1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Atheism vs (ignosticism, theological noncognitivism, igtheism)

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Igtheism, May 5, 2020.

  1. Conscious thoughts

    Conscious thoughts Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    13,385
    Ratings:
    +8,461
    Religion:
    Osmanli Nakshibedi Way, Sufism
    Thank you for your answer :) I asked my questions because from your posts it looked very much as of you where wanting to ban any form of religion and or spiritual practice.
     
  2. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    Well, I can't see that any religion is anything more than meaningless word trickery, and I would like to see people not be tricked by it any more, but as long as they're not hurting anybody, I can tolerate it. Most Unitarians aren't theists but they have church services.
     
  3. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    I’m opposed to all beliefs of any kind, but I’m also opposed to alliances revolving around campaigns of denunciation. Also, I’m opposed to all beliefs, but I’m not opposed to everything in all the religions. I have no interest in trying to turn people away from following religions. All I want is for them to stop using “God says ...” to excuse and camouflage their harmful attitudes and behavior. I also want them to stop using “Science says ...” in those ways.
    I’m not interested in keeping that going, but I could be interested in discussing your ideas about how that might happen.
    I’m thinking that you won’t be kicked out, but you might get a warning about the rule against proselytizing, using the forums to try to recruit people for your movement. I’m thinking that informing people about it, and debating about what it’s promoting, are not against the rules, but using the forums to try to recruit people for it, is.
     
  4. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    14,796
    Ratings:
    +3,500
    Religion:
    Hindu Sanatana Dharma
    Let me pose a question. What about the status of an 'error' of judgement? Or the status of a dream elephant?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    Now I’m confused. You’re promoting a movement which you say may eventually rid the world of religion, but you say that you aren’t against all denominations. Are you trying to help rid the world of all religions, completely, or just some parts of some of them? All I want is for people to stop using “God says ...” or any other ways of thinking, to excuse and camouflage their harmful attitudes and behavior.
     
  6. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    Jim>>>All I want is for them to stop using “God says ...” to excuse and camouflage their harmful attitudes and behavior. I also want them to stop using “Science says ...” in those ways.

    I'm with you on that, but it may be that the only way to stop it is to get rid of "belief on faith".

    Jim>>I could be interested in discussing your ideas about how that might happen

    I'm interested in discussing whether "belief by faith" is really belief. I can't believe it is. I'm interested in how people can be talking when they can't think of anything they could be talking about, yet believe they are making sense to themselves. I just wish somebody would explain that to me. That's all I can see that people are doing when they say "God".
     
  7. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    Can you give me some examples of what you mean by “belief by faith,” and beliefs that are really belief?
    I’m not sure this will help, but maybe it will: “God” as part of some analogies, and as some characters in some stories
     
  8. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    Imagine two children who think that their Christmas presents were put under their Christmas trees by Santa Claus. One of them says “Look what Santa Claus brought me!” In that moment, she might not have any picture of Santa Claus in her mind at all. In that moment, “Look what Santa Claus brought me!” is just a different way of saying “Look what I got for Christmas!”
     
  9. Jim

    Jim Nets of Wonder

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,169
    Ratings:
    +2,175
    Religion:
    personal development and community service, with love for nature
    @Igtheism If you don’t have the same issues with “science says” that you have with “God says,” then my interests might actually be opposed to yours.
     
  10. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    Jim>>Can you give me some examples of what you mean by “belief by faith,” and beliefs that are really belief?

    I believe that there is now a pencil lying here on my desk. That's really a belief that I hold at this moment. I believe that belief is not something we can choose. What people say they believe on faith, they're just saying that. They're just hoping and wishing so strongly that they think they believe it. Otherwise they couldn't doubt their verbal claim that "God" refers to something they claim to worship. But all Christians tell me they doubt and pray for more faith. I don't have any doubt whatever that a pencil is lying on my desk. Belief is not voluntary,

    Did you read the article?

    The Ineffability of God | Ron Rolheiser

    That article clearly show that Rolheiser believes that he believes in something specific that no human has ever thought of. In other words, he "talks about what he cannot possibly talk about".

    Jim>>>If you don’t have the same issues with “science says” that you have with “God says,” then my interests might actually be opposed to yours.

    I'm not sure I know what you're talking about? Can you give me an example of something "science says" that you don't go along with? If we listened only to science and ignored the emotions and feelings of people, then science might tell us "We have too many people on earth, so we should kill off some, for that would make life better for the ones that are left". I certainly would not go along with that. I consider the emotions of people as part of science. So I'd like some examples. Thanks.
     
