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:
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did you find some good evidence that "G-d does not exist" in Christianity term, God-the-Father? Please present that evidence.Christianity. Keep in mind you are asking for the religions I was part of. This will not include religions I entertained but never joined.
Faith is far closer to ignorance than prudence in not "buying into" anything that can't be supported with verifiable evidence. Subjective experience is severely flawed and unreliable. Which is why the scientific method is used to counteract the inherent bias of personal experience.I'm ignorant, hence I'm an atheist!!!
Is it an acknowledgement from an Atheist that Atheism is a function of ignorance?
Ok, but how is that relevant?No...your confusing the word belief , in this context, for a counterpoint word to 'knowing'; which, it doesn't actually imply. Theism is 'belief', however, belief can be based on any evidence, /or lack thereof/. Ie you still label it 'belief'; //the belief
I address Him as Allah.
I used to write on a Jewish forum. The moderator/owner of the forum once informed that a lot many people who say that "God does not exist" mean that Jesus is not God, they are Christians and don't believe in the mythical God of Christianity. I noted that to differentiate from this, there, people spelled God as G-d, omitting the vowel yet keeping the constants intact. I liked the idea.
Allah may be addressed with any good attributes/names in any language:
[7:181] And to Allah alone belong all perfect attributes. So call on Him by these. And leave alone those who deviate from the right way with respect to His attributes. They shall be repaid for what they do.http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?submitCh=Read+from+verse:&ch=7&verse=180
Well, that's thick with equivocation.My theism comes from this:
1) Let us define "gods" as that which a person or culture deems worthy of worship
2) Let us understand "worship" to be showing respect and gratitude for something; holding something in high regard, in a position of honor, or as sacred
3) There are many things in this world that I find worthy of worth-ship, that I consider valued and sacred
4) Therefore, these things are my gods, and my gods are an expression of my values
Well, that's thick with equivocation.
1) Let us define "white whale" as the greatest adversary a person has.
2) Let us understand "greatest adversary" as the thing a person hates most.
3) Therefore, the thing everyone hates most is a whale.
4) Therefore, everyone hates whales more than anything else.
Just that the approach you describe doesn't really work, so it doesn't address the issues described in the OP.
How do you think I've misrepresented you?
The purpose of that post (which was made way back in the summer of 2015, by the by)
was to describe
my approach towards theism. It obviously works for me (and some other theists, by happenstance) just fine.
It was an observation (the first part, that you didn't quote, pointing out that one's status as an (a)theist is not necessarily related to what one thinks about cosmogony) and a
It wasn't *all* equivocation; for the record, these were the specific equivocations I was referring to:Calling it an "equivocation" and then posting a "parallel" that misrepresents and parodies the spirit of that post is something I found offensive and unnecessary.
Yeah - sorry for that. It came up as a trending topic. I'd been mostly away for the weekend, so when I saw a whole unread thread, I assumed it was all new without checking the dates of the posts in it.
I meant that it's not a reasonable path to theism. I have no doubt that you can find many people who have adopted unreasonable views.
So it wasn't offered as an approach for consideration? It read like one.