This song is talking about how rationalists perceive our existence, specifically atheists. Many atheists claim that atheism is the "lack of a belief" with regards to God, which is somewhat ridiculous. If you ask an atheist if they believe that God does not exist, they will say yes, otherwise they are agnostic at best. Therefore, atheists do have a belief, the belief that God does not exist. This is what this song portrays at the end when it says "you believe in unbelief."
The rest of the song is basically talking about how people try to rationalize everything and twist things to fit in with their presuppositions. What they don't realize is that if a creator existed outside of the universe, (which the Christian God must), then he does not have to play by all of the rules of the universe. After all, he is the one who created them. This song says that we need to look at what is real and tangible to help us understand what is really going on.
It sounds that you haven't spoken with many atheists. You also seem to be confused about the terms "atheist" and "agnostic." The terms are NOT mutually exclusive. You can be both, neither, or one or the other. This is because they address two different inquiries. Theism is the BELIEF in a deity. Adding the a- prefix to theism is basically saying "without theism" or "no theism." It does not get into the depths of theism being empirically false. Simply, if you are not a "theist," then you are atheist by default. Also, atheism is not a belief at all -...
It sounds that you haven't spoken with many atheists. You also seem to be confused about the terms "atheist" and "agnostic." The terms are NOT mutually exclusive. You can be both, neither, or one or the other. This is because they address two different inquiries. Theism is the BELIEF in a deity. Adding the a- prefix to theism is basically saying "without theism" or "no theism." It does not get into the depths of theism being empirically false. Simply, if you are not a "theist," then you are atheist by default. Also, atheism is not a belief at all - much the same way that my non-belief of Bigfoot isn't a belief. We don't have a term for "Abigfootists" because the majority of people know it to be myth.
I don't think I've met a single atheist who would genuinely claim that "There is definitely no God." Claiming certainty of something's non-existance is just silly, you're going to have trouble trying to prove a negative. However, these people could be defined as "gnostic atheists". FOr all practical terms, I would say there is probably no God, given our current understanding of everything around us. However, since I know it is silly to claim with absolute certainty the non-existance of something, you might call me an agnostic atheist. This brings me back to my earlier point, which is how "atheist" and "agnostic" deal with two different things. As we know, theism involves belief, while agnosticism deals with knowledge (greek: gnÅsis = "knowledge"). An agnostic (notice the use of the "without" prefix of "a-") would say that there is no current knowledge to be able to make a claim about, in this case, God. So there are agnostic and gnostic theists (some claim they KNOW there's a God), and the same goes for atheists.
I would strongly disagree with your interpretation that the song encourages us to examine what is real and tangible to help determine truth. In fact, it is doing the opposite. As a skeptic myself, I push myself hard to examine things critically, and use actual evidence to determine what I understand as true. This song, as well as organized religion in general, looks down on people who are naturalists and get their truth from science and observation. Theists, on the other hand, have nothing tangible except a book writen by men, and delusional thoughts that help re-enforce their delicate notion of a father figure watching over them.
I understand the terms and I agree with your definitions. I just prefer to simplify the terms a little more. When I say agnostic I am essentially referring to a "soft atheist" or an "agnostic atheist." When I say "atheist" I am referring to a "hard atheist" or "gnostic atheist." I should have clarified.
I understand the terms and I agree with your definitions. I just prefer to simplify the terms a little more. When I say agnostic I am essentially referring to a "soft atheist" or an "agnostic atheist." When I say "atheist" I am referring to a "hard atheist" or "gnostic atheist." I should have clarified.
Really the only point I was getting at is that "hard atheists" are just being silly, which is exactly what you said. So we are in agreement.
Really the only point I was getting at is that "hard atheists" are just being silly, which is exactly what you said. So we are in agreement.
I continue to hold to the belief...