    #150 Igtheism, May 15, 2020
    Last edited: May 15, 2020
  11. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    Jim<<Imagine two children who think that their Christmas presents were put under their Christmas trees by Santa Claus. One of them says “Look what Santa Claus brought me!” In that moment, she might not have any picture of Santa Claus in her mind at all. In that moment, “Look what Santa Claus brought me!” is just a different way of saying “Look what I got for Christmas!”<<

    Kids believe that a very imaginable man in a red suit brought their presents, and they truly believe it because their parents lied to them and told them -- but it was something imaginable. "Santa Claus" is not at all like "God". "Santa" stands for a vivid (though false) concept, whereas "God" refer to any concept at all. Kids have something to imagine to believe that the moniker refers to. (Adult) Christians don't with their row of letters "G..

    I live in the Bible Belt, a Southeastern state, and have no choice but to get along with Christians. They can't help their brainwashing.. So I almost never reveal my stand around here. In fact even sing in a church choir, but only in a liberal church.
     
  12. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    Well, I do believe that all religion is bunk. I can't help that. But it's just like I believe that Trump is all bunk and is doing damage to this country. I can't help that either. So I'm in this forum for the same reason a Democrat might be in a Republican forum. Democrats are not for getting rid of Republicans nor vice-versa. Both believe in a two-party system. But each side needs to check on the other. Do you think I should not be here?
     
  13. Conscious thoughts

    Conscious thoughts Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    13,385
    Ratings:
    +8,461
    Religion:
    Osmanli Nakshibedi Way, Sufism
    I have no problem with you being here :)
    It was some of your postings (in my eyes it was extreme atheistic,) and I kind of have had problems with atheists in this forum before, so I was maybe spooked by what you wrote.
     
  14. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    Amanaki>>I have no problem with you being here :)
    It was some of your postings (in my eyes it was extreme atheistic,) and I kind of have had problems with atheists in this forum before, so I was maybe spooked by what you wrote.<<

    You label me "an atheist". That label doesn't fit me at all. Let's look up "atheist" in the dictionary and see who the lexicographers think should be labeled that: The Merriam-Webster lexicographers wrote this under "atheist": "a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods". But Christians, Jews, Muslims and Hindus don't either, they just think they do. Speaking and behaving as though they believed in the existence of a god that they worshiped doesn't show at all that they do. But they can't believe in the existence of any god that they worship because they haven't defined one to believe in the existence of to be worshiping.

    Also some ancient people worshiped Zeus and Thor (who were well-defined by the ancient Greeks as super humans living on a mountain) They are labeled "nonexistent gods". We don't have to worship these gods in order for us to label them "gods". Other ancient people worshiped the earth and the sun. Therefore to be consistent with our labeling of Zeus and Thor as "nonexistent gods", we must label the earth and the sun as "existent gods". They're gods as much as Zeus and Thor. The big difference is that they exist whereas Zeus and Thor don't. So I can't say I don't believe in the existence of a god or any gods. I definitely believe in the existence of these gods, namely the earth and the sun.

    So there are two reasons why I am not an atheist.
     
  15. night912

    night912 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,356
    Ratings:
    +523
    Religion:
    Not religious
    Both of them are the same. When using the word, "god," just like as it's with "santa," the word can can also be referenced back to a concept, whatever that may be. I believe the reason why you think that the "god" concept is different is because you are viewing it as having only one definition, while at the same time, you also refer to the definition based on individual/specific "god" from individuals. The problem here is how us, humans, communicate. We use words to define other words. And words usually have many definitions. Me, personally, I don't use the dictionary as being the absolute rule, instead I what's more important is the the usage of the word.

    Something that is important and should be taken into consideration is that, not everyone will use the same definition. One theist's may have a concept of what they see as "god" and see another theist's concept of "god," is not "god" at all. And even "Santa" is not consistent, having a variety of what Santa really.

    You shouldn't confuse "god" as having an unclear definition and/or concept, with not having one at all.
     
  16. night912

    night912 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,356
    Ratings:
    +523
    Religion:
    Not religious
    I disagree with you here. God is not necessarily what it is being describes with and/or represents. Let me clarify this using your example of the sun and earth. The sun and earth are not the entirety of their concept of "god." A "sun god," is not necessarily the actual sun. So one can believe that the sun and earth exist, and still not believe that a god exist.

    I'll give an example. A topic of debate these days regarding christianity, being debated by Christians and non-christians alike. That is, the existence of a historical Jesus. I'm not going to go into great details about it, so a brief description of it is that there was an actual person named jesus who existed that went around spreading his teachings, but wasn't necessarily the son of god and/or god. So someone can believe that there was a person named jesus that existed, but don't believe a "god jesus" exist.

