>On May 12, 2:27 pm, Hatter gmail.com> wrote:

>> On May 12, 10:26 am, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>>> On May 11, 5:20 pm, Free Lunch wrote:

>>

>>>> On Sun, 11 May 2008 14:28:50 -0700 (PDT), Jerry Kraus

>>

>>>> - Show quoted text -

>>>>>Let's clarify what exactly you mean by "superstition".  This term
>>>>>seems to be regularly used by the so-called "atheists" in the U.S.,
>>>>>who I am really referring to here.  Frankly, I haven't the slightest
>>>>>idea what these so-called "atheists" mean by "superstition", but they
>>>>>claim that they reject all "superstition".

>>

>>>> Claims about the supernatural which are unsupported by any evidence. It
>>>> includes belief in gods, spirit ancestors, souls, etc.- Hide quoted text -

>>

>>> What is "supernatural"?  What is real?  How do we tell the
>>> difference?  How CAN we tell the difference without making certain
>>> assumptions which can be questioned?

>>
>> How can we tell the difference. Science and logic. No, we cannot tell
>> the difference without certain assumptions. Those include: (1)Science
>> and (2)Logic
>>
>>
>>

>>> Do so-called "atheists" simply object to vagueness?  Certainly, the
>>> concept of "God" in monotheism is extremely vague, probably
>>> undefinable.

>>
>> Most adherents of montheism have attributes of their Deity. The
>> Abrahamic God is tri-omni, which is a logical paradox and at odds with
>> the observable universe....so it can be easily discounted as false.
>> The fact is, that they move around the goalposts to work the "cannot
>> prove a negative" angle for some vauge deitist type god, which is
>> possible, then use equivocation to then say the disprovability of this
>> vauge concept means there particular deity exists. It is such a common
>> tactic it is called "moving the goalposts" and not a month has gone by
>> since I've started reading alt.atheism that some theist tries this
>> tactic. It is also combined with someone who is obviously abrahamic,
>> probably Christian, but will state he makes no postive claim. I
>> wouldn't have to go far to find someone using this tactic, not far at
>> all.
>>
>>
>>

>>> What exactly do so-called "atheists" claim to believe in?  Anything?
>>> If they do believe in something, why exactly do they believe in it?
>>> What "evidence" do you use?  Why?  How can you tell if the evidence
>>> for your beliefs is real, or adequate for you to believe in it?

>>
>> Atheists as a class, don't need to have a particular belief. No more
>> people whom do not engage in model railroading have a particular
>> hobby.
>>
>> But I can tell you what I believe in: People make crap up. One should
>> look at fantastic claims with suspicion.
>>
>> Hatter- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -

>
>Depends a lot on who you talk to. Most intelligent monotheists say
>that their concept of God is undefinable.

> And, therefore, the
>existence of God can neither be proven nor disproven.

>Curiously, Kurt Godel, the famous mathematician and logician -- you
>know, the uncertainty and undefinability theorems?-- actually did
>write a proof of the existence of God.

>He defined God as the
>coexistence of all possible states of being. Most intelligent
>religious people, however, would say that their concept of God
>transcends all logic. Purely undefinable. Possibly, by definition.