Why are there religious people?

[GrimKingGrim]

So Colter... Where's the Tomb at? If there's ONE piece of evidence that would make or break your case. It would be the tomb.

So where's the tomb?

 

[HitchSlap]

Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed."

You're describing gullibility.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Since I have faith that the Christian God exists, and since He says that He is the only God, then, obviously, I have faith that Thor or Odin must not exist.

You, on the other hand, contend that no gods exist at all. How do you know this?

I don't claim to know that at all. I don't believe in gods. I don't claim to know that there are no gods.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The resurrection of Jesus is a falsifiable claim, yet no one has been able to do so. There are multiple sources, even non Christian sources, who attest that:
1. Jesus was crucified
2. the apostles sincerely believed that they had seen the risen Christ and were willing to die for that belief
3. the conversion of James the Skeptic
4. the conversion of Saul of Tarsus
5. the empty tomb.

No alternate explanation has been able to explain away this evidence.

So, do you hold to a counter-position belief concerning this falsifiable claim?

The key word is 'believed'. This seems to be evidence that early Christians believed Jesus had been raised from the dead. I could show you evidence that early Muslims believed Muhammad had ascended into Heaven. Would you accept that as evidence that Muhammad actually ascended into Heaven?

 

[quatona]

Well, we have plenty of historical documentation to support the claim that Jesus resurrected.

Out of interest: Please name five reliable sources.

Why do you think we don't have any reputable documentation that disputes it?

There can be many reasons for that. Do you want me to make assumptions about a negative?

I did not change. You said that we did not make a claim that could be falsified and I simply proved you wrong.

Well, neither did I say that nor did you prove me wrong. If you go back, it was you who pointed out that the existence of a god is unfalsifiable. I was referring to this very point, not to other claims.

No change of topic here either. You're simply refusing to acknowledge that I have provided you with a falsifiable claim regarding the Christian faith.

Since "are there falsifiable claims regarding the Christian faith" was not the subject of our conversation (but instead you were the one to point out that god´s existence is unfalsifiable) you did change the subject.

I have cited evidence to support our claim and your response should be either to believe the evidence or not to believe the evidence. You have chosen not to believe, but you refuse to explain why.

No, I shouldn´t - since you are the one making the claims, it´s on you to produce evidence. Nonetheless I humoured you with my reasons.

Since I have answered your questions, would you kindly respond by answering mine? Why have you chosen not to believe the evidence I cited?

I did:
1. You are asking a loaded question - I didn´t choose to not believe.
2. I don´t need a reason for not believing a claim, I need a reason for believing it.

 

[Davian]

As do yours, I'm not hiding that I believe something,

Me niether.

pretending to be neutral, innocently inquisitive,

By what method do you determine that others are pretending to be something that are not? Do you have some sort of mind-reading device?

while simultaneously mocking faith

Never. Bad science, straw-man arguments, and fallacious reasoning, maybe.

and practicing poor armchair psychology.

Who appointed you the arbiter of armchair psychology?

 

[Davian]

Atheist come in many flavors, whatever their belief is, that is their belief. The unity of the atheist community is their disbelief in God and the godless ideals that bind them together. There is diversity among atheist just like the diversity among believers.

What is a "godless ideal"?

Are there "stampless ideals" that bind together those that do not collect stamps?

 

[Davian]

The answer should be obveous, whatever your current beliefs about the origens of life, destiny, morality etc are.

If the child of an atheist came home and said some of the kids in the neighborhood were talking about God, creationism, salvation, life after death kind of stuff, asks dad about all if these things, the atheist promoting dad would impart his beliefs (theology) about all of those things.

Not being an "atheist promoting dad", when my children ask me these things, I prompt them to use their critical judgment skills, and apply them to these concepts.

Trusting dad, jr might be satisfied with those answers, they would become his conceptual pholosophy going forward until he realized differently.

Children eventually figure out that mom and dad aren't perfect, neither is the church.

This mom and dad are not claiming to be infallible. Are you infallible?

 

[TheBarrd]

I don't claim to know that at all. I don't believe in gods. I don't claim to know that there are no gods.

So, you admit that it is a matter of belief. You don't actually know.
Points for honesty at least...

 

[Archaeopteryx]

So, you admit that it is a matter of belief. You don't actually know.
Points for honesty at least...

I never claimed to know that there is no god. I don't believe there is a god; that is, I lack belief in gods, which makes me an atheist. I don't know why you would assume that I would dishonest about this.

 

[GrimKingGrim]

So, you admit that it is a matter of belief. You don't actually know.
Points for honesty at least...

What Atheist would say "there is no god" as a claim?

 

[TheBarrd]

I never claimed to know that there is no god. I don't believe there is a god; that is, I lack belief in gods, which makes me an atheist. I don't know why you would assume that I would dishonest about this.

I don't understand why atheists make such a huge deal out of something so ridiculous, as if there is some serious difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack belief".
"I don't have any money" means exactly the same thing as "I lack money", doesn't it?
Someone says to you "your atheism is based on your lack of belief in any gods" is the exact same thing as "your atheism is based on your belief that there are no gods"...either way, you have faith that no gods exist. You do not have knowledge that no gods exist, you simply have a lack of any belief that gods exist.
Why the silly tap dance? I have never understood this....

 

[quatona]

I don't understand why atheists make such a huge deal out of something so ridiculous, as if there is some serious difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack belief".

I agree, and that´s not the difference in question - as you will see further down.

"I don't have any money" means exactly the same thing as "I lack money", doesn't it?

Well, it doesn´t mean exactly the same thing, but it´s sufficiently close for most intents and purposes.

