Those who believe there is no God live by faith

[3rdAngel]

What stage are you at?

Very close now

 

[3rdAngel]

3rd Angel said: Ok thanks for this. I missed your post here. So just to make sure I am understanding you correctly. Your trying to argue that bearing false witness in the ninth commandment is not lying is that correct? I will respond in detail after I hear back from you.

Your response...

Not what I said or even implied. Your posts keep telling us that you cannot understand the responses given to you. Here is a suggestion. Try to understand what is written. Don't try to make it what you want to hear. Go back, read the post and try again. You asked for an answer. You should not ignore it when given to you.

What I read from your post was that you believe that bearing false witness does not necessarily mean lying that is why I was asking you for clarity in relation to the ninth commandment and lying. If I wanted to make it something else I would not ask you for clarity. I never ignnored it I missed your earlier post there is a difference. It may be earlier I think to deal with the content of your last post but I will add it here now..

Bearing false witness against your neighbor is making false claims about them. It is not necessarily lying about them, though a lie probably would be a false claim. What you seem to have a hard time understanding is that even if one believes what one said is true if what one said is incorrect that is bearing false witness. Let's say there was a party that we both were invited to,but I was the only one that went. For some odd reason I remember seeing you there. When asked about it I tell others that you were there. In reality you weren't. Now I did not lie about seeing you there, I really believed that you were there, but since you were not I would have been bearing false witness if I said that you were.

Ok this is what I get from your post. You claim that bearing false witness is any message about your neighbore that is a false message regardless of intention, mistake or no mistake. According to the scriptures this is absolutely false. This was why I asked you earlier do you know what bearing false witness means. The Hebrew words have different meaning to the english and have a wider meaning. Let's look at them in the 9th Commandment in the next post now that we know what your definition and claims are in relation to bearing false witness.....

To be continued ...

 

[3rdAngel]

BEARING FALSE WITNESS 9th COMMANDMENT - WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

EXODUS 20:16, You shall not BEAR FALSE (שׁקר) WITNESS against your neighbor.

The Hebrew word used here for false H8267 שׁקר; šā·qer. The Hebrew word meaning of שׁקר; šā·qer
means, without a cause, deceitful, falsehood feignedly, liar, lie, lying, vain thing, wrongfully; From shaqar; an untruth; by implication, a sham (often adverbial) -- without a cause, deceit(-ful), false(-hood, -ly), feignedly, liar, + lie, lying, vain (thing), wrongfully.

The Hebrew meaning implied here is to bear false witness by intention to deceive and lie.

Let's look at other uses of the Hebrew word שׁקר; šā·qer within the scriptures to see how it is applied in other parts of the bible and it's application. How else is it used?

Englishman's Concordance

šā·qer — 35 Occurrences

Exodus 5:9
HEB: יִשְׁע֖וּ בְּדִבְרֵי־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: no attention to FALSE words.
KJV: therein; and let them not regard vain words.
INT: will pay words to false

Leviticus 6:3
HEB: וְנִשְׁבַּ֣ע עַל־ שָׁ֑קֶר עַל־ אַחַ֗ת
NAS: about it and sworn falsely, so that he sins
KJV: concerning it, and sweareth falsely; in any
INT: and sworn regard falsely regard to any

Job 13:4
HEB: אַתֶּ֥ם טֹֽפְלֵי־ שָׁ֑קֶר רֹפְאֵ֖י אֱלִ֣ל
NAS: But you smear with lies; You are all
KJV: ye [are] forgers of lies, ye [are] all physicians
INT: you smear lies physicians worthless

Psalm 7:14
HEB: עָ֝מָ֗ל וְיָ֣לַד שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: mischief and brings forth falsehood.
KJV: mischief, and brought forth falsehood.
INT: mischief and brings falsehood

Psalm 31:18
HEB: תֵּ֥אָלַ֗מְנָה שִׂפְתֵ֫י שָׁ֥קֶר הַדֹּבְר֖וֹת עַל־
NAS: Let the lying lips be mute,
KJV: Let the lying lips be put to silence;
INT: be mute lips the lying speak against

