Why does the believer in God's existence have the burden of proof?

[Lyndon]

Actually its the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, American English that was misquoted( leaving four words off a sentence is not quoting!!) The actual huge Oxford English dictionary is much more detailed in its multiple definitions covering every possible interpretation of the word, unfortunately it is only available online by subscription.

 

[Lyndon]

Here's the actual Oxford English Dictionary, its subtly different in its definitions;

It says Denies or disbelieves in the existence of a God, which is a much stronger statement than "lacks a belief in God" (which would be agnosticism)

 

[leibowde84]

Wrong again, the Oxford English Dictionary, you know the huge very small print two volume one, is only available on line by subscription, what you are quoting is the Oxford Learner's Dictionary, American English. Oxford is in England, by the way

First of all, the mere fact that Oxford is in England isn't relevant at all. We are in the US, and in the US we use American English, which is not the same as the English used in England. Second, you are discounting the definition I provided from "Oxford Dictionaries" without providing any reason why you are doing so. Do you think that the definition of Atheism provided on the "Oxford Dictionaries" website is different than that in the Oxford American English Dictionary that you must subscribe to? If so, why?

 

[Lyndon]

You didn't bother to read my posting of the Actual Oxford English Dictionary definition above, which is quite Different from you online Oxford Advanced Learners dictionary, an ABRIDGED dictionary, If you know what I mean.

The reason is there is only one DEFINITIVE Oxford dictionary The OED I posted above, the online quote you gave is an abridged version that is nether comprehensive or definitive. Yes the online Oxford Advanced Learners dictionary (abridged) seems to support your definition, but the actual unabridged Oxford English Dictionary does not support your definition, neither does the Merriam Webster dictionary.

 

[leibowde84]

Here's the actual Oxford English Dictionary, its subtly different in its definitions;

It says Denies or disbelieves in the existence of a God, which is a much stronger statement than "lacks a belief in God" (which would be agnosticism)

"Disbelief" is the refusal to believe in something or a lack of faith. How on earth do you get a requirement for a positive belief that something does not exist from this word? I don't have a subscription to Oxford English, but no definition I have seen for "disbelief" requires the active belief that something does not exist. It merely requires a "lack of belief".

 

[Lyndon]

Your definition of atheism was lack of belief in God, not disbelief in God, two different things, disbelief is much more active than lack of belief.

Its the difference between not believing at all, and not having a belief (one way or the other).

For instance if I said I don't believe in aliens, that's strong statement, however if I were to say I lack a belief in aliens, it doesn't mean I don't believe they might exist, It just means I don't have a belief in them existing. Two distinctly different meanings.

 

[jonathan180iq]

We all understand that dictionaries are little more than explanations of ways words are used, right?
Meaning that we can alter the definition by how we use a word...
Dictionaries are also quite often outdated because of this, which is why new editions are produced so often, and why some editions are better than others.

So, if it has become generally accepted that disbelief and/or lack of belief both describe atheism, then is it prudent to worry so much about only 1 definition of a word or how it is used?
If someone is expressly telling you how they are using a word, who cares what one part of one dictionary says?

 

[outhouse]

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities

NOT A BELIEF

Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[jonathan180iq]

You seem to think billions of believers are idiots who can't tell whether or not prayer is helping them

People falling prey to logical fallacies and basing their faith on flawed thought systems doesn't make them idiots - it just means they are mistaken in their assertion of things.

 

[jonathan180iq]

Again....

If it wasn't for theists claiming there was a god, could I be called an atheist?

That question is the root of this whole debate.

 

[leibowde84]

Your definition of atheism was lack of belief in God, not disbelief in God, two different things, disbelief is much more active than lack of belief.

Its the difference between not believing at all, and not having a belief (one way or the other).

For instance if I said I don't believe in aliens, that's strong statement, however if I were to say I lack a belief in aliens, it doesn't mean I don't believe they might exist, It just means I don't have a belief in them existing. Two distinctly different meanings.

I disagree. The word "lack" means to be without. To be without means that you don't have or "hold" something. If I say that "I don't believe in aliens", it is the exact same as saying "I lack a belief in aliens". It is literally saying I am "without" a belief in aliens. Now, the stronger statement would be "I believe that aliens cannot exist". "Disbelief" is simply the refusal to believe something, which represents most atheists in that they refuse to believe in God due to a lack of evidence.

 

[leibowde84]

Your definition of atheism was lack of belief in God, not disbelief in God, two different things, disbelief is much more active than lack of belief.

Its the difference between not believing at all, and not having a belief (one way or the other).

For instance if I said I don't believe in aliens, that's strong statement, however if I were to say I lack a belief in aliens, it doesn't mean I don't believe they might exist, It just means I don't have a belief in them existing. Two distinctly different meanings.

How is "not having a belief" any different than "not believing at all"?

 

[Lyndon]

Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities

NOT A BELIEF

Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Another person that takes me for an idiot, the rejection of all belief in the existence of deities, is in and of itself a belief, you can believe something doesn't exist just like you can believe something does exist. whether you like it or not THEY ARE BOTH BELIEFS.

 

[Lyndon]

How is "not having a belief" any different than "not believing at all"?

For instance "I don't have a belief whether Obama is a good person" vs "I don't believe at all that Obama is a good person", totally opposite meanings.

 

[leibowde84]

Another person that takes me for an idiot, the rejection of all belief in the existence of deities, is in and of itself a belief, you can believe something doesn't exist just like you can believe something does exist. whether you like it or not THEY ARE BOTH BELIEFS.

No one has claimed that believing something doesn't exist is impossible. And, no one has claimed that there aren't certain atheists who hold this belief about God. What we are arguing is that there is a difference between the rejection of the belief that God exists (due to lack of evidence) and the belief that God does not exist (due to evidence that God cannot exist). Do you not agree with this? Do you think that anyone who lacks or rejects a belief due to lack of evidence automatically must actively believe that the thing cannot exist?

 

[leibowde84]

For instance "I don't have a belief whether Obama is a good person or not" vs "I don't believe at all that Obama is a good person", totally opposite meanings.

I agree with that. It supports my argument, though. Don't both statements show a "lack of belief" that "Obama is a good person"?

 

[outhouse]

, is in and of itself a belief,

Not it Is not. The definition of disbelief is ONLY the absence of belief.

Do you believe the answer to 1 + 1 = is 2 or do you know it is 2


I factually do not believe the answer is 2 I know it factually is 2.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Once again, the nuances of basic logic prove to be too difficult for some people to comprehend.

 

[leibowde84]

For instance "I don't have a belief whether Obama is a good person" vs "I don't believe at all that Obama is a good person", totally opposite meanings.

But, "disbelief" is a passive term. It doesn't mean that you believe something to be false. It means that you do not hold that belief, and refuse to do so due to lack of evidence/reasoning. I fail to see how an agnostic would not fit into this definition.

 

[Lyndon]

I agree with that. It supports my argument, though. Don't both statements show a "lack of belief" that "Obama is a good person"?

The first statement 'I don't have a belief whether Obama is a good person", expresses no opinion one way or the other, is in essence an agnostic position, which is the whole point of this argument, to show you the difference between agnostic and atheist.