| 08 May 2008 12:15 am |
Regular Rep: 17  Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | A newborn believes in nothing but it’s parents. Therefore atheistic in that it does not believe in a higher supernatural being. “Strong Atheism” is what you are referring to, which is when you actively deny the existence of such a being. It seems many don’t realize that agnosticism is also a form of atheism.
---
 | |
 |
| 08 May 2008 12:19 am |
Reanimated Rep: 38 Joined: 01 Apr 2007 Posts: 8,045 | Khorib wrote:
A newborn believes in nothing but it’s parents. Therefore atheistic in that it does not believe in a higher supernatural being. “Strong Atheism” is what you are referring to, which is when you actively deny the existence of such a being. It seems many don’t realize that agnosticism is also a form of atheism.
Agnosticism states that it doesn’t know whether a god or deity exists, where an Atheist claims it does not. (one is neutral, one is negative, in those respects)
Guess in a really weird way, some people could claim it to be a type of atheism, but I don’t think it’s technically correct.
---
-={Amin Wile Ilyamenie Liy End Rimmi Llie}=-
 Last edited 08 May 2008 12:21 am by Tyrane | |
| 08 May 2008 12:27 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:30 am |
The one and forever only... Rep: 38 Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Posts: 10,620 OFFLINE | Why hide the eggs from jesus?
---
God is evil God is pure God is neither God is God
Don’t FUCK with my insanity I’ll warp your REALiTY | |
| 08 May 2008 12:32 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | Point is, if you lived off in some remote area and had never heard the idea of there being a greater being, you would be an atheist, simply because you don’t believe in a theistic being.
You do not need to deny the being after hearing about it to define atheism.
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:34 am |
The one and forever only... Rep: 38Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Posts: 10,620 OFFLINE | ...hmmm it does really taste like butter...hmmm.
---
God is evil God is pure God is neither God is God
Don’t FUCK with my insanity I’ll warp your REALiTY | |
| 08 May 2008 12:37 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33 Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
A newborn believes in nothing but it’s parents. Therefore atheistic in that it does not believe in a higher supernatural being. “Strong Atheism” is what you are referring to, which is when you actively deny the existence of such a being. It seems many don’t realize that agnosticism is also a form of atheism.
that’s wrong. atheism is a position. a newborn can’t take a position if it doesn’t even know anything about God, etc. that means they simply have no position or thought on the matter.
athiests just like to think that having no position and being neutral is atheism to make them feel better because they can say everybody is an atheist.
it’s like eggs. if a baby doesn’t even have an idea or know anything about an egg it can’t take a position on it.
---
 the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:41 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
Point is, if you lived off in some remote area and had never heard the idea of there being a greater being, you would be an atheist, simply because you don’t believe in a theistic being.
You do not need to deny the being after hearing about it to define atheism.
you are really stretching definitions here. atheism is the belief that God does not exist. if you have no idea then you can’t believe anything. and you do need deny the existence of God in order to be an atheist.
put it this way, atheism is on one side and any belief in God is on the other side. they are polar opposites. people that don’t have a thought on it are in the middle and are on neither side. they have no position. they are neutral.
being neutral and being an atheist are not the same thing.
---
the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:45 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | No, you are referring to Atheism as an explicit position, which it can be. However, I’m not stretching the definition. When it is broadly defined, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:50 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
youre right that agnosticism is not the middle ground but agnostics are not atheists. that is why they are called agnostics. but most agnostics do NOT go assuming that God does not exist. an agnostic that does believe God does not exist would be agnostic-athiest. that is much different than an agnostic.
and theistic-agnostics can believe in God for more reasons than what you stated. wuts this about “being safe”? some are like that but not all. some just simply believe.
---
the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:51 am |
The one and forever only... Rep: 38Joined: 11 Feb 2008 Posts: 10,620 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
No, you are referring to Atheism as an explicit position, which it can be. However, I’m not stretching the definition. When it is broadly defined, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.