Psalm 38:19
HEB: וְרַבּ֖וּ שֹׂנְאַ֣י שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: are those who hate me wrongfully.
KJV: and they that hate me wrongfully are multiplied.
INT: and many hate wrongfully

Psalm 63:11
HEB: פִּ֣י דֽוֹבְרֵי־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: of those who speak lies will be stopped.
KJV: of them that speak lies shall be stopped.
INT: the mouths speak lies

Psalm 109:2
HEB: אִ֝תִּ֗י לְשׁ֣וֹן שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: against me with a lying tongue.
KJV: against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue.
INT: against tongue A lying

Psalm 119:104
HEB: כָּל־ אֹ֬רַח שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: I hate every false way. Nun.
KJV: therefore I hate every false way.
INT: every way false.

Psalm 144:8
HEB: וִֽ֝ימִינָ֗ם יְמִ֣ין שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: hand is a right hand of falsehood.
KJV: [is] a right hand of falsehood.
INT: right hand of falsehood

Psalm 144:11
HEB: וִֽ֝ימִינָ֗ם יְמִ֣ין שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: hand is a right hand of falsehood.
KJV: [is] a right hand of falsehood:
INT: right hand of falsehood

Proverbs 6:17
HEB: רָ֭מוֹת לְשׁ֣וֹן שָׁ֑קֶר וְ֝יָדַ֗יִם שֹׁפְכ֥וֹת
NAS: eyes, a lying tongue,
KJV: look, a lying tongue,
INT: Haughty tongue A lying and hands shed

Proverbs 6:19
HEB: כְּ֭זָבִים עֵ֣ד שָׁ֑קֶר וּמְשַׁלֵּ֥חַ מְ֝דָנִ֗ים
NAS: A false witness [who] utters
KJV: A false witness [that] speaketh
INT: lies witness A false spreads strife

Proverbs 10:18
HEB: שִׂ֭נְאָה שִׂפְתֵי־ שָׁ֑קֶר וּמוֹצִ֥א דִ֝בָּ֗ה
NAS: hatred [has] lying lips,
KJV: hatred [with] lying lips,
INT: hatred lips lying spreads slander

Proverbs 11:18
HEB: עֹשֶׂ֥ה פְעֻלַּת־ שָׁ֑קֶר וְזֹרֵ֥עַ צְ֝דָקָ֗ה
NAS: earns deceptive wages,
KJV: worketh a deceitful work:
INT: earns work deceptive sows righteousness

Proverbs 12:19
HEB: אַ֝רְגִּ֗יעָה לְשׁ֣וֹן שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: forever, But a lying tongue
KJV: for ever: but a lying tongue
INT: instant tongue A lying

Proverbs 12:22
HEB: יְ֭הוָה שִׂפְתֵי־ שָׁ֑קֶר וְעֹשֵׂ֖י אֱמוּנָ֣ה
NAS: Lying lips are an abomination
KJV: Lying lips [are] abomination
INT: to the LORD lips Lying deal faithfully

Proverbs 14:5
HEB: כְּ֝זָבִ֗ים עֵ֣ד שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: will not lie, But a false witness
KJV: will not lie: but a false witness
INT: lies witness A false

Proverbs 17:7
HEB: לְנָדִ֥יב שְׂפַת־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: Much less are lying lips to a prince.
KJV: not a fool: much less do lying lips
INT: to a prince lips are lying

Proverbs 20:17
HEB: לָ֭אִישׁ לֶ֣חֶם שָׁ֑קֶר וְ֝אַחַ֗ר יִמָּֽלֵא־
NAS: Bread obtained by falsehood is sweet
KJV: Bread of deceit [is] sweet to a man;
INT: to a man Bread falsehood afterward will be filled

Proverbs 21:6
HEB: א֭וֹצָרוֹת בִּלְשׁ֣וֹן שָׁ֑קֶר הֶ֥בֶל נִ֝דָּ֗ף
NAS: of treasures by a lying tongue
KJV: of treasures by a lying tongue
INT: of treasures tongue A lying vapor fleeting

Proverbs 25:14
HEB: מִ֝תְהַלֵּ֗ל בְּמַתַּת־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: who boasts of his gifts falsely.
KJV: boasteth himself of a false gift
INT: boasts of his gifts falsely

Proverbs 25:18
HEB: בְ֝רֵעֵ֗הוּ עֵ֣ד שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: who bears false witness
KJV: that beareth false witness
INT: his neighbor witness false.

