Fed up of non believers

[mjw47]

That is not what I asked, your reliance on definitions is perplexing.

 

Once again

 

I originally asked you if you accepted the evidence to justify a position of belief in god(s), you said you didn't.

 

Therefore, don't you have an absence of belief?

 

It really is either Yes or No

 

No, I do not have an absence of belief.

 

I BELIEVE that no one will ever be capable of determining the truth.

 

I BELIEVE that there may be a God, but no one will ever know.

 

I BELIEVE that there may be no God, but no one will ever know.

 

The contradiction means that at one and the same time I also disbelieve in the existence of, or the non existence of God(s).

 

It's all in the word 'may'.

 

And that is in complete contrast to any theist or atheist that I have ever met.

 

Neither of whom will ever give credence to the possibility of the opposite viewpoint.

 

If you know anyone of either professed persuasion that is prepared to admit that the opposite point of view may be correct, then I would suggest that they are agnostics, as they are admitting to lack of knowledge as to the truth.

 

As to my 'reliance' on definitions it is simply that you give me the impression that you don't have a clue what you're on about, and so I thought that a third party- uninvolved - informed source might help you.

 

Doesn't appear to be working so far.

[dosxuk]

And that is in complete contrast to any theist or atheist that I have ever met.

 

Neither of whom will ever give credence to the possibility of the opposite viewpoint.

 

If you know anyone of either professed persuasion that is prepared to admit that the opposite point of view may be correct, then I would suggest that they are agnostics, as they are admitting to lack of knowledge as to the truth.

 

And there lies your problem. You've never found an atheist willing to consider there is a god, because any who do share that view you've already categorised them into your own definition as being simply agnostic rather than atheist.

 

Again, atheism is simply a lack of belief in the existence of God. It implies nothing else.

[SnailyBoy]

No, I do not have an absence of belief.

 

I BELIEVE that no one will ever be capable of determining the truth.

 

I BELIEVE that there may be a God, but no one will ever know.

 

I BELIEVE that there may be no God, but no one will ever know.

 

The contradiction means that at one and the same time I also disbelieve in the existence of, or the non existence of God(s).

 

It's all in the word 'may'.

 

And that is in complete contrast to any theist or atheist that I have ever met.

 

Neither of whom will ever give credence to the possibility of the opposite viewpoint.

 

If you know anyone of either professed persuasion that is prepared to admit that the opposite point of view may be correct, then I would suggest that they are agnostics, as they are admitting to lack of knowledge as to the truth.

 

As to my 'reliance' on definitions it is simply that you give me the impression that you don't have a clue what you're on about, and so I thought that a third party- uninvolved - informed source might help you.

 

Doesn't appear to be working so far.

 

Yet you don't accept the evidence that theists use as the basis of their beliefs. You lack the belief, therefore you are not a theist.

 

Combine that lack of belief with a lack of overall knowledge.

 

Makes you an Agnostic Atheist

 

Ta Da!

[mjw47]

Every single person I have ever discussed religion with has agreed there are two types of atheists - those who believe and those who don't and are waiting for the evidence to come in.

 

 

 

That is exactly my view too, however, I'm happy to admit I'm an atheist because I don't believe in the existence of a God.

 

 

 

Ever heard of the word "consensus" and it's relevance to the English language? Academia doesn't define English - it's users do.

 

It's strange how I'm willing to allow you to keep your definition, however different it is to the mainstream, yet you, the accepting, open party, is unwilling to have any other viewpoint heard without resorting to insults. It's starting to come over a bit Richard Dawkins with your intolerance.

 

And every single person that I have discussed religion with has said the opposite.

 

There is only one type of atheist, and that's someone that doesn't believe in the existence of God.

 

The ones waiting for evidence are agnostics, that is the meaning of the word 'a' without + gnostic knowledge.

 

So we need to get rid of dictionaries and thesaurus's, anarchy rules and the people decide?

Who gets to inform us all? How do we get to find out how a word we thought we knew the meaning of has change and now means something different?

 

Why do you think Greek words were employed in the first instance?

Maybe to fix the word as coined, and retain it's meaning over time?

 

Or perhaps you are Humpty Dumpty and words mean what you wish them to mean?

 

As for the insults, it's been a pleasure, you deserved them.

[flamingjimmy]

The ones waiting for evidence are agnostics, that is the meaning of the word 'a' without + gnostic knowledge.

 

Pretty much all the atheists you are debating with at the moment are also agnostic I think, none of us claim to know that there is no god, we just do not believe that there is one.

Edited March 13, 2014 by flamingjimmy

[s5gh]

So you haven't any proof but you believe anyhow?

 

Sounds like the very definition of closed minded.

 

 

The open minded way is to reserve judgement until the evidence is in, if ever.

 

No because i have experienced encounters so i have proof:loopy:

if im closed minded why would i have put i will change my mind:loopy:_

[SnailyBoy]

No because i have experienced encounters so i have proof:loopy:

if im closed minded why would i have put i will change my mind:loopy:_

 

Excellent, lets see the proof.

[s5gh]

The OP is only a kid, says they're in year 5 in an earlier post. Go easy on a 9 year old!

 

It was a mistake i meant when was in y5

[mjw47]

.

 

Makes you an Agnostic Atheist

 

Ta Da!

 

And this is precisely why I feel the need to use definitions and dictionaries when dealing with the deliberately terminally obtuse.

 

Atheist : 'a' without + theos God

 

Agnostic : 'a' without + gnostic knowledge

 

Now can you see the contradiction there?

 

One is an indication that they are Godless, without God, there is no God in their belief. It is a statement of belief ' I do not believe in God.'

 

The other is admitting to a lack of knowledge as to whether there is or is not a God. There well may be a God, they are not without a God they are without proof and therefore unwilling to believe either way.

 

An agnostic would never make either declaration ' I believe in God' or ' I do not believe in God.'

 

The two descriptions are perfectly able to stand alone ' I am an atheist' or alternatively ' I am an agnostic.'

 

You, and one or two others, appear unable to accept this fact.

 

You have some seemingly overwhelming desire to link both together at all times.

 

Someone describing themselves as an agnostic atheist would presumably be trying to say that on balance they lean toward atheism, fair enough if that's what floats their boat, but that description does not apply to me.

 

That is also why I have to keep referring to dictionaries to point out that they are defined separately with differing meanings.

[SnailyBoy]

And this is precisely why I feel the need to use definitions and dictionaries when dealing with the deliberately terminally obtuse.

 

Atheist : 'a' without + theos God

 

Agnostic : 'a' without + gnostic knowledge

 

Now can you see the contradiction there?

 

One is an indication that they are Godless, without God, there is no God in their belief. It is a statement of belief ' I do not believe in God.'

 

The other is admitting to a lack of knowledge as to whether there is or is not a God. There well may be a God, they are not without a God they are without proof and therefore unwilling to believe either way.

 

An agnostic would never make either declaration ' I believe in God' or ' I do not believe in God.'

 

The two descriptions are perfectly able to stand alone ' I am an atheist' or alternatively ' I am an agnostic.'

 

You, and one or two others, appear unable to accept this fact.

 

You have some seemingly overwhelming desire to link both together at all times.

 

Someone describing themselves as an agnostic atheist would presumably be trying to say that on balance they lean toward atheism, fair enough if that's what floats their boat, but that description does not apply to me.

 

That is also why I have to keep referring to dictionaries to point out that they are defined separately with differing meanings.

 

You've already admitted you lack a belief in god(s)

 

Do me a favour, do one of your famous searches for "Agnostic Atheist" because you can't seem to grasp it on here.