Ah so you entertain the possibility that mermaids exist. My bad. When you said you lacked belief, I assumed you did not entertain the possibility. So in that case, you also entertain the possibility that God exists. So we need a new word for those who believe there is no God.
Thats another concept that makes no sense to me, its like being weakly pregnant. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
ashura pointed it out for you. "Strong atheist". Of course it largely depends upon which god we're talking about. allah and his virgins, brahma and his six testicles, yhwh and his bad attitude.. I would consider myself strong atheist. A god as some seemingly undefinable, beyond human comprehension being.. Who's to say?
Does that mean you only weakly entertain the possibility of God, like maybe a few seconds a day? Considering of course that you don't fully reject theism or whatever, and don't have any concept of God of your own; or at least not one that makes sense to you Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Do you subscribe to these views then? http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=1420044&postcount=52
Which one? Zeus gets 0 seconds thought, allah/yhwh/apollo/brahma/tiamat get 0 seconds thought. Who and what are you talking about?
Hmm so you weakly entertain the possibility of a God that has no concept? (when you're not contemplating mermaids, that is) Okay. I see why they call it rational thinking. Apparently, it is carefully rationed out. Very interesting btw, all the gods you don't have a concept of.
Well, I lack a belief. But ok. What I find more interesting is that you failed to explain which god you were talking about. So.. which god are you talking about? Define it.
Why does it matter, you have no concept, right? So what would you, in your conceptless world, consider evidence of a god?
No you said you lack belief because there is no evidence, so what evidence would you need to attain belief? Any god, take your pick.
I said I lack belief because I don't understand the concept, (unless you define specifics). As such... You choose.
Ah, of course, especially since it was you that decided it was undefinable.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Now I see very clearly. You have no definition/concept of god , no evidence that could possibly convince you since god is undefinable, yet you lack a belief in the concept of God and still know that it could not possibly be one of concepts the theists believe in since there is no evidence for their god that you have no concept of and hence lack belief in Pretty simple really. Should get real popular.
Righty ho. (Of course it depends which one). If this 'god' is undefinable, then sure.. probably not. Which one? It could possibly. With defined gods I can argue against. Weird that you applied this to a defined god, (i.e the god of the thiest that they believe in. As you yourself argued, to believe in it they must have some definition of it).
Whatever the assigned definition is. If, for example, you stated that 'god' was an entity that lived under and was visible under every buttercup I would argue non-existence on the basis that I had looked under buttercups and found no such thing, (dependant upon further definition - i.e a blue, six armed, elephant headed dude). If you want to impress me give me your definition and we can work from there.
