false equivalency or not?

[tokutter]

This is used a lot: "Your almost an atheist......you don't believe in all the other gods"
Recently seen an apologist counter this with..........."That's like saying Barack Obama (who is married or course) is a bachelor to all other woman"
Is this a false equivalency?

[William]

I think that there is some truth to the idea that Christians are almost atheists - as in they almost lack belief in all gods.

As far as the solipsist argument goes, if one were to strip back the costume that religions theists placed on their great variety of god-ideas [beliefs] this does not merely stop at the monistic, because even that ONE is shrouded in religious costume...

...thus - when the costumes are all fully removed, we are left with the very example of The Original Solipsist in the idea which formulates without the imagery...there - even in the Christian God. For none existed before...so alone in 'His' own mind, He is...and according to our reality, that would simply not do...being alone sucks...or something...so create away...the creation becomes the costume which The Original Solipsist donned.

GO figure...

[bjs1]

But then in this thread we are discussing the idea that Christian is “almost” an atheist, which on the face of it is absurd. It is saying that a person is “almost” something, except for the fact that they are not that thing in any meaningful way.

It depends on what "almost" means here. As it's used in the atheist quote, it means that Christians in general are "atheist" in regard to other gods (Christians are atheist about "almost" as many gods as I am). The emotional attachment that most Christians have to the possibility of Asherah or Quetzalcoatl having an effect on their lives is the same level as I feel about Yahweh's impact on mine.

"How can an atheist simply dismiss God?"
"The same way a Christian simply dismisses Shamash."

If you don't dismiss the impact that Shamash has on our lives, then the analogy doesn't apply to you. If the evidence for Yahweh's existence is qualitatively different than that for other gods, then the analogy doesn't apply to any Christians. You might argue that the evidence is better, but to put it back into the perspective of your "Moon" analogy, I can take a picture of the Moon on demand (or at least within a few hours). Until that's true of Yahweh, the comparison of Yahweh with the Moon is at least hyperbole.

This seems to be an actual example of equivalency. You are equivocating the concept of God with a specific deity.

Saying, “How can an atheist simply dismiss God?” is asking how someone can dismiss all of metaphysics or how someone can dismiss the concept of a Creator God.

Saying, “The same way a Christian simply dismisses Shamash” is saying that someone rejects a specific understanding metaphysics or the specific named deity.

Since this thread is all about analogies, I would compare it to the difference between saying, “I am not in love with Jane Jones,” or saying, “Love itself is a lie.”

[Difflugia]

This seems to be an actual example of equivalency.

Just to align our terms together, equivalence (or equivalency) aren't the same as equivocation. Equivalence means two things are equivalent, such as you want in an analogy. "False equivalence" would mean two analogies that don't apply in the same way.

Equivocation means waffling between two definitions that are different in some important way.

You are equivocating the concept of God with a specific deity.

I'm not. "God" with a capital "G" in a Christian context refers to a specific god, Yahweh. When I capitalize it, that's how I mean it. If I use a lowercase "g" then I mean any member of the class of divine beings. The god of Christians is God.

Saying, “How can an atheist simply dismiss God?” is asking how someone can dismiss all of metaphysics or how someone can dismiss the concept of a Creator God.

I capitalized "God" there, meaning a euphemism for the specific god named Yahweh. I almost wrote "Yahweh," but I was writing that in the voice of a Christian, most of whom don'y say "Yahweh." I meant that, however, to be exactly synonymous with, "How can an atheist simply dismiss Yahweh?"

Richard Dawkins has said this in slightly different ways, but here's the full quote with context from The God Delusion:

The fact that orbiting teapots and tooth fairies are undisprovable is not felt, by any reasonable person, to be the kind of fact that settles any interesting argument. None of us feels an obligation to disprove any of the millions of far-fetched things that a fertile or facetious imagination might dream up. I have found it an amusing strategy, when asked whether I am an atheist, to point out that the questioner is also an atheist when considering Zeus, Apollo, Amon Ra, Mithras, Baal, Thor, Wotan, the Golden Calf and the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I just go one god further.

Christians dismiss every god other than Yahweh as false gods or idols. I agree with them, usually for the same reasons. I just think one more god belongs on the pile.

Saying, “The same way a Christian simply dismisses Shamash” is saying that someone rejects a specific understanding metaphysics or the specific named deity.

Yes.

Since this thread is all about analogies, I would compare it to the difference between saying, “I am not in love with Jane Jones,” or saying, “Love itself is a lie.”

Now reread my earlier post in light of this one and see if you still think that (not whether or not you agree with me, but whether you think that's what I wrote).

[William]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #14]

"God" with a capital "G" in a Christian context refers to a specific god, Yahweh. When I capitalize it, that's how I mean it. If I use a lowercase "g" then I mean any member of the class of divine beings. The god of Christians is God.

