"atheism is a belief"

Originally posted by KellyJay
We disagree, because I'm not saying what causes your rejection of God, I actually could
careless what that was or is. If you step into a room with rose colored windows than they
are what you have to look through, it doesn't matter how or why you are in the room, in the
room you are.

The genesis of your view *pun intended* doesn't matter, it only matte ...[text shortened]... because again they will cause you to look at things the way you think they should
be looked at.

You keep using that word 'cause'.

I do not think it means what you think it means.


For my views to be CAUSED by my atheism, then my atheism MUST be the cause
of my views.

This is tautologically true.

As my atheism is CAUSED by my other views, and not the other way around, it
CANNOT be true that my world view is caused by my atheism.

Therefore your claims to the contrary must be wrong.

Originally posted by KellyJay
There isn't a backwards with respect to viewing the universe one way or another, no
matter what side of, if God is real or not, will cause you to view the universe the way you
believe. It does not matter if you look at it and you see no reason to believe in one, or you
don't believe in one so you don't see the reason. The very fact you are there has give ...[text shortened]... iverse with the results of that view, it is a world view of beliefs that carry on in all things.

Imagine what would happen if you and googlefudge's position were proved wrong in relation to God.

In other words, it is proved to you beyond any doubt that God does not exist. And it is proved to googlefudge beyond any doubt that the Christian God does exist (and is the only God).

Now, imagine it were also technically possible for a human to keep some part of another person 'alive' and conscious after death and torment this eternally.

Would you think it acceptable to do this to anyone in the light of your new knowledge that God definitely does not exist? I imagine you would shudder in horror at the thought and reject the idea out of hand.

In other words, on you becoming an atheist, your world view would change on this issue. 180 degrees.

Now imagine googlefudge in the face of proof of the existence of the Christian God. Would he suddenly think the idea of hell was morally acceptable because his atheism has collapsed and he has become a theist.

No - he has previously said that, if the Christian God exists on these terms, he would declare war on it.

So, on this one issue, his atheism cannot be the source of his beliefs (or 'caused' his beliefs, as you would say), as it does not change once he becomes a theist.

And there would be many, many more issues like this, on both sides.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Imagine what would happen if you and googlefudge's position were proved wrong in relation to God.

In other words, it is proved to you beyond any doubt that God does not exist. And it is proved to googlefudge beyond any doubt that the Christian God does exist (and is the only God).

Now, imagine it were also technically possible for a human to kee ...[text shortened]... once he becomes a theist.

And there would be many, many more issues like this, on both sides.

Nice. I was actually considering making such an argument, but I doubt I would have made it so succinctly.

My world view stands regardless of whether we discover tomorrow that a god exists, or that their is magic, or fairies, etc.

Obviously I would change in as much as I would acknowledge that those things now exist [or that we now know that they
exist]. But it does nothing to my sense of morality, or understanding of the efficacy of science and skepticism, or any of
the core beliefs that go to making my world view. I would still [for example] hold that faith is a damn silly way of trying
to determine what the truth is.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
No - he has previously said that, if the Christian God exists on these terms, he would declare war on it.

This is due to his misunderstanding of God. He can make this error because after all, he's only a man. A man who has deemed himself worthy to judge God.

I suspect that GF will not ever encounter his proof of God until Judgement. At that time, all will be made clear to him. The damage he has done to himself and the damage he has done to others by rejecting God. In order to fully understand his sin, he will be shown the truth. And there will be anguish, believe me. He won't be standing before God with his middle finger in the air, no. He will finally understand the truth of God and how his own decisions (even in the face of people trying to teach him about God) have sealed his fate. His anguish will come in knowing he has no one to blame for his fate but himself. This is the source of where this 'wailing, and gnashing of teeth' concept comes from. He'll finally know his error and how he's decided his own fate, when it could have been totally different, if only he'd been less arrogant and vindictive. He'll finally see how no man - least of all, him - can judge God.

