Fed up of non believers

[mjw47]

God isn't possible therefor it doesn't exist, you could of cause redefine God to make it possible, but then would it really be a God or just your personal idea of what a God is.

 

I take it that you do think its possible that we all have non corporeal monkeys sat on our shoulders.

 

You also haven't abstained you have committed yourself to the belief that nothing is knowable about God, and to form that opinion you must have decided what attributes a God must have.

 

Have I really? You now claim to read minds do you?

 

The more that you disagree with me the happier I am, as you are so deluded it would actually worry me if we could agree on what day it is.

 

'God isn't possible.'

 

Well that's it then, ivanava says so, must be true.

 

Call up the Vatican, get in touch with the chief Rabbi, inform the Dalai Lama, send a message to the Ayatollah, it's all over boys, time to get a proper job.

 

The all knowing ivanava has spoken.

 

Do me a favour, before you post again take a look at the career of Georges Lemaitre.

 

This was the man of whom Einstein said 'This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened.'

 

After you have done that answer me a simple question.

 

What is it that gives you the unmitigated arrogance to believe that you actually know something to be a fact that such a man didn't?

 

Atheists will of course be able to produce the name of someone also quite smart who believes the opposite, which is one of the reasons that agnostics think the way we do.

 

ivanava, such certainty, so little to back it up.

[ivanava]

Have I really? You now claim to read minds do you?

 

The more that you disagree with me the happier I am, as you are so deluded it would actually worry me if we could agree on what day it is.

 

'God isn't possible.'

 

Well that's it then, ivanava says so, must be true.

 

Call up the Vatican, get in touch with the chief Rabbi, inform the Dalai Lama, send a message to the Ayatollah, it's all over boys, time to get a proper job.

 

The all knowing ivanava has spoken.

 

Do me a favour, before you post again take a look at the career of Georges Lemaitre.

 

This was the man of whom Einstein said 'This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened.'

 

After you have done that answer me a simple question.

 

What is it that gives you the unmitigated arrogance to believe that you actually know something to be a fact that such a man didn't?

 

Atheists will of course be able to produce the name of someone also quite smart who believes the opposite, which is one of the reasons that agnostics think the way we do.

 

ivanava, such certainty, so little to back it up.

 

I don't need to read your mind because you have made your beliefs very clear, and do you think it's possible that we all have a non corporeal monkeys on our shoulders? You appear very reluctant to answer.

[hearlon]

 

Atheists will of course be able to produce the name of someone also quite smart who believes the opposite, which is one of the reasons that agnostics think the way we do.

 

 

Hi. Is it your position that you cannot be both atheist and agnostic? I don't believe in gods. Additionally, I can't prove there are no gods so can't state the non existence of gods as a knowable fact.

 

So I am both an atheist and I am agnostic. Anyone who does not believe that we can prove the existence or non existence of gods is agnostic. If they then choose to believe in gods they are also a theist. If they have no belief in gods they are an atheist.

 

Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive.

[mjw47]

Hi. Is it your position that you cannot be both atheist and agnostic? I don't believe in gods. Additionally, I can't prove there are no gods so can't state the non existence of gods as a knowable fact.

 

So I am both an atheist and I am agnostic. Anyone who does not believe that we can prove the existence or non existence of gods is agnostic. If they then choose to believe in gods they are also a theist. If they have no belief in gods they are an atheist.

 

Agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive.

 

I have no problem whatsoever with your points. The only contention which I have made and to which I remain adamant is that It doesn't apply to me.

 

You do not have to be an agnostic atheist nor do you have to be an agnostic theist. If you are either then it simply shows that you have a slight bias one way or the other, I don't.

 

Whilst the terms are not mutually exclusive neither are they attached at the hip.

 

Were that to be the case the term agnostic would not be included in all dictionaries as a separate word with a definition differing from theist and atheist, would it?

 

If you had at all times to link the word with one or other of the other two don't you think that would be stated?

 

I am an agnostic nothing more or less.

 

The fact that some people cannot get it through their heads is a source of immense amusement to me.

[ivanava]

I am an agnostic nothing more or less.

 

 

But do you think it's possible that we all have a non corporeal monkey on our shoulders? If not, why not? and if you do what are you basing your belief on?

[Ryedo40]

I have no problem whatsoever with your points. The only contention which I have made and to which I remain adamant is that It doesn't apply to me.

 

You do not have to be an agnostic atheist nor do you have to be an agnostic theist. If you are either then it simply shows that you have a slight bias one way or the other, I don't.

 

So are you agnostic & apathetic?

[mjw47]

So are you agnostic & apathetic?

 

Getting it now. Agnostic and believe it is an otiose discussion.

 

As for your previous comment that atheism isn't a belief, do atheists believe that God does not exist?

 

Do atheists have proof to confirm that contention?

 

If they believe something to be true without proof then they BELIEVE it, yes?

 

That makes atheism a belief whether you like it or not.

 

Agnostics are believers only in the matter of believing that mankind will never know the answer.

 

We cannot prove that contention, which makes it only a belief.

[Ryedo40]

Getting it now. Agnostic and believe it is an otiose discussion.

 

Obviously, you aren't indifferent given some of your earlier arguments & comments. You also seem to be confusing knowledge or a lack of with belief. If you are apathetic, it would mean you hold no positive belief in God's existence(if you did you wouldn't be apathetic). So just by being apathetic, you also have an absence of belief in God's existence. This is where your argument or claim to be purely agnostic fails.

 

As for your previous comment that atheism isn't a belief, do atheists believe that God does not exist?

 

Again the root of atheism is the absence of belief: the positive belief there is a god is absent from their mind. Babies, and those who have never been exposed to the claim God exists - or those who haven't come up with the belief in God - are default atheists because this(they have an absence of belief). Those who have been exposed to those claims, but reject those claims due to lack of evidence, or because it's "unknowable", still have an absence of belief in Gods existence.

 

Atheism makes no knowledge claims; although some atheists may state a god doesn't exist - or claim to know a god doesn't exist. This is secondary to absence of belief. And this is where you are getting confused.

Edited March 16, 2014 by Ryedo40

[Guest]

Define 'nasty'

 

Don't you know what that means??

[SnailyBoy]

Don't you know what that means??

 

Yep, but I wanted a definition in the context of the original statement. I've got a feeling that 'nasty' might be simply having the nerve to suggest that belief in ghosts, or the supernatural is irrational.