That is why I do not refer to GOD as "God" but rather as The Creator, as this moves far enough away from the confusion wrought by Christians appropriating the once common label "God" which was used to denote the overall idea of The Creator, and using it as the name for their god.

To avert confusion, either refer to the Christian god as "YHWH" or "the Christian god" ... works for me.

[JehovahsWitness]

This is used a lot: "Your almost an atheist......you don't believe in all the other gods"

No, its more like saying "almost dead" ... if you are almost dead you are alive. The opposite of not having a belief is having a belief; if you have a belief it no more exists in degrees than not having it does.

You can't be "almost an atheist" any more than you can be slightly pregnant.

[1213]

This is used a lot: "Your almost an atheist......you don't believe in all the other gods"
...

I think it is also good to notice, In Christianity the point is not to deny the existence of other gods. It may be that many of them exist or have existed, it would not matter, because Christian keeps only one as his God. It is not very reasonable to try to deny the existence of other gods, because is it possible that many of them are real. People have for example kept a golden calf as their god and such thing exists. Even Bible speaks of many gods, but:

…though there are things that are called "gods," whether in the heavens or on earth; as there are many "gods" and many "lords;" yet to us there is one God…
1 Cor. 8:5-6

For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1 Timothy 2:5

It is not reasonable nor useful to deny the existence of gods, because the meaningful question is, what and why is person willing to keep as his God.

[Purple Knight]

This is used a lot: "Your almost an atheist......you don't believe in all the other gods"
Recently seen an apologist counter this with..........."That's like saying Barack Obama (who is married of course) is a bachelor to all other women"
Is this a false equivalency?

Sort of, yes, it's a bit of a false equivalency. Those other women do exist after all. Christians don't select from among all gods that exist and marry their souls to one, then say the others don't exist out of spite; they absolutely don't think the other gods exist at all.

What the atheist argument is trying to point out is that there are four thousand religions and Christians don't give the time of day to believing 3,999 of them, so they shouldn't be all that weirded out if I disbelieve all the ones they do and also don't believe that last one. In fact, it should be as easy to understand that I don't have faith in the Jewish God as that you don't have faith in Shiva.

The really analogous thing would be a bunch of married men who all married different women being weirded out by a bachelor who instead married none of the women.

However, that doesn't mean a Christian is almost an atheist. He believes in something so he's not close to an atheist at all. But since that's not really the point of saying he's almost an atheist, I'm going to call it valid and attempting to compare it to expecting people to marry everybody to be a bit fallacious. Atheists don't expect you to marry everybody. We're just pointing out that you think Shiva doesn't exist. You think Zeus doesn't exist. You think the Sky Woman doesn't exist. So it shouldn't be that odd to you that I think the Jewish God doesn't exist.

So if you take it literally, yes, it's perfectly analogous. But if you understand why the Christian is being called almost an atheist, it has nothing whatsoever to do with whether you marry one person or everyone.

You can't be "almost an atheist" any more than you can be slightly pregnant.

I absolutely agree with you but I pictured someone pregnant with hundreds of babies pointing and laughing at someone who was pregnant with just one or two.

Despite what popped into my crazy head, both are pregnant. It's binary.

[bjs1]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #14]

Okay, I think I understand what you are saying now. I will note that Christians are far from the only people who talk about a capital “G” God, so this approach may be more confusing than it has to be.

More importantly, I wonder if you are now creating a straw argument. Obviously I don’t know who you have encountered in the past, but I have found it rare for Christians to say, “How can an atheist simply dismiss God?” and mean “God” in the way that you mean it here. Especially when you start talking to more educated Christians who enter into serious debate, there is a common recognition that the term on “God” is a title used to refer to a complex concept. When someone says, “How can an atheist simply dismiss God?” they are probably not using the word “God” the way that you are.

Your response would be valid against a specific argument, but it is not an argument that many Christians are making.

[We_Are_VENOM]

This is used a lot: "Your almost an atheist......you don't believe in all the other gods"
Recently seen an apologist counter this with..........."That's like saying Barack Obama (who is married or course) is a bachelor to all other woman"
Is this a false equivalency?

LOL.

Reminds me of a comedian who stated (regarding the BLM stuff).....I am paraphrasing..

"We say Black Lives Matter. But you have those that say of course black lives matter, but so does the lives of every person of every race. So all lives matter, not just the lives of black people."

He said that that is the equivalence of a wife asking her husband..

Wife: Sweetheart, do you love me?

Husband: Of course, honey; I love everyone, including you.

LOL.

But to the post, yeah I've heard atheist use that quip. But instead of fighting them on it, I just go with the flow.

"Sure, I am an atheist to all other God's except my own. So what? And?".

[brunumb]

"Sure, I am an atheist to all other God's except my own. So what? And?".

And, what criteria did you apply to dismiss all those other gods?

Or, was the reality that you were originally inculcated with your belief in God and subsequently sought ways to justify that belief without any reference to other gods and beliefs at all?