Atheists, What's the point?

[Dave Ellis]

I think that's splitting hairs.

You deny the existence of Zeus, so do I. You deny the existence of Thor and Poseidon, so do I. You actively DISbelieve in those gods, just as I do.

In fairness, that doesn't make him an Atheist... by definition if he believes in even one God, he is at the very least a Deist, however in TNmusicman's case, he is a Theist.

The most could be said is that he has an Atheistic stance towards Zeus, however to label him as an Atheist is incorrect.

 

[RainbowDashIsBestPony]

Actually, I don't actively disbelieve those so called gods but rather I have no need of entertaining the idea of Zeus existence. If I were actively disbelieving it would imply its something I contend with on a daily basis. I assure you Zeus existence is not on my minds daily checklist

So...why do you feel the need to entertain the idea of Yahweh's existence?

 

[Tnmusicman]

Perhaps a wrongly chosen word on my part.

But if I asked you, would you say that Zeus is a fictional character?

Let us get to the heart of the matter.Obviously, I find theism correct. Then why do I reject Judaism and Islam, which are rival, monotheistic religions? I've already admitted theism, which is at the core of these other religions–so my rejection of them will not be based on the same reasoning as an atheist. I reject Judaism because I find the evidence for the Resurrection so compelling.

Quite a few religions have at least elements of truth in them, and the ‘gods’ they worship do exist in the form of spiritual powers. The problem is that from this, it does not follow that I am an atheist. All that follows is that I am a rival theist, which is exactly what I pointed out previously. It’s not merely a matter of not believing in their god (which I may–I just disagree about them being God * note capital G *), rather it is a matter of me being a rival theist. I do not merely disbelieve. Rather I believe in a rival tradition.
Your only point is “you don’t believe in other religions.” But, I do believe Christianity is true, and that therefore means that to other religions I am a theist.

 

[Tnmusicman]

So...why do you feel the need to entertain the idea of Yahweh's existence?

Because I believe Jesus is who He claimed to be and God was revealed in Him through the resurrection of Jesus. The other religions I searched out did not "hold up" to Christianity.

 

[Tnmusicman]

In fairness, that doesn't make him an Atheist... by definition if he believes in even one God, he is at the very least a Deist, however in TNmusicman's case, he is a Theist.

The most could be said is that he has an Atheistic stance towards Zeus, however to label him as an Atheist is incorrect.

Well, I'll be darned-- Mr Ellis and I agree !!!

 

[Tnmusicman]

Just because they remarked he's a good debater, doesn't mean they think he's right.

In fact, I think it's rather obvious that Hitchens and Harris think he's completely wrong.

No, I'm not claiming they thought he was right. I know they don't think he is right but its the point that I was making that WLC has good arguments or atheists wouldn't say he's a good debater (not that they agree) or at the very least he's able to go deeper than others that might use a similar argument.

 

[Tiberius]

Let us get to the heart of the matter.Obviously, I find theism correct. Then why do I reject Judaism and Islam, which are rival, monotheistic religions? I've already admitted theism, which is at the core of these other religions–so my rejection of them will not be based on the same reasoning as an atheist. I reject Judaism because I find the evidence for the Resurrection so compelling.

Quite a few religions have at least elements of truth in them, and the ‘gods’ they worship do exist in the form of spiritual powers. The problem is that from this, it does not follow that I am an atheist. All that follows is that I am a rival theist, which is exactly what I pointed out previously. It’s not merely a matter of not believing in their god (which I may–I just disagree about them being God * note capital G *), rather it is a matter of me being a rival theist. I do not merely disbelieve. Rather I believe in a rival tradition.
Your only point is “you don’t believe in other religions.” But, I do believe Christianity is true, and that therefore means that to other religions I am a theist.

I get that. I don't think you are understanding my question.

Do you think there is an actual entity named Zeus as described by the Norse religion that really exists?

 

[quatona]

I'm not suggesting that we call theists "atheists" because they don't believe in the majority of gods.

It's more the fact that he claimed that he wasn't an atheist to those deities, but rather a "rival theist".

Nonetheless, that´s a strange way of using "atheist". As far as I can tell an atheist is defined as someone who lacks belief in any deity. "Atheist towards a particular deity" is conflicting with the definition of atheist.
It would be like saying "I am a vegetarian when it comes to chicken wings, but I eat all other sorts of meat."

TN's disbelief in Zeus is the same as mine.

That´s an interesting question. I tend to disagree with that statement, as well (and we can discuss it), but it´s not material for the point I am trying to get across, so I´ll leave it unaddressed for the time being.

 

[Tiberius]

Nonetheless, that´s a strange way of using "atheist". As far as I can tell an atheist is defined as someone who lacks belief in any deity. "Atheist towards a particular deity" is conflicting with the definition of atheist.
It would be like saying "I am a vegetarian when it comes to chicken wings, but I eat all other sorts of meat."

I never suggested that we call Christians "atheists" simply because they do not believe in non-Christian gods. I am simply saying that they have atheistic viewpoints towards other gods. In that they do not believe in those other gods, just as atheists don't believe in those same other gods.

To extend your analogy, it would be a person saying, "I'm not a vegetarian, but I don't eat chicken wings, just as vegetarians don't eat chicken wings."

