Atheists and proof cont….

[Kdtym10]

A carry on from the previous thread

They’re in my 17:17 post 🙂

It seems basically unless the being itself is living breathing and can submit to genetic testing then all we have is just faith that there may be more supernatural beings that have the powers like humans wrote about in various texts ?

Thank you. I’ll look into those resources. Thanks for your kind words too. I lLike debating it helps you clarify your thoughts. Some other posters on here are clearly well read (eg @Garlicking) and it quite good fun😀.

Pretty much

Merriam Webster, cambridge, collins and Oxford dictionary definitions below

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
someone who does not believe in any god or gods, or who believes that no god or gods
An atheist is a person who believes there is no gods

I don't generally go to an encyclopedia for a specific definition of a word, I go to a dictionary but you go with what you want.

thought atheists were utilitarian but now understand it's a belief like any religion.

Atheism is the lack of belief and is very different to a religion. I would have understood (not agreed but understood) if you had compared it to spirituality, but it bears no resemblence whatsoever to a religon. Thats like saying that boys who dont go to scouts belong to an organisation like scouts.

www.psypost.org/new-research-finds-that-atheists-are-just-as-healthy-as-the-religious/

I thought you meant Samuel Taylor Coleridge, so I must be very out! Which Coleridge do you mean please?

I did, he died before the origin of the species was published

Oh I thought you were referring to him being referenced as a 19th centry visionary when you said the dates were out, not in reference to the origin of the species, I must have misfollowed that strand of the conversation

That makes me feel better I hadn't missed some famous Coleridge though 🤣

I would think, when you’re trying to establish details of a concept rather than the grammar, etymology and brief definition of a word an encyclopaedia is probably a better starting point

I wasn't trying to establish the details of a concept though.

And given the etymology of the word is "without God" this just goes to the definitions I've quoted

Apologies, I was talking about the way people viewed white Christian men in the context of Darwin. I would most probably have said late Victorian Christian men. I think men of Blake’s and Coleridge’s time would be best seen in the light of the prioritisation of the aristocracy and Revolutions.

There is always Samuel Coleridge Taylor.

But STCs family is very interesting.
What became the family home in Devon has an incredible history - he certainly had a very different early life to Blake!

I admit I HRTFT but I would ask what your reason is for “arguing” with atheists.

The reality is that no amount of 'evidence' for Christ will convince a person to come to Christ: It is Christ who does the revealing and the changing of heart'

It’s fun😀 plus I learn some things. And it’s debate not arguing, thanks very much.

What’s your interest in my motives?

My view is you don’t come to Christ you realise you are Christ. But I’m not trying to persuade anyone about anything. I leave that to bonkers evangelical types

What do you think you will learn?

Good lord, now you’re even arguing with people who are nominally on your side…

My view is you don’t come to Christ you realise you are Christ. But I’m not trying to persuade anyone about anything. I leave that to bonkers evangelical types

Ah, now I get you. You are Christ and you have come to debate the error of our heathen ways with us. Thanks for the heads up 👍

😂😂

Well I learned quite a bit already about science via a spiffing little cartoon. I’ve learned that sometimes atheism is an active belief there is no god, sometimes it’s a lack of belief. A lot of people can’t tell the difference (until you quote the “wrong” concept).

Ive had some interesting reference given for me to follow up.

Ive clarified some of my thought processes by other people challenging them I’ve learned I think most stand up for me.

I’ve learned which posters here have got some really interesting things to say so will look out for them in future.

I’ve had confirmed people often fall back on ad hominem arguments at certain points. Some people can't control their anger when challenged.

one of the most interesting bits so far is when atheists are trying to describe some inner intuition. Unfortunately that part of the discussion seemed to stop short.

they're the things which immediately come to mind. Sure there’s loads more!

As Blake said - “Jesus Christ is the only God and so am I and do are you” -I suspect you and @TheHorneSection are going to miss the point 😃.

Love and light 💜💜💜

Duh ??

🤔

It’s a shame because the original question was interesting, and it could have been a really good discussion, had you been remotely interested in actually learning anything and engaging in a debate. And by debate, I don’t mean calling people uneducated because they haven’t read the entire works of Blake and Coleridge, or aren’t fully versed in the Draper White model ie they don’t have the exact same interests in literature, history and philosophy as you.

We’ll all head off to our uneducated, unimaginative, non-ideological lives and you can stay and bask in the safe knowledge that you are much cleverer, better read and more imaginative than the rest of us. We bow to your greater knowledge.

You do realise OP. that Blake had a very 'fertile' imagination?

Even at an early age his unique mental powers would prove disquieting. On one ramble he was startled to “see a tree filled with angels, bright angelic wings bespangling every bough like stars.” His parents were not amused at such a story.

Fair enough. Have a great evening. If you’re looking for a good book. Peter Ackroyds biography of Blake is great!

I’ve learned that sometimes atheism is an active belief there is no god, sometimes it’s a lack of belief.

One of the interesting things about the thread has been the approach to try to gather the atheists into one agreed definition of athiesm

Atheists don't have to agree on one definition, its not an organised belief system like an organised religion

And given Christians cant even agree on one approach, never mind all the many many different religions Im not sure why atheists should all be expected to agree on the same approach either

That's really interesting about health, thanks for the link . I looked some more and there is this Pew Study;
Global Pew Study; Atheists and Believers
So interesting
For the dictionary definition would you then accept that atheists can believe in spirits then? I didn't think you did, but okay. I do see the Humanists UK website as a kind of secular religion replacement and was pretty shocked ( and disappointed) when the President Alice Roberts supported gender identity, a true modern religion, as well as the American Atheists. And we all know there is zero scientific proof of a gender identity.
Were you disappointed as an atheist. Do you feel the need for atheist-supporting orgs? I'm interested; don't know many atheists, always keen to learn.