HaHa you’re the 69th poster
---
God is evil God is pure God is neither God is God
Don’t FUCK with my insanity I’ll warp your REALiTY | |
| 08 May 2008 12:55 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
youre right that agnosticism is not the middle ground but agnostics are not atheists. that is why they are called agnostics. but most agnostics do NOT go assuming that God does not exist. an agnostic that does believe God does not exist would be agnostic-athiest. that is much different than an agnostic.
and theistic-agnostics can believe in God for more reasons than what you stated. wuts this about “being safe”? some are like that but not all. some just simply believe.
but see, for those “some that simply believe” then they are not agnostic either. They are theists. I’m not talking about Atheism as a position, I’m talking about its general broad definition.
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:55 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
No, you are referring to Atheism as an explicit position, which it can be. However, I’m not stretching the definition. When it is broadly defined, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.
no, it IS an explicit position. that is why it is called atheism.
by your stretched definition i would be labeled an athiest but i have nothing in common with atheism nor do i have anything in common religion.
really, there is no label i can think of yet for people like me that dont go either way except not having a position on whether or not God exists.
if atheism was not a position then atheists wouldn’t be on this religion section fighting with religious people.
i know u have no counter for that bolded part. it’s fact. no position would mean no arguing about the existence of God.
---
the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
| |
| 08 May 2008 12:58 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
youre right that agnosticism is not the middle ground but agnostics are not atheists. that is why they are called agnostics. but most agnostics do NOT go assuming that God does not exist. an agnostic that does believe God does not exist would be agnostic-athiest. that is much different than an agnostic.
and theistic-agnostics can believe in God for more reasons than what you stated. wuts this about “being safe”? some are like that but not all. some just simply believe.
but see, for those “some that simply believe” then they are not agnostic either. They are theists. I’m not talking about Atheism as a position, I’m talking about its general broad definition.
it has no general broad definition.
and have u been taking drugs?
someone can believe there is no evidence for or against God and still simply believe God exists. they just believe that his existence can’t be proven. that’s the only difference. that is agnostic-theist.
the appropriate thing as close to a label as you can get for people without a stance or belief is “no stance or belief” or literally “nothing”.
---
the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
Last edited 08 May 2008 01:05 am by the21gamer | |
| 08 May 2008 01:08 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
No, you are referring to Atheism as an explicit position, which it can be. However, I’m not stretching the definition. When it is broadly defined, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.
no, it IS an explicit position. that is why it is called atheism.
by your stretched definition i would be labeled an athiest but i have nothing in common with atheism nor do i have anything in common religion.
really, there is no label i can think of yet for people like me that dont go either way except not having a position on whether or not God exists.
if atheism was not a position then atheists wouldn’t be on this religion section fighting with religious people.
i know u have no counter for that bolded part. it’s fact. no position would mean no arguing about the existence of God.
I just said that it can be a position, but it does have a broader definition. I’m not stretching it, you can look it up. Make sure you look up the history of the word while your at it.[/b]
As for your statement in bold
The reason atheists (or nontheists) are in this forum and debating is because religion steps on OUR toes for simply not believing. Just because someone doesn’t take an actively contradictory belief (such as asserting that there is no god, period end) and just simply doesn’t believe, does not mean that they have no cares if society were to become a completely totalitarian Christian, Muslim , Jewish, etc...
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 01:15 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
youre right that agnosticism is not the middle ground but agnostics are not atheists. that is why they are called agnostics. but most agnostics do NOT go assuming that God does not exist. an agnostic that does believe God does not exist would be agnostic-athiest. that is much different than an agnostic.
and theistic-agnostics can believe in God for more reasons than what you stated. wuts this about “being safe”? some are like that but not all. some just simply believe.
but see, for those “some that simply believe” then they are not agnostic either. They are theists. I’m not talking about Atheism as a position, I’m talking about its general broad definition.
it has no general broad definition.
and have u been taking drugs?
someone can believe there is no evidence for or against God and still simply believe God exists. they just believe that his existence can’t be proven. that’s the only difference. that is agnostic-theist.
the appropriate thing as close to a label as you can get for people without a stance or belief is “no stance or belief” or literally “nothing”.
