Vote.. on this atheistic position

[varit]

For a deistic God,

I understand holding the position that you do not believe in it, based on knowledge that there's no good reason to believe in it.

But what is your position on Belief that there is no deistic god.

Are you
Sure in your belief that there is no deistic god?
do you believe there is no deistic god, but have low confidence in that belief?
is it only a suspicion that there is no deistic god? (and thus not something you could really say you believe there is no deistic god?)

 

[Prolescum]

Why?

What do you expect to learn this time that you didn't learn last time?

 

[Thomas Doubting]

The position "Do not believe in God but refuse to deny that there is no God"

If you do hold this position, then reply Ay. or 1

Do not believe in God and refuse to admit that the common versions based on logical fallacies and morbid works of fiction from ignorant sand dwelling piss stained slave driving murdering pedophiles and alike are plausible enough to even try to believe them, thus denying their existence.
Whoever makes the claims is of course free to back them up with genuine evidence, never happened so far though... for thousands of years already, which is another good reason to call bullshit.
Rejecting an "Argumentum ad rectal extractum" is the default position, if somebody calls bullshit it is and never will be reason enough to unload the burden of proof on them.
You got a great answer from Squawk in the other thread.

Is there really a difference between a person who asserts there is no cheese eating intergalactic tazer wielding shark orbiting mars, and one who simply says he has no belief in that proposition and will only have a believe in it when evidence is presented?

I'd argue no. I'd argue the strong position here is just as rational, requiring no further evidence. The difference is an acceptance (belief?) that absence of evidence actually is evidence of absence, depending on circumstances. I adopt the same position when it comes to deities. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence in my opinion. The one caveat, that opinion is open to change with presentation of evidence.

Put up or shut up.

 

[Squawk]

Also, re-read the questions, since your question makes no sense.

"deny that there is no god" is a double negative that I presume you didn't intend. I presume you meant "deny there is a god".

 

[Dean]

The position "Do not believe in God but refuse to deny that there is no God"

If you do hold this position, then reply Ay. or 1

Am I the only one here who is rather confused as to the actual purpose of this post(??)

 

[Leçi]

This is my oppinion, I could be wrong.

There's a possibility there's a "god", its highly unlikely there is such a being but still, there might be an organism that with our current findings we couldn't explain yet wether it be because it has superiour technology or it's some kind of planet eating monster. The chance of it being the god of a religion is quite small (and that's an understatement I guess).

So yes there might be a superiour being however unlikely
No I don't think it's the god of any religion.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

There could be one.. There could be a magical dwarf fairy called Annie waiting for me when I die... I don't care. Lack of evidence = lack of giving a shit, that's how it works for me.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

I for one think that there is a god.

His name is Krom, and he grants me victory.

 

[Leçi]

Or a moronic egg called Jos that dresses up like a smurf sometimes.

 

[varit]

Also, re-read the questions, since your question makes no sense.

"deny that there is no god" is a double negative that I presume you didn't intend. I presume you meant "deny there is a god".

correct, sorry, well spotted. That was the question.

If anybody here holds the position, if so for them to say Yes they do "Do not believe in God but refuse to deny that there is a God"

And as far as other remarks, yes, I know there's a remote possibility of anything, and I can mock the idea of a God too. But that is not a Yes to that question. I was just asking if anybody would give a Yes to that question.

Nobody then so far, who would say their position is ""Do not believe in God but refuse to deny that there is a God""

I have another question.. Would anybody here refuse to say they "believe there is no god", but still say they are fairly or very sure there is no God.
(obviously many people here are fairly/very sure there is no God , but would any of them refuse to say they believe there is no God). If so, Why?

 

[australopithecus]

Nobody then so far, who would say their position is ""Do not believe in God but refuse to deny that there is a God""

I would say that's my position entirely. I have no theistic faith, I reject the claims of theism, yet there is no way I can know with 100% certainty that god(s) either described by man or as of yet undescribed do not exist. You'd have to define 'god'. If said description is stupid I will call bullshit, but I'm not professing any gnosticism on the part of the non-existence of a deity.

