This post is to move a discussion from Sandbox(4) at Entropy’s request.
Over on the Sandbox(4) thread, fifthmonarchyman made two statements that I disagree with:
“I’ve argued repeatedly that humans are hardwired to believe in God.”
“Everyone knows that God exists….”
As my handle indicates, I prefer to lurk. The novelty of being told that I don’t exist overcame my good sense, so I joined the conversation.
For the record, I am what is called a weak atheist or negative atheist. The Wikipedia page describes my position reasonably well:
“Negative atheism, also called weak atheism and soft atheism, is any type of atheism where a person does not believe in the existence of any deities but does not explicitly assert that there are none. Positive atheism, also called strong atheism and hard atheism, is the form of atheism that additionally asserts that no deities exist.”
I do exist, so fifthmonarchyman’s claims are disproved. For some reason he doesn’t agree, hence this thread.
Added In Edit by Alan Fox 16.48 CET 11th January, 2018
This thread is designated as an extension of Noyau. This means only basic rules apply. The “good faith” rule, the “accusations of dishonesty” rule do not apply in this thread.
Your evidence that it is God’s Word ,Fifth. Without that we only know they reject the assertion that it is God’s Word not God’s Word.
Strange that everyone knows God exists but need a book to tell them what God is and wants.
ETA Wonder why that is not hardwired as well.
newton,
Providing evidence is not proving.
It is a start and closer to proof then not providing any.
All there seems to be some confusion here as to what is being said
1) I do not deny that Aluker rejects the belief that any deities exist
2) I do not deny that Aluker does not consciously believe in any God
3) I do not deny that Aluker sincerely believes he does not know God exists
4) I do not assert that Alurker is lying
5) I do not assert that Alurker is not posting in good faith
6) I do no assert that Alurker is ignorant or stupid
I do only assert (when directly asked) that Alurker knows God exists
Hope that clears it up
peace
newton,
Scripture contains evidence. That is what fifth is basing his argument on.
We need much more than a book we need the guidance of the Holy Spirit and a regenerated heart. Our rebellion is that great
https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/spirits-internal-witness/
The Christians here might also be interested in this free book
https://www.desiringgod.org/books/peculiar-glory
peace
fifthmonarchyman,
Maybe you could explanation the difference between belief and knowledge. How can someone know one thing yet believe the opposite?
Because that knowledge is necessary for your argument in order to avoid vicious circularity?
If knowledge is a true belief how can it be knowledge without a belief?
I’ve gone through the Bible from Genesis to Revelation 7 times and some parts in the original languages, and nowhere did I recall it saying anywhere: “atheists don’t exist.”
You of course could cite a verse where in the Bible it says, “atheists don’t exist.”
See here: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/sandbox-4/comment-page-4/#comment-207724
where FMM claims he’s “not aware of any way to have knowledge sans revelation.” He claims “If knowledge is possible, then revelation is possible.” is a tentative assumption of his. If it’s a tentative assumption he should be ready to at least consider he might be wrong about that, but that would mean that knowledge is possible without revelation and he would need to cut the crap about us “knowing” God exists.
pffftt
As long as you have faith that it is God’s Word
What about unconsciously?
Belief is an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists
Knowledge is justified true belief
We all believe various contradictory things. That is because we are finite and fallible and the world is big and complicated and it’s hard to keep track of it all.
check this out
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
The whole point of self examination is find and reconcile or remove our contradictory beliefs.
That should be a big part of what we do in life not just here
quote:
Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, “I believe; help my unbelief!”
(Mar 9:24)
end quote”
peace
I appreciate your religious fervor, Fifth. I will check out your links.
That’s a very generic answer. Now give a specific answer to how someone can profess to be an atheist but in actual fact believe in god and not even know that themselves. You know, from a psychological point of view. Has how that works been revealed to you?
I wonder what would happen if by some error all copies of scripture were lost. That’d be that I guess, unless god starts over. I wonder if he’d mention slavery being bad this time round….