    If those ancient people that believed Zeus is a god and existed. And there there was an actual person who they considered to be Zeus. If that, then would you believe that a god named Zeus exist? To simply put it, if people started worshipping me as a god, and you know that I exist. Then, do you consider yourself as being not an atheist because you believe and know that I exist, regardless of me being an actual god or not?
     
  17. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    A
     
    #157 Igtheism, May 25, 2020
    Last edited: May 25, 2020
  18. night912

    night912 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,356
    Ratings:
    +523
    Religion:
    Not religious
    You're mistaken, I did noticed that you've made a distinction between the two, but it doesn't matter whether, God/god Santa/santa are still the same like how I explained above. I don't presuppose a definition of "god" for Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. I let the theist define what they believe to be the concept of god. They put meaning in to the word.

    We communicate using words to describe other words, in effect, we give meanings to the words. I'll use your example, "Bliffle". In this context, even that is not meaningless. It's usage here is to show the concept of something that is meaningless, but by doing that, you've made it into something that is meaningful. I personally don't make the distinction of "God" and "god" as being different, but a Christian does. And therefore gives it a meaning.

    Your post above shows that "God" does have a meaning, you've even given examples of it. It appears that you think that it's meaningless because you do not agree with their definition of the word.

    And you're also mistaken about me not knowing about Christians, Jews, and Muslims. I know about them though my interactions with them. I accept it when they say that they believe the things that they believe. I don't presuppose a belief for them and become the authority in regards to their beliefs.

    I purposely used "S", "s", "G", and "g" interchangeably here to show my point. I'll show you my point here. You said this earlier,

    "We all have a concept of Santa. But why did you spell it with a small "S". You're the first person I've ever seen do that."

    You have in mind, the concept of what "Santa" is. When I used "santa," I gave it meaning to the point where even you admitted to being the first time seeing someone using a lower case "s" and yet, you were able to grasp that I was referring to the same "Santa concept." All this shows that, the meaning of a word is determined by its usage. And it is not the dictionary that determines the meaning. It's the person who used the word, is the one who determines which definition is being used. So to answer your question, that is the rule that the majority of English speakers use when speaking and writing.
     
  19. Igtheism

    Igtheism Rdwin McCravy

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2020
    Messages:
    150
    Ratings:
    +9
    Religion:
    None
    night912>>You're mistaken, I did noticed that you've made a distinction between the two, but it doesn't matter whether, God/god

    Can you do anything but assert (on faith) that it doesn't matter whether you speak the word "god" or the row of letters "God"? The word "god" (capitalized only when at the beginning of a sentences) can refer to many things of which we have vivid concepts of things worshiped, like 'Zeus' and 'Hercules', to name some imaginary things, and 'the sun' and 'the earth', to name some real things that people worship. But I know of no concept of anything that "God", "Yahweh", "Elohim" and "Allah" when spoken by a Christian, Jew, or Muslim could refer to. And -- you haven't told me of any concept they could be having when they speak or write those.

    night912>> Santa/santa are still the same like how I explained above.<<

    Everybody I know capitalizes "Santa". It's a perfectly meaningful word. We see Santas at many department stores in December.

    nnight912>>I don't presuppose a definition of "god" ["God"] for Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc. I let the theist define what they believe to be the concept of god.

    But they all say "God is the creator and ruler of the universe". Are you saying that there are some who don't say that?

    night912>>They put meaning in to the word.

    How can you believe that "creator and ruler of the universe" makes sense? The words "creator" and "ruler" can only be defined in terms of an already existing universe. Saying "The universe exists is because somebody created it" is like saying, "The Internet exists because somebody googled 'how to create the Internet' and followed the instructions from that website." That is NOT a false statement, that's an utterance that makes no sense at all. That's because "googling" and "website" are defined in terms of the Internet. Before the Internet, "googling" and "website" were meaningless. It's the same with "creator" and "the universe". [I covered this in another thread "First Cause"]. You need for "universe" to already be a defined word before you can speak of "creating" and "ruling".

    night912>>We communicate using words to describe other words, in effect, we give meanings to the words. I'll use your example, "Bliffle". In this context, even that is not meaningless. It's usage here is to show the concept of something that is meaningless, but by doing that, you've made it into something that is meaningful. I personally don't make the distinction of "God" and "god" as being different, but a Christian does. And therefore gives it a meaning. Your post above shows that "God" does have a meaning<<<

    Yes, when you put quotation marks around a row of letters, what you have means that row of letters.

    night912<<you've even given examples of it. It appears that you think that it's meaningless because you do not agree with their definition of the word.<<

