Spreading the word

Originally posted by David C
There is no "god" of atheism, a "gospel" of Darwin, or "dogma" of science. You are obviously confused. *Not* believing in something is not a belief, it is a rejection of a proposition, for whatever reason. Hope that helps.

Belief in a God that doesn't exist is still a belief system...and a belief system in a god that is re-defined to fit the dogma.

Hope that helps.

Originally posted by Red Night
Belief in a God that doesn't exist is still a belief system...and a belief system in a god that is re-defined to fit the dogma.

Hope that helps.

Belief in a God that doesn't exist is still a belief system

Thus Christianity is a religion.

Atheism is not a religion. Atheism is a belief that God does not exist.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
[b]Belief in a God that doesn't exist is still a belief system

Thus Christianity is a religion.

Atheism is not a religion. Atheism is a belief that God does not exist.[/b]

You cling to your beliefs and dogma as ardently as the most fundamental christian or muslim.

I ask you only to open your mind.

Originally posted by Red Night
You cling to your beliefs and dogma as ardently as the most fundamental christian or muslim.

I ask you only to open your mind.

You cling to your beliefs and dogma as ardently as the most fundamental christian or muslim.


I don't see how you can state this.

I started entire thread saying I might be wrong.

As I remember, you refused to acknowledge that you might be wrong.

That's called hypocracy.


I ask you only to open your mind.

My mind is open. Yours is apparently open too far.

Originally posted by Red Night
I define God as an entity that is beyond description or understanding.

Having said that, his existence or non-existence (on the material plane) could take any form or no form.

I don't know you or what you believe, but what I see most atheists saying on this forum is that their god takes no form and does nothing...still a god in my mind. The dogma is ...[text shortened]... there. The dogma is still there. The god is still there only in a form that lacks substance.

Oh, you see I thought you were speaking English.

I am going to tentatively assume that by the word "belief" you simply mean belief and not something else totally different than belief. If this assumption is incorrect, please let me know.

Of course atheists have beliefs. I believe that science is a pretty good way to investigate the natural world, that philosophy is a pretty good way to investigate the normative world, and that meditation can lead to important but inarticulable knowledge. I believe that it is foolish to name things that are "beyond description and understanding", since that leads people to start predicating things of the name's referent and this leads to worshipping idols. I believe in using words accurately, that I have two cats, and that witbier is fabulous.

So, what's my God?

Originally posted by scottishinnz
[b]As I remember, you refused to acknowledge that you might be wrong.

Wrong about what?

I have never stated a belief in anything..only an openess to infinite possibilities and a certainty that no one group has all of the answers.

Originally posted by Red Night
I define God as an entity that is beyond description or understanding.

Having said that, his existence or non-existence (on the material plane) could take any form or no form.

I don't know you or what you believe, but what I see most atheists saying on this forum is that their god takes no form and does nothing...still a god in my mind. The dogma is ...[text shortened]... there. The dogma is still there. The god is still there only in a form that lacks substance.

I define God as an entity that is beyond description or understanding.

There may well be aspects of the natural cosmos that are beyond our ability to describe or understand.

What do you mean by “an entity”? Do you believe that such an entity has consciousness? Does your conception of such an entity entail that it is supernatural? What justifies calling such an entity “God”? Why do you refer to that entity using the personal pronoun (“his” )?

Existence is not an attribute: something either exists or it does not.

It sounds as if you believe in a personalistic being of some sort, especially when you use the personal pronoun.

Originally posted by bbarr
Oh, you see I thought you were speaking English.

I am going to tentatively assume that by the word "belief" you simply mean belief and not something else totally different than belief. If this assumption is incorrect, please let me know.

Of course atheists have beliefs. I believe that science is pretty good way to investigate the natural world, that ...[text shortened]... ccurately, and that I have two cats, and that witbier is fabulous.

So, what's my God?

I find it interesting that my statements upset the atheists and the deists equally.

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]I define God as an entity that is beyond description or understanding.

There may well be aspects of the natural cosmos that are beyond our ability to describe or understand.

What do you mean by “an entity”? Do you believe that such an entity has consciousness? Does your conception of such an entity entail that it is supernatural? What justi ...[text shortened]... you believe in a personalistic being of some sort, especially when you use the personal pronoun.[/b]

Well, one possibility is that God exists in the collective consciousness of humanity.

This could be closely related to the concept that God is an invention of man.

Another possibility is that God is the immutuable laws of the universe which we as humans have only begun to remotely understand.

I think my point is that an irrational and fundamental belief in the premacy of Yahweh, Allah, Jehovah, Atheo, Ahura-Mazda, Ba'al, Ra, Vishnu, etc is just that...an irrational belief.

Also, arguing for the premacy of one over the other is devisive.

Originally posted by Red Night
I find it interesting that my statements upset the atheists and the deists equally.

But it is so clear. Just redefine the word "statements" as "gibberish" and you'll have your answer.

Originally posted by bbarr
But it is so clear. Just redefine the word "statements" as "gibberish" and you'll have your answer.

I'm sorry that my ecumencialism has offended you. Feel free to follow your dogma if it makes you happy, but I cannot accept it as fact anymore than I can accept the views of other fundamentalists.

Originally posted by Red Night
Wrong about what?

I have never stated a belief in anything..only an openess to infinite possibilities and a certainty that no one group has all of the answers.

Ah, yes, that's right. You dodged the question.


You are open to infinite possibilities?

So you worship Zeus? Thor? Satan? The Maori Gods? You accept atheism may be right? You fully accept and endorse Buddhism, Shinto and Islam? How about the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Giant Celestial Chicken?

Or perhaps not. Perhaps you only consider the possibility you want to.

Originally posted by Red Night
I'm sorry that my ecumencialism has offended you. Feel free to follow your dogma if it makes you happy, but I cannot accept it as fact anymore than I can accept the views of other fundamentalists.

You actually say nothing and take no position on anything. Hmm, there's someone else on here which wastes everyone's time with that nonsense.

Originally posted by Red Night
I'm sorry that my ecumencialism has offended you. Feel free to follow your dogma if it makes you happy, but I cannot accept it as fact anymore than I can accept the views of other fundamentalists.

I will assume that by "your dogma" you mean "your best judgement". Thanks, you too!

Originally posted by scottishinnz

So you worship Zeus? Thor? Satan? The Maori Gods? You accept atheism may be right? You fully accept and endorse Buddhism, Shinto and Islam?

Yes and others too.