Atheism, please note the capitalisation❤️

[ProfessorDavey]

Not all atheists are theophobic I grant.

A simple test though would be to substitute the word theism with the word gay, or black, or trans or feminism and see how it reads.

Total category error - with the exception of feminism all of the things you mention are innate characteristics of an individual that they have no choice over.

Religion isn't like that at all - it is an opinion or belief and it is a choice.

So a better comparison with religion would be political or other philosophical beliefs.

[Enki]

I freely admit I am Thor dodging on the grounds I find polytheism leaves many unanswered questions and was a science substitute and Leprechauns which are at the root of antitheisms bare face and hateful use of the horses laugh fantasy and little green irishmen have not presented themselves to me although I did have a boss once.

On October 5th 2017, on the subject 'Faith vs blind faith' you said:

No - you'd need to demonstrate as a fact "God" before the claim could be "dodged", I would have thought demonstrating the act of Goddodging would act as evidence for God even in your madcap ontology.....and we can courtesy of Messrs Brian Greene and the very wonderful Mr N De Grasse Tyson....

So, by the same inane token, you should believe that your Thordodging would act as evidence of Thor as 'you'd need to demonstrate as a fact "Thor" before the claim could be "dodged".

In terms of theophobia, If your treatment of theists matches that which homophobes treat guys and gay issues I.e. with the same disdain, then you are theophobic.

You seem to be entirely ignorant of what theophobia means. It is an irrational fear of God or religion, not the participants of a religion. In some ways it is akin to a fear of spiders. Homophobia, on the other hand, is much more related to 'negative attitudes towards homosexual people and homosexuality which may be manifested in discrimination, hostile behaviour, or hate crimes'.(Oxford University Press).

Back to the drawing board, Vlad 

[ProfessorDavey]

I freely admit I am Thor dodging on the grounds I find polytheism leaves many unanswered questions and was a science substitute and Leprechauns which are at the root of antitheisms bare face and hateful use of the horses laugh fantasy and little green irishmen have not presented themselves to me although I did have a boss once.

Firstly that point was aimed at Gonners.

But the fundamental point is that you can only be accused of 'dodging' something that either has been demonstrated to exist or that the person accused of dodging believe exists.

It makes no sense to claim that someone is deliberately avoiding something (i.e. dodging) that they do not think exists. That isn't the case for someone in denial - in other words someone who believes that something exists but is refusing to accept this. You know like someone who might claim to be atheist, but says that they are 'angry with god for not existing' - clearly a theist in denial not an atheist. So it would be legitimate during his claimed atheist (but actually theist in denial) phase to claim CS Lewis was god dodging.

But the same does not, and indeed cannot apply, to someone who genuinely does not believe that god exists.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Prof,

Sorry sticking with dodging, has to be dodging ( theophobia, nah! sorry Vlad ) dodgers, but in truth I am only going with this forum, can't really say I am a expert in so called Atheism, I have read books by Atheists but they have mostly been having a pop at a certain kind of Christian and Muslim and for the most part I have agreed with them, but on this forum most definitely dodgers, but I will change my definition ever so slightly.

Ultimate God dodgers, God dodgers extraordinaire, God dodgers par excellence, God dodgers of the highest order, and I know what all the other God dodgers are thinking " gee thanks Gonners, oh please Gonners I am now blushing" no! no! no need to thank me, I have always believed that compliments come easy when they are true

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

On October 5th 2017, on the subject 'Faith vs blind faith' you said:

So, by the same inane token, you should believe that your Thordodging would act as evidence of Thor as 'you'd need to demonstrate as a fact "Thor" before the claim could be "dodged".

You seem to be entirely ignorant of what theophobia means. It is an irrational fear of God or religion, not the participants of a religion. In some ways it is akin to a fear of spiders. Homophobia, on the other hand, is much more related to 'negative attitudes towards homosexual people and homosexuality which may be manifested in discrimination, hostile behaviour, or hate crimes'.(Oxford University Press).

Back to the drawing board, Vlad 

No, As I said not all atheists are Goddodging at anyone time, secondly, theists can also Goddodge. That is what the biblical story of Jonah is about.
If an atheist is actively prepared to cleave to an idea that is more "bonkers" than a necessary entity to preserve their atheism then that is goddodging writ large.
I have heard of an antitheist who says he doesn't believe specifically because he believes a God would inevitably stand in judgment presumably by dint of merely existing.

[Maeght]

No, As I said not all atheists are Goddodging at anyone time, secondly, theists can also Goddodge. That is what the biblical story of Jonah is about.
If an atheist is actively prepared to cleave to an idea that is more "bonkers" than a necessary entity to preserve their atheism then that is goddodging writ large.
I have heard of an antitheist who says he doesn't believe specifically because he believes a God would inevitably stand in judgment presumably by dint of merely existing.

You've heard of this. Where?