Proverbs 29:12
HEB: עַל־ דְּבַר־ שָׁ֑קֶר כָּֽל־ מְשָׁרְתָ֥יו
NAS: pays attention to falsehood, All
INT: and act to falsehood All his ministers

Isaiah 57:4
HEB: פֶ֖שַׁע זֶ֥רַע שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: of rebellion, Offspring of deceit,
KJV: of transgression, a seed of falsehood,
INT: of rebellion Offspring of deceit

Isaiah 59:13
HEB: מִלֵּ֖ב דִּבְרֵי־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: from the heart lying words.
KJV: from the heart words of falsehood.
INT: the heart words lying

Jeremiah 6:13
HEB: כֻּלּ֖וֹ עֹ֥שֶׂה שָּֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: Everyone deals falsely.
KJV: every one dealeth falsely.
INT: Everyone deals falsely

Jeremiah 8:10
HEB: כֻּלֹּ֖ה עֹ֥שֶׂה שָּֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: Everyone practices deceit.
KJV: every one dealeth falsely.
INT: Everyone practices deceit

Jeremiah 28:15
HEB: הַזֶּ֖ה עַל־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: people trust in a lie.
KJV: to trust in a lie.
INT: this in A lie

Jeremiah 29:21
HEB: לָכֶ֛ם בִּשְׁמִ֖י שָׁ֑קֶר הִנְנִ֣י ׀ נֹתֵ֣ן
NAS: who are prophesying to you falsely in My name,
KJV: which prophesy a lie unto you in my name;
INT: are prophesying my name falsely behold will deliver

Jeremiah 29:31
HEB: אֶתְכֶ֖ם עַל־ שָֽׁקֶר׃
NAS: him, and he has made you trust in a lie,
KJV: him not, and he caused you to trust in a lie:
INT: trust in A lie

Hosea 7:1
HEB: כִּ֥י פָעֲל֖וּ שָׁ֑קֶר וְגַנָּ֣ב יָב֔וֹא
NAS: For they deal falsely; The thief
KJV: for they commit falsehood; and the thief
INT: for deal falsely the thief enters

Micah 6:12
HEB: וְיֹשְׁבֶ֖יהָ דִּבְּרוּ־ שָׁ֑קֶר וּלְשׁוֹנָ֖ם רְמִיָּ֥ה
NAS: speak lies, And their tongue
KJV: thereof have spoken lies, and their tongue
INT: her residents speak lies and their tongue is deceitful

Habakkuk 2:18
HEB: מַסֵּכָ֖ה וּמ֣וֹרֶה שָּׁ֑קֶר כִּ֣י בָטַ֞ח
NAS: a teacher of falsehood? For [its] maker
KJV: and a teacher of lies, that the maker
INT: it an image A teacher of lies when trusts

As can be shown above the Hebrew word for false שָׁ֑קֶר mean intention to deceive or lie. It is used interchagable between translations to falsehood; falsely; deceive; lie and lying (intention)

Where you seem to be confused is here. A "MISTAKE" is NOT A LIE or intention to decieve. It is a mistake and does not break God's 9th commandment as it has no intention to deceive. If someone makes a mistake like in your example than that is what it is. It is not a lie. It is a falsehood in the english definition of the word but the Hebrew definition is more defined to intention to deceive.

Obviously a falsehood is a falsehood and if someone in error finds out that they made a mistake they need to acknowledge and own up to it and see it for what it is but until they do see their mistake that is all it is. You are were not correct in your interpretation of the scriptures again.

Hope this was helpful

 

[Ayjaydee]

Depends I guess if you believe your chart or if you believe the dictionary definitions which do not seem to be agreeing with each other. I have never heard of your definitions before although I am quite aware that there are many variations within and belief or religion.

