Pope says atheists can go to heaven...

[cybercoma]

The belief that there is nothing to the universe other than what can be explained by science *is* a belief.

And that has nothing to do with atheism.

[TimG]

Once again, you are twisting the definition to suit your own silly beliefe that somehow a non-belief is actually a belief.

What you seem to miss is that by not believing in gods you are choosing to believe in metaphysical framework that does not include gods. That is a belief. It can't be anything but a belief.

[cybercoma]

Metaphysics is not religion. It's philosophy. There's a difference. Otherwise being a political conservative means you're part of the Church of Conservatism.

[The_Squid]

What you seem to miss is that by not believing in gods you are choosing to believe in metaphysical framework that does not include gods. That is a belief. It can't be anything but a belief.

That is a bunch of gibberish. "Metaphysical framework"? So I "choose to believe" something? Really? So disbelief in the sasquatch is choosing to believe? LOL How does that make any sense?

Again, you are twisting a definition to suit your own purposes.

Not belieiving is not a belief.

[TimG]

So I "choose to believe" something?

Yep. It makes no difference that you don't want to acknowledge it. You care enough about metaphysics to bother to debate with me so that means you must have a set of beliefs about metaphysics - beliefs that don't happen to include a god.

[Mighty AC]

A lack of belief in something does not equate to a belief in the opposite.

A large jar contains an unknown amount of jellybeans. You claim there are an even number of beans. I deny that assertion. My position does not equate to a belief that the total is odd. I simply do not accept that the total is even, due to a lack of evidence.

Atheists simply deny the claim that gods exist; which, does equate to the assertion that gods do not exist.

Edited January 21, 2014 by Mighty AC

[cybercoma]

He's not debating metaphysics. He's debating your terrible grasp on language and logic.

[eyeball]

Once again, you are twisting the definition to suit your own silly beliefe that somehow a non-belief is actually a belief.

Atheism is the disbelief of any gods or the supernatural. "I don't believe in gods"

not "I believe there are no gods". Who says that?? "I believe there no sasquatches"... No one says that.

Maybe we should say it that way, it does seem a little more to the point. As I've said before even if there was a god I wouldn't necessarily believe in it in the sense that I would trust, follow, worship or obey it. I mean, if god was a murderous fickle son of a bitch why would anyone believe in anything it says, does or says we should do?

Edited January 21, 2014 by eyeball

[cybercoma]

Look. There's no point discussing this. Atheists are very clear in where they stand. I've been very clear as to why agnostics must be atheists, but not all atheists are agnostics. There's another thread (and more) where this debate already happened. Let's move on.

[TimG]

A lack of belief in something does not equate to a belief in the opposite.

You are being pedantic. Atheism/theism is never just about gods - it is the root of an individual's metaphysical belief system because no one can construct a metaphysical belief system without addressing the question of gods. They either exist, don't exist or are not relevant. The rest of the metaphysical belief system is constructed based the initial assumptions (a.k.a. beliefs). IOW - in a extremely pedantic and irrelevant definition of the word, not believing is not a belief in itself but anyone who cares enough about metaphysics to argue the point most definitely has a belief system that is built on their assumptions about gods.

[TimG]

Look. There's no point discussing this. Atheists are very clear in where they stand. I've been very clear as to why agnostics must be atheists, but not all atheists are agnostics. There's another thread (and more) where this debate already happened. Let's move on.

Your argument is a irrational as a bunch of Jews claiming that all Christian are Jews. IOW - the opinion that matters is not the one who self-identifies as a Jew but that the one who self-identifies as Christian. I don't know any self identified agnostics who claim to be atheists. Edited January 21, 2014 by TimG

[cybercoma]

Your argument is a irrational as a bunch of Jews claiming that all Christian are Jews. IOW - the opinion that matters is not the one who self-identifies as a Jew but that the one who self-identifies as Christian. I don't know any self identified agnostics who claim to be atheists.

then they believe in God. Is that what you're telling me?

[TimG]

then they believe in God. Is that what you're telling me?

No - I am saying that they have no opinion. It is not relevant to the metaphysical outlook. They don't make claims that it is 'highly improbable' or that 'need evidence'. Such claims are the mark of a self declared atheist.

[cybercoma]

Do they believe in God? That's not a question you can logically abstain from. Either you believe in God or you don't. A different question--does God exist?--you can abstain from that. But that's not what I asked and it's irrelevant to atheism. Atheism is the absence of belief. Since agnostics can't logically believe in the existence of a God, whom they abstain from being able to know, they therefore belong to the category of atheists.

Edited January 21, 2014 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

It's absolutely painful discussing this with you when you categorically refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that atheism describes belief and agnosticism describes knowledge. If you can't even work with the same language, there's no point even talking to you.

[TimG]

Either you believe in God or you don't.

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? The answer either yes or no? Right? Or is it more complicated? People can choose to not have an opinion on gods. That is different than not believing in gods.