LMFAO. That means knowing god exists is “justified true acceptance that god exists”. What kind of idiot would claim that applies to atheists? Yes, that’s FMM
This is what the Word of God says:
When it says, “they did not believe in God“, it says they did not believe in God. Therefore they are atheists. So the Bible teaches atheists exist. God said it, therefore believe it: Atheists exist.
What about it?
We all believe lots of things unconsciously.
We demonstrate that we believe something at least unconsciously when we act as if it were true.
For instance I show that I believe that the law of non-contridiction is valid when I expect that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time.
If I said that I did not believe that the law of non-contridiction was valid but acted as if I expected that contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time I would demonstrate that did in fact believe that the law of non-contridiction was valid (at least subconsciously)
peace
Hebrew literature has a cool feature called parallelism. You might want to learn about it.
When we look at a couplet in Hebrew poetry we can understand the meaning of one line better by looking at the other.
In this particular couplet “Did not believe in God” is parallel to “did not trust his saving power”.
So “Did not believe in God” means something related to “did not trust his saving power”.
This psalm is talking about the children of Israel at the time of the Exodus, they certainly did not doubt Yahweh’s existence they doubted his desire and ability to do stuff.
If all Alurker means when he says that he does not know God exists is that he does not trust in God’s saving power there would be no disagreement here.
peace
newton,
In addition to faith there is evidence that it is Gods word.
fifth:
dazz:
Fifth is his own worst enemy. It’s something to behold.
OK
God is Truth.
A person could believe that God was not truth but instead was a white haired grandpa that looks like Jerry Garcia setting on a cloud in the sky.
So such a person could accept that truth exists but deny that God exists at the very same time.
This would simply mean that he was mistaken as to God’s identity.
peace
Faith is not taking a blind leap without evidence
Faith is simply trusting in something that has proved itself to be faithful
peace
Right, you demonstrate that you know God exists when you act as if you accept that he exists.
You do this all the time.
Like when you assume the law of noncontridiction is valid and that your senses and powers of reasoning are generally reliable. When you have no justification for doing so if God does not exist.
peace
I’m not as keen bible reader as you and fifth, but I found this:
Ps 14:1
“…The fool says in his heart, “There is no God…”
Does this prove that the bible acknowledges that there are atheists, although it calls them fools?
We’ve already addressed that, J-Mac. Read the thread.
And yes, that passage acknowledges the existence of atheists — people who do not believe in God — though fifth denies it.
If by atheist we mean someone who says in his heart that there is no God then atheists certainly exist.
On the other hand if by atheist we mean someone who does not know God exists then atheists don’t exist.
I would speculate that one reason the psalm calls them fools is because they tell themselves something that they know is not true.
peace
That’s not what you’ve been saying up to now. You’ve been asserting that “Everyone knows that God exists.” That’s a direct quote. If you’d prefaced it with “I believe” I might not have raised the issue.
Then again, I might have. If you say that then I tell you that I don’t believe in any god, you still have to take me at my word according to the TSZ rules.
Let’s see you park those priors and abide by the rules.
Part of the problem is with the definition of atheism
I (with the apostle Paul) claim everyone knows God exists. If an atheist is someone who does not know that God exists then their are no atheists end of story.
On the other hand there is no place in the bible that says that there are no people who claim that God does not exist.
Do you see the difference?
peace
According to the rules you must accept that I am posting in good faith, honestly, without suffering from ignorance, stupidity, or dementia. That means that accusing me of deceiving myself is not allowed’. So yes, in order to participate in discussions here and abide by the rules you must accept for the sake of argument something you don’t believe. That’s part of the park your priors by the door concept. Who knows what you might learn?
No, it’s being willing to entertain new ideas and perhaps learn from them. You should try it.
I do not. I’ve made that very clear. Your claim is wrong. Please abide by the rules (and common courtesy) and stop trying to tell me what I believe.
when I say anything at all there is a implicit “I believe” in front of it.
When I say “2 plus 2 is four” you can read “I believe 2 plus 2 is four”
When I say “Trump is president” you can read “I believe Trump is president”
When I say “my user name is fifthmonarchyman” you can read “I believe my user name is fifthmonarchyman”
I make no claims to infallibility on anything whatsoever I’m not God.
The confusion seems to be on your part.
