re: Satanic Temple puts up display at Michigan Capital

quote:

---

Is there a God?

---

There is no evidence of a god, so there are no god(s). In the realm of limitless possibilities, is it possible there is a god? Sure. That's not a belief...provide evidence of a god and I will then acknowledge there is a god. As you describe and understand belief, our entire existence, the physical world, our reality is simply a belief.

quote:

---

Wrong.

Faith is based on unverifiable beliefs

---

You can have faith in anything, whether verifiable or unverifiable.

I trust my wife when she tells me something is true. I could follow up and verify what she says, but I trust (have faith) that what she tells me is true.

Religious faith is also verifiable. When you die, you'll either go to Heaven, Hell, some place in between, or no where (consciousness ceases and your dead body rots in the ground). The faith held in life will either be confirmed or invalidated in death.

The difference is when the verification takes place, and that's what you need to qualify your statement with to make it valid, IMO.

quote:

---

Capitol rules require that displays have to be taken down each night.

---

Would solve a lot of problems if they just followed the First Amendment.

quote:

---

Then as you've said, you're agnostic

---

Sorry you're struggling so much with the English language, I take it it's not your native tongue?

I'm an agnostic atheist.

quote:

---

Not all signs.

---

there's literally no evidence for any gods. I don't know how much more clearer I have to be..

quote:

---

Would solve a lot of problems if they just followed the First Amendment.

---

Problem is that I'm not sure the 1st mandates what you're implying.

quote:

---

Religious faith is also verifiable. When you die, you'll either go to Heaven, Hell, some place in between, or no where (consciousness ceases and your dead body rots in the ground). The faith held in life will either be confirmed or invalidated in death.

---

No, that's only provisionally verifiable to the person who dies, if it's true. That's kind of a goofy way to define something as verifiable.

If a proposition cannot be verified in a substantive way that can be shared with others, it's not verifiable. Otherwise, the crazy lady next door could "verify" that she's being abducted by aliens every night. If she can't provide substantive evidence of this belief to others, then it's not verifiable.

quote:

---

there's literally no evidence for any gods. I don't know how much more clearer I have to be..

---

This doesn't mean that there's any evidence pointing toward there not being a god, which is what your post seemed to say. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

I say this as an agnostic atheist.

quote:

---

Then as you've said, you're agnostic

---

I'm of the view that there really isn't any such thing as an agnostic.

To me, one believes or one does not believe.

If one says they are "agnostic" then by definition, they do not fall into the former.

To me, atheism is simply the absence of belief. I realize that Webster's disagrees but frankly, that view is from the viewpoint of a belief.

I subscribe to the following.

quote:

---

Atheism is usually defined incorrectly as a belief system. Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God.

---

Atheism is the default. When you are born, you have no belief in a God of any sort. You are effectively, an atheist. If no one EVER introduced the idea of God to you, then you'd have to create the idea on your own but you weren't born with it either way.

I used to say I was "agnostic" but I came to view the term as nonsensical. I pretty much said it as an "out". IE, somehow, the whole "well, if there's a God, I didn't say I was atheist" line of thinking meaning I could somehow still work my way into heaven.

But, that's silly. If there in fact turned out to be a God, he obviously would know I didn't believe in him. If pretending to ride the fence fooled him, then he isn't God in the first place.

Hence, to me, either you believe or don't. Either you're a theist, or an Atheist.

quote:

---

This is not a timeline issue.

A fact is verifiable in the present.

A belief is not verifiable in the present.

Try to philosophize this all you want, but it does not change it.

---

Again, I disagree.

I play a shell game. I believe the ball is under the third shell because that's where it looked like it went. It is verifiable by picking up the shells.

The fact is that the ball is under the second shell. My belief was wrong, but justifiable considering that I watched the shells move around.

In this case, I'm taking "verifiable in the present" to mean "possible to be proven or disproven in the present"

Maybe we're talking past each other?