ATHIESM DEFINITIONS

“Atheism” is typically defined in terms of “theism”. Theism, in turn, is best understood as a proposition—something that is either true or false. It is often defined as “the belief that God exists”, but here “belief” means “something believed”. It refers to the propositional content of belief, not to the attitude or psychological state of believing. This is why it makes sense to say that theism is true or false and to argue for or against theism. If, however, “atheism” is defined in terms of theism and theism is the proposition that God exists and not the psychological condition of believing that there is a God, then it follows that atheism is not the absence of the psychological condition of believing that God exists (more on this below). The “a-” in “atheism” must be understood as negation instead of absence, as “not” instead of “without”. Therefore, in philosophy at least, atheism should be construed as the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, the proposition that there are no gods). (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Atheism is, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)". (Wiki).

Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable. (Encyclopedia Britannica)

Atheism a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods; a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods (Merriam Webster dictionary)

Atheism the doctrine or belief that there is no God or disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. (Dictionary.com)

Atheism The term “atheist” describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists (Encyclopedia of Philisophy).

Athiesm a'-the-iz'-m (atheos, "without God" (Ephesians 2:12)): Ordinarily this word is interpreted to mean a denial of the existence of God, a disbelief in God, the opposite of theism. (International Stantard Bible Encyclopedia)

Athiesm the belief that God does not exist; not believing in any God or gods, or relating to such beliefs (Cambridge Dictionary)

Thanks for sharing your opinion though.

Athiesm the belief that there is no God, or denial that God or gods exist godlessness (Your Dictionary)



Someone who believes in Atheism...........?



Atheist, a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism (Merriam Webster dictionary)

Theism can only be the belief god exists.

 

[3rdAngel]

You say "indeed", but every single one of your posts demonstrates the opposite.

Nonsense. I simply do not agree with you and have shown why. Seems you do not like it. Then again I guess you have your faith and I have mine

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ Well firstly you haven't proven their belief to be false, you have not proven there is no God or that God does not exist or have you proven that God has not revealed himself to them. Your comparing isolated cases with billions of people that claim God has revealed himself to them personally. If your talking about an isolated case you have to wonder if there is any truth in it. When your talking billions or people throughout time all world-wide all believing the same thing you have collective witnesses of truth the begs investigation. For example (hypothetically), a single person comes up to you and says I saw GODZILLA but no one else saw it, you would have to question the truth of this claim. However if you woke up the next morning reading the newspaper with a front page cover GODZILLA PASSES BY LONG ISLAND IN NEW YORK and these claims are seen by 1000's of people then you have collective witness to the event even though you never saw it and perhaps then cannot prove that it happened.

Your repsonse...

I can see that you are having trouble reasoning again. Christianity is the largest religion in the world. So even if they are right that means 2/3 of the world is wrong. No matter what belief you go with you will find that even more people are wrong than right. So what does the number of believers have to do with an idea being right or not?
And by the way, the burden of proof to even begin to claim that your beliefs are right are upon you. If you cannot support your beliefs then the rational act is to not believe. Perhaps if we try hard enough we can get you to reason rationally.

Not at all. Try addressing the post you are responding to it is more about numbers it is about numbers evidence and probability to truth through colective witness in a single generation and all through time. I think you have missed that

 

[3rdAngel]

You need to define what you mean by faith. the word is very elastic. If you define it loosely enough, virtually everyone lives by faith.
You seem to believe in a god, and use faith to do so, yet seem to imply that if someone does not believe a god exists he has faith and that is bad. Is faith bad or good?

To me, faith is a belief that does not have definitive evidence for that belief. There is also the biblical definition that christians live by as well in Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith is good if it is based on truth and bad if it is not.

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ Not really. Not believing in God for example is a belief that does not believe in God. If you do not believe in God and have no evidence for your belief then you are living by faith just as much as those who believe in God

Your response...

and this is still just plain flat out wrong.