Good. You have no reason not to take my statement about my lack of belief at face value.
That cannot possibly follow from what you just wrote and be aligned with the TSZ rules. I know my own views. I have explained them to you repeatedly. You are saying that I am dishonest, ignorant, stupid, or some combination of those. That is against the rules. Stop it.
Here is my question for fifth:
If we are hardwired to believe in God, or we already know that God exist, what do we need faith for?
I found these two:
John 12:39-40
Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Not only do atheists exist, the Christian god creates them.
Again I’m not telling you what you believe.
I’m telling you when directly asked that you know God exists
It’s not about you it’s about God making himself know
Do you think that it’s even possible for you to know something and not admit it to yourself?
peace
As I wrote before, from your other statements, this isn’t entirely accurate. Are you now saying that your concept of god is synonym for “truth”? Here’s the definition of that word:
“- the quality or state of being true.
– that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality.
– a fact or belief that is accepted as true.”
If what you mean by “God” is simply “truth”, why use the word with more baggage? If you mean more by “God”, what exactly is that more?
Faith is not believing something with out evidence. It’s trusting in someone who has proven themselves faithful.
We need faith because that is the only way to please God.
peace
Nice assertion. Got any rational arguments to back it up?
And before you try to turn around and ask me a question instead of answering, just don’t. You made the claim, you support it.
Really? I find it more than a little sad.
Is your preferred definition authoritative in some way? Why?
God is not “simply” truth but he is truth.
And I don’t find the term God to have more baggage than the term truth
I already posted a handy summery the first line of which includes “whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but himself”
Since we can’t comprehend his essence there is no way for anyone to spell out “exactly what is that more”.
I think you would be well served for now just dwelling on what truth is. It would take a thousand lifetimes to get a handle on that aspect of his being.
peace
peace
Worth repeating:
Yes, you are.
I’ve told you repeatedly that is not the case. I am telling you that honestly. According to the site rules you must accept that, at least for purposes of discussion here. You are not allowed to tell me that I don’t exist.
When you have some evidence that such a thing exists, you can use it in the discussion. All I see here is you being rude and refusing to abide by the rules.
I spent a lot of time extricating myself from my faith. I suspect I’ve done far more introspection than you have. I certainly know my own mind better than you know it.
Follow the rules and stop telling me what I know.
I’m willing to entertain the idea that you don’t believe in God. In fact I would very much welcome that conversation.
For instance if there is no God how can you know your reasoning is valid?
peace
Interesting choice of words
Do you think you can decide what you believe? If I offered you a thousand dollars to believe in the Easter bunny could you do it?
If I offered you a thousand dollars to stop believing that cigarettes cause cancer could you do it?
peace
If you mean more than “truth” by the word “God” then you’re bringing in some baggage. It is less than honest to use one meaning and then equivocate to another.
And yet you seem to have all kinds of opinions on it.
This subthread started because I asked you what you meant by the word “God” in your claim “Everyone knows that God exists.” You have yet to answer. In fact, you give every appearance of avoiding answering. Please stop squirming and participate fully.
I think you would be well served to not condescend when you lack the intellectual and moral authority to do so. You answer no questions, you refuse to abide by the site rules, you are rude, and yet you think yourself superior. You’re not.
Then start by abiding by the site rules and accepting what I say at face value.
That’s a ridiculously loaded question and tangential to the issue. By the rules of this site you must accept, at least for the sake of discussion, that I do not believe in any god. When you are willing to abide by those rules, we can continue. So long as you keep violating them, there is no point in raising other topics.
Lets say I’m an atheist….
I have been admiring the Fibonacci sequence present in nature…
I acknowledge that nature used a mathematical formula to create life systems that have Fibonacci sequence in them… Nobody can deny this fact that nature used a mathematical formula in many life forms…
But if someone says; if you acknowledge that many life systems have been made using a mathematical formula, you must also acknowledge that a mathematician applied this formula because natural processes don’t known mathematics…
If I disagree, would it make me what fifth has been talking about? Would it make me an atheist who acknowledges the obvious-mathematical formula-but refuses to attribute this formula to a mathematician because of its implications?