{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Изменено (VENOM_MDK_117):
12/26/2015 7:31:04 PM
292
A question for atheist
I'm Christian so hate all you want were used to it, but this is not a hate thread, it's a simple question....errr well not simple but ends in a paradox so I would like for you to answer the question because I can't understand it.
So the true definition of atheist is " one who doesn't believe in God or Gods."
Okay let me out it this way. To be an atheist you don't believe in Gods. But without gods you couldn't be atheist. Therefore being an atheist is a paradox. There is no way to not believe in a god without acknowleding that that person or thing is or once was a god?
English
#Offtopic
-
A lack of a belief is not a belief
-
No sweetie that's not how it works
-
Thats not the definition of an atheist. An atheist is [u]someone who lacks a belief in a higher power[/u]. However a lack of a belief is not a belief in itself. You're paradox is non existent as that is not the definition of an atheist. Also, people who hate religion are anti-theist. So be careful when you jump to conclusions.
-
Do you acknowledge the existence of a character in a novel named Harry Potter? Is that character "real"? No. I acknowledge Harry Potters existence but I don't believe he's a real entity.
-
I don't understand
-
1 ответ
-
How old are you?
-
This is quite possibly the most stupid thing I've ever had the misfortune of reading.
-
Изменено (BlinksAlot): 12/30/2015 12:51:30 PMNo its not a paradox because people can [u]believe[/u] in damn near anything regardless of the reality, furthermore you're saying there is no way to not believe in God by acknowledging the concept of God. That in itself is a fallacy since one needs the very concept to believe or doubt it.
-
Изменено (Dedication4life): 12/30/2015 11:51:14 AMDo you belive in ghosts? Or aliens? Animals that can talk?
-
God was created as an explanation for the unknown, and then evolved into something more. We truly don't know if he exists or not. We can never know.
-
Изменено (Drone): 12/30/2015 9:26:11 AM
-
8 отв.No, see someone saying "there is no God" does not create a paradox. It is when someone begins to start trying to disprove God that creates the paradox. Every time someone triesto disprove God, an answer is throwm back meaning that every "disproval" builds a stronger case for God. In summation. For an atheist to say "i dont believe" doesnt create a paradox, it stops right there. They may even support it with a why. But it is when they claim to be able to disprove God that they allow for further support for his existence, thus starts the paradox.
-
Well, atheists simple means that u dont BELIEVE in god/gods, not that u meen that they simply dont exist. Im an atheist myself, but i believe that we cant deny nor confirm that a god really exists [spoiler]my grammar may be a bit wrong, dig in grammar-n.azi's![/spoiler]
-
32 отв.Изменено (Princess Anomaly): 12/27/2015 8:41:41 PMSaying that I wouldn't exist without a god implies that a god exists in the first place, which he/she/they/it doesn't. Belief in a deity is taught. We're all born with no knowledge of any god, we're technically all atheists at birth. No one believes in a god until someone tells them a god exists. Some people become indoctrinated into the faith of their parents or community, while some of us reject the mass delusion that is religion.
-
1 ответIs your logic a block of swiss cheese? [spoiler]cuz I'm seein' a lot of holes[/spoiler]
-
4 отв.Изменено (Killlerschaf): 12/28/2015 10:35:18 AMEver heard of a syllogism? If not, that's why your train of thought is absolutely wrong. The Christian God is a concept of an omnipotent being, who is by definition superhuman. The greek gods were still superhumans, however not omnipotent. The Buddhists oth believe in Buddha, who once was human, and definitely wasn't omnipotent. So the first issue with your question is one of the nomenclature. What kind of god do you mean (you could say that it's obvious that you mean the Christian interpretation of a god, you question isn't formulated in such a way though)? The second issue is the word "believe". Believing means that you have no proof. You just believe. Thus going by the word believe, an atheist has absolutely no need of acknowledging the true existence of a god, as he refuses to believe that such an entity, the concept of a god itself, could even exist. If god would truly exist, by definition, atheism itself would be wrong. There simply is no Paradox. Just a huge logical fallacy in your post. A believer needs god, to justify his faith. If god isn't real, his faith was useless. He might have even worshipped the wrong god. An atheist however needs the inexistence of God. If God would exist, the PoV of the Atheist would be inherently wrong, as reality contradicts the Atheist's beliefs. Your question and paradox are nonsensical, simply because you don't seem to realise that an Atheist has no need for a God's existence. If the concept of a God truly exists outside of metaphysical hallucinations, Atheists wouldn't exist. I liked the analogy from other users: Do I have to truly believe in Unicorns/Dragons and suppose their existence is real, to say that they aren't real? No of course not. Dragons and Unicorns are creatures from fairy tales, nothing more, and nothing else. Just because I can imagine something, doesn't mean that it truly exists. You must also have some sort of persecution complex, as Christians have it mightily well in our western societies. As a Muslim however, I would understand your prefacing words of hate and intolerance towards religions.
-
1 ответJust because we give something a word doesn't mean it's real. We have a word for unicorn, but we know unicorns aren't real. We have a word for leprechauns, but we know leprechauns aren't real. Same goes for gods.
-
2 отв.I believe in the 8 divines
-
Where is the question?
-
Guys he's right. I need to go reevaluate my life after being blessed with this paragraph of goodness...
-
The Domain believes you are willfully playing ignorant, but if you are not, The Domain is in awe.
-
Ontological evidence is faulty no matter what you're arguing.
-
42 отв.No worries brah it's trendy and fun for teenie boppers to be atheist thru the adolescent years. It'll change later for sure
-
1 ответYour logic is flawed, there is no paradox. That's like saying centaurs must exist for me to not believe in them.
-
That makes no sense.
