Welcome to the trick the non-religous have been observing for oh my, millenia.
Do I believe in God? Sure (it’s a word)
Do I believe God performs miracles? Sure (in the Bible yes)
Do I believe God is real? Sure (in the Bible)
Do I believe God rules the universe? Sure (in the Bible)
Do I believe in the Bible? Sure (umm… yeah stupid, there’s one right behind you)
Do I believe in Satan? Uh huh (in the bible)
Do I believe in seperation from God? Sure (in the Bible)
Do I believe in the Holy Trinity and Christ the Savior who died for all of our sins? Sure (in the Bible)
Do I believe God is the supreme creator of all being without any rules to abide? Sure (in the Bible)
Do I believe God doesn’t exist? Nope. (You just said the damn word, how could it not exist?)
Do you believe in the principle of faith? Sure (I have faith in my lack of faith - the faith of reason)
Do you think God is meaningful? Sure (As a test for brainwashing susceptability, does this stupid word actually mean anything other than that?!)
I just passed a considerably rigorous evaluation of religious faith with flying colors! I did not lie. Maybe those of religion, might garner some sense of frustration that the non-religous feel about their lack of full disclosure. As a religious person, how exactly would you narrow down my position?
while I fully agree religious people are idiots, your qualification “in the bible” is disingenuous because by saying you believe it “in the bible” that necessarily implies you believe it in the “real world” because the bible is supposed to be an actual account of the real world, and not the fairy tale for which it is.
Also, when asked if you believe in god, you’re not being asked if you believe the word exists; you’re being asked if you believe in the definition of that word, i.e. a supreme being creature who controls everything and knows everything.
Hmm, I’m just narrowing down your position from all the data I’ve recieved. Uh, huh, yep. Okay. Based on this and previous posts by you, I have determined with about 90% accuracy that you’re a misguided incoherent nut.
What were we talking about?
If you only believe in “God (in the Bible)” it’s pretty safe to say you’re atheist/agnostic or something like that. As in: “There is no higher power, save my incredible logic and reason” or “my incredible logic and reason evaluate this as neither provable nor disprovable”.
Also, I’m not a religious person anyway. So maybe I shouldn’t have responded. I think this is my first GD post, I may as well waste it in one of your threads.
“”""""""“your qualification “in the bible” is disingenuous because by saying you believe it “in the bible” that necessarily implies you believe it in the “real world” because the bible is supposed to be an actual account of the real world, and not the fairy tale for which it is.”"""""""""
So let’s run the negation:
Do I believe in a God outside of the Bible? Sure (In other peoples heads, and in the Bible since the Bible refers itself at times as being a historical record of events.)
Do I believe those events actually took place outside of the Bible itself? Sure (inside the Bible)
How about this:
Do I believe(,) in(side of) the Bible? No. (The Bible never states that I am inside of it or that my beliefs are inside of it.).
Well, ok so I failed the test BUT, this has nothing to do with the quality being sought!! A deeply religious person can be excluded for being honest!!
Why don’t I believe in the Bible? The Bible never states that I am inside of it or that my beliefs are inside of it. In fact, it states that they are Gods’ beliefs.
Do I believe in the beliefs of God? Sure (in the Bible)
Do I believe in the Bible? Sure (it’s right there behind you)
Do I believe in the beliefs of God outside of the Bible, outside of all minds except God? Do I believe that God exists outside of the Bible as well as in the Bible? Sure (in the Bible)
Maybe someone has a fancy name for this phenomenon. I just call it non-transparency. The question is: How can I possibly lie about this in the context of a questionairre or even living in a monastary for an entire life-time? It seems that religious people would take SOME interest in this phenomenon!! Or is the whole thing just a big crock?
I probably am being disingenuous, however I’m sure a bit more analysis of this can build a structure where that quality is effectively weeded out. I think the point here, is to show those who believe in God a window of how everyone typically feels about the situation as a whole… the hidden references which twist and turn behind the question, allowing people to wrestle their minds free of specific catagorization.
“”""""“Also, when asked if you believe in god, you’re not being asked if you believe the word exists; you’re being asked if you believe in the definition of that word, i.e. a supreme being creature who controls everything and knows everything.”"""
