Do you believe in hell?

[Alien]

I do not believe in any god.

That is NOT the same as saying I believe no god(s) exist.

The difference is subtle but when you have looked at as much computer code as I have, it is massive.

I hate lots of nested double not if statements as you turn somersaults trying to figure out what some code is doing.

But your stance still adheres to the dictionary definition of atheism, meaning that your claim that I had mistyped continues to be wrong.  By the way, I don't do computer code; I do human code, especially as we are dealing in human code on a site such as this.

If you do code it improves your logic.

So you will know that not believing X is true, is NOT the same as believing X is false.

You do see that?

There are at least two definitions of "atheism" that I know of. The OED one is "Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods" which fits how BR (and many others here) use it. However, there is also the definition from places such as Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which equate atheism as follows, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." To help avoid confusion (and have a bit of fun), I tend to use the terms "weak atheism" (BR/OED version) and "strong atheism" (Stanford).

Thus BR is a "weak atheist."

(Back to lurking for a bit).

[Leonard James]

I do not believe in any god.

That is NOT the same as saying I believe no god(s) exist.

The difference is subtle but when you have looked at as much computer code as I have, it is massive.

I hate lots of nested double not if statements as you turn somersaults trying to figure out what some code is doing.

But your stance still adheres to the dictionary definition of atheism, meaning that your claim that I had mistyped continues to be wrong.  By the way, I don't do computer code; I do human code, especially as we are dealing in human code on a site such as this.

If you do code it improves your logic.

So you will know that not believing X is true, is NOT the same as believing X is false.

You do see that?

There are at least two definitions of "atheism" that I know of. The OED one is "Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods" which fits how BR (and many others here) use it. However, there is also the definition from places such as Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which equate atheism as follows, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." To help avoid confusion (and have a bit of fun), I tend to use the terms "weak atheism" (BR/OED version) and "strong atheism" (Stanford).

Thus BR is a "weak atheist."

(Back to lurking for a bit).

In the same way, "I believe there is a god" is not the same as "I don't believe that there are no gods".

[Sassy]

If you do believe in hell, what do you think it is like?

If as a Christian you don't believe in the place, why not, presumably you believe in heaven? Do you believe non believers cease to be when they die?

I do not believe there is a cop out...

non believers cease to be when they die?

As for HELL why are you asking?
Wondering if I am going to find you venting your anger and other insults further down the thread.


I believe that those who are Christians do not dwell much on hell. After all they won't be going there. Just as we know that no one has to go there. God judges from the books but what does one sin mean? If the wages of sin is death but love covers over many sins... who really knows.

Perfection is something to work towards but the truth is a Christian relies on Grace from God through Jesus Christ. No one perfect but Jesus as a human being. The only one without sin.
Maybe we have something wonderful ahead. Though I know you won't believe me and may mock I don't want ((you)) OR ANYONE to go to hell.

As far as I could tell from Dives and Lazarus they simply reversed the roles... But Dives could not cross back too late...

It is when it is all thrown together which you need to fear in the lake of fire.

[BeRational]

I do not believe in any god.

That is NOT the same as saying I believe no god(s) exist.

The difference is subtle but when you have looked at as much computer code as I have, it is massive.

I hate lots of nested double not if statements as you turn somersaults trying to figure out what some code is doing.

But your stance still adheres to the dictionary definition of atheism, meaning that your claim that I had mistyped continues to be wrong.  By the way, I don't do computer code; I do human code, especially as we are dealing in human code on a site such as this.

If you do code it improves your logic.

So you will know that not believing X is true, is NOT the same as believing X is false.

You do see that?

There are at least two definitions of "atheism" that I know of. The OED one is "Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods" which fits how BR (and many others here) use it. However, there is also the definition from places such as Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which equate atheism as follows, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." To help avoid confusion (and have a bit of fun), I tend to use the terms "weak atheism" (BR/OED version) and "strong atheism" (Stanford).

Thus BR is a "weak atheist."

(Back to lurking for a bit).

In the same way, "I believe there is a god" is not the same as "I don't believe that there are no gods".

Actually I think these are the same.

If belief in a god is TRUE.
Then it is also TRUE that you do NOT believe there are no gods.

Double negatives are a problem.

