Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Philosoft,
Sure...see
<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com" target="_blank">here</a>.


Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

Godless Sodomite

You're either pregnant, or you're not. It's the same thing with a/theism; you either believe, or you don't--there is no middle ground.

For illustration: I am a person going about my own business. You, the theist, comes along and tells me about "god" and ask if I believe that such a thing exists. My answer is: No, I do not believe that.

That isn't making a knowledge claim. I'm merely stating that I don't hold your theistic beliefs as true. That's not the same thing as my saying that your "god" is false. Most of us have already agreed that a god or gods is possible in the realm of logic (though I hasten to remind you that there is zero credible evidence in support of any deity, so all such possible deities still remain unsupported).

I really don't know why we're dwelling on this, anyway. Atticus has already admitted this argument is going to be a proof for the xian deity--the xian god, I am quite sure does not exist. There are many reasons why I not only not believe in this deity, but I go even further and claim that such a fictional character does not exist (Koy's arguments are completely correct--fictional characters do not factually exist.) Jesus never leaves the realm of fiction. Even if there is a person who inspired such hateful and antihuman theology, the character as presented in the New Testament is a work of fiction. I've already made this conclusion based on the evidence presented. Counter-arguments, in the form of apologetics, have also been reviewed and dismissed as false. With that in mind, I have absolutely no interest in a debate that attempts to prove the xian god when I already know there is no such thing. I no longer find it even interesting to talk about.

-Jerry

Philosoft

I think we're in agreement that God is a character in a book. I can also write a book about a skibble. That doesn't change the state of its non-existence. The Bible allegedly refers to the same thing that you allegedly refer to when you say "God." I want to know what that thing is.

DarkBronzePlant

Agnosticism = I don't know if I believe in a god or not.

Atheism = I don't believe in a god.

Do we really need to keep doing this?

Goliath

SOMMS,

This is where your argument fails. Believing that no gods exist implies a lack of belief that any gods exist. However, not believing that any gods exist does *NOT* imply belief that all gods do not exist.

You are drawing a logical implication that is absolutely false. I am a living counterexample to your absurd claim that "atheists claim the truth value of the statement 'There is a God' is false."

This is a complete list of things that I believe regarding the supernatural:

NOTHING.

Sincerely,

Goliath

DarkBronzePlant

SOMMS: Do you believe that god exists?
INFIDEL: No.
(1)
SOMMS: How can you prove that god does not exist?
INFIDEL: I can't.
SOMMS: But you just told me that god doesn't exist.
INFIDEL: No I didn't. I said that I don't believe that god exists.
return to (1)

Philosoft

Not bad. How about this:

SOMMS: Are you an atheist?
INFIDEL: Yes.
SOMMS: So you affirm unequivocally that you know no God exists?
INFIDEL: No, I just don't believe it exists.
SOMMS: So you're an agnostic?
INFIDEL: No, I know I don't believe in God.

Malaclypse the Younger

Satan Oscillate My Metallic Sonatas

You realize however that puerile semantic games might have received some attention in Junior High, but they are unpersuasive here.

Atheism

This is simply nonsensical. How does one "hide behind" a definition of a word? We are simply refusing to accept your definition, which is no less arbitrary than any other definition.

It would be somewhat more pleasant conversing with you if you didn't make ridiculously false-to-fact assertions. There are (as you have been shown time and again) many ways of looking at it that make "There is a god" have no truth or falsity value at all.

Again, it becomes increasingly difficult to ascribe your refusal to understand simple English to simple ignorance rather than intentional perversity.

This is simply nonsense. As has been shown, "atheism" is a belief statement, not a truth statement.

Since you ask, I think you're an idiot.

Baloo

From AF:
I make a very limited point. That is, CHRISTIANITY, as defined by me, IS THE PRACTICE OF SEXUALLY MOLESTING CHILDREN. (I know a number of you state that CHRISTIANS only AFFIRM that there is proof of God and Jesus, but it is not my job to give you a name). I choose a definition simply for the purpose of making sure we were all talking about the same thing.

From AF:
I freely admit that my definition of "Christianity" may not comport with other peoples. That is why I found it important to define the term early on. I had a rather simple purpose from the beginning. I have found in my READING NEWSPAPERS that many will REGULARLY SEXUALLY MOLEST CHILDREN.

So, AF, are we ready to move onto my PROOF that Christianity is an immoral worldview, or are you beginning to see the importance of agreement on definitions prior to debating the finer points of those things defined?

sir drinks-a-lot

According to your nonstandard definitions maybe. Of course, it is all really semantics and convention. But the most popular definition of an agnostic is one who believes it cannot be proven whether or not god(s) exist. Quite different from your usage.

Of course this doesn't change my relationship with the statement "God Exists." Who has claimed that it does? Stop erecting straw men!

Sure I believe it is possible that god exists. Big Deal. Alot of far fetched fantasies are possible. Let's get on to the arguments for his existance. What do you have to offer?

The Moral of the Story: Your statement "No matter how you look at it atheists claim the truth value of the statement 'There is a God' is false." was wrong.

[ March 22, 2002: Message edited by: sir drinks-a-lot ]</p>