atheism is a theism, belief to the contrary
Debate Rounds (5)
you just try to snipe a hole in my newly polished gigantic antimatter and blastwave absobing secured spaceship with autmated nukes and an autmatic launch response before missle lock.. bring it
According to dictionary.com, this is the definition of an atheist:
a deism ).
My opponent insists that atheism and theism are the same thing. He insists that believing in one god makes you disbelief in other gods. While this is true, that does not make one an atheist. A theist is one who believes in a god (or multiple gods.) If a Christian rejects the Hindu gods as being fake but Yahweh as real, this does not make them an atheist. An atheist is one who believes in no gods.
Atheism is the disbelief in gods, theism is the belief in a god or gods. Rejecting one god but believing in another still makes you a theist.
Atheism and theism are complete antonyms, my opponent is not making sense here.
in the example in round 1, the theist is by default an atheist to all opposing belief claims in order to believe in that god, because surely if the christian god is true other creation claims must be false, so natural atheist
you havnt adressed anything i have argued so far
My opponent asks "if you are an atheist, why disbelieve?" Some people may not see evidence for god, thus making them an atheist.
Vi_spex than argues that by being a theist, you're an atheist to other "belief claims." This does not make sense because atheism is disbelief in god. If one believes in a god, they're still a theist. They may disbelieve in other gods, but that does not make them an "atheist" to those gods, it simply means they just disbelieve. If they were an atheist, they would believe in no gods what so ever.
If what Vi_spex is saying is true, this would mean that an atheist means somebody who rejects a certain god. This isn't true, because an atheist is one who rejects all gods. A theist is one who accepts at least one god.
are you an atheist btw?
religion is non sense, atheism is belief to the contrary, not just other belief claims because science dosnt deny the existence of god, you can still believe in science as a christian.. atheism is a belief based counter position on my claim as a theist
disbelief=belief to the contrary
but you cant disbelieve to the contrary and be an atheist without a counter belief, like belief in Thor and odin
atheism is belief in god, theism, in order for it to exist
to get really simple, belief is belief in god, god is information
any theist, is an atheist
In the first sentence, I do not understand what vi_spex means by "not seeing evidence isn't a position." They then ask if i'm an atheist, which I would like to note that I don't classify as one.
I couldn't quite get the third statement my opponent made, then they insist that atheism is theism again. Vi_spex isn't seeming to make any sense here, they then say atheism is belief in god. It isn't, it's the polar opposite.
I don't quite get what Vi_spex is saying, but he has not bothered to refute my arguments.
belief is theism, disbelief is belief
you cant be an atheist if you dont have a belief to disbelieve from, like a christian disbelieves Thor and odin
religion is non sense
i dont see any arguments
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Con clearly won this debate, they successfully showed the difference between an atheist and a theist using definition. Showing how theists are still theists if they believe in one god and reject all others, because according to the definition, they still believe in a divine entity. This argument was dropped by Pro, who referred back to their round 1 argument, adding nothing new to it, even though it had just been refuted by Con. This one crucial argument by Con was left untouched by Pro, who in the rest of the debate continued to make statements that didn't make sense and didn't relate to the topic at hand, in a way only vi_spex can.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.