[Gordon]

Dear Prof,

Sorry sticking with dodging, has to be dodging ( theophobia, nah! sorry Vlad ) dodgers, but in truth I am only going with this forum, can't really say I am a expert in so called Atheism, I have read books by Atheists but they have mostly been having a pop at a certain kind of Christian and Muslim and for the most part I have agreed with them, but on this forum most definitely dodgers, but I will change my definition ever so slightly.

Ultimate God dodgers, God dodgers extraordinaire, God dodgers par excellence, God dodgers of the highest order, and I know what all the other God dodgers are thinking " gee thanks Gonners, oh please Gonners I am now blushing" no! no! no need to thank me, I have always believed that compliments come easy when they are true

Gonnagle.

Gonners

Glad you've noticed the sublime skill of the atheists here at 'dodging' what we think isn't there to avoid in the first place - it is effortless: and as easy as enjoying a drink with some friends in Babbity Bowsters 

[ProfessorDavey]

... secondly, theists can also Goddodge.

Only theists can goddodge - because to dodge something (deliberately avoid it) you have to believe it is there in the first place.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Only theists can goddodge - because to dodge something (deliberately avoid it) you have to believe it is there in the first place.

Goddodge is a bit of a blunt instrument term to describe a human state that may or may not involve deliberation but rather a more visceral reaction.

One can contemplate how they would react if they encountered God or avoid to do even that for fear God might somehow get through.

[Dicky Underpants]

What books.

Believe it or not, Vlad, I've read rather a lot of books - as no doubt have you. It would take up rather too much space to name the relevant ones, and rather fruitless.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Believe it or not, Vlad, I've read rather a lot of books - as no doubt have you. It would take up rather too much space to name the relevant ones, and rather fruitless.

I think though you were referring to books which clarified your experience of calling for God and him not coming.
That surely narrows the field so, of those books ,which was the standout?

[Gonnagle]

Believe it or not, Vlad, I've read rather a lot of books - as no doubt have you. It would take up rather too much space to name the relevant ones, and rather fruitless.

Dear Dickie,

Spot the Dog, Jack and the Flum flum tree, The very Hungry Caterpillar yes we don't give old Guttenberg enough credit.

Anyway I have solved this whole religious debate ( debate aye right ) thingy, but not to worry, when I am writing my Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech everyone on this forum will get a mention which will only leave me with one other highly important and thought provoking question Why am I so bloody wonderful? ( that's a clue )

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Dear Dickie,

Spot the Dog, Jack and the Flum flum tree, The very Hungry Caterpillar yes we don't give old Guttenberg enough credit.

Anyway I have solved this whole religious debate ( debate aye right ) thingy, but not to worry, when I am writing my Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech everyone on this forum will get a mention which will only leave me with one other highly important and thought provoking question Why am I so bloody wonderful? ( that's a clue )

Gonnagle.

Have you ever read "Kangaroo over Kelvingrove Park" by the Australian author Dan Under?

[Gonnagle]

Have you ever read "Kangaroo over Kelvingrove Park" by the Australian author Dan Under?

Dear Vlad,

You shouldn't you really should not, but I am in a helpful mood this morning

Dear God dodgers,

What old Vlad is trying to do, well! its a play on words, Dan Under, down under, you see

Gonnagle.

[Gordon]

Have you ever read "Kangaroo over Kelvingrove Park" by the Australian author Dan Under?

That made me smile, Vlad - so thank you for that. 

Reminds me of jokes from my childhood involving book titles - as in 'Falling Off a Cliff' by Eileen Dover.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Total category error - with the exception of feminism all of the things you mention are innate characteristics of an individual that they have no choice over.

Religion isn't like that at all - it is an opinion or belief and it is a choice.

So a better comparison with religion would be political or other philosophical beliefs.

Not sure what you mean by religion or philosophical beliefs being a choice.

Yes, you can change your mind or belief due to nature/ nurture - if you encounter information or inputs or experiences that are processed by the cerebrum, the resulting electro-chemical activity  / thoughts or changes in brain structure / creation of new neural pathways may alter your beliefs or alter behaviour.

How much control do you have over these billions of neurons in your brain and cerebral processes for beliefs to be considered a choice?

[Gonnagle]

Dear Thread,

Well after much musing and soul searching ( yes its painful ) the whole question of God no God is ego that's it, pure ego on both sides, but ( always a damn but ) the God dodgers honest stance should be Agnostic❤️

Anyway Dear Fellow Posters the very wonderful Nina Simone is telling me she is feeling good✝️

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHRNrgDIJfo

Gonnagle.

[Enki]

No, As I said not all atheists are Goddodging at anyone time, secondly, theists can also Goddodge. That is what the biblical story of Jonah is about.