I continue to hold to the belief that the song encourages us to examine what is real and tangible. Basically the skeptic is saying "Nothing is real. Color is white, is black is color-blind," essentially closing themselves off from any real truths that they can tangibly see and understand with their senses. The next line "tucking away what's true, what's tangible" describes how they forget about the power of observation and critical examination that you spoke highly of. They are "tucking away" obvious truths and in doing so convince themselves that they are not true.
Saying theists have nothing tangible except a book is quite laughable, and I really should just leave that alone. I'll give a few examples of tangible evidence for you just for the fun of it.
The fact that the Bible is written by over 40 authors over hundreds of years and is in complete agreement with itself after endless examination and scrutiny.
The fact that (as recorded in the Book of Martyrs) each of Jesus' disciples other than John died an excruciating death after seeing him raised from the grave and spending the rest of their lives boldly preaching his Gospel. This after they were completely discourage and wrought with self-pity after realizing their leader was dead. What could have caused them to boldly give their lives other than knowing Jesus was alive after such a devastation?
The countless first-hand experiences with miraculous and mysterious happenings that Christians all over the world continue to claim. This is not as tangible, that is true, but is worth mentioning nonetheless. I can certainly cite first hand experiences of my own which makes it important to note.
The complexity of the Earth and the incredible balance in which it hangs, along with the existence of little to no room for adjustment without a complete collapse. (This makes randomness seem a little more than unlikely.)
The fact that the world's best scientists still cannot explain how something living came from something non-living.
The fact that the beginning of the Earth, let alone the universe, has no logical explanation outside of a creator.
Of course, this evidence is of little use to someone who is convinced in their heart that there is no God. That is the real issue. All I ask is that you continue your search for truth, and I pray that one day God will grant you the faith to believe in him, and open your eyes to the unseen truths of this world.
"The fact that the Bible is written by over 40 authors over hundreds of years and is in complete agreement with itself after endless examination and scrutiny."
"The fact that the Bible is written by over 40 authors over hundreds of years and is in complete agreement with itself after endless examination and scrutiny."
>
Just Google, "Bible Contradictions" and then click on any link and look them up in the Bible, it does contradict itself a lot. The Bible is a great literary piece, but can't really be considered fact.
"The fact that the world's best scientists still cannot explain how something living came from something non-living."
>
Just Google, "Bible Contradictions" and then click on any link and look them up in the Bible, it does contradict itself a lot. The Bible is a great literary piece, but can't really be considered fact.
"The fact that the world's best scientists still cannot explain how something living came from something non-living."
True, but just because "science" is unable to come up with an answer, doesn't make...
>
True, but just because "science" is unable to come up with an answer, doesn't make any other answer true by default. I find the idea of "a creator" hard to believe because if the big-bang couldn't have happened, then the endless regression of "who create the creator?" is still yet to be answered.
Realistically, you're an Atheist too, you're an Atheist to Thor, Zeus, Apollo, Shiva, Allah, I trust you believe in the father of Jesus Christ? So you don't believe in all these other 'Gods' that many other people put their faith in or have put their faith in, fair enough, well Atheists just go one god further. ;-) Surely that's not so incomprehensible.
Now talking personally, I just can't find the faith to choose one of the many religions, just because most condemn you for believing in anything else. Islam the 'peaceful religion' condemns all 'fakhir' (non-believers) while Christianity sends me to hell apparently for not sharing their beliefs, these 'peaceful' religions are only peaceful if you're a part of them. So I choose to accept these theories, and go with a theory that since these guys contradict each other, they both can't be right. And since neither one has any real/enough evidence to show me the proof of their God (after all the burden of proof rests with the believer) I will just choose to not believe what they believe.
'The burden of proof rests with the believer' - this is a very good phrase. If some one came to you trying to convert you to the Church of The Flying Spaghetti Monster you'd think they were crazy and ask for evidence. After all evidence is the only real reason to give something your support. Authority, 3rd party revelation and Tradition are all reasons you shouldn't blindly believe what someone or something says.
i think everybody needs to consult the dictionary:
i think everybody needs to consult the dictionary:
a·the·ism   
[ey-thee-iz-uhm] Show IPA
—noun
1.
the doctrine or belief that there is no god.
