Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby
To touch on just what's been mentioned in the last page or so, they mostly argue God-as-written based on particular religion, vs. God the concept.
|
I think, at the very least, MarchHare and I have been pretty consistent in NOT arguing that at all. I can, if you would prefer. I'm not sure how many times I need to say this: I reject all supernatural claims until such time as I am presented with sufficient evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby
For instance, the "strong" argument atheists have against the belief of god based on the the rejection of Norse Mythology: It's no argument at all. It may be an argument against Christianity, but not god. The version of what God is, it's attributes or whatever, vary from text to text. These attributes go towards creating an understanding and give rule and structure to whatever community abides by that text. Concerning the concept of God: the Christian God, Thor/Odin/Zeus, Buddha, Vishnu/Brahma, Mother Nature, it's all human understandings of the exact same thing. So to say "Well you're an atheist because you don't believe in Odin" shows a lack of understanding that there is no difference between Odin and the Christian God. Regardless of religion, belief in any God is belief in "God".
|
You are correct. I reject Odin as there is no evidence. I reject the God of the bible as their is no evidence. I reject Vishnu as there is no evidence. I reject there exists a "Mother Nature" that controls the weather as there is no evidence. Claiming Zeus didn't exist therefore the God of the Bible doesn't exist is not what most atheists (or any atheists) that I know do. They claim that Zeus didn't exist, and they also claim that the God of the Bible doesn't exist... for the same reason: lack of evidence.
If you are referring to the somewhat famous saying by, I believe, Richard Dawkins that goes something like "most of us are atheists with respect to Odin and Zeus, some of us just go one god further" I think you are either taking it out of context or not understanding the intent behind the message. Again, Richard Dawkins rejects the god claim of Zeus, he also rejects the god claim of the bible (and every other god claim). He is also suggesting that, for example, most Christians will reject Vishnu, Xenu, etc. while accepting Jesus/Yahweh. Most Hindu's will reject Jesus and Xenu while accepting Vishnu/Brahma. Most Scientologist will sit in the corner and drool while giving all their money to a scam artist... and then accept Xenu while rejecting Vishnu, etc. You get the idea. Richard Dawkins was attempting to say that the reasons you reject Vishnu/Jesus/Xenu are the same exact reasons he uses to reject all of them. For some reason, religious people seem to suspend their critical thinking/logical thought process that they apply to all other gods when it comes to their own god.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chill Cosby
Plus you have a couple guys making specific reference to Christianity and treating that like "God", while inferring that the Christian God or Islamic God are different, when in fact those two understandings are quite literally the exact same.
|
You can blame Fox News for part of that. I'm not sure most Fox News hosts could find their ass in the dark with both hands on a flashlight. Again though, most if not all atheists I know will reject the god of the bible due to lack of evidence, and will also reject the god of Islam for lack of evidence. I know they are the same god, each with the same amount of actual evidence.