Jim<<It might not do any good to prove it if no one else is convinced by your arguments.<<
How could you not be convinced? No atheist has ever shown that "God", "Yahweh" and "Allah" are meaningful words. They just assume they are meaningful. It just like what Christians, Jews and Muslims do. The only difference is what they say after making this blunder. Christians utter the meaningless sound "God exists". Atheists utter the meaningless sound "God doesn't exist".
Jim<<Has anyone ever been convinced by your arguments that what you’re saying is true?>>
Yes, everybody who has ever stayed with me long enough to think it through enough. Many walk away. But those who stay with me are always convinced. They have no choice. You can label me "arrogant", but to prove me wrong, you must come up with a meaningful definition for "God" that Christians will accept. BTW, "God is the creator of the universe" is not meaningful, because for one reason it is equivalent to "God created the universe", and "God" must be a defined noun before you can meaningfully put the verb "created" after it.
Jim<<Are you thinking that if a person wants to discredit Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, it might work better to point out that it’s meaningless to say “God exists,” rather than saying “You have no evidence”?
Yes indeed, for that is the undeniable truth. The bitter pill that the atheist must swallow is that it's not just the Christian, Jew and Muslim that is wrong. The atheist is JUST AS WRONG when he babbles his meaningless "God does not exist" as the Christian is when he babbles his "God exists". [The agnostic is also just as wrong as they are when he babbles his "I don't know whether God exists or not".]
Jim<<Maybe. Maybe not.<<
I challenge you to think hard. The question is this: "Are 'God', 'Yahweh' and 'Allah'" meaningful words of the language or not? It never occurs to atheists to ask themselves that question: Am I sure that "God", "Yahweh" and "Allah" are meaningful words? Atheists haven't done anything toward showing that they are speaking meaningfully. They just ASSUME IT! Yes, theists assume it, atheists assume it, agnostics assume it. Don't YOU assume it -- anymore.
Jim<<I have nothing against anyone trying that if they want to.<<<
But it's the only logical thing to try. Can you name something else? Atheists and agnostics just don't realize that they haven't justified their assumption that "God", "Yahweh" and "Allah" are meaningful words. It just doesn't dawn on them that they MUST do that first. They just jump to the conclusion that they are meaningful words, that a god named "God" has been defined, when it hasn't. The "God-god" problem I referred to earlier is because atheists are so convinced that "God" (capitalized) is a meaningful word that they think they are showing disrespect for something by decapitalizing it. But they're not. They're swapping a meaningful word "god" for a meaningless row of letters "God", when nothing has been spoken of to show and disrespect for.
Jim<< For myself personally, I don’t say that “God exists” can’t have any meaning.
What meaning can it have? Can you describe anything that it can mean? How about the row of alphabet letters "Bliffle"? Would you also say "For myself personally, I don't say that "Bliffle exists" can't have meaning?" I don't think you would say that, would you?
If I don't know whether a row of alphabet letters is a meaningful word or not, I just don't speak or write it. I may write it with quotation marks around it, but if I do, I use it only to speak of that particular row of letters that spell it or its pronunciation. I would never use "God" as though I believed it referred to a god. I use it only to speak of a capitalized row of three letters spoken as though it referred to a god.
What about you? Do you speak and write rows of letters when you aren't sure whether they are meaningful or not -- as though you believed they are meaningful words? I don't myself. Do you? Why would you?
Jim<<I say that I personally have never seen any way for it to have any meaning,<<
Would you say that about "Bliffle", too?
Jim<<if people think that they’re using the word “God” in the way it is used in the scriptures of those religions.<<
What way do you believe it is used in the scriptures of those religions? And why do you believe it is?
Jim<<I wouldn’t say “atheism.” I would say: people arguing and protesting against “God” beliefs.
What beliefs are you talking about when you say "God"-beliefs? What I think you are talking about is not anything to label a "God"-belief, but THE BELIEF THAT THEY HAVE A BELIEF! They don't believe in a god. They only THINK they do. But they can't possibly believe in a god because they haven't defined any god to believe in.
They trick themselves into believing that they believe the words "creator of the universe" are meaningful. But "creator of the universe" is meaningless. I can prove to you that "creator of the universe" can make no sense if "creator" is used the only way people can possibly come to learn the usage rule for the word "creator", [i.e., in terms of the already defined word "universe"].
Jim<<I’m thinking that people arguing and protesting against “God” beliefs...<<
But you aren't talking about 'a belief in a god'. You're talking about their belief that they believe in a god. There is a big difference. Think about it.
Jim<<helps perpetuate people using those beliefs to excuse, camouflage and promote harmful attitudes and behavior.<<
The thing they must realize is that they don't really believe in a god at all, but only think they do -- because they haven't defined any god to be believing in. They CAN be shown this truth if they don't walk away. Many Christians, Jews and Muslims will just walk away, but not the intelligent ones.
Jim<<If you mean, when people argue and protest against some other people’s “God” beliefs, I agree.<<
What you and atheists need to realize is that there aren't any god-beliefs anymore. Long ago there were god-beliefs. The ancient Greeks defined a god Zeus and worshiped it. Of course Zeus didn't exist just as unicorns don't exist. But "Zeus" is a meaningful word because they defined it. But nobody can believe in gods like Zeus anymore. So what do they do? They believe that they believe in a god. But they don't.
Jim<<It looks to me like a kind of combat sport with words,<<
Indeed, indeed indeed! Religion is due to language trickery -- the belief that "creator of the universe" is meaningful. It isn't because the word "creator" can only be defined and learned by human IN TERMS of the word "universe". So uttering "creator of the universe" is like uttering "shmeator of the shmuniverse". lol
Jim<<where no one knows or cares what anyone on the opposing team is actually thinking, and no one is actually trying to prove anything to anyone on the other side.<<
But this can all (and I predict will someday) come to a halt when atheists learn the truth that I am imparting to you. I may sound arrogant to you, but I know that I know of no meaningful definition for "God". I also know, and you have admitted that you know of none either.
Jim<<Anyone who is actually trying to change anyone’s mind about anything that really matters might be accused of violating forum rules.>>
Indeed I am very aware that most all forum moderators believe "God" is a defined word. Many cannot stand to be told that it isn't. So I must be careful.
Jim<<In fact, if your purpose here is to try to turn people away from following those religions, you might actually be violating the agreement you made, to be able to post here.>>
I realize that. So maybe from here on I'll just ask "What is your definition for 'God?" I won't say "There is no definition for "God".
Jim<<I don’t think that seeing “God exists,” as not having any meaning would do anything to turn most people away from following any of those religious. I’m thinking that many leaders of those religions have always been aware of that,<<
I'll try not to violate the forum rules. I may ask you for your assistance in what to do and how to word things in case the moderators on here think I'm "proselytizing".