any number of ways.Take the current God-is-objective gig. All I am attempting to do is to elaborate on 1 Cor 2:14 - to flesh that verse out and ones which convey a similar message: that the problem lies with the 'observer' being in fact blind and not that which can be so easily observed. And I feel that there is nothing particularily illogical in my stance. But can I prove it. Of course not. But the gospel doesn't require itself to be proven in order for it to work on people. If it did then it couldn't work!So I'll carry one presenting it in any fashion I can. And you (and others) go on feeding me with both a medium to present it and ideas for ways in which to present from other angles. His goal is achieved by such things.Although I can't prove it of course!

quote:

---

I didn't say someones account of a sunset was objective (any more than my account of God is). But the sunset is objective. It can be observed by those able to observe.

---

What you said was:

quote:

---

Direct evidence of a sunset needs no interpretation.

---

As soon as anyone sees the sunset, it is being interpreted by their brain.How do you know the susnset is happening unless it is through someone's experience of it?

quote:

---

Something doesn't have to be described in order for it to be objective Schraf - unless you figure different.

---

If it cannot be described then how do you know it exists?

I wouldn't say I pride myself, because I'm more of a wisdom-seeker, than a logic-fan. You are correct. Most of the time this isn't allowed, but both statements are both technically correct, in that both are true because of an exception to bivalence, in that we cannot say if God is true or false according to human knowledge. You once told me that an absence of evidence is evidence of absence IF we would expect that a certain evidence SHOULD be there, if the entity exists. (Or similar words atleast).I agree that there cannot be evidence for the non-existence of something a lot of the time, but it depends what we expect would evidence it if it did exist. The difference is one of knowledge.Your argument assumes that the positive is true,(as it is proven true) and is therefore not anologous, IMHO. Thus I could say;There isn't any eagle that eats, then; There isn't any eagle that does not eat.This time the negative favours me. But both your example and my example, are not valid analogies of what I am doing. ordinarily you would be correct, but logical rules are only there to stop error.For example, if I said;Your pig is pink therefore pink = your pig.This form is only fallacious because of error. But there are exceptions. For example, if your pig was the only pink thing in existence, then the logical rule would not apply.

Well, I agree with Nemesis on what a qualifier should be. Just to add; I don't think you can lump all gods in there anyway, as each case is vastly different.For example, evidence of an idol God being God would be a vastly different evidence from an invisible God.You can't prove God is not there, but it doesn't mean he is or isn't.

I guess you mean that there are reasons to reject God.I'm sure there are subjective and unique individual reasons that make this so, and I think you're right that this happens. It could also be argued that there are reasons to believe.On the whole, it's probably harder to believe. It can be nhilistic and worrysome, if one believes God isn't there to help. But it's harder to keep believing when things are tough, and God seems to not be there.But I've discovered that this is not really a truth; the TRUTH is that we don't want to have a tough time so we reject faith because it's too hard to accept that God is there, if we're having a tough time. Now people might pretend this isn't the case, but I think they know I am right about that.

What???????????????That has all the characteristics of a Yogiism. LOLGoogle that one.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Of course, you are basing your concepts on a set of books that you claim, without any objective evidence, to be a blueprint of what God is going to do.However, for someone who does not accept the authority of the Gospels for being 'the word of god', your statement is meaningless.And just because someone does not agree with the Gospels doesn't mean that they are not familar with them, or do not understand them.

When the Israelites were brought out of Egypt, they murmured against God because times were tough.What specifically confused you? Perhaps pragmatics are involved. What I mean to say, is that faith is tough to stick with. But nothing worthwhile is easy.

quote:

---

But I've discovered that this is not really a truth; the TRUTH is that we don't want to have a tough time so we reject faith because it's too hard to accept that God is there, if we're having a tough time. Now people might pretend this isn't the case, but I think they know I am right about that.

---

Not really because I'm not actually sure what it is you are saying!

That's okay, most of the time I don't know what I'm saying either.Who cares what I say anyway? I don't. I already know I'm full of it.

I don't understand why the default position has to be neutral or IF it is even possible for no belief to be so neutral and not a positive truth claim in its own right.Having faith in human wisdom and curiousity exclusive of any other influence is a bit of a positive claim in the progress of humanity, is it not?

Mike, sometimes I think that you are becoming a bit like Robin...who intellectualizes his way OUT of Faith rather than INTO Faith.Lets leave the Bibles alone for a moment. IF God exists, can we not agree that He desires to reach everyone? Atheists have had no proverbial tap on the shoulder nor any inner unction. Have you?Or are you still questioning your own Faith?

I don't really do this. No. It's just such a freedom to admitt I could be entirely wrong about it. Edited by mike the wiz, : No reason given.

Ian, I must admit that you have shown me two things:1) You preach to yourself as you preach to us.(And actually are getting better at it.)2) I would imagine that God (If He exists) does use you at times, but I think that the Devil (If he exists) also uses us Christians as a walking advertisment aginst christianity sometimes.Lets look at it from the atheists point of view, IF we even can.Perhaps it would be better if we christians stopped trying to force the freewill hand of the atheists and just allowed our God..and His Spirit...to flow through us by our actions and draw them towards Him by His gentle pull.Lets get back to the issue of Why Atheism is a belief, however.Why should we worry about this "great commission" sorta thing? Can't God Himself reach these people IF in fact our belief system is the "best" way?Perhaps the way atheists see it is live and let live. They probably DO figure out that Christians (many, at least) have this seemingly irrational and zealous desire to correct their belief system.Perhaps Christians would actually do more good by leaving atheists alone and allowing the Spirit (which we christians "know" to be real) draw the atheists closer to the Truth that we (christians) all believe to be real.

Is it possible for a true (theres that word again) believer to ever become a true atheist?Or are you caught up in the fact that you have the freedom to disbelieve in God? (Perhaps claiming, internally, that the ball is in Gods court and it is up to God to show you that He exists?)I suppose that by definition, a true atheist is at peace in their heart that their choice of defining spiritual and metaphysical reality is as honest as it can be.And if we are honest with ourselves, does anything else really matter? Disclaimer: As a believer, Im confidant that it will all work out for everyone. Don't go packing your bags for Hell just yet! If we are honest with ourselves as to what we actually believe, all of our doubts and insecurities will be answered. (Don't you all think?)