You are the one that is skewing the term for theistic-agnosticism. IF you believe in a deity, then you are theistic. I will accept that that can be turned against my atheism case.
But mind you, theistic-agnosticism is the same position as agnostic, the only difference being that you participate in the religious customs. While you can say they don’t disbelieve, they still don’t believe either.
The only way you can make agnostic the middle ground is to say they are confused.
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 01:21 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
No, you are referring to Atheism as an explicit position, which it can be. However, I’m not stretching the definition. When it is broadly defined, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.
no, it IS an explicit position. that is why it is called atheism.
by your stretched definition i would be labeled an athiest but i have nothing in common with atheism nor do i have anything in common religion.
really, there is no label i can think of yet for people like me that dont go either way except not having a position on whether or not God exists.
if atheism was not a position then atheists wouldn’t be on this religion section fighting with religious people.
i know u have no counter for that bolded part. it’s fact. no position would mean no arguing about the existence of God.
I just said that it can be a position, but it does have a broader definition. I’m not stretching it, you can look it up. Make sure you look up the history of the word while your at it.[/b]
As for your statement in bold
The reason atheists (or nontheists) are in this forum and debating is because religion steps on OUR toes for simply not believing. Just because someone doesn’t take an actively contradictory belief (such as asserting that there is no god, period end) and just simply doesn’t believe, does not mean that they have no cares if society were to become a completely totalitarian Christian, Muslim , Jewish, etc...
see, this is where your messing up. 1st youre using the term athiest as a position and then you use the term as a broad term. it’s either one or the other. it’s not both. you seem to act as if by both definitions they are the same term. they aren’t. because of that its pointless for you to be pushing this further.
i already know all that bs about the word. what you need to understand is the term atheist a while back is not the same term it is today. they are in fact two separate words. meanings change over time and you’re using an outdated term. athiets always use this doubleterm definition just so they can call everybody atheists to make them look good. its a dirty and sly game that just embarrasses other atheists.
as for ur counter to my statement in bold.
according to ur definition im an atheist.
according to u religion steps on our toes simply for not believing.
tell me, if by ur deifnition im an atheist then why the hell arent my toes being stepped on?! lol
there ur just contradicted urself badly.
am i an atheist because i have dont have a belief or are ur toes being stepped on?
ive read through alot of this crap and none of it is debate. its just fighting between religious people and athiests. nothing more. who is doing the REAL toe stepping here? can it be not atheists or religion but upset and angry people that happen to be atheists so they come on here and make all atheists look bad?
because people like gplex make us “athiests” look pretty bad. he almost makes me feel embarassessed to believe in evolution.
---
the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
Last edited 08 May 2008 01:27 am by the21gamer | |
| 08 May 2008 01:26 am |
King of the Gamer Army Rep: 33Joined: 22 Nov 2005 Posts: 14,667 OFFLINE | Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
youre right that agnosticism is not the middle ground but agnostics are not atheists. that is why they are called agnostics. but most agnostics do NOT go assuming that God does not exist. an agnostic that does believe God does not exist would be agnostic-athiest. that is much different than an agnostic.
and theistic-agnostics can believe in God for more reasons than what you stated. wuts this about “being safe”? some are like that but not all. some just simply believe.
but see, for those “some that simply believe” then they are not agnostic either. They are theists. I’m not talking about Atheism as a position, I’m talking about its general broad definition.
it has no general broad definition.
and have u been taking drugs?
someone can believe there is no evidence for or against God and still simply believe God exists. they just believe that his existence can’t be proven. that’s the only difference. that is agnostic-theist.
the appropriate thing as close to a label as you can get for people without a stance or belief is “no stance or belief” or literally “nothing”.