Ok, so I believe in the God of the Bible. Either way, it seems the mind doesn’t require much. You can either hold:
“Inside the Bible” or “Inside the inside of the Bible” (the Bible does refer to itself)
now you’re just arguing semantics. bill clinton didn’t have “sex” with that woman if “sex” doesn’t include fellatio. If you’ve just discovered that you can be disingenuous by the use of semantics, you’re a slow learner. Most people figure that out by the time they’re 2 years old.
I’d like a clarification on this. Do you agree with him that SOME religious people are idiots, or are you saying that all of them are? I myself am an atheist, but not for a moment do I think that religious people are stupid as a rule. Some of them are smarter than I am, certainly. I believe that because you have faith that a certain thing is true doesn’t mean that you are automatically a gullible fool.
“”""“If you only believe in “God (in the Bible)” it’s pretty safe to say you’re atheist/agnostic or something like that.”"""
This is a good point; absolutes!
Do I only believe in God? Umm… no (I’d starve to death)
Do I only believe in God (in the Bible)? No (That would mean there is no point in doing anything outside the Bible or it would be blasphemy to believe anything of Gods can exist outside of the Bible, aka. starvation) Yes (Only the true word of God is in the Bible, why believe in anything else; it is false by necessity - which of course disproves the meaningfulness of the Bible, but hey; I’m just trying to get into the monastary).
“”""""""""""""“now you’re just arguing semantics. bill clinton didn’t have “sex” with that woman if “sex” doesn’t include fellatio. If you’ve just discovered that you can be disingenuous by the use of semantics, you’re a slow learner. Most people figure that out by the time they’re 2 years old.”""""""""""
It’s slightly different. You’re dealing with an undefined term acting within the context of a storyline in a book. Why undefined?
Place a condition upon God: Ooops that means he lies about himself.
Make God unconditional: Welcome to the words anything and everything, what’s the point?
Do you believe in anything? Yes
Do you believe that anything exists? Yes
Do you believe that anything is possible? Yes
Plus! This is in the context of a book, a virtual representation of form in concept.
You have a virtualized undefined term!! Do virtualized undefined terms exist? Of course they do! How can you be lying if you admit this?
You’ve been here for six months and you haven’t figured out the Quote thing yet? Eh, it’s hard to read, with the weird symbols. Just put “left bracket quote right bracket” [ quote ] (with no spaces) in front of whatever you want to quote, and put “left bracket slash quote right bracket” [/ quote ] meaning “end quote” (with no spaces) at the end of whatever it was you were quoting. Then Preview to make sure it worked. That’s all it is.
[/nitpicky hijack]
We now return you to your regularly scheduled semantics debate.
I daresay that there’s quite a bit of difference in believing in the God of the Bible and believing that there is a God in the Bible.
Asking one and giving the answer of the other is a way of “cheating the system” of the language, because while you know what the question is supposed to mean, you purposely avoid answering it.
It’s not that “You cannot lie about believing in God,” it’s that you choose to answer different questions.
In replying to the questions put, you are using the word “believe” or the word “God” or both in senses which you know
are not the senses which the questioner employs when he uses them,
are not the senses which the questioner understands when you use them, and
are not the senses in which the words are ordinarily employed.
You can defend, as a logical exercise, the senses in which you are used the words, but what is the point? You know that there is a mutual misunderstanding between you and the questioner about the sense in which the words are being used. You know that he is unaware of this. You are wilfully misleading him.
A more honest approach would be
(a) to tell the questioner what you believe in language that will correctly convey your meaning to him, or
(b) to tell the questioner to mind his own business.
If you want to mislead people about your beliefs, why not just lie directly? The approach you are adopting is not more honest or more defensible than this.
I struggle with this problem all the time. Since I usually point out to well meaning religious folks (usually after some unsolicited attempt to impose their version on me) that what they believe in is based on absolutely nothing, they rightly assume that I am an atheist.
But THERE IS A GOD- a very powerful one at that. He controls people’s lives, makes them kill each other with wild abandon, whispers promises of eternal life and happiness into their ears if they kill the non-believers for him, fills children with guilt, compels them to fly planes into buildings, blow themselves up, etc., etc. This god exists only in the mind. But it’s still a very powerful god.
Some very smart people I’ve met have also been very religious, but since they don’t question some very fundamental inconsistencies, it makes them look like idiots…