muso wrote on Apr 30^th, 2011 at 8:33am:


Couldn't agree more Muso, dictionaries are Anarchy in action; I was getting desperate.


freediver

Quote:


Is it your BELIEF that pigs don't fly? Everybody needs a little certainty in their lives 

muso wrote on Apr 30^th, 2011 at 9:13am:

Yes, particularly when the point to this latching-on, in the context of this argument, is to dishonestly defend theism by morphing atheism into a religion without even the concession that the 'religion' (into which the advocate wants atheism morphed) is no different in any way to the kind of religion that necessarily and conventionally defines theism.

In other words a tactic, not to honestly defend theism, but to lower the bar of religion's definition such that just about anything can pass as a religion.

Helian, I think you are the only one who has not answered the question.

Quote:


typo?

Quote:
muso

ME!

Now get back to work, I'm watching.

This whole belief in ridiculously implausible human fantasy constructs, as actual, physical, entities, is what most atheists baulk at.
Most reasonable people have no issue with people holding spiritual beliefs that there may be an afterlife, or a greater force in the universe, and the only argument comes into play when some start to ascribe characteristics that are pure human invention, to these concepts.
Such as those who truly believe that the unknown greater force is actually called Allan, and he chooses people on the same criteria as alien abductors, to spread his message, which is you are not allowed to eat meat unless it has been killed by a man wearing a funny hat, who is chanting stairway to heaven in swahili whilst performing the ritual slaughter, and similarly impressive messages.
It is understandable how more primitive times led people to humanise concepts that are so difficult to understand, but how many other rituals from thousands of years ago do we hang onto?
The religious have always sought to protect their domain by declaring any diversion from their script as an eternal damnation worthy event, and that unearned, and undeserving exclusion from open questioning will no longer work, now that so many see that they are not just odd ones out of step with the believers, but actually a part of a large number of individuals who have independently come to the same conclusion.
That has given people far more confidence to call BS when they see it, without fear of breaking a cultural taboo.
Religion , and religious belief, are no longer sacrosanct, out of bounds topics, and the more light that is shed upon them, the more apparent it becomes that the whole structure is an inverted pyramid shaped house of cards, all pinned on Alan really having come down and told the three amigos the meaning of life, via the singing bush.
I don't care if the people who want to believe that actually happened, also don't care that I call BS when they do.

Actually i think believing things is an awful bad habit that many of the worlds ills are attached to.

freediver wrote on Apr 30^th, 2011 at 8:23am:


All Gods have different qualities... Abraham's God claims he is the head God of his people... Athena of the Greek Pantheon does not. Abraham's God says he is a creator... Athena makes no such claims. Abraham's God is claimed to be all knowing, all powerful and all good... Athena is Goddess of warfare, wisdom, justice etc... Abraham's god is, always was and always will be... Athena was born of Zeus.

What you seem to suggest is that whilst Theist can on a individual level decide which god/s they will believe in... so that Athena will be believed and Abraham's God will be not believed, but that an Atheist cannot.

Equally, you seem to suggest that there is something in common with them all... what is that? Not all god's are eternal... Athena was born... Adonis dies. It is not only gods can invoke magic... Merlin was not a god, yet believed to be capable of great magic. Finally, not all gods create... some destroy that which other gods have created.

So what is the commonality you speak of that allows me to make a universal statement about belief or non belief in Gods?

Finally... how on earth can you believe in God and be close to Agnostic? And what does that actually mean?

Quote:


Pretty much. To be an atheist you have to reject all religion right? Does it make sense to call a Chritian an atheist in contemplating Hinduism? I'm not sure why this is a problem.

Quote:


Belief in a diety. It is the definition of theism - you can only define it that way because they all have it in common. It is not as Grey suggested the accepted of a recieved theology that they have in common, just the belief. This is why you are able to understand me when I talk about theism or even religion, without listing all the religions.

Quote:


I think it is deism or pantheism. People who reject all the traditional faiths but still believe in some kid of god. These people are obviously not atheists. The god they accept is the god you accept the possibility of when you think of yourself as an agnostic. Not necessarily the exact same thing, as everyone has their own view, but close enough for the purpose of definition.