Nope it is not. You will not admit it though as it shows that you are living by faith if you do not believe in God or that God does not exist. If you have no evidence for your belief you are living by faith just like those who you claim have no evidence for their belief.

 

[3rdAngel]

And if all of these people agreed on the particulars, you would have a point. But they don't. And *that* shifts the evidence to it simply being something made up and/or people conditioning themselves into belief. I don't agree that there is a 'collective witness' because there are simply too many disagreements between those in the 'collective'. if it was a real being, as opposed to self-deception, I would expect much more consistency around the world and there simply wouldn't be the diversity of religions. Once again, they cannot all be correct, but they *can* all be wrong. And the diversity suggests exactly that.

But they do all agree. This is what I am indeed claiming all these people (reference to christianity) all collectively agree on common basic point in which God has revlealed himself to them personally. Yes there is some variation in regards to scripture doctrine (this is not shift in evidence) and this is not in reference to the overall basic view in common to the collective witness that God has revealed himself to these people. The disagreements are not in regards to basic belief that God has revealed himself to them but within some doctrines and interpretation of the scriptures. Not to the individuals experience or the collective. This is the point being made.

3rdAngel said: I have a similar background but not in general mathamatics. My proffession leads me more towards biometrics but that said many of these models are indeed based on assumptions. Something that cannot be quantified without them unfortunately as you would agree. I am sure not every assumption used in many mathamatic models are correct. However they do give us a general understanding of the probabilities and chances of things that are likely to take place IMO so are useful as a general guide.

Your response...

Of course models have assumptions. That is how they arise, whether it be in biology or in physics. The question is whether the models are testable and give results consistent with observation. Those models that don't give any testable predictions can be discarded as meaningless and those that give incorrect predictions can be discarded as wrong (or, potentially, mere approximations). That's because I have not seen any calculation that is anywhere close to valid from either end of this. As far as I know, given the natural laws make life inevitable. We simply don't know, although the evidence we have is that life arose naturally (or, at least not by any processes that contradict the known laws of nature). So, as far as I can see, the probabilities are exactly the same in the two scenarios.

I would argue that those that cannot be tested are meaningless. For example how to you test for the chances of the origin of life which is the context to what we are talking about here? I think generally though I agree with you that there is not enough evidence to simply know one way or the other but the mathamatical models provided for some things that cannot be tested for can give us an idea in regards to the correctness of our theories IMO.

Once again, I withhold belief until there is evidence and the burden of proof is on the one making the positive existence claim. This i s how it is in every other subject.

I would say according to the scriptures no one ever finds God by waiting for evidence that God exists as he is only ever revealed to those who seek him in his appointed way through faith or by believing and following his Word. The scriptures teach that it is the fool that says in his heart that there is no God so from that perspective at least you do not take this position and your opened to God which is good. If your waiting for your evidence however you will never find God as this is not how he reveals himself. He only reveals himself to those who are open and honestly seek him through prayer and his Word.

As to your claim of buden of proof this is simply an athiest saying that I do not believe and is simply nonsense in my opinion. I accept for somethings I do not have conclusive evidence as a "christian". For example I cannot prove if a miracle has happened to me or that God has revealed himself to me but I do not need to because I know my own experience so for anyone to tell me something differently is simply folly IMO. Just as I cannot prove my experience to you and I know it is real. No one can tell prove to me through evidence that my experience is not real of that of the collective witness that is always present throughout the world since the begining of time.

Now I can tell you about my experience but I cannot show you evidence of God so I live by faith and have become a part of a collective witness whicn is in my view evidence in and of it self but I live by faith because I have no deifnitive evidence to prove God. Yet this is no different IMO to those who claim to believe there is no God or do not believe in the existence of God both live by faith because they cannot prove or not prove God through evidence one way or nother. So to my depending on your view (in God or against) burden of proof is on both sides and IMO there is more evidence in a collective witness then those who simply claim there is no God (not speaking of you).

And you can believe that if you wish. At this point, that is a hope based on a complete lack of evidence.