The truly sad part is that he's convinced himself that his error is true, in this life, when he still has time to change his fate. And all he has to do is believe. That's why it is such a tragic waste.

Originally posted by Suzianne
This is due to his misunderstanding of God. He can make this error because after all, he's only a man. A man who has deemed himself worthy to judge God.

I suspect that GF will not ever encounter his proof of God until Judgement. At that time, all will be made clear to him. The damage he has done to himself and the damage he has done to others by reje ...[text shortened]... ime to change his fate. And all he has to do is believe. That's why it is such a tragic waste.

You can believe this drivel as much as you like, it wont make it true.

I will never receive proof for your gods existence because it doesn't exist. Period.


However, in the hypothetical scenario which you describe I will certainly not behave the way your
fevered imagination would apparently have you believe.

It's tragic how much your morality and life has been corrupted and ruined by your evil religion.

And I remind you again, that such empty and pathetic threats as you have just made only make me
despise your religion more. You are doing the exact opposite of what might make me not despise
your religion.

So, you know, if you actually cared about what your message was doing, might want to consider that.

Originally posted by googlefudge
You keep using that word 'cause'.

I do not think it means what you think it means.


For my views to be CAUSED by my atheism, then my atheism MUST be the cause
of my views.
This is tautologically true.

As my atheism is CAUSED by my other views, and not the other way around, it
CANNOT be true that my world view is caused by my atheism.

Therefore your claims to the contrary must be wrong.

"because I'm not saying what causes your rejection of ..."

I used the word cause and that is your argument?

If you are an Atheist, than it is the prism of Atheism that you look at the
world around you, if you looked at the world around as something else,
you would be something else.

You will be blind to any truth out there that is not accepted by your
Atheism. Rejection on face value of anything that does not fit that world
view will occur due to it doesn't fit your Atheism mind set.

I again am NOT talking about what made you choose Atheism, it does
not matter, the road to get you where you are, could have been a million
different paths, but where you is, simply where you are.

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Imagine what would happen if you and googlefudge's position were proved wrong in relation to God.

In other words, it is proved to you beyond any doubt that God does not exist. And it is proved to googlefudge beyond any doubt that the Christian God does exist (and is the only God).

Now, imagine it were also technically possible for a human to kee ...[text shortened]... once he becomes a theist.

And there would be many, many more issues like this, on both sides.

Ask anyone who said they were once a Christian and now they are
Atheist, their views on all things changed, the same would true of any
Atheist who because a Christian.

The universe around them now would take on an entirely different
foundation, for one the universe would not have no reason and purpose
to be, for the other it would now have a purpose and reason to be.

There is NOT going to be proof beyond any doubt period for God in this
life it that were true, it would not be a matter of faith, but facts.

One of the great torments in eternally will be the in your face reality that
God is real and how it was all rejected. The warning signs could be as
big and bold as the Plagues for Pharaoh, or the raising of the dead of
Lazarus and still God is rejected.

Originally posted by KellyJay
"because I'm not saying what causes your rejection of ..."

I used the word cause and that is your argument?

If you are an Atheist, than it is the prism of Atheism that you look at the
world around you, if you looked at the world around as something else,
you would be something else.

You will be blind to any truth out there that is not accepted by ...[text shortened]... ere you are, could have been a million
different paths, but where you is, simply where you are.

No no no. You have this wrong, and it's fundamental to how you misunderstand me/us/atheism.

If you are an Atheist, than it is the prism of Atheism that you look at the
world around you, if you looked at the world around as something else,
you would be something else.

WRONG.

I am a Secular Humanist. [for reasons not relevant to this discussion].
This means that I view moral issues through a Secular Humanist 'prism' as you put it.
I don't view them through an 'atheist prism'.

The difference and demonstration being that if I stopped being an atheist [a gods existence was
demonstrated to my satisfaction so that I believed that a god or gods existed] I would STILL be
a Secular Humanist when it came to moral issues. Thus if changing my status as an atheist/theist
has absolutely no effect on my moral stance it cannot be a source of it, or be the 'prism' through
which I view moral issues.