 

[varit]

Nobody then so far, who would say their position is ""Do not believe in God but refuse to deny that there is a God""

I would say that's my position entirely. I have no theistic faith, I reject the claims of theism, yet there is no way I can know with 100% certainty that god(s) either described by man or as of yet undescribed do not exist. You'd have to define 'god'. If said description is stupid I will call bullshit, but I'm not professing any gnosticism on the part of the non-existence of a deity.

As I said, I'm not talking about 100% certainty.

Presumably you'd deny the God of the Quran or Bible, right? Or would you just say it's stupid but you don't deny it?

What God would you not deny? Can you give an example.

 

[australopithecus]

Presumably you'd deny the God of the Quran or Bible, right? Or would you just say it's stupid but you don't deny it?

The Abrahamic God, I would consider to be self contradictory and as I've said in another thread today, vastly implausible if not impossible. I would reject claims of those descriptions of a God, and I would deny the plausibility of said God, but I could not honestly deny it's existence as that would be making a claim of knowledge, if by deny you mean claiming it does not exist.

What God would you not deny? Can you give an example.

God is a matter of semantics really. Any sufficiently advanced entity could conceivably be called a God, or be mistaken for one, by a lesser advanced society. If it was logically consistent and obeyed the laws of physics and could be evidenced, I would have to concede it existed, though I wouldn't call it a God.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

More or less exactly what our early hominid friend said.

Although I suppose I should concede that I do believe in god when said god is defined as, "Love," "everything," "consciousness," etc. I do believe in these things, so if that is what you call god, then I believe in god.

I am more of the Ignostic position: that I cannot tell you if I believe in god or not, until you define what you mean by the term.

 

[varit]

Presumably you'd deny the God of the Quran or Bible, right? Or would you just say it's stupid but you don't deny it?

The Abrahamic God, I would consider to be self contradictory and as I've said in another thread today, vastly implausible if not impossible. I would reject claims of those descriptions of a God, and I would deny the plausibility of said God, but I could not honestly deny it's existence as that would be making a claim of knowledge, if by deny you mean claiming it does not exist.

What God would you not deny? Can you give an example.

God is a matter of semantics really. Any sufficiently advanced entity could conceivably be called a God, or be mistaken for one, by a lesser advanced society. If it was logically consistent and obeyed the laws of physics and could be evidenced, I would have to concede it existed, though I wouldn't call it a God.

I agree the word deny does seem to be making a knowledge claim.. so one couldn't honestly do so.. but what about a contradiction like 1=2 if belief in an entity entailed logical contradictions, would you not deny it based on knowledge of logic? you said you consider the Abrahamic God to be self-contradictory.

For an Abrahamic God you wouldn't deny it(that's understandable given the reason.. and i'd agree) . And it's implausible. Would you say you believe it doesn't exist?

Similarly for an advanced entity very powerful with a mind, and created the universe, and is a first cause, would you say you believe that doesn't exist?

 

[varit]

Why?

What do you expect to learn this time that you didn't learn last time?

In the previous thread nobody stepped forward and said they had that position.

Here I was hoping some would and i'd question them on it.. I see one person has.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

More or less exactly what our early hominid friend said.

Although I suppose I should concede that I do believe in god when said god is defined as, "Love," "everything," "consciousness," etc. I do believe in these things, so if that is what you call god, then I believe in god.

I am more of the Ignostic position: that I cannot tell you if I believe in god or not, until you define what you mean by the term.

And when people define "God" as omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent... It's just a bunch of vague-ass terms. Anyone who has ever pondered about the meaning of those three words... the true meaning of them, will understand that they're concepts that we're far from understanding. Randomly applying these concepts to God without even thinking about them is just hilarious.

 

[Squawk]

Quite happy to stand up and state that there is no god. I'll also agree that is a belief (I define belief simply as something which I hold to be true).

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

Quite happy to stand up and state that there is no god. I'll also agree that is a belief (I define belief simply as something which I hold to be true).

No need to say "I define (...)". That just happens to be the meaning of "belief". Don't be ashamed, it's what the word means!

 

[CommonEnlightenment]

Quite happy to stand up and state that there is no god. I'll also agree that is a belief (I define belief simply as something which I hold to be true).

No need to say "I define (...)". That just happens to be the meaning of "belief". Don't be ashamed, it's what the word means!

And it's important to remember that what we hold to be true doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make a premise true. That would be described as the wishful thinking fallacy.