TS,
Sure. And I apologize. I can't post as often as I like. As for you not being up to my particular standards, that isn't true at all. I think this is the best bunch of atheists as far as discussion goes that I've seen in a long time. No problem there, but I've always been of the opinion that atheists can not grasp the simple concept of god. I've tested this on many forums over a period of about 30 years. Y'all (as we Americans say) did surprise me at one point by almost getting it, but no surprises there.
Does it not occur to you that the problem here isn’t that atheists “cannot grasp the simple concept of god”, but rather that by smooshing together very different concepts of god you’ve made the claim of “a” concept incoherent?
Victory. No. I don't think like that. There is no victory to be had here. I'm past the ego posting. A good conversation is my only victory and I've had some here. I hope that you all have as well.
You could make it a better conversation if you at least acknowledged the objection to what you’re doing, and then try to address it.
God is anything you want it to be. God is anything or anyone that is . . . I'm not going to say it again. What puts you off is the Scribal superstitious removal of God's personal name. You think God is God, when God can be any god. Jehovah is a god. Jehovah is my God. Baal is a god. Satan is the god of the system of things, aka, the world. Moses was made God by God to Pharaoh and Aaron. God called the judges gods.
How do you explain all of this?
We don’t need to – it’s incoherent.
It is really very simple. Atheism is the disbelief or lack of belief…
Again, just the latter…
… in God (okay who is the God in question? The God of western culture, of the Bible, Jehovah) and gods.
No, just the gods proposed by deists and by theists - in both cases “supernatural”, and in the latter case the ones able at will supposedly to intervene in human affairs.
So who are the gods? There is no clarification there…
Yes there is - the gods of deists and of theists.
…so your atheist ideology…
There’s no such thing as "atheist ideology”. If you want to call adherence to reason and logic an “ideology” though, that applies to vastly more ”-isms” than to just atheism.
…dictates to you that no gods can exist.
No it doesn’t. What it “dictates” - all it dictates in fact - is that the atheist has been given no sound reasons to believe there to be gods.
That isn't true.
Straw men generally aren’t.
The only problem I have with atheism is that "or gods" at the end of the definition.
No, your actual problem with atheism is either that you don’t understand what it entails, or you choose to mischaracterise what it entails.
Who are the gods?
Any proposed by deists and by theists.
Because, though atheist will be quick to point out that atheists have nothing in common they are equally quick to point out the commonalities of their opposition. Not particularly bright, atheists, really.
Bright enough to be right though – ie, on logically firm ground.
You dismiss me easily with Spud or Alan Burns or Vlad. Tack that on me. Makes no difference to me. You are all just Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. That isn't a compliment.
I’d take it as one.
So we're the same sort of idiots. You should have figured that out long ago.
That “so” is a
non sequitur – another fallacy.
Still waiting for you to define god. Might as well ask the cat? C'mon. You can do it. Is there a child here I can ask? A JW child perhaps, of 4 or 5 years of age. Ask them. They can tell you. It's easy.
Why are you waiting for other people to define for you whatever it is that you believe in?
Shifting of the burden of proof is another fallacy you know… or perhaps you don’t?