Much of this is already answered in the previous section. There is no lack of evidence to the person that God has revealed himself to as this is a personal experience. There is only lack of external evidence in being able to prove God to others who do not believe the collective witness. Wheather one believes in God or does not believe in God both beliefs have a lack of evidence for their position therefore both beliefs are one of faith.

My basic point is that people are really, really good at deluding themselves, even to the point of hearing the voice of Cher giving advice. I see no reason to suspect God belief is anything different. And, given the evidence of how much people can delude themselves, and that the *ways* to delude oneself align well with activities like prayer and meditation, the evidence as I see it points to self-delusion and not a perception of reality.

Yes I agree with you generally here. Although I disagree at the same time in that if you have 1/3 of the worlds population and people all though time as a collective witness saying that God has revealed himself to them and that is their personal experience that is something that cannot be disproven. Yet your examples and the examples of othere here of individuals believing imaginary things cannot be applied to a collective like that which I have shared with you IMO. You cannot say that every person that believes they have had an experience in God is deluded. If you do the burden of proof is now on you to provide definitive evidence for your claims that every person in the collecive witness (1/3 of the current world population and those all through time) have been deluded in their experience, but you cannot as there is no evidence that can even deny a single persons experience which you no nothing about. So even your claims here are simply an opinion based on faith.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts Poly and nice talking to you

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ Not really. Not believing in God for example is a belief that does not believe in God. If you do not believe in God and have no evidence for your belief then you are living by faith just as much as those who believe in God

I strongly disagree. Not believing is simply not having a belief. For example, I lack a belief in the existence of axions (a proposed subatomic particle). The evidence is not in for one way or the other and it is unreasonable to believe one way or the other without evidence. That is exactly NOT a position of faith. Instead, it is going with the available evidence and understanding that the positive existence claim is where the burden of proof lies. Not believing in God and believing there is no God are two different positions. The first is reasonable when there is no evidence either way. The second is reasonable when the lack of evidence becomes evidence of absence.

Of course you disagree here as it puts the buden of proof on you to prove that there is no God in order to prove your belief. However I also strongly disagree with your claims here. Whatever way you want to spin it not believing that there is a God or that there is no existence of God is still a belief that there is no God and for that reason if you do not have evidence for this belief it is simply an opinion based on faith IMO. Even if you claim not having a belief in God it is also no evidence that there is no God either. Don't forget now the very definition of athiesm is a disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. This is pretty consistent across the board ...

ATHIESM DEFINITIONS

“Atheism” is typically defined in terms of “theism”. Theism, in turn, is best understood as a proposition—something that is either true or false. It is often defined as “the belief that God exists”, but here “belief” means “something believed”. It refers to the propositional content of belief, not to the attitude or psychological state of believing. This is why it makes sense to say that theism is true or false and to argue for or against theism. If, however, “atheism” is defined in terms of theism and theism is the proposition that God exists and not the psychological condition of believing that there is a God, then it follows that atheism is not the absence of the psychological condition of believing that God exists (more on this below). The “a-” in “atheism” must be understood as negation instead of absence, as “not” instead of “without”. Therefore, in philosophy at least, atheism should be construed as the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, the proposition that there are no gods). (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Atheism is, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)". (Wiki).

Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable. (Encyclopedia Britannica)

Atheism a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods; a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods (Merriam Webster dictionary)

Atheism the doctrine or belief that there is no God or disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. (Dictionary.com)

Atheism The term “atheist” describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists (Encyclopedia of Philisophy).

Athiesm a'-the-iz'-m (atheos, "without God" (Ephesians 2:12)): Ordinarily this word is interpreted to mean a denial of the existence of God, a disbelief in God, the opposite of theism. (International Stantard Bible Encyclopedia)

Athiesm the belief that God does not exist; not believing in any God or gods, or relating to such beliefs (Cambridge Dictionary)

Athiesm the belief that there is no God, or denial that God or gods exist godlessness (Your Dictionary)

Someone who believes in Atheism...........?