You are the one that is skewing the term for theistic-agnosticism. IF you believe in a deity, then you are theistic. I will accept that that can be turned against my atheism case.
But mind you, theistic-agnosticism is the same position as agnostic, the only difference being that you participate in the religious customs. While you can say they don’t disbelieve, they still don’t believe either.
The only way you can make agnostic the middle ground is to say they are confused.
lol you have no idea what you’re talking about.
and i already said it isn’t the middle ground but i am saying it isnt athiesm either. in fact. it has its own separate position away from religion and atheism but it can still be combined with either.
agnosticism has absolutely nothing to do with the belief whether or not God exists. it has to do with the belief that evidence exists or not. thats the scale its on. atheism and religion are on their on separate scale and answer a different question than agnosticism.
---
the21gamer wrote:
ramunematt wrote:
Did you hear me? I’m a bigger better pussy than you’ll ever be.
Wtf...
| |
| 08 May 2008 01:37 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | You are right, not every atheist has a problem with religion within politics. And certainly they do not all come here to this forum. I’m more the type that simply likes to discuss with hope of myself and the other party coming out with something more. The problem is that many people’s defenses go on high when they are contradicted or even when the subject is brought up. This leads to misinterpreting many things that were said into insults. It happens even more in forums such as this when the tone of the message is lost in text.
I could rattle on the many things that bother me about the religion in our society, absolutely I could, but I would rather avoid that. I don’t want to post pointless ranting, especially when it has nothing to do with the topic.
My overall views are that I don’t care what religion others are, as long as we maintain equal rights.
---
| |
| 08 May 2008 01:42 am |
Regular Rep: 17Joined: 06 May 2008 Posts: 734 OFFLINE | the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
the21gamer wrote:
Khorib wrote:
Agnostics believe you cannot prove there is or isn’t a god. These people lives non-committed to any god and go about assuming that there isn’t.
There are theistic-agnostics. Ones you live the religious lifestyle because they were either raised that way, or to be safe.
agnosticism isn’t the absolute middle ground.
youre right that agnosticism is not the middle ground but agnostics are not atheists. that is why they are called agnostics. but most agnostics do NOT go assuming that God does not exist. an agnostic that does believe God does not exist would be agnostic-athiest. that is much different than an agnostic.
and theistic-agnostics can believe in God for more reasons than what you stated. wuts this about “being safe”? some are like that but not all. some just simply believe.
but see, for those “some that simply believe” then they are not agnostic either. They are theists. I’m not talking about Atheism as a position, I’m talking about its general broad definition.
it has no general broad definition.
and have u been taking drugs?
someone can believe there is no evidence for or against God and still simply believe God exists. they just believe that his existence can’t be proven. that’s the only difference. that is agnostic-theist.
the appropriate thing as close to a label as you can get for people without a stance or belief is “no stance or belief” or literally “nothing”.
You are the one that is skewing the term for theistic-agnosticism. IF you believe in a deity, then you are theistic. I will accept that that can be turned against my atheism case.
But mind you, theistic-agnosticism is the same position as agnostic, the only difference being that you participate in the religious customs. While you can say they don’t disbelieve, they still don’t believe either.
The only way you can make agnostic the middle ground is to say they are confused.
lol you have no idea what you’re talking about.
and i already said it isn’t the middle ground but i am saying it isnt athiesm either. in fact. it has its own separate position away from religion and atheism but it can still be combined with either.
agnosticism has absolutely nothing to do with the belief whether or not God exists. it has to do with the belief that evidence exists or not. thats the scale its on. atheism and religion are on their on separate scale and answer a different question than agnosticism.
so...?
“I don’t know if God exists, but I believe he does."
Btw, be nice. I haven’t insulted you at all. 
---
| |
|
Previous Page - Post Reply - Next Page |
»
Religion
» Atheism = Religion