If you do not believe there are no gods, then you must believe in at least one god.

[cyberman]

If there is any difference (if being the operative word) then it's so minute as to be totally insignificant.

That's the mistake.

There is a massive difference and unless you understand  it you will continue to make logical mistakes.

Anyone who writes computer code would see and be aware of the massive difference between the two statements which I admit at first reading seem to be equivalent but they are not.

There is a massive difference, yes. And agnostic is someone who lacks a belief in god because they believe that there is no way of knowing whether a god exists or not. An atheist is someone who believes there is no god. Which are you?

(Yes, I know all about the etymology and the "a" prefix...)

[BeRational]

If there is any difference (if being the operative word) then it's so minute as to be totally insignificant.

That's the mistake.

There is a massive difference and unless you understand  it you will continue to make logical mistakes.

Anyone who writes computer code would see and be aware of the massive difference between the two statements which I admit at first reading seem to be equivalent but they are not.

There is a massive difference, yes. And agnostic is someone who lacks a belief in god because they believe that there is no way of knowing whether a god exists or not. An atheist is someone who believes there is no god. Which are you?

(Yes, I know all about the etymology and the "a" prefix...)

No that is wrong, and I cannot believe you do not already know this as it is explained so many times.

An atheist is someone who does not believe a god exists. He/she does NOT believe a god does not exist.

I am an agnostic atheist, I do not believe a god exists but I do not claim to know a god does not exist.

Atheism and agnosticism are different. One about belief, the other about knowledge.

[Leonard James]

Actually I think these are the same.

If belief in a god is TRUE.
Then it is also TRUE that you do NOT believe there are no gods.

Double negatives are a problem.

If you do not believe there are no gods, then you must believe in at least one god.

OK, let's get rid of the double negative. I believe that there is a god, is not the same as, I don't believe that "there are no gods".

The first is a monotheistic belief, the second is clearly plural.

[cyberman]

Atheism and agnosticism are different. One about belief, the other about knowledge.

I know that! I just outlined exactly that difference.

[Alien]

...

An atheist is someone who does not believe a god exists.

Agreed.

He/she does NOT believe a god does not exist.

That should read "He/she does NOT NECESSARILY believe a god does not exist (or better "believe no god exists"). The position you describe is weak/agnostic atheism. A strong atheist does indeed believe no god exists.

I am an agnostic atheist, I do not believe a god exists but I do not claim to know a god does not exist.

Understood and accepted.

Atheism and agnosticism are different. One about belief, the other about knowledge.

Too simple. There are different types of agnosticism as well. There are agnostics who say, "I just don't know whether any gods exist", but there are some for whom agnosticism is that it is not possible to know whether gods exist, i.e. they "know" we can't know.

[Alien]

I do not believe in any god.

That is NOT the same as saying I believe no god(s) exist.

The difference is subtle but when you have looked at as much computer code as I have, it is massive.

I hate lots of nested double not if statements as you turn somersaults trying to figure out what some code is doing.

But your stance still adheres to the dictionary definition of atheism, meaning that your claim that I had mistyped continues to be wrong.  By the way, I don't do computer code; I do human code, especially as we are dealing in human code on a site such as this.

If you do code it improves your logic.

So you will know that not believing X is true, is NOT the same as believing X is false.

You do see that?

There are at least two definitions of "atheism" that I know of. The OED one is "Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods" which fits how BR (and many others here) use it. However, there is also the definition from places such as Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy which equate atheism as follows, "‘Atheism’ means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God." To help avoid confusion (and have a bit of fun), I tend to use the terms "weak atheism" (BR/OED version) and "strong atheism" (Stanford).

Thus BR is a "weak atheist."

(Back to lurking for a bit).

In the same way, "I believe there is a god" is not the same as "I don't believe that there are no gods".

Actually I think these are the same.

If belief in a god is TRUE.
Then it is also TRUE that you do NOT believe there are no gods.

Double negatives are a problem.

If you do not believe there are no gods, then you must believe in at least one god.

Disagree. Double negatives can make one's brain ache, but they are important. Not believing there are no gods is not the same as believing there is a god. Not believing there are no gods may just mean the person has no view on whether there are no gods.

[cyberman]

Actually I think these are the same.