Let's put it another way. There are broadly 3 metaphysical belief systems:

1) Those that presume gods do not exist;

2) Those that presume gods do exist;

3) Those that presumes that the existence of gods is irrelevant.

What words would you use to describe each of those beliefs?

[The_Squid]

Have you stopped beating your wife yet? The answer either yes or no? Right?

No, that's asinine. The question is "do you beat your wife?" It's either yes or no. The other is a loaded question.

[cybercoma]

People can choose to not have an opinion on gods. That is different than not believing in gods.

Its different and irrelevant, since the question is about what they believe. Not taking a stance is simply refusing to answer when it comes to belief. You know what you believe at all times.

Let's put it another way. There are broadly 3 metaphysical belief systems:1) Those that presume gods do not exist;2) Those that presume gods do exist;3) Those that presumes that the existence of gods is irrelevant.What words would you use to describe each of those beliefs?

Your "other way" here is referring to knowledge claims and not belief, so they're not relevant to the point I'm making.

Look, clearly you have no interest in understanding what atheism actually means and how it relates to agnosticism, so I'm done even trying to have a conversation with you. Several others in this thread have absolutely no trouble understanding what I'm saying, so I can only assume that you're just unwilling. That doesn't make this discussion interesting or enlightening. You want to somehow convince me that agnostics are not atheists. Substituting the definition of atheism into that sentence yields: you want to tell me agnostics are not without belief in God(s).

If you don't understand why that comes off as absurd yet, then there's nothing else to be said here.

Edited January 21, 2014 by cybercoma

[On Guard for Thee]

If the Pope says I as an atheist can go to heaven than I am going to take him up on it. He wouldn't lie to me would he? In any case I have thought about this before and if I do ever end up there I reckon what will happen is that God, whoever he or she is, will greet me at the door and welcome me in saying something to the effect of "good on you for not buying into all that crap they made up about me down there on earth"

[kimmy]

Playing semantics with the definition of "atheism" is a debating antic used by people like Christian apologist William Lane Craig, or by internet forum trolls and keyboard warriors like some we've seen here at the MLW.

Insisting that atheism means nothing less than compete certainty that no god exists is a rhetorical stunt meant to demand one of two concessions. Either "yes, I am absolutely certain that there is no god", in which point you're demanded to provide proof of the non-existence of something. Or else, "no, I can not say with absolute certainty that there is no god," in which you are told "well then you're not actually an atheist, you are an agnostic. You're actually open to the possibility that god exists. You have no position on the matter."

It's a sleezy rhetorical tactic that is intended to either nullify your opinion, or force you into an ideological corner.

Previously when this debate came around, I asked American Whatsherface (and betsy, the time before) a question in response. "Do you believe in Leprechauns?"

Tim and sharkman: do you believe in Leprechauns? I will have some follow-up questions once I get your answers.

-k

[kimmy]

On the subject of "atheist churches": one of the few tangible benefits of religious affiliation that can be objectively demonstrated is the benefit of belonging to a community. Some atheists even attend United Universalist congregations just for the sake of belonging to a community.

The existence of "atheist churches" isn't evidence that atheism is actually a religion, it's evidence that atheists would like to enjoy the good parts of belonging to a church without the parts that suck.

-k

[Bonam]

Your argument is a irrational as a bunch of Jews claiming that all Christian are Jews. IOW - the opinion that matters is not the one who self-identifies as a Jew but that the one who self-identifies as Christian. I don't know any self identified agnostics who claim to be atheists.

Several people have self-identified as both agnostic and atheist in this very thread.

You're arguing a completely indefensible and logically self-contradictory position, TimG. Disappointed.

What next, are you gonna use AW's "it's just different" argument in regards to kimmy's question?

Edited January 21, 2014 by Bonam

[Mighty AC]

You are being pedantic. Atheism/theism is never just about gods - it is the root of an individual's metaphysical belief system because no one can construct a metaphysical belief system without addressing the question of gods. They either exist, don't exist or are not relevant. The rest of the metaphysical belief system is constructed based the initial assumptions (a.k.a. beliefs). IOW - in a extremely pedantic and irrelevant definition of the word, not believing is not a belief in itself but anyone who cares enough about metaphysics to argue the point most definitely has a belief system that is built on their assumptions about gods.

You're being obtuse. Theism/Atheism is only about gods.

[cybercoma]

On the subject of "atheist churches": one of the few tangible benefits of religious affiliation that can be objectively demonstrated is the benefit of belonging to a community. Some atheists even attend United Universalist congregations just for the sake of belonging to a community.

The existence of "atheist churches" isn't evidence that atheism is actually a religion, it's evidence that atheists would like to enjoy the good parts of belonging to a church without the parts that suck.

-k

Saying atheist "churches" means its a religion is like saying being a fratboy is a religion.

[Mighty AC]

Saying atheist "churches" means its a religion is like saying being a fratboy is a religion.

Lead us into temptation,

and deliver us a pizza.

For thine is the party,

The bong hit, and the keg stand,

For ever and ever.

Amen.