Thread: Argue Pointlessly over the Definition of Atheism

Actually basic understanding would allow you to grasp that the more people you talk to the more extensive your conversation becomes, because one person ask a question then another person ask a question. etc.. etc.. It's pretty simple to understand not all that hard.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Actually basic understanding would allow you to grasp that the more people you talk to the more extensive your conversation becomes, because one person ask a question then another person ask a question. etc.. etc.. It's pretty simple to understand not all that hard.

I understand that, but FUCK these posts are long. I can almost feel my beard growing while I read them.

You're very good at picking out small pieces of someone's post that appear to be in your favour whilst ignoring any part of their argument that is hostile to your own. For now, we're all really tired of the long posts. It would be more engaging if the conversation was actually going somewhere, but it's not. There are many things I want to answer in your post, but I'd only be repeating everything that has been said. It's obvious by now that neither one of us is going to convince the other, so I'm going to answer pretty much the only part of the post that isn't so much about the whole 'belief and uncertainty' argument.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

How could you possibly believe in an afterlife with no evidence and no reason? If you cannot believe in a God because there is no evidence and no reason supporting a God. Equally there is no evidence supporting an after-life, how could you believe in this? I'm not saying that you do believe in an afterlife but you said that you "could" with no evidence. So "could" you believe in a God with no evidence equally?

I'm saying that I could believe in an afterlife, if I feel that I have seen enough evidence for it and am convinced. Just like with the idea of a God. But the main point I was trying to make here was that belief in a God isn't exactly necessary for belief in an afterlife.

Originally Posted by Heavy Sleeper

You're very good at picking out small pieces of someone's post that appear to be in your favour whilst ignoring any part of their argument that is hostile to your own. For now, we're all really tired of the long posts. It would be more engaging if the conversation was actually going somewhere, but it's not. There are many things I want to answer in your post, but I'd only be repeating everything that has been said. It's obvious by now that neither one of us if going to convince the other, so I'm going to answer pretty much the only part of the post that isn't so much about the whole 'belief and uncertainty' argument.

Nothing you have posted was in any way hostile to anything I stated here. I Have no idea how you came to that conclusion, if you haven't noticed my replies tend to be much longer than yours. Reason being is because I answer every single point and additional points that are embedded within other points. I'll end with this, the main point that seems to elude you is the point of Subjective. For some strange reason you can't seem to grasp that point in logic. Anyway that's neither here nor there. We are essentially going in circles and I'm in total agreement that we drop it entirely. Here's a complimentary internet fist bump.


And to you good sir. A fine day.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

Then you and I are not referring to the same thing. Faith is this to me.

Faith: Faith is belief with strong conviction; firm belief in something for which there may be no tangible proof; complete trust; opposite of doubt.

When you say something needs to be reaffirmed that's classified as doubt. You are reaffirming something because you are unsure of that something.



I do not believe that to be accurate. As far as I am aware, Scientist would utilize equations not because there is a possibility of doubt but because if we wanted to launch a satellite to orbit around Jupiter, we would then need to perform calculations in order to make this happen.



Exactly, because in the case of a Scientist who cross checks his calculations is not because he believes the Law's are wrong but because he may have made an error in his own work and is unsure thus he requires validity because he is in doubt. Once he's confident and believes without a doubt that his calculations are accurate enough then that satellite is launched. I'm willing to also put money down that Scientist do not launch satellite's into orbit when in doubt.

I don't make a habit of continuing discussions with people who ask questions and counter with baseless assertions when they don't like the answers. You have your own definition of faith, and that is fine. If you don't have any doubts then that is fine as well. By my definitions and beliefs, you are intellectually dishonest, which is also fine.

You can disagree about the things I have said about scientists, but your reasons for disagreeing have nothing to do with the question you asked me. The people who are performing calculations so that they can launch a satellite into space are not performing science, they are technicians. They are following procedures that are dictated by the accepted science that has been empirically tested previously. Any doubts they may or may not have have nothing to do with science, and so this would be where your intellectual dishonesty comes in.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

I don't make a habit of continuing discussions with people who ask questions and counter with baseless assertions when they don't like the answers.

If you think the universally excepted definition of faith is just a mere baseless assertion then you have problem. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't it make untrue. Faith is without doubt, it is what it is and repeating this to you and Heavy Sleeper is getting quite old. In the way faith is viewed by millions is not going to change no matter how much you don't like. Just a word of advice, accept it for what it is and move on, there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

You have your own definition of faith, and that is fine. If you don't have any doubts then that is fine as well. By my definitions and beliefs, you are intellectually dishonest, which is also fine.

My definition of faith as faith being the concept of truth without the slightest doubt is once again the common definition of what faith is. You and the other guy are the only one's I have ever seen who disagree's with this. And don't twist it because yes I do have a lot of doubts about a great many things in life, GOD is not one of them.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

You can disagree about the things I have said about scientists, but your reasons for disagreeing have nothing to do with the question you asked me.