Similarly, I understand the universe through scientific principles and via scientific discovery.
If sufficient evidence was discovered to demonstrate the existence of a god or gods then by using the
scientific method I would come to believe that a god or gods existed. And cease to be an atheist.

However I would still understand the universe via scientific skepticism and by scientific methods.
[through a scientific 'prism' to use your terminology]
As this again does not change as I change from atheist to theist, it again CANNOT be the source
or cause or 'prism' through which I understand the universe.

You will be blind to any truth out there that is not accepted by your
Atheism. Rejection on face value of anything that does not fit that world
view will occur due to it doesn't fit your Atheism mind set.

WRONG. My atheism is a conclusion based on evidence and reason.
IF new evidence were to arise that invalidates that conclusion I will change it.
I don't START by assuming gods don't exist and evaluate the evidence from there.
Although you DO start by assuming a god DOES exist and then evaluate the evidence from there.

I/we ARE open minded, it is you [theists] that pre-proposes that a god exists and then let that blind
you to the evidence that says otherwise.

I again am NOT talking about what made you choose Atheism, it does
not matter, the road to get you where you are, could have been a million
different paths, but where you is, simply where you are.

It DOES matter, and we keep explaining why.

Ok, how about an analogy.

You want to buy a new car, and you want it to be as cheap as possible to run so you want good mileage per
$ spent on fuel. [and let's say your choices are between Petrol and Diesel for simplicity]

There are two camps;
Those who believe that Petrol is best [Petrolists]
And those who believe that Diesel is best [Dieselists]

You review all the evidence you can find and decide that based on the current market and predicted trends
and fuel efficiency of current engines that Diesel is best and so you become a Dieselist and buy a Diesel car.

Now, what you are trying to tell me/us, is that now that you are a Dieselist, and currently believe that Diesel cars
are cheaper to run, that you will now evaluate all now evidence from that perspective, that you will slant all your
future car purchasing decisions based on the fact that you are currently a Dieselist.

However, all you WANT is the part I put in bold, the cheapest possible car to run.

If new evidence comes along, and/or conditions change by the time you come to buy your next car, then are you
really saying that you will still choose a Diesel car even if all the evidence now points to Petrol cars being cheaper?

It matters how you came to the decision. In this example you came to it after rationally analysing the evidence
and coming to a conclusion. And your overriding concern is getting the best value for money, and not commitment
to any particular camp.


The same is true of my atheism.

I am not committed to being an atheist because I don't like your god, or any other gods.
I am not committed to being an atheist because I pre-decided I liked the term, or just felt like it.

I am an atheist because I don't believe in belief based on faith because I don't accept faith as a valid reason
for believing in something. And because there is no evidence sufficient to rationally justify belief in gods I don't.
The prism I used to conclude that I will remain an atheist and not accept any god claims is the same prism
I will use to evaluate any further evidence. It didn't change when I concluded that I was currently an atheist.

Just as in my analogy, the reasons for choosing a Diesel car didn't change after deciding that they were currently
the best, and that concern for value for money was still the deciding factor when you came to revisit that choice.
And consequently if the evidence changed, so did your choice.

If you present actual, valid, evidence for god/s, Then I will fairly evaluate that evidence and if it's sufficient I will change
my mind.

Because I didn't pre-decide to be an atheist.

WHY I made that choice, to identify as an atheist, IS relevant and DOES matter to the issue at hand.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Ask anyone who said they were once a Christian and now they are
Atheist, their views on all things changed, the same would true of any
Atheist who because a Christian.

I/we are not claiming that someone who switched from atheist to Christian, or Christian to atheist wouldn't
[necessarily] have a change of worldview.

But that doesn't mean that when the Christian became an atheist that their worldview became an atheist
worldview.
They might for example embrace Secular Humanism, and Rational Scientific Skepticism. [They might embrace
Buddhism... just saying] And those would be the foundation of their worldview.