    I agree that "God" means the three letters that spell it. Not only is it meaningful, but "God" EXISTS! because I can see "God" written there on the screen where I typed it. If "God" (the three letters that spell it) didn't exist, I wouldn't be able to see them there on the screen, would I? Your mistake here is forgetting that Christians don't claim to worship "God" because they don't worship any alphabet letters. They say "I worship God", not "I worship "God" ". [They also don't say "I worship god".]

    night912<<And you're also mistaken about me not knowing about Christians, Jews, and Muslims. I know about them though my interactions with them. >>

    Then why haven't you told of any concept you believe they have for "God", "Yahweh", "Elohim", or "Allah"?

    night912<<I accept it when they say that they believe the things that they believe.>>

    Accept what? Can't you say what you're talking about that they say that you say you 'accept'?

    night912<<I don't presuppose a belief for them and become the authority in regards to their beliefs.<<

    So I take it that you believe that when Christians, Jews and Muslims speak or write the rows of letters "God", "Yahweh", "Elohim", and "Allah", they are referring to something. What do you believe they are referring to? Please answer.
     
    #159 Igtheism, May 26, 2020
    Last edited: May 26, 2020
  20. night912

    night912 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2019
    Messages:
    1,356
    Ratings:
    +523
    Religion:
    Not religious
    Your whole argument fails because it is a fallacious argument and is contingent on using the fallacies that you've committed, in order it to even have the appearance of being an argument, let alone a rational one. Off the top of my head, I can name two, moving the goalpost and special pleading. And of course, a strawman has to be thrown in as one of your counterargument against mine. You've used, "concept" as being something that we use alongside a word and its definition. But then you throw in a restriction only allowing concepts that are aligned with your argument. Then there's also the moving of the goalpost. You started off with using Santa as an example for the position of the achievable goal. Then once I've demonstrated that I've reached the goal, which it was explaining how it is meaningful the concept of "God" is, which was the equivalent to the concept of Santa. And response to that was, "we're not talking about Santa." It's laughable that someone even considered that reasoning as being a rational.

    And of course the strawman came in when you tried to represent my argument as being an argument for just the actual three letter word, "God." And that was after I had clarified my position.

    You are wrong when you used Zeus as being the concept for "god." Zeus is an example of a god, not the concept of god. One needs to have a concept of what "god" is in order to consider Zeus falling into the category of a god. So you failed on this point.

    Next, your internet analogy also fails because you are describing something that is not equivalent to the "creator"/created in regards to the universe. You are arguing about a concept when it comes to a creator and the universe. But in your internet analogy, you are arguing about the actual words that can be found on the internet. It is nothing more than a bait and switch tactic that happens to be quite transparent, at least for some. But in doing so, you've managed to confuse yourself and the end. I noticed that once you argued that the existence of the concept of "creator/created" is dependent on the universe being in existence beforehand. But in actuality, concepts are dependent on us, humans. Concepts only exist because the human mind exist and is able to come up with the concepts. Searching for information on Google regarding how the internet was created can be found on the internet. The words that you see are not the mechanism how the internet was created, but the concept in which those words are used to describe the process, is the mechanism. So your point here also failed.

    You accept the concept that Zeus is a god, and people such as the ancient Greeks once worshipped him as being a god. But when it comes to Christians, Jews and Muslims, you moved the goal further to away. Zeus is the label we put on the particular "god" that the former believe in and "God" is the label we put on the particular "god" that the latter believes in.

    And unlike you, I don't assert a concept of what "God" is and is not, then handing it to Christians and telling them that you know them more than they know themselves. Besides, you've already given examples of it already. Your argument regarding their beliefs is the same as what some apologists argue regarding atheists. The argument that, "atheists really do believe that a god exist, they just don't want to accept it."

    It all comes down to you believing that "God" is meaningless because you are unwilling to accept the concept that a Christian has given you regarding their beliefs on the god that they believe in. A concept that doesn't make sense to you, does not necessarily mean that it's meaningless. And not accepting that their god exist is not the same as not accepting that they believe that their god exist. It's not a rational way of thinking if someone defends a dishonest position, the position that asks a Christian to explain their reasons behind their usage of "God" then after the explanation, one rejects their reasons simply because it is not what the individual had in mind.

    BTW,
    Just remember this one thing, you don't really believe all those things that you've said. You might think and act as if you do, but in actuality, you don't. Instead, what you really believe, are all the things that I said in my explanation that I presented. And if you can come to accept it, who knows, santa might even bring you a present for Christmas, with a note that reads,

    To: the actual person, and not the word "Igtheism" that is found on the internet, may this present also give you meaning how like it does with those who believe that I exist.

    From: Santa ;)
     
Loading...