2.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
a·the·ism   
[ey-thee-iz-uhm] Show IPA
—noun
1.
the doctrine or belief that there is no god.
2.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
This song is talking about how rationalists perceive our existence, specifically atheists. Many atheists claim that atheism is the "lack of a belief" with regards to God, which is somewhat ridiculous. If you ask an atheist if they believe that God does not exist, they will say yes, otherwise they are agnostic at best. Therefore, atheists do have a belief, the belief that God does not exist. This is what this song portrays at the end when it says "you believe in unbelief."
The rest of the song is basically talking about how people try to rationalize everything and twist things to fit in with their presuppositions. What they don't realize is that if a creator existed outside of the universe, (which the Christian God must), then he does not have to play by all of the rules of the universe. After all, he is the one who created them. This song says that we need to look at what is real and tangible to help us understand what is really going on.
Thats how I see it anyway... :)
It sounds that you haven't spoken with many atheists. You also seem to be confused about the terms "atheist" and "agnostic." The terms are NOT mutually exclusive. You can be both, neither, or one or the other. This is because they address two different inquiries. Theism is the BELIEF in a deity. Adding the a- prefix to theism is basically saying "without theism" or "no theism." It does not get into the depths of theism being empirically false. Simply, if you are not a "theist," then you are atheist by default. Also, atheism is not a belief at all -...
It sounds that you haven't spoken with many atheists. You also seem to be confused about the terms "atheist" and "agnostic." The terms are NOT mutually exclusive. You can be both, neither, or one or the other. This is because they address two different inquiries. Theism is the BELIEF in a deity. Adding the a- prefix to theism is basically saying "without theism" or "no theism." It does not get into the depths of theism being empirically false. Simply, if you are not a "theist," then you are atheist by default. Also, atheism is not a belief at all - much the same way that my non-belief of Bigfoot isn't a belief. We don't have a term for "Abigfootists" because the majority of people know it to be myth.
I don't think I've met a single atheist who would genuinely claim that "There is definitely no God." Claiming certainty of something's non-existance is just silly, you're going to have trouble trying to prove a negative. However, these people could be defined as "gnostic atheists". FOr all practical terms, I would say there is probably no God, given our current understanding of everything around us. However, since I know it is silly to claim with absolute certainty the non-existance of something, you might call me an agnostic atheist. This brings me back to my earlier point, which is how "atheist" and "agnostic" deal with two different things. As we know, theism involves belief, while agnosticism deals with knowledge (greek: gnÅsis = "knowledge"). An agnostic (notice the use of the "without" prefix of "a-") would say that there is no current knowledge to be able to make a claim about, in this case, God. So there are agnostic and gnostic theists (some claim they KNOW there's a God), and the same goes for atheists.
I would strongly disagree with your interpretation that the song encourages us to examine what is real and tangible to help determine truth. In fact, it is doing the opposite. As a skeptic myself, I push myself hard to examine things critically, and use actual evidence to determine what I understand as true. This song, as well as organized religion in general, looks down on people who are naturalists and get their truth from science and observation. Theists, on the other hand, have nothing tangible except a book writen by men, and delusional thoughts that help re-enforce their delicate notion of a father figure watching over them.
I understand the terms and I agree with your definitions. I just prefer to simplify the terms a little more. When I say agnostic I am essentially referring to a "soft atheist" or an "agnostic atheist." When I say "atheist" I am referring to a "hard atheist" or "gnostic atheist." I should have clarified.
I understand the terms and I agree with your definitions. I just prefer to simplify the terms a little more. When I say agnostic I am essentially referring to a "soft atheist" or an "agnostic atheist." When I say "atheist" I am referring to a "hard atheist" or "gnostic atheist." I should have clarified.
Really the only point I was getting at is that "hard atheists" are just being silly, which is exactly what you said. So we are in agreement.