If belief in a god is TRUE.
Then it is also TRUE that you do NOT believe there are no gods.

Double negatives are a problem.

If you do not believe there are no gods, then you must believe in at least one god.

OK, let's get rid of the double negative. I believe that there is a god, is not the same as, I don't believe that "there are no gods".

The first is a monotheistic belief, the second is clearly plural.

That's nonsense, surely? You are proposing that it would be logical and consistent to say "I believe in god" and "I believe that there are no gods"; which of course it would not.   

If someone said "I don't believe in ghosts" - but then later said "I am firmly convinced that there is a ghost in my house", you would I am sure pick them up for contradicting themselves. If they argued "ah, I said I don't believe in ghosts, plural; the one in my house is just a ghost, singular" you would think they were talking nonsense.

[Leonard James]

We will just have to agree to disagree, Cyber!

Btw, talking of ghosts, the usually seem to be clad. I suppose there must be ghost clothes, too!   

[BeRational]

...

An atheist is someone who does not believe a god exists.

Agreed.

He/she does NOT believe a god does not exist.

That should read "He/she does NOT NECESSARILY believe a god does not exist (or better "believe no god exists"). The position you describe is weak/agnostic atheism. A strong atheist does indeed believe no god exists.

I am an agnostic atheist, I do not believe a god exists but I do not claim to know a god does not exist.

Understood and accepted.

Atheism and agnosticism are different. One about belief, the other about knowledge.

Too simple. There are different types of agnosticism as well. There are agnostics who say, "I just don't know whether any gods exist", but there are some for whom agnosticism is that it is not possible to know whether gods exist, i.e. they "know" we can't know.

I strong atheist (I do not like the term) would be a gnostic atheist and they would have the burden of proof for such a position.

I am an agnostic atheist. I simply do not believe the case for god has met it's burden of proof.

In the courtroom analogy, I find god not guilty of existing.

[Alien]

...

I strong atheist (I do not like the term) would be a gnostic atheist and they would have the burden of proof for such a position.

I agree.

I am an agnostic atheist. I simply do not believe the case for god has met it's burden of proof.

I understand your position.

[ippy]

So it looks like you're already there then Hope, since, in my humble opinion, there's no credible evidence to support the god idea.

ippy

FIFY, ippy

O K Hope, so again where is this elusive evidence then, let's have it, a lot of us will be going down your road if you could supply it; just think of all of those brownie points and get weaving.

Still waiting.

ippy   

[ippy]

It's not NS by the way.

Sorry, my mistake

I do not understand, I do not believe we currently have a god in this universe, and yet we can still discuss the possibility of it.

Precisely, you believe that there is no god, yet you can still debate/discuss the possibility. In hell, I don't believe that you will be able to because then God will definitely not be there.

What would a universe with no god in it look like?

I would have to question whether there would be a universe if God was not here.

I suggest it would look just like this one.

That's your prerogative.

No you make a big mistake when you say I believe there is no god.
I think you misstyped as you know I am an atheist, and that is s not atheism.

I do not believe your God exists, BUT that is NOT the same as saying I believe your God does not exist.

Do you understand the difference, as it to s crucial and you need to understand and accept this

Do you really have to be so condescending?

B R's being quite tame compared to the stuff you hand out daily B A.

ippy

[ippy]

If you do believe in hell, what do you think it is like?

If as a Christian you don't believe in the place, why not, presumably you believe in heaven? Do you believe non believers cease to be when they die?

I do not believe there is a cop out...

non believers cease to be when they die?

As for HELL why are you asking?
Wondering if I am going to find you venting your anger and other insults further down the thread.


I believe that those who are Christians do not dwell much on hell. After all they won't be going there. Just as we know that no one has to go there. God judges from the books but what does one sin mean? If the wages of sin is death but love covers over many sins... who really knows.

Perfection is something to work towards but the truth is a Christian relies on Grace from God through Jesus Christ. No one perfect but Jesus as a human being. The only one without sin.
Maybe we have something wonderful ahead. Though I know you won't believe me and may mock I don't want ((you)) OR ANYONE to go to hell.

As far as I could tell from Dives and Lazarus they simply reversed the roles... But Dives could not cross back too late...

