Total Posts:24|Showing Posts:1-24
Jump to topic:

Theists/ Deists Unite!

Artur
Posts: 719
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2013 6:24:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I am here, I am deist.

but let us behave fairly, atheists donot have evidence for nonexistence of god. but does nonexistence of something require a proof or existence of something require a proof?
"I'm not as soft or as generous a person as I would be if the world hadn't changed me" Bobby Fischer
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2013 10:18:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/18/2013 6:24:56 AM, Artur wrote:
I am here, I am deist.

but let us behave fairly, atheists donot have evidence for nonexistence of god. but does nonexistence of something require a proof or existence of something require a proof?

Faith is the only proof that there is an invisible Creator because our Creator is the one who gives us saints faith to know Him.
Idealist
Posts: 2,520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/18/2013 11:35:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/18/2013 6:24:56 AM, Artur wrote:
I am here, I am deist.

but let us behave fairly, atheists donot have evidence for nonexistence of god. but does nonexistence of something require a proof or existence of something require a proof?

If anyone wants to earnestly and honestly debate the truth behind anything, then those on both sides of the debate have to be be willing to admit they might possibly be wrong even though they may feel they are certainly right. It's not a debate unless both sides have at least some chance of proving their point. I know that people who believe in God often seem to have the feeling that if they express any doubt then they are are selling God short in some way and that their faith is flawed, but isn't it true that even the most faithful believers admit to feeling personal doubt at some time in their lives? Even some personal doubt, no matter how small, makes their overall faith less than 100%. And if one is certain of God then that person should never fear any challenge to that certainty. I'm pretty open about the way I feel - I would like to see a lot more discussion on the subjects of God and atheism. And not only on the evidence which support them, but also on the philosophies which support the existence or lack thereof of a greater objective being. A creator. Someone who adds certainty to our personal beliefs. I tend to believe in a larger intelligence and an independent goodness in the world, but I do not ignore the arguments for the evolution of all things. I want there to be a God, but I'm very aware that my wants alone aren't enough to make something true. I think the greatest evidence for God lies in our own existence and characteristics. I really love to hear others open-up about what they truly believe regarding the subject. :)
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 12:14:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

well that depends which God and what you take from the doctrine etc to be true. Desist, yes there is no proof. But the Biblical God if you believe the bible is divinely inspired. Then prayer has been shown to not work, so the bible is wrong and god is not real.
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 5:20:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

Deists are by definition theists.

Or didn't you know?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 1:43:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 5:20:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

Deists are by definition theists.

Or didn't you know?

That's stupid, desits don't claim any revealed knowledge of God,, they just know him from the world around them.
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 7:27:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 1:43:06 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 5:20:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

Deists are by definition theists.

Or didn't you know?

That's stupid, desits don't claim any revealed knowledge of God,, they just know him from the world around them.
Do you know how to use a dictionary?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
themohawkninja
Posts: 816
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:11:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

And theists have no proof that a God does exist.

Therefore moot point.

Moving on.
"Morals are simply a limit to man's potential."~Myself

Political correctness is like saying you can't have a steak, because a baby can't eat one ~Unknown
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:11:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Every time I see something of this level of intelligence I always first think of trolling, and usually later come to realize it was actually supposed to be serious. And funnily enough majority of times it has been so with theists.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:55:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 7:27:24 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/19/2013 1:43:06 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 5:20:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

Deists are by definition theists.

Or didn't you know?

That's stupid, desits don't claim any revealed knowledge of God,, they just know him from the world around them.
Do you know how to use a dictionary?

Yes. Do you? They're different words for a reason.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 8:56:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:11:31 PM, nummi wrote:
Every time I see something of this level of intelligence I always first think of trolling, and usually later come to realize it was actually supposed to be serious. And funnily enough majority of times it has been so with theists.

Give me some evidence for atheism being true,then we'll see who's trolling.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 9:19:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:56:42 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:11:31 PM, nummi wrote:
Every time I see something of this level of intelligence I always first think of trolling, and usually later come to realize it was actually supposed to be serious. And funnily enough majority of times it has been so with theists.
Give me some evidence for atheism being true,then we'll see who's trolling.
This response from you proves you don't even know what atheism is.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 9:19:54 PM, nummi wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:56:42 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:11:31 PM, nummi wrote:
Every time I see something of this level of intelligence I always first think of trolling, and usually later come to realize it was actually supposed to be serious. And funnily enough majority of times it has been so with theists.
Give me some evidence for atheism being true,then we'll see who's trolling.
This response from you proves you don't even know what atheism is.

Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/19/2013 10:48:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 9:19:54 PM, nummi wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:56:42 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:11:31 PM, nummi wrote:
Every time I see something of this level of intelligence I always first think of trolling, and usually later come to realize it was actually supposed to be serious. And funnily enough majority of times it has been so with theists.
Give me some evidence for atheism being true,then we'll see who's trolling.
This response from you proves you don't even know what atheism is.

Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.

Or perhaps more accurately stated as.
The rejection of the man made claims that god/s exist.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 4:07:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.

No. You are trying to address two prongs of a dilemma simultaneously, and creating a false dichotomy in the process.

Imagine if I told you that I am going to make a true/false statement. Is it true that any statement I make must be either true or false? No. Here is an example: "this statement is false".

To claim that true or false are the only two options would be a false dichotomy as I just demonstrated by showing that the statement I just made is neither. In order to turn that into a true dichotomy you have to address only one prong at a time. All true/false statements are either true or not true. You can also choose between false and not false.

The most common place where you see this is in our justice system. It is true that a defendant on trial for murder is either guilty or innocent, however we don't ask jury's to choose between the two because that would again be a false dichotomy since as human beings we can only address belief.

Imagine the prosecution argues that the defendants finger prints were found on the murder weapon. That is clearly an argument for guilt. Now imagine that the defense shows that the fingerprints do not in fact belong to the defendant. Is that an argument for innocence? No. He could still be guilty regardless. What that is, is a rejection of the argument for guilt, aka an argument for "not guilty". Not guilty and innocent are two different arguments.

The burden of proof is determined by which side of the dilemma is being addressed. Since the prong being addressed is "guilty" then the alternative becomes "not guilty", forcing the prosecution to bear the burden. If the choice was between innocent and not innocent that that would place the burden on the defense.

Theism is the belief in deity. It is one prong of the dilemma. Atheism addresses the same prong, and simply means "not a theist". And since theism is the side that asserts the positive claim, it is theism that has the burden. If an atheist wants to go the extra mile and claim that God does not exist, then that is a claim which requires justification and demands a burden of proof, but that would be the opposite side of the dilemma and therefore be a separate debate. However, you do not need to hold that position to be an atheist.
nummi
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 8:46:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 9:19:54 PM, nummi wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:56:42 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 8:11:31 PM, nummi wrote:
Every time I see something of this level of intelligence I always first think of trolling, and usually later come to realize it was actually supposed to be serious. And funnily enough majority of times it has been so with theists.
Give me some evidence for atheism being true,then we'll see who's trolling.
This response from you proves you don't even know what atheism is.

Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.
Wrong. Disbelief and a lack of belief are not exactly the same. Atheism is the lack of belief, and perhaps a touch of rejection of the ideas of any gods (as it doesn't take much mental capacity to see all the flaws in those ideas).

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.

No, first there must be provided evidence for one's existence, there is none. All we have is nothing, and that indicates it does not exist.

The reasons god/gods do not exist is the simple fact that it is so very easy to make one up.

Another reason is that there are claimed to be hundreds, even thousands of different gods, all with no evidence whatsoever to their existence.

As well there are thousands, and more, of fantasy novels and stories created by humans after the bible, having their own versions of gods. Neither do those gods have any evidence to their existence, I wonder why... Not to mention the stories the bible itself was based on.

That's right, the bible is the result of plagiarizing.

There's a series of novels, 10 books - "A Tale of the Malazan Book of the Fallen". It's a fantasy story, totalling about 11 000 pages. The story has "gods", many of them, some more powerful than others, it has a complex world, magic system, etc. It is well written, well thought through. It's considered a masterpiece. The series was finished last year? Took about ten years. It's new, it's really good, the author has an extensive vocabulary though. The point of this is that the bible crap is so inferior to this story. I would recommend you read the 10 book series and compare those stories to your bible nonsense, and then think over which one is more, well, realistic (I know they're both fantasy stories...). Also, that 10 book series, you can learn about life, if you viewed it that way, from there so much more than from ramblings in the bible.

The most important fact - not one version of a god has any evidence to its existence.
If you "believe" one version of a god that has no evidence to its existence then you basically have the obligation to believe every single one ever made up.

If you try to put yourself into the god's position you take as real, trying to imitate the mentality, awareness, and qualities subscribed to it, as best as you can, then you would come to realize that it would not do any of the things the "Book of Oldest Fairytales" says. A god, with the most commonly claimed qualities, would let the people advance on their own, without any external influence.

As well the contradictions in the claims of the people who state a god or gods exist.
Also, whether a being of immense power exists or not cannot be known, and if one does exist then it is in no way a god. It would be just another intelligent being, a person, just like we are individually, simply with lots of power.

If you, being a "believer", deny other versions, then with that you are in reality contradicting your own "beliefs". As I mentioned, if you believe one you have to believe every single one. Because those other version are exactly the same things as your's, simply a different color.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 10:10:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 4:07:04 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.

No. You are trying to address two prongs of a dilemma simultaneously, and creating a false dichotomy in the process.

Imagine if I told you that I am going to make a true/false statement. Is it true that any statement I make must be either true or false? No. Here is an example: "this statement is false".