The question with regards to faith shouldn't have anything to do with the discussion regarding Scientist. I don't see how you've managed to form the two together. I gave an example with regards to certainty on some fundamental universal constants and the reason why calculations are performed. You say calculations are performed because of doubt. I say they are performed out of necessity in order to make something happen in a specific way.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

The people who are performing calculations so that they can launch a satellite into space are not performing science, they are technicians. They are following procedures that are dictated by the accepted science that has been empirically tested previously. Any doubts they may or may not have have nothing to do with science, and so this would be where your intellectual dishonesty comes in.

And this is where your opinion comes in. If I tell you. "I have faith that GOD exist beyond the shadow of a doubt" and you tell me I'm intellectually dishonest? Who are you to tell me what I truly believe in? Funny thing is that you're totally serious too. I find that extremely amusing.

We do not live in a Universe where things are constantly popping in and out of existence. There are Fixed Laws in this Universe and yes they are FIXED. You want to live in an illusionary Universe with doubts on rather or not you going to cross dimensions the next time you step out of your front door then be my guess. I find it illogical, but hey it is what it is, I accept there are people in this world that think like that and you're apparently one of them. I prefer to live in reality and know that just like the millions of times before, when I walked out of my front door I stepped on pavement.

And on that note, I'm done with this. It's gotten very old and I'm pretty tired of going back and fourth talking to people who think teapots are actually giraffes and people who thinks walking out of their front door tomorrow is going to open up a portal to a parallel dimension.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

We do not live in a Universe where things are constantly popping in and out of existence. There are Fixed Laws in this Universe and yes they are FIXED. You want to live in an illusionary Universe with doubts on rather or not you going to cross dimensions the next time you step out of your front door then be my guess. I find it illogical, but hey it is what it is, I accept there are people in this world that think like that and you're apparently one of them. I prefer to live in reality and know that just like the millions of times before, when I walked out of my front door I stepped on pavement.

Actually, that bit is a bit more possible than you give it credit for. At any given moment, there is an incredibly small probability that the electrons in your body will all line up so perfectly as to allow you to fall through the ground or walk through a wall. Indeed, a given system can even rewind itself. How bizarre a sight it would be to watch Mars move backwards. It CAN happen, but the probability of it actually doing so is incredibly tiny.

Also, dimension-portal-opening aliens.

Ne-yo, what dictionary are you smokin? No definition in the one I'm using says anything about doubt or the lack thereof. It is intellectually dishonest to make a bold truth claim like "the common definition is..." (or the more laughable, "universally excepted definition") while either knowing this to be untrue, or not caring to check.

You asked me if astrophysicts doubt two certain natural laws. Astrophysicists are scientists. They don't perform calculations to launch satellites into space, (because technicians do things like that) they perform calculations to check the position and motion of astronomical bodies against current theories and hypotheses. It is intellectually dishonest to misrepresent an example in order to make it appear to support your argument; this would be a strawman fallacy.

We actually do currently (theoretically speaking) live in a world where things are popping in and out of existence at all times; research quantum foam. Nothing is fixed, everything is dynamic, the only constant is change (until it stops )

We'll I was done but I guess I'm not :p Lets continue.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Ne-yo, what dictionary are you smokin? No definition in the one I'm using says anything about doubt or the lack thereof. It is intellectually dishonest to make a bold truth claim like "the common definition is..." (or the more laughable, "universally excepted definition") while either knowing this to be untrue, or not caring to check.

Hmmm, I actually thought you'd understand that I was speaking specifically regarding universally accepted and common amongst "Christians" I'm pretty sure that people who do not believe in a GOD (atheist) or people who are unsure of a GOD (agnostics) have any kind of real use for the word faith in a GOD. They usually have doubt and uncertainty. Also you appear one-tracked, it's a wonder why you never even thought to examine the definition of doubt which is defined as a "lack of faith". Or perhaps you should research the meaning of the word self-doubt here instead. Which is once again, defined as a "lack of faith". Either way it appears I have to school you on what Faith means to Christians.

James 1:6 - But let him ask in faith, nothing doubting: for he that doubteth is like the surge of the sea driven by the wind and tossed.

Let him ask in faith - Believing that God IS; that he has all good; and that he is ever ready to impart to his creatures whatever they need.

Nothing wavering - Μηδεν διακρινομενος· Not judging otherwise; having no doubt concerning the truth of these grand and fundamental principles, never supposing that God will permit him to ask in vain, when he asks sincerely and fervently. Let him not hesitate, let him not be irresolute; no man can believe too much good of God.

Is like a wave of the sea - The man who is not thoroughly persuaded that if he ask of God he shall receive, resembles a wave of the sea; he is in a state of continual agitation; driven by the wind, and tossed: now rising by hope, then sinking by despair.

You're not a Christian so I don't expect you to really relate to this anyway. But now you know what faith means to us in retrospect to GOD.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

We actually do currently (theoretically speaking) live in a world where things are popping in and out of existence at all times; research quantum foam. Nothing is fixed, everything is dynamic, the only constant is change (until it stops )

Oh really? I actually doubt this. what about you? Do you have any doubts whatsoever about this?