Really the only point I was getting at is that "hard atheists" are just being silly, which is exactly what you said. So we are in agreement.
I continue to hold to the belief...
I continue to hold to the belief that the song encourages us to examine what is real and tangible. Basically the skeptic is saying "Nothing is real. Color is white, is black is color-blind," essentially closing themselves off from any real truths that they can tangibly see and understand with their senses. The next line "tucking away what's true, what's tangible" describes how they forget about the power of observation and critical examination that you spoke highly of. They are "tucking away" obvious truths and in doing so convince themselves that they are not true.
Saying theists have nothing tangible except a book is quite laughable, and I really should just leave that alone. I'll give a few examples of tangible evidence for you just for the fun of it.
The fact that the Bible is written by over 40 authors over hundreds of years and is in complete agreement with itself after endless examination and scrutiny.
The fact that (as recorded in the Book of Martyrs) each of Jesus' disciples other than John died an excruciating death after seeing him raised from the grave and spending the rest of their lives boldly preaching his Gospel. This after they were completely discourage and wrought with self-pity after realizing their leader was dead. What could have caused them to boldly give their lives other than knowing Jesus was alive after such a devastation?
The countless first-hand experiences with miraculous and mysterious happenings that Christians all over the world continue to claim. This is not as tangible, that is true, but is worth mentioning nonetheless. I can certainly cite first hand experiences of my own which makes it important to note.
The complexity of the Earth and the incredible balance in which it hangs, along with the existence of little to no room for adjustment without a complete collapse. (This makes randomness seem a little more than unlikely.)
The fact that the world's best scientists still cannot explain how something living came from something non-living.
The fact that the beginning of the Earth, let alone the universe, has no logical explanation outside of a creator.
Of course, this evidence is of little use to someone who is convinced in their heart that there is no God. That is the real issue. All I ask is that you continue your search for truth, and I pray that one day God will grant you the faith to believe in him, and open your eyes to the unseen truths of this world.
"The fact that the Bible is written by over 40 authors over hundreds of years and is in complete agreement with itself after endless examination and scrutiny."
"The fact that the Bible is written by over 40 authors over hundreds of years and is in complete agreement with itself after endless examination and scrutiny."
>
"The fact that the world's best scientists still cannot explain how something living came from something non-living."
>
"The fact that the world's best scientists still cannot explain how something living came from something non-living."
True, but just because "science" is unable to come up with an answer, doesn't make...
>
Realistically, you're an Atheist too, you're an Atheist to Thor, Zeus, Apollo, Shiva, Allah, I trust you believe in the father of Jesus Christ? So you don't believe in all these other 'Gods' that many other people put their faith in or have put their faith in, fair enough, well Atheists just go one god further. ;-) Surely that's not so incomprehensible.
Now talking personally, I just can't find the faith to choose one of the many religions, just because most condemn you for believing in anything else. Islam the 'peaceful religion' condemns all 'fakhir' (non-believers) while Christianity sends me to hell apparently for not sharing their beliefs, these 'peaceful' religions are only peaceful if you're a part of them. So I choose to accept these theories, and go with a theory that since these guys contradict each other, they both can't be right. And since neither one has any real/enough evidence to show me the proof of their God (after all the burden of proof rests with the believer) I will just choose to not believe what they believe.
'The burden of proof rests with the believer' - this is a very good phrase. If some one came to you trying to convert you to the Church of The Flying Spaghetti Monster you'd think they were crazy and ask for evidence. After all evidence is the only real reason to give something your support. Authority, 3rd party revelation and Tradition are all reasons you shouldn't blindly believe what someone or something says.
Any questions? Comments?
i think everybody needs to consult the dictionary:
i think everybody needs to consult the dictionary:
a·the·ism    [ey-thee-iz-uhm] Show IPA —noun 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no god. 2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
a·the·ism    [ey-thee-iz-uhm] Show IPA —noun 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no god. 2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.