Dealing with an Jewish Atheist

[tonyrey]

Atheism isn’t a claim. It’s the rejection of a claim (the claim that gods exist).

To be precise it is a counterclaim which requires evidence…

Since there’s no evidence for the existence of any gods, the rational position is to reject the claim that they exist.

You need to produce evidence that there is no evidence!

I’m not making the claim that there are no gods – I’m merely stating that there is no good reason to accept that they exist.

“merely” is the significant word! That is all you are doing: making a gratuitous assertion…

 

[Charlemagne_II]

AntiTheist

Since there’s no evidence for the existence of any gods, the rational position is to reject the claim that they exist.

Since there is no evidence for atheism (the claim that gods do not exist) the rational position is to reject that claim.

Try to think like a chess player. Anticipate your opponent’s response before you lock yourself in to an untenable position.

 

[AntiTheist]

AntiTheist

Since there’s no evidence for the existence of any gods, the rational position is to reject the claim that they exist.

Since there is no evidence for atheism (the claim that gods do not exist) the rational position is to reject that claim.

Indeed. And many atheists do reject the claim that there are no gods, just as much as they reject the claim that there are gods.

The question is do you believe that there are gods? If you don’t accept that there gods, then you’re an atheist, regardless of whether or not you accept that no gods exist.

I know that’s hard to grasp, so I like to use the example of a coin flip. Let’s say I flip a coin and conceal it in my palm so that no one can see it. You come along and say, “I believe the coin is Heads up!” So let’s call you “headsist” (or theist).

I say, “I don’t believe you.” I’m an aheadsist (an atheist). I don’t accept that the coin is heads up, and I can maintain that position without believing that the coin is tails up.

That’s my position. I don’t accept the claim that gods exist, and I don’t have to accept the claim that there are no gods anywhere in the universe (or outside of the universe). All I’m saying is that there’s insufficient evidence to believe in them.

Try to think like a chess player. Anticipate your opponent’s response before you lock yourself in to an untenable position.

And you just have to stop feeding me opportunities to make great points that show how rejecting your faith is the correct posiiton.

 

[lemondiesel]

If you cannot demonstrate that your claim is likely to be true, then other people can dismiss it.

It is just like how I can’t disprove that leprechauns do not exist, but does this mean that I don’t have the authority to do so?

You need to produce evidence that there is no evidence!

And you have to show that what you claim is real through repeatable, testable, and verifiable ways.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

That’s my position. I don’t accept the claim that gods exist, and I don’t have to accept the claim that there are no gods anywhere in the universe (or outside of the universe). All I’m saying is that there’s insufficient evidence to believe in them.

That’s more agnosticism than atheism.

*And many atheists do reject the claim that there are no gods. *

Name just one, other than yourself!

 

[tonyrey]

And you have to show that what you claim is real through repeatable, testable, and verifiable ways.

The reality of God have been tested and verified repeatedly by millions of human beings throughout history who have been given the strength and the courage to overcome suffering, persecution and even martyrdom for the sake of what is true, good, right, just and beautiful. His love has inspired great works of philosophy, science, art, poetry, architecture and music as well as the foundation of schools, universities, hospitals, asylums, orphanages and hospices for the dying. Even in our own time men and women like Archbishop Romero and Mother Teresa have sacrificed their lives for the poor and destitute.

“By their fruits you shall know them”…

 

[Charlemagne_II]

• Originally Posted by lemondiesel

And you have to show that what you claim is** real** through repeatable, testable, and verifiable ways.*

The real is not always subject to scientific experiments. Not Michaelangelo, nor Mozart, nor Shakespeare subjected their work to the scientific method. They intuited the beautiful, the truly beautiful, in their hearts as much as in their heads. Their work is real and they never asked, and don’t need, science to verify its** real **beauty.

This is likewise above all the way to know God … in our hearts.

Do not presume to demand that God must be found in a science lab in order to verify Him.

 

[StrawberryJam]

• Originally Posted by lemondiesel

And you have to show that what you claim is** real*** through repeatable, testable, and verifiable ways.

The real is not always subject to scientific experiments. Not Michaelangelo, nor Mozart, nor Shakespeare subjected their work to the scientific method. They intuited the beautiful, the truly beautiful, in their hearts as much as in their heads. Their work is real and they never asked, and don’t need, science to verify its** real **beauty.

This is likewise above all the way to know God … in our hearts.

Do not presume to demand that God must be found in a science lab in order to verify Him.

When bible literalism is insisted on, do you believe that it can be ignored at times?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

StrawberryJam

*When bible literalism is insisted on, do you believe that it can be ignored at times? *

Yes, it can be at certain times. But if the Church insists on a literal interpretation, it may not be ignored. It is the hallmark of Protestantism that private interpretation of virtually anything in the Bible is allowed. That way lies falsehood and ultimate anarchy. When a Protestant disagrees with his denomination’s interpretation of a passage in scripture, he goes and starts his own church.

That is the tragic condition of Christianity today. Divided and very nearly routed everywhere. In some countries, like Sweden, there is hardly any Christianity left, remnants of Lutheranism at best, whereas it was once entirely Catholic. It is sad to enter the majestic old churches there … mausoleums of what used to be.