Some, not many. Faith is not a christian word, and even so; you should be honest and say that your source is Mary Fairchild, and not the bible. If you were a true christian, you would know that we all fall short of what is ideal, and none may meet the highest expectations of faith; even jesus who was heard to plead, "father, why have you forsaken me?" as he hung dying on the cross. If the son of man is afforded room for doubt, why aren't we? If Moses was allowed to doubt so that god had to turn his staff into a snake, and have his brother Aaron speak for him, if Abraham was allowed to doubt that god would bring a child to his wife Sarah since he was so old, why then aren't we allowed to doubt again? Why would psalms 10:1 exist ("Why, O LORD, do you stand far off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?") if no true christian can have any feelings of doubt?

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Some, not many. Faith is not a christian word, and even so; you should be honest and say that your source is Mary Fairchild, and not the bible.

If you were unsure about Quantum Foam then I don't see you're point in referencing it. :p Yea, Mary-Fairchild is a devout Christian, whats your point? I've already explained to you how many Christians define faith. Mary is just one of many Christians who defines faith to be without doubt. So I guess the account of James 1:6 is not a biblical source huh? Or perhaps you just stopped reading after the first paragraph. Here I'll show it to you again.

James 1:6 - But let him ask in faith, nothing doubting: for he that doubteth is like the surge of the sea driven by the wind and tossed.

And I especially find it very amusing how you disregarded the other definitions which displays doubt as a "Lack of Faith"

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

If you were a true christian, you would know that we all fall short of what is ideal, and none may meet the highest expectations of faith;

If you really think this, then you should read the book of Job. Job was just the ideal of what standing fast to Faith truly mean. When you read it think of me as if I was Job and picture yourself as Job's wife. Because it's like almost the same scenario. You'll get a kick out of this one, it's really a very good read, I hope you do really read it.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

even jesus who was heard to plead, "father, why have you forsaken me?" as he hung dying on the cross. If the son of man is afforded room for doubt, why aren't we?

You think Christ was in doubt? Please explain to me what was Christ unsure and uncertain about?

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

If Moses was allowed to doubt so that god had to turn his staff into a snake, and have his brother Aaron speak for him, if Abraham was allowed to doubt that god would bring a child to his wife Sarah since he was so old, why then aren't we allowed to doubt again?

I never said you were not allowed to doubt. Everyone has free will of choice to doubt be unsure about EVERYTHING that encompasses their life. However there are those who have built faith and conviction in GOD existence. Faith that does not encompass doubt. Faith possessing a strong conviction in the likes that you are obviously ignorant of. I've had doubt before (repeating myself) as I've actually mentioned previously in this thread. I wasn't always a Christian and I wasn't born into faith, I made a choice in my life to become a Christian and I built faith upon a slew of doubts and questions that I had throughout many years of my life. Now, I'm at a point where I no longer doubt because I'm at a point in my life now where I know the truth. It doesn't mean I don't have questions about a many things, but no human and especially no one like you can make me think otherwise with regards to the "Faith" I have in GOD's existence. You can call it being intellectually dishonest or whatever. Does it mean anything to me because you gave your opinion to me from a DV's discussion forum? I don't think so.

See the point you're missing is that in order to get faith, yes, you must have doubt, you must have uncertainty. This is why uncertainty and doubt does not correlate to faith. Once you have faith, you no longer have uncertainty and doubt. You say that one must reaffirm faith or faith becomes stagnant. Then it's not faith you're reaffirming, You're building on doubt to affirm a mode of faith. If you can't understand that then yes, you're completely lost in understanding what faith truly means to Christians.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Why would psalms 10:1 exist ("Why, O LORD, do you stand far off? Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?") if no true christian can have any feelings of doubt?

I do not believe you're reading anything I'm putting here. Christians do not doubt GOD's existence. We are not "uncertain whether or not He exist" We are not "unsure" and we do not have doubts about His existence period. What makes you think Psalms 10:1 is referencing doubt in retrospect of GOD's existence? There are a ton of examples in the Bible where many people, even the most righteous Saints are questioning things that pertains to GOD. This is how we learn about GOD, through questioning. It does not in anyway mean that they are questioning rather or not GOD exist to them. Or that they doubt GOD exist.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

If you really think this, then you should read the book of Job. Job was just the ideal of what standing fast to Faith truly mean. When you read it think of me as if I was Job and picture yourself as Job's wife. Because it's like almost the same scenario. You'll get a kick out of this one, it's really a very good read, I hope you do really read it.

Have YOU read Job? Cuz he questioned god. He got majorly pissed off.

Aren't you on his ignore list?

Yeah. So?

M'kay then.

Atheism is a non-prophet organization.

Atheism is a religion where you strive towards not believing in the Christian God. Everybody knows this.

Not collecting stamps is a hobby, where you strive towards avoiding the collection of stamps.

...but only stamps with Crosses on them because your parents made you collect cross stamps when you were younger.