Someone says to you "your atheism is based on your lack of belief in any gods" is the exact same thing as "your atheism is based on your belief that there are no gods"

That, however is an entirely different difference than between "not believing" and "lacking belief". "You believe that no gods exists" asserts a positive, active belief that I simply don´t hold.

...either way, you have faith that no gods exist.

No, I don´t even hold a belief that no gods exist, and even less "faith".

You do not have knowledge that no gods exist, you simply have a lack of any belief that gods exist.

Indeed. But I don´t hold the belief that no gods exist.

Why the silly tap dance?

Conversations work better without the insults.
There would be no need for this "tap dance", would you simply accept the description of my state of mind, instead of trying to reword it in a way that construes "faith" where there is none.

I have never understood this....

I do not hold a belief that a god or gods exist(s). -> I am not a theist = I am an atheist. And neither do I hold a belief that no gods exist. I hold no beliefs regarding the existence of gods.
As for the knowledge part: I don´t have any knowledge concerning the existence of gods, and I hold the view that this can´t be known. -> I am an agnostic.

 

[TillICollapse]

I don't understand why atheists make such a huge deal out of something so ridiculous, as if there is some serious difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack belief".
"I don't have any money" means exactly the same thing as "I lack money", doesn't it?
Someone says to you "your atheism is based on your lack of belief in any gods" is the exact same thing as "your atheism is based on your belief that there are no gods"...either way, you have faith that no gods exist. You do not have knowledge that no gods exist, you simply have a lack of any belief that gods exist.
Why the silly tap dance? I have never understood this....

If you say to me, "I have some money in my pocket," and I say, "I don't believe that," or "I doubt it," or "I lack belief in what you're saying," ... it's different than saying, "No you don't have any money in your pocket." In the one instance I'm merely claiming my own belief or lack of belief in something, which could be based on a variety of factors and may even leave open the possibility that I could change my mind ... in the other instance I'm making a more definitive statement, and regardless of the factors of why I'm making that statement my words would show a more definitive stance. I'm not claiming to just believe or lack belief, I'm asserting a position that I essentially *know* one way or another.

 

[TheBarrd]

Until you've checked my pockets, gone through my purse, and covered any other place where I may have stashed money...something even my husband, may he rest in peace, was never able to do, there is no way you could ever "know" one way or the other.
You might make the claim...but you can never be quite sure, can you?

 

[TillICollapse]

Until you've checked my pockets, gone through my purse, and covered any other place where I may have stashed money...something even my husband, may he rest in peace, was never able to do, there is no way you could ever "know" one way or the other.
You might make the claim...but you can never be quite sure, can you?

Which is why some people, like myself, typically don't make such a claim without evidence ***gives thumbs up sign here to you***

Would you think it arrogant of me, perhaps, if I claimed to know such a thing without having attempted to check your pockets, go through your purse, cover other places where money may be stashed, etc ? If not arrogant, perhaps another term may be applied to how I could be viewed ?

 

[TheBarrd]

Which is why some people, like myself, typically don't make such a claim without evidence ***gives thumbs up sign here to you***

Would you think it arrogant of me, perhaps, if I claimed to know such a thing without having attempted to check your pockets, go through your purse, cover other places where money may be stashed, etc ? If not arrogant, perhaps another term may be applied to how I could be viewed ?

I would think it very arrogant, and probably be chuckling the whole time you were searching, quite confident that you'll never find that money unless I show you where it is hidden.
Of course, if you've convinced yourself that there is no money, you won't ask, will you? And so, you'll never know...

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I don't understand why atheists make such a huge deal out of something so ridiculous, as if there is some serious difference between "I don't believe" and "I lack belief".
"I don't have any money" means exactly the same thing as "I lack money", doesn't it?
Someone says to you "your atheism is based on your lack of belief in any gods" is the exact same thing as "your atheism is based on your belief that there are no gods"...either way, you have faith that no gods exist.

No, you are confusing belief for lack of belief and faith for lack of faith.

You do not have knowledge that no gods exist, you simply have a lack of any belief that gods exist.
Why the silly tap dance? I have never understood this....

There's no tap dance at all. I never claimed to know that there are no gods.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I would think it very arrogant, and probably be chuckling the whole time you were searching, quite confident that you'll never find that money unless I show you where it is hidden.
Of course, if you've convinced yourself that there is no money, you won't ask, will you? And so, you'll never know...

I forgot... because it was awhile ago in the thread...but aren't you the person who claimed to be a "christian mystic"?

 

[TillICollapse]

I would think it very arrogant, and probably be chuckling the whole time you were searching, quite confident that you'll never find that money unless I show you where it is hidden.
Of course, if you've convinced yourself that there is no money, you won't ask, will you? And so, you'll never know...

If I were to make such a claim that I knew you had no money when you said that you did, you could easily prove me wrong by showing the money. It would reveal both my arrogance (for those who would perceive my behavior as such) and also that I was faulty in my conclusion (for whatever that would be worth to someone). It would prove you correct obviously, and perhaps trustworthy if your credibility were somehow in question. If you actually had the money, but refused to show it to me ... then it would be more like a game, and not only would I possibly be arrogant for claiming you had no money, but I may also be a fool for playing your game of "I have it, but I'm not showing you ..."

The easiest way for me to clarify however, would be to ask where it was. If I was convinced one way or another, I still may ask you where it is, for any number of reasons. But I do think that asking directly and clarifying before making a conclusion is often more conducive to learning.

So having said all of that, do you then see the difference between stating a belief, stating one's disbelief, stating one's lack of belief ... contrasted with outright claiming a positive or negative truth (i.e. that one "knows") ? This is often where some of us find the believer: claiming to *know* something that they have little to no evidence to support, instead of simply asserting their belief or disbelief in something. They may claim to *know* something about reality, when they've only checked a couple of pockets.