Atheist, a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism (Merriam Webster dictionary)

So for this one perhaps we will agree to disagree

 

[3rdAngel]

Hard atheism: I am convinced there is no God
Soft atheism: I lack a belief in God.
Soft agnosticism: I don't know either way
Hard agnosticism: It is impossible to know either way

So, an agnostic atheist is someone who lacks a belief in God but doesn't claim to *know* that no God exists.

There are also other positions:
Ignosticism: the concept of God is too ill-defined for the question of existence to be meaningful.

Apatheism: I don't care if a God exists or not.

For myself, I am convinced the Abrahamic God does not exist. I allow for other possibilities (say, pantheism, or maybe panentheism), but see them as low likelihood. I also think there are too many different conceptions of God for meaningful discussion prior to settling on a definition.

So I have a mixture of hard and soft atheism (depending of the conception of God in question), a bit of agnosticism, and a lot of ignosticism. Every once in a while I feel apatheistic: the whole question often seems pointless.

Yep I am aware that there is all versions and colors of the spectrum in relation to any belief. However there are core beliefs that are normally held in common across all view points both within religion and outside of it. The core belief of athiesm is disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods

 

[Ayjaydee]

To me, faith is a belief that does not have definitive evidence for that belief. There is also the biblical definition that christians live by as well in Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith is good if it is based on truth and bad if it is not.

How would one know?

 

[3rdAngel]

Most are in my experience.
Due to practicality. They live their lives as if God does not exist. They are not worried about judgement, some moral code from religion(s), etc. They get on with living to put it simply. Keep in mind the agnostic part can be about knowledge and if God is even "knowable". So that often become an issue regarding methodology not merely a belief in God. The systems we have are inadequate to prove or provide a high probability of existence or non-existence. Keep in mind belief and faith are similar. The difference is what is used for evidence in the for/against view. Scripture vs philosophy for example. Both categories of people will use philosophy but only one uses scripture *scripture being an umbrella term for religious texts.

Thanks Shad but to me that sounds more simply like a definition of an "unbeliever" (someone that does not believe) rather then an athiest which is generally defined as a disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. I understand the many spectrums within this belief though and have met a variety of them here as defined in this definition. I would not say that most athiests are agnostic in my view. If they were they would simply be better off being agnostic rather than athiests. Each to their own however. Thanks for sharing your view.

 

[3rdAngel]

One cannot have faith in something that they are lacking. Faith only concerns "belief."

If you're going to argue from an etymological stand point, then both atheism and theism does not have anything to do with the belief that a god exist or not. It's basically a moot point. But if talking about belief, then theism(theos) is the belief that a god exist. And atheism(atheos) means without
the belief of a god.

No, because agnosticism deals with the knowledge, not belief. That's why someone can be an agnostic or gnostic atheist. It's the same as someone being a Christian theist, Christianity deals with religion and theism deals with simply the belief that a god exist.

In regards to god, the existence of a god is not known. See how their belief is not about the belief that a god doesn't exist.

Some atheist see it as a big difference. One cannot have any beliefs if they are lacking in belief, so they have no belief. Someone who does not believe, does lack the belief that a god exist. The difference comes when it goes into further details.

That's two separate things. Being open to believing in a god doesn't define what atheism is about.

Again, being open has nothing to do with atheism. Just like a theist being open to the idea of no god exist. They still believe that a god exist.

Theism can be both. What's important is the usage in "context." A proposition is true or false, but not in the way that you might think. Being true or false is hinges on what the proposition is.

Propositions are not required to argue for or against them.

Nope, you're wrong. But as I said, being true or false it is dependent on the proposition. In this case, it is believe a god exist, so if you believe that a god exist, it is true. If you don't, then it is false. Theism is not god exist. You even said it yourself, it's "believe that a god exist." So the proposition would be, "you believe that a god exist." Let's dissect it, I color coded it. R is obviously the who. B is the action, the deciding factor of being true or not. G is the what, that correlates to the action. The "a-" in atheism stands for, "without" belief or "not" believe , it doesn't matter. See how the proposition plays the role? You have to know what that is and how it is being presented. And being dishonest by changing the meaning of theism didn't work because I'm using the definition, quoting exactly what you said, "is best understood as," the belief that a god exist.