It is when it is all thrown together which you need to fear in the lake of fire.

Hi there Sass how's he evidence going have you managed to come up with any, Hope seems to think he has some why don't you two team up and nail this problem the pair of you have?

ippy

[ad_orientem]

In the meantime, you could try learning punctuation.

[ippy]

In the meantime, you could try learning punctuation.

Hi there A O, still in your narrow little dream world?

ippy

[ad_orientem]

Whether or not I live in a dream world, others can decide; but at least I can punctuate (reasonably well) thus rendering my posts (reasonably) intelligible compared to yours.

[BashfulAnthony]

It's not NS by the way.

Sorry, my mistake

I do not understand, I do not believe we currently have a god in this universe, and yet we can still discuss the possibility of it.

Precisely, you believe that there is no god, yet you can still debate/discuss the possibility. In hell, I don't believe that you will be able to because then God will definitely not be there.

What would a universe with no god in it look like?

I would have to question whether there would be a universe if God was not here.

I suggest it would look just like this one.

That's your prerogative.

No you make a big mistake when you say I believe there is no god.
I think you misstyped as you know I am an atheist, and that is s not atheism.

I do not believe your God exists, BUT that is NOT the same as saying I believe your God does not exist.

Do you understand the difference, as it to s crucial and you need to understand and accept this

Do you really have to be so condescending?

B R's being quite tame compared to the stuff you hand out daily B A.

ippy

Do you know what "condescending" means, ippy?

[ippy]

Whether or not I live in a dream world, others can decide; but at least I can punctuate (reasonably well) thus rendering my posts (reasonably) intelligible compared to yours.

Well goody for you.

I have to admit you seem to understand my posts very well, considering.

Ar well it's talking to yourself day for you tomorrow, that'll help you get over all of these mountainous problems you seem to be having.

ippy
 

[ippy]

It's not NS by the way.

Sorry, my mistake

I do not understand, I do not believe we currently have a god in this universe, and yet we can still discuss the possibility of it.

Precisely, you believe that there is no god, yet you can still debate/discuss the possibility. In hell, I don't believe that you will be able to because then God will definitely not be there.

What would a universe with no god in it look like?

I would have to question whether there would be a universe if God was not here.

I suggest it would look just like this one.

That's your prerogative.

No you make a big mistake when you say I believe there is no god.
I think you misstyped as you know I am an atheist, and that is s not atheism.

I do not believe your God exists, BUT that is NOT the same as saying I believe your God does not exist.

Do you understand the difference, as it to s crucial and you need to understand and accept this

Do you really have to be so condescending?

B R's being quite tame compared to the stuff you hand out daily B A.

ippy

Do you know what "condescending" means, ippy?

I can explain it to you if you're finding it difficult, it really wouldn't be that much trouble, I love helping people any time I can.

ippy

[BashfulAnthony]

I can explain it to you if you're finding it difficult, it really wouldn't be that much trouble, I love helping people any time I can.

ippy

If you actually know, then why naively use it, when it so aptly describes your post?  As you are so helpful, maybe you could elucidate (another word for you to look up!))

[Dicky Underpants]

"The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all nations that forget God."   Psalm 9:17

Now the wicked and the righteous do not go to the same place so I cannot accept that hell is just the grave. Nope, in this case hell is more than the grave.

'Hell' 'Grave', same word - 'Sheol' throughout the OT, as far as I'm aware.

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die"  Ezekiel

Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.

Daniel 12:2

Yes, most of us who know something about the OT and the Bible in general know that quote from Daniel. It is virtually unique in the OT in referring to some definite afterlife or resurrection. It is of course a very late scripture in the OT, and reflects the way beliefs of the ancient Hebrews were beginning to change - and they changed a lot, as can be seen from the writings known as the 'Apocrypha'. As I said in a previous post:

I'm not denying that these concepts changed over time in the scriptures - particularly during the inter-testamental years. By the time we get to Christianity, lots of other stuff has got mixed into the pudding.

.

However, my comments in this thread are not meant to argue ideas about "What the message of the OT really is" (and certainly not what the message of the Bible really is, since there are many viewpoints expressed throughout). I simply wish to reiterate that I agree with Ecclesiastes' unequivocal statement: When you're dead, you're dead.