atheism is a belief system

Originally posted by whodey
Jesus once said that to obtain the kingdom of God one must come to him with the faith of a child.

However, he also wrongley inferred that the two assigned the same credit to X, then the underlying belief system that led to that accredidation are the same. Thus the inference was not warranted, since the different sets of beliefs can lead to the same accredidation in this sense.

What a buffoon. 😛

To the extent that Jesus valued the faith of a child as manifested in people who are no longer children, yes Jesus was a buffoon. When a person grows from a child to an adult, her mind is supposed to also develop in concert; one is supposed to intellectually mature and others have reason to encourage this to the extent they can. Perhaps Jesus missed that memo? Or perhaps Jesus didn't have the cajones to defend and justify himself in an environment that encourages healthy skepticism and questioning attitude? Or, who knows, maybe Jesus was just too lazy? I guess it's just easier to tell people to shut up and follow you (figuratively of course) than to actually be receptive and responsive to their doubts. I guess it's a little off-topic here but it would maybe make for a good thread to explore the source of Jesus' buffoonery on this point.

EDIT: Of course, your assumption that Jesus was speaking of a childlike 'faith' can be questioned. This article has a different take on it:

http://www.gotquestions.org/childlike-faith.html

Originally posted by KellyJay
Why would I care? That has nothing to do with the point! How you get
there, either through (I don't believe this or that), or (this is not important
enough to me to care about) isn't the issue or the topic!

Once you get to the place where you by design, or though lack of caring
say or just through deeds without saying that God/gods are not required,
...[text shortened]... ok at all things as if God/gods are not
required or even wanted thus a system is born.
Kelly

You keep moving the goal-posts!
Create another thread with a coherent proposition that we can debate.

PLEASE.

Originally posted by LemonJello
To the extent that Jesus valued the faith of a child as manifested in people who are no longer children, yes Jesus was a buffoon. When a person grows from a child to an adult, her mind is supposed to also develop in concert; one is supposed to intellectually mature and others have reason to encourage this to the extent they can. Perhaps Jesus missed tha ...[text shortened]... is article has a different take on it:

http://www.gotquestions.org/childlike-faith.html

For the sake of arguement, if God exists your mind compared to his is less than that of a child.

Nuff said.

Originally posted by apathist
There are those who believe that atheism is best defined as a lack of belief in gods. Well, babies and rocks don't believe in gods.

By using dictionaries and encyclopedias, it turns out that atheism requires belief.

I'm pretty sure than must be correct, unless you have scientific evidence that gods cannot exist? :/

ehhhh
there are two kinds of atheism
which one are you talking about specifically?

Originally posted by googlefudge

therefore any belief system that also agrees with
that will share almost all the same beliefs in that no God or gods are to get
blame or credit.

No. No. No.

There are many totally different, almost no-overlap, belief systems that do
not include gods.

What you are saying is false, and blatantly so.

To keep this simple.

There are a lot of different belief systems that do not have God or gods in
them.

Do these different belief systems have God or gods in them?
Kelly

Originally posted by whodey
For the sake of arguement, if God exists your mind compared to his is less than that of a child.

Nuff said.

Meh, what does that have to do with whether or not one should value adult exhibition of childlike deliberations and mentality? One would think an adult should have outgrown childlike deliberations. Have you considered alternative interpretations of what Jesus was saying there, such as the alternative interpretation provided in the link?

Originally posted by whodey
For the sake of arguement, if God exists your mind compared to his is less than that of a child.

Nuff said.

So therefore, my mind (that of a child, in your analogy) is to be prefered over Gods mind. Or have you lost track of your original argument?

I must also point out that a child is not rendered less capable by my existence, and I am not rendered less capable by Gods existence contrary to what I suspect you were implying.

I must also point out that your Gods intelligence is childlike in comparison to the Spaghetti monster, whose every noodly appendage could outwit God any day of the week. Think you have a counter argument? Sorry, you're the child of a child in comparison to the Spaghetti monster so anything you say or think is totally worthless.

Originally posted by googlefudge
That is not what you were claiming.

You said, and I quote...

therefore any belief system that also agrees with
that [b]will share almost all the same beliefs in that no God or gods are to get
blame or credit.

"will share almost ALL the same beliefs".

You are not moving the goal posts...

You made this claim. Its wrong. Admit that and then we can move on.[/b]

Go back and read all the posts, I've been saying all along that each of us
will build our belief systems, we will have a foundation to them, the rejection
of, or the ignoring of God or gods are two different groups, and we have hit
over and over, of course there are going to be differences!

I told you up front many people will hit that place from completely different
roads, but they hit it.
Kelly

Originally posted by wolfgang59
You keep moving the goal-posts!
Create another thread with a coherent proposition that we can debate.

PLEASE.

I'm not moving them, the discussions move when you get deeper into the
weeds, but you can stop following the discussion, up to you.
Kelly

Originally posted by LemonJello

that system will be equal to those
people who down right deny "X" in their beliefs to build a system without
"X".

You can keep on stating that they lead to the same belief system until you're blue in the face (which seems to be what you are intent on doing), but that statement is false. Belief systems are constituted by beliefs, and t [/i], it still wouldn't follow that the belief systems are equal.

They give the same accreditation to X means they give the same
accreditation to X does it not? I've already told you that I'm not talking
about the path to X, but X itself! They arrive at X and that is where they
are, each according to whatever it was that got them there, so they
will be forced to started to filling in all the blanks that they see to
accommodate X, because that is the world they are in according to
what they believe. They will consider everything in light of X, there are
no other options other than moving on to something else.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
They give the same accreditation to X means they give the same
accreditation to X does it not? I've already told you that I'm not talking
about the path to X, but X itself! They arrive at X and that is where they
are, each on according to whatever it was that got them there, so they
will be forced to started to filling in all the blanks that they see to ...[text shortened]... hing in light of X, there are
no other options other than moving on to something else.
Kelly

They give the same accreditation to X means they give the same
accreditation to X does it not?

Yep, hard to argue against a tautology. 🙄

I've already told you that I'm not talking
about the path to X, but X itself!

And I've already made two counterpoints. Perhaps you missed them above. Here they are again:

(1) You have no reasons to think the two give the same accreditation to X in the first place.
(2) Even if you did have reasons to think the two give the same accreditation to X, it doesn't follow that the two belief systems are the same.

I provided argument in support of both these points above. Did you read any of it?

Originally posted by LemonJello

They give the same accreditation to X means they give the same
accreditation to X does it not?

Yep, hard to argue against a tautology. 🙄

You keep harping on the path to X, I don't care how you get there, once
there, that is where you are!
Kelly

Originally posted by LemonJello

They give the same accreditation to X means they give the same
accreditation to X does it not?

Yep, hard to argue against a tautology. 🙄

I guess you are getting a feel for what its like talking about evolution. 🙂
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I guess you are getting a feel for what its like talking about evolution. 🙂
Kelly

🙄🙄

Are you drunk tonight? 🙂😵

Originally posted by LemonJello
🙄🙄

Are you drunk tonight? 🙂😵

You trying to be funny?
Kelly