As I explained in my earlier post, just because YOU use your religious position as the foundation for, and
'prism' through which you view the world. Does NOT mean that EVERYONE views the world through a
'prism' of their religious standpoint.


Atheism is a really lousy standpoint to try to build anything on because the only thing their is a lack of belief
in gods.... Well now what?

This is only confusing if you insist on STARTING with atheism, instead of realising that atheism is a result
of other things.

Those 'other things' will change from atheist to atheist, but it is those 'other things' that provide the world view,
the prism, the foundation, of our world-views. And it is to those 'other things' that you need to look to to understand
both us, and our point of view.

Insisting that it's our atheism that is our foundation is wrong, and will lead you to assume, and think wrong things,
and to fail to understand us.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Ask anyone who said they were once a Christian and now they are
Atheist, their views on all things changed, the same would true of any
Atheist who because a Christian.

What if there were someone (and quite possibly there is,) who shares your beliefs
on absolutely everything except on the existence of a god.

In other words the exact same morality as yourself, same opinions, same judgements,
even the same tastes and preferences. But does not believe a god exists.

How would you describe their world view?

Originally posted by googlefudge
No no no. You have this wrong, and it's fundamental to how you misunderstand me/us/atheism.

If you are an Atheist, than it is the prism of Atheism that you look at the
world around you, if you looked at the world around as something else,
you would be something else.

WRONG.

I am a Secular Humanist. [for reasons not relevant to ...[text shortened]... I made that choice, to identify as an atheist, IS relevant and DOES matter to the issue at hand.

I do not believe I am misunderstanding anything with respect to your Atheism. Being a
Secular anything simply proclaims what I have been telling you. You’ve stripped away
the possibility of the divine in all things, you can be a Christian humanist by name as
well, it will just make your Christian walk very difficult.

Your moral stance with God will have God and His Word as your chief moral compass
just because you acknowledge a higher power with greater intellect and wisdom, without
God you are on your own to come up with one on your own, or adopt another human’s.
This of course also means you can change your mind since you don’t really owe your
allegiance to a higher power, it will all be basically up to your likes and dislikes. So again
looking at the world without God will give you a different stance than if you acknowledged
God.

I don’t think anything need change with respect to scientific principles via scientific
discovery, the truth will be the truth regardless of your opinions on its origins. Your
opinion of why would more than likely be altered since with God you would have to
acknowledge a plan and purpose, where without God not so much.

Our skepticism would not change, it shouldn’t we should always be trying to drill down to
the truth and reality.

You cannot view the world with an Atheistic mindset and see God’s hand in it anywhere,
so yes you would be blind to God.

Am I blind to natural reasons for the universe being here without God, actually I’ve never
seen anyone give a natural reason for it being here without God. I’ve seen processes
talked about, but never the reason for why they begun in the first place it is always a
midstream rational for why it is the way it is now, not why it begun.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Yes, that is exactly right, you view it as you think it should be...

Not as I think it should be (for sure), but as it is.

I'm an atheist still, because I'm a sceptic. I'm not a sceptic because I'm an atheist. Maybe this is what you fail to understand. If anything colours my views, it would be my scepticism of any explanation that cannot be supported by good evidence.

Originally posted by C Hess
Not as I think it should be (for sure), but as it is.

I'm an atheist still, because I'm a sceptic. I'm not a sceptic because I'm an atheist. Maybe this is what you fail to understand. If anything colours my views, it would be my scepticism of any explanation that cannot be supported by good evidence.

You are attempting to justify something I'm not arguing for.

Originally posted by KellyJay
I do not believe I am misunderstanding anything with respect to your Atheism.

That is because you are just too stubborn to actually listen to what people are saying.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You are attempting to justify something I'm not arguing for.

If I misunderstood you, my apologies, but it seemed you were saying that my atheism makes me look at the world and giving me ideas of how it should be, rather than seeing it as it is.