Atheism, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of a god, is the result of theism when used as a proposition.

Hello night912, nice to see you again. You do know right, that mostly everything in the previous posts you thought were my words were quotes from outside sources and not my own words right? They were not me posting my words. Everything you have responded to here are direct quotes in regards to athiesm all linked here to the outside sources from...

1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2. Encyclopedia Britannica
3. Merriam Webster dictionary
4. Encyclopedia of Philisophy
5. International Stantard Bible Encyclopedia
6. Cambridge Dictionary
7. Your Dictionary
8. Dictionary.com
9. Wiki

Someone who believes in Atheism...........?
10. Atheist Merriam Webster dictionary

So your not responding to anything that I have written here but only to the quotes I provided from the linked sources above. Perhaps if you disagree with them you can take your views up directly with the academics who have written them. So we will have to agree to disagree in this regards but thankyou for sharing your view

 

[3rdAngel]

Nope. Not believing in god cannot be an example for a belief that does not believe in god. Believing and not believing are two separate things. Use yourself as an example. You not believing that no god exist is not an example for you believing that a god exist because you not believing tells nothing about you believing.

Yep. Not believing in God or the existence of God is still a belief no matter how you want to spin it. Not believing in anything is simply not believing in anything. Now if you believe that there is no God and that God does not exist then that is your belief. If you cannot prove your belief and you have no evidence that God does not exist then it is simply your opinion in which you are living by faith

And here's where you are wrong. I'll play along and show you the difference. I'm not living by faith, I live by evidence. I believe without a shadow of a doubt that my belief is true and can support it with sufficient and justifiable evidence. My evidence is that I believe that I lack the belief that a god exist because I am not lying to myself.

Nope. If you have no evidence for your belief that there is no God then all you have is an opinion that you cannot prove which means your opinion is simply based on faith as you cannot prove it. If you live by evidence then you should be able to prove that there is no God. Yet here you still are with no evidence and simply providing your own opinion you cannot prove.

Hope this helps

 

[3rdAngel]

How would one know?

Hi Ayjay nice to see you again. How would one know what?

 

[Ayjaydee]

Yep. Not believing in God or the existence of God is still a belief no matter how you want to spin it. Not believing in anything is simply not believing in anything. Now if you believe that there is no God and that God does not exist then that is your belief. If you cannot prove your belief and you have no evidence that God does not exist then it is simply your opinion in which you are living by faith



Nope. If you have no evidence for your belief that there is no God then all you have is an opinion that you cannot prove which means your opinion is simply based on faith as you cannot prove it. If you live by evidence then you should be able to prove that there is no God. Yet here you still are with no evidence and simply providing your own opinion you cannot prove.

Hope this helps

Not believing in something is a FACT.
even if god existed, the FACT remains the athiest does not believe it

 

[3rdAngel]

Not believing in something is a FACT.
even if god existed, the FACT remains the athiest does not believe it

Indeed that is their belief and for that belief they have no evidence to prove what they believe so their belief is based on faith.

 

[Ayjaydee]

Your response...

Nope it is not. You will not admit it though as it shows that you are living by faith if you do not believe in God or that God does not exist. If you have no evidence for your belief you are living by faith just like those who you claim have no evidence for their belief.

Nonsense. He doesnt have faith that he doesn't believe he knows full well he doesmt

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Depends I guess if you believe your chart or if you believe the dictionary definitions which do not seem to be agreeing with each other. I have never heard of your definitions before although I am quite aware that there are many variations within and belief or religion.

I'm telling you what my, and most other atheist's, position actually is.

You can either accept that, or pretend to know better then ourselves what it is that we believe (or don't believe).

Personally, I'm not arrogant enough to know better then someone else what goes on inside their heads.

Someone who believes in Atheism...........?

Atheism is not something you "believe in".

Atheism is just the label used for someone that is not a theist.
There are no claims in atheism, so there's nothing there to "believe".

Theism is the claim.
Atheism is simply when you don't believe the claim of theism.

Atheist, a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods

Exactly.

So, not a belief.
Not believing, is not a belief. It is the opposite.