That´s an interesting question. I tend to disagree with that statement, as well (and we can discuss it), but it´s not material for the point I am trying to get across, so I´ll leave it unaddressed for the time being.

Feel free to start a new thread about it. I'll be sure to post in it.

 

[quatona]

I never suggested that we call Christians "atheists" simply because they do not believe in non-Christian gods. I am simply saying that they have atheistic viewpoints towards other gods. In that they do not believe in those other gods, just as atheists don't believe in those same other gods.

To extend your analogy, it would be a person saying, "I'm not a vegetarian, but I don't eat chicken wings, just as vegetarians don't eat chicken wings."

Two points, if I may:
1. I have no issue with this wording. I do have an issue with "I am vegetarian towards chicken wings". Because "vegetarian" means eating no meat at all.
2. Even though I consider the above statement acceptable, I fail to see what all the additions to the actually pretty clear statement "I don´t eat chicken wings" are meant to help with.

Feel free to start a new thread about it. I'll be sure to post in it.

Then again, it´s not THAT interesting.
As for my position it is suffice to say that I am extremely careful with calling two things "the same" - especially when it comes to stuff in people´s heads.

 

[RainbowDashIsBestPony]

Because I believe Jesus is who He claimed to be and God was revealed in Him through the resurrection of Jesus. The other religions I searched out did not "hold up" to Christianity.

Well, no religions held up to my standards. While it's silly to call you an atheist for denying all other gods, I think it's still an interesting play on words. Our logic for rejecting gods is quite similar.

It doesn't deter you that you can't really know whether Jesus was resurrected, though?

 

[KCfromNC]

I think I would trust his credentials considering a number of your fellow atheists have commented that WLC is rather well versed in the arena of debating. Namely,Hitchens and Harris. I'm sure you have respect for your fellow atheists opinions.

Being good at debating means I would go to him if I wanted to learn how to debate. Not sure how that relates to learning about religious belief.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Let us get to the heart of the matter.Obviously, I find theism correct. Then why do I reject Judaism and Islam, which are rival, monotheistic religions? I've already admitted theism, which is at the core of these other religions–so my rejection of them will not be based on the same reasoning as an atheist. I reject Judaism because I find the evidence for the Resurrection so compelling.

Quite a few religions have at least elements of truth in them, and the ‘gods’ they worship do exist in the form of spiritual powers. The problem is that from this, it does not follow that I am an atheist. All that follows is that I am a rival theist, which is exactly what I pointed out previously. It’s not merely a matter of not believing in their god (which I may–I just disagree about them being God * note capital G *), rather it is a matter of me being a rival theist. I do not merely disbelieve. Rather I believe in a rival tradition.
Your only point is “you don’t believe in other religions.” But, I do believe Christianity is true, and that therefore means that to other religions I am a theist.

You must be aware that even if the resurrection actually happened, that's not evidence for divinity, right?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Well, I'll be darned-- Mr Ellis and I agree !!!

Who'd have thought it possible? lol

 

[Dave Ellis]

No, I'm not claiming they thought he was right. I know they don't think he is right but its the point that I was making that WLC has good arguments or atheists wouldn't say he's a good debater (not that they agree) or at the very least he's able to go deeper than others that might use a similar argument.

I can grant you that WLC is able to go deeper than others that may use a similar argument, which is what makes him a good debater.

However, Hitchens, Harris (or I) would not go as far as to say he has a good argument. On the contrary, there are some major logical flaws in WLC's arguments which have been exposed and he has never accounted for. He just has a skill for milking a bad argument for all that it's worth.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I get that. I don't think you are understanding my question.

Do you think there is an actual entity named Zeus as described by the Norse religion that really exists?

Note: Zeus was a Greek God, not a Norse one

 

[Tnmusicman]

Being good at debating means I would go to him if I wanted to learn how to debate. Not sure how that relates to learning about religious belief.

I'm saying he's able to expand on the arguments for Gods existence in ways that other debaters can't . That's really the only point I was trying to make. I don't consider the arguments for the Christian God to be lessons in religious belief though.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm saying he's able to expand on the arguments for Gods existence in ways that other debaters can't . That's really the only point I was trying to make. I don't consider the arguments for the Christian God to be lessons in religious belief though.

Craig has invented new ways of being wrong. I will grant him that.

The ability to debate has little to do with being right. You can be a good salesman and still be selling a bad product. That is the point that you seem to be missing.

 

[Loudmouth]

I know that!! Im commenting on Subduction Zones following comment:

I apologize for misreading your post. Thanks for the clarification.

I'm saying the asinine comparison that Christians are atheists to other gods is nonsense because by definition a theist can't be an atheist.

What is being compared are the thousands of deities that one theist and one atheist share a disbelief in. Atheists just add one more god or pantheon to the list.

 

[Loudmouth]

Actually, I don't actively disbelieve those so called gods but rather I have no need of entertaining the idea of Zeus existence. If I were actively disbelieving it would imply its something I contend with on a daily basis. I assure you Zeus existence is not on my minds daily checklist

Replace Zeus with the god you believe in and you will come a lot closer to understanding the atheist position.