Professing Theist

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist k, where did I make the claim that there is a first cause that is a deity? otherwise, by definition, you're targetting a claim I never made and are making a random diversion

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist You present yourself as a Xian apologist and you argue for for the Xian god and a first cause. The definition of a deity is "a god" or "a creator". Stop acting like your suggestion to stop infinite regress isn't a god/deity/ultimate creator.

it do be like that

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist Cool, so you agree that this was a random diversion and wasn't getting after any claims I made

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist Please don't pretend that your ultimate creator isn't a deity.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist no

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist Yes, you have definitely problems to keep them apart.

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist Cool, so you fully admit that you're targetting claims that I never made.

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist You reject an infinite regress, which we don't know is impossible or possible, and instead replace it with an ultimate cause and magic. You haven't answered any questions with your position, only created new ones.

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist and where exactly did I suggest that the first cause is a deity? I literally just said that I think there is a first cause and commented nothing about its nature. why are you reaching so hard

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist In order to stop an infinite regress you want to put in an uncaused cause. For you this cause is an undemonstrated deity. I simply suggested "why not stop at the universe and view it as uncaused?".

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist nah, didn't do that

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist Religion & theism/atheism.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist alright?

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist Traditional theism means beleif in a god or gods, no matter if that has a religious basis or not. learnreligions.com/theism-the-sam…

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist You "addressed" it in a way that also addressed things that were not there. Where did I say we need to stop at the universe, or not stop at the universe, etc? All I said is that I reject an infinite regress.

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist I addressed the claim you made in your previous tweet.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist Which concepts am I mixing up?

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist You're really mixing up the concepts. Maybe you should try to sort that out and then come back....🤔

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist I did say "traditional theism is fully grounded in religious thought", yes

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist You said that theism is grounded in religious ideas.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist philosophers of religion, which is the field that studies arguments for and against theism

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist Which experts are you referring to in this case? People who happens to share your views. What makes those experts in defining what atheism means to me and other people? To me it sounds like you're the "toe sucker", not Dillahunty or anyone else.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist what? I didn't provide any definition of theism there.

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist You're wrong about theism as well. Theism is simply being convinced that a god or gods exists. That most theists also are religious is irrelevant to the meaning of theism.

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist seems like you're targetting claims I never made

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist If not everything needs a creator why not stop at the universe? Adding a god doesn't answer any questions.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist what? the article was literally written by one of the most prominent atheists in the field. I have no idea what you are on about

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist The article clearly starts from a monotheistic Abrahamic position. Basically all atheists I know disagree with the definition it gives. I suggest that you ask people instead.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist yes, but the consensus of experts in the relevant field will have more validity than the council of new atheist matt Dillahunty toe suckers. as for your second question, traditional theism is fully grounded in religious thought, there is not much room for puzzlement.

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist People in general. Anyone can be a "philosopher". Using such label doesn't automatically give a persons opinion more validity. Atheism nor theism are religions, so why is studies/knowledge in religions important?

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist This is to misunderstand what the meme is saying. The meme isn't saying that new atheism, in particular, means "lack of belief in theism", but that new atheists espouse this definition and that it is inferior to the one standardly used in the relevant field, Phil of religion.

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist No it isn't accurate. Atheism, no matter if you but old or new in front of, is still just not being convinced that gods exists (lack of belief in gods). If people stay quite about it or are outspoken, is also irrelevant.

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist ah ok, the full image didn't appear until I clicked it :/ still completely accurate though

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist The first tweet in this thread was about "new atheism".

@Watchmiker @054durin @CapturingChrist wasn't making a statement about your feelings, but about an action you were doing, namely, that of whining

@054durin @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist ... like ... atheist philosophers of religion?

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @CapturingChrist Why do you think that philosophers in religion have a better or more valid definition of atheism than people who actually label themselves as atheists?

@054durin @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist this is irrelevant. do you think that the following argument is a non-sequitur: 1) Who created God? 2) Therefore, God does not exist.

@ProfessingT @Watchmiker @wxMichael @CapturingChrist The existence of a god(s), not only the Xian one, is often justified with "everything must have a creator". In order to avoid a special pleading fallacy, the question "who or what created god(s)" is a fully valid one.