Obvously it is possible for theists to practise god evasion or 'goddodging' because they actually have some sort of belief in a god. Just as obviously, it does not really make much sense for an atheist who doesn't believe in a god to evade something which they believe doesn't exist. I suggest that someone who does goddodge must have some sort of underlying feeling, at least, that this god exists, such a person as C S Lewis, for instance.

For my own part, I don't believe in any god so the idea of goddodging makes little sense for me. You, on the other hand, are a self confessed Thor dodger, and therefore either you have at the very least a feeling that Thor exists, or you are simply lying.

If an atheist is actively prepared to cleave to an idea that is more "bonkers" than a necessary entity to preserve their atheism then that is goddodging writ large.

If an atheist has "bonkers" ideas, then perhaps their "bonkers" ideas should be challenged. It doesn't follow, however, that believing in a necessary entity is inevitably "bonkers", or that the alternative to a necessary entity is "more bonkers". It is also quite possible to believe in a necessary entity and remain an atheist.

I have heard of an antitheist who says he doesn't believe specifically because he believes a God would inevitably stand in judgment presumably by dint of merely existing.

Two things here. Firstly you are talking about an antitheist, not just an atheist. Secondly, the idea that a god would inevitably stand in judgement simply because it exists, does not allow for the possibility of deism.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Obvously it is possible for theists to practise god evasion or 'goddodging' because they actually have some sort of belief in a god. Just as obviously, it does not really make much sense for an atheist who doesn't believe in a god to evade something which they believe doesn't exist. I suggest that someone who does goddodge must have some sort of underlying feeling, at least, that this god exists, such a person as C S Lewis, for instance.

For my own part, I don't believe in any god so the idea of goddodging makes little sense for me. You, on the other hand, are a self confessed Thor dodger, and therefore either you have at the very least a feeling that Thor exists, or you are simply lying.

If an atheist has "bonkers" ideas, then perhaps their "bonkers" ideas should be challenged. It doesn't follow, however, that believing in a necessary entity is inevitably "bonkers", or that the alternative to a necessary entity is "more bonkers". It is also quite possible to believe in a necessary entity and remain an atheist.

Two things here. Firstly you are talking about an antitheist, not just an atheist. Secondly, the idea that a god would inevitably stand in judgement simply because it exists, does not allow for the possibility of deism.

There is the question of whether a deist thinks an encounter with God is possible.
As a theist I don't follow the rationale of thinking there is a God, but something forbids him to interact with his creation.
Depending on how assured/ committed the Deist is in their deism, that will affect the possibility of contemplating a direct
encounter.
I think it possible for antitheist, theist, atheist or deist to psychologically resist contemplation of an encounter.

What then is one's personal response to the idea of God, one's gut feeling, given that we can't or don't analyse such feelings?

[Gonnagle]

Dear Enki,

If an atheist has "bonkers" ideas, then perhaps their "bonkers" ideas should be challenged. Who by?

Equally if a Theist has "bonkers" ideas?

Who is the more bonkier

Now listening to Leonard Cohens hallelujah, beautiful.

Cold and broken hallelujah, well that's a shame

Gonnagle.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That made me smile, Vlad - so thank you for that. 

Reminds me of jokes from my childhood involving book titles - as in 'Falling Off a Cliff' by Eileen Dover.

Hi Gordon

You might enjoy "Cannibalism" by Henrietta Mann.

[Gordon]

Hi Gordon

You might enjoy "Cannibalism" by Henrietta Mann.

Excellent 

How about 'Rushing to the Toilet' by Willie Makeit.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Excellent 

How about 'Rushing to the Toilet' by Willie Makeit.

Liking it!

[Enki]

There is the question of whether a deist thinks an encounter with God is possible.

Probably not, seeing as a deist usually thinks that god has left the universe to run on its own. But, it depends on the deist, I suppose.

As a theist I don't follow the rationale of thinking there is a God, but something forbids him to interact with his creation.

No problem.

Depending on how assured/ committed the Deist is in their deism, that will affect the possibility of contemplating a direct
encounter.

See my first answer.

I think it possible for antitheist, theist, atheist or deist to psychologically resist contemplation of an encounter.

Anything's possible, I suppose.

What then is one's personal response to the idea of God, one's gut feeling, given that we can't or don't analyse such feelings?

I think you probably know my personal response. My gut feeling is that the idea of God has no specific meaning or significance for me. However, because gut feelings cannot be relied upon, when analysing the subject further, I find no evidence that any god actually exists.

[Enki]

Dear Enki,

If an atheist has "bonkers" ideas, then perhaps their "bonkers" ideas should be challenged. Who by?

Equally if a Theist has "bonkers" ideas?

Who is the more bonkier

Now listening to Leonard Cohens hallelujah, beautiful.

Cold and broken hallelujah, well that's a shame

Gonnagle.

Who by? I don't know, Gonners. Perhaps you should ask Count Vlad. He was the one who brought up the idea of "bonkers"