To claim that true or false are the only two options would be a false dichotomy as I just demonstrated by showing that the statement I just made is neither. In order to turn that into a true dichotomy you have to address only one prong at a time. All true/false statements are either true or not true. You can also choose between false and not false.

The most common place where you see this is in our justice system. It is true that a defendant on trial for murder is either guilty or innocent, however we don't ask jury's to choose between the two because that would again be a false dichotomy since as human beings we can only address belief.

Imagine the prosecution argues that the defendants finger prints were found on the murder weapon. That is clearly an argument for guilt. Now imagine that the defense shows that the fingerprints do not in fact belong to the defendant. Is that an argument for innocence? No. He could still be guilty regardless. What that is, is a rejection of the argument for guilt, aka an argument for "not guilty". Not guilty and innocent are two different arguments.

The burden of proof is determined by which side of the dilemma is being addressed. Since the prong being addressed is "guilty" then the alternative becomes "not guilty", forcing the prosecution to bear the burden. If the choice was between innocent and not innocent that that would place the burden on the defense.

Theism is the belief in deity. It is one prong of the dilemma. Atheism addresses the same prong, and simply means "not a theist".

Not particularly. That's why this there's this term called "non-theism". THAT means "not a theist".

And since theism is the side that asserts the positive claim, it is theism that has the burden. If an atheist wants to go the extra mile and claim that God does not exist, then that is a claim which requires justification and demands a burden of proof, but that would be the opposite side of the dilemma and therefore be a separate debate. However, you do not need to hold that position to be an atheist.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 12:49:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 10:10:06 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/20/2013 4:07:04 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.

No. You are trying to address two prongs of a dilemma simultaneously, and creating a false dichotomy in the process.

Imagine if I told you that I am going to make a true/false statement. Is it true that any statement I make must be either true or false? No. Here is an example: "this statement is false".

To claim that true or false are the only two options would be a false dichotomy as I just demonstrated by showing that the statement I just made is neither. In order to turn that into a true dichotomy you have to address only one prong at a time. All true/false statements are either true or not true. You can also choose between false and not false.

The most common place where you see this is in our justice system. It is true that a defendant on trial for murder is either guilty or innocent, however we don't ask jury's to choose between the two because that would again be a false dichotomy since as human beings we can only address belief.

Imagine the prosecution argues that the defendants finger prints were found on the murder weapon. That is clearly an argument for guilt. Now imagine that the defense shows that the fingerprints do not in fact belong to the defendant. Is that an argument for innocence? No. He could still be guilty regardless. What that is, is a rejection of the argument for guilt, aka an argument for "not guilty". Not guilty and innocent are two different arguments.

The burden of proof is determined by which side of the dilemma is being addressed. Since the prong being addressed is "guilty" then the alternative becomes "not guilty", forcing the prosecution to bear the burden. If the choice was between innocent and not innocent that that would place the burden on the defense.

Theism is the belief in deity. It is one prong of the dilemma. Atheism addresses the same prong, and simply means "not a theist".

Not particularly. That's why this there's this term called "non-theism". THAT means "not a theist".

And since theism is the side that asserts the positive claim, it is theism that has the burden. If an atheist wants to go the extra mile and claim that God does not exist, then that is a claim which requires justification and demands a burden of proof, but that would be the opposite side of the dilemma and therefore be a separate debate. However, you do not need to hold that position to be an atheist.

If you are a non-theist, that means you are an atheist. What do you think the "a" means in atheism?
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 6:06:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 12:49:02 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 12/20/2013 10:10:06 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/20/2013 4:07:04 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 12/19/2013 9:25:26 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
Atheism is disbelief in the existence of a god/gods.

Disbelief in God requires you to think that His existence is at least less likely than his non-existence. But that requires you to have some evidence for him not existing. Tell me what makes you think God does not exist.

No. You are trying to address two prongs of a dilemma simultaneously, and creating a false dichotomy in the process.

Imagine if I told you that I am going to make a true/false statement. Is it true that any statement I make must be either true or false? No. Here is an example: "this statement is false".

To claim that true or false are the only two options would be a false dichotomy as I just demonstrated by showing that the statement I just made is neither. In order to turn that into a true dichotomy you have to address only one prong at a time. All true/false statements are either true or not true. You can also choose between false and not false.

The most common place where you see this is in our justice system. It is true that a defendant on trial for murder is either guilty or innocent, however we don't ask jury's to choose between the two because that would again be a false dichotomy since as human beings we can only address belief.

Imagine the prosecution argues that the defendants finger prints were found on the murder weapon. That is clearly an argument for guilt. Now imagine that the defense shows that the fingerprints do not in fact belong to the defendant. Is that an argument for innocence? No. He could still be guilty regardless. What that is, is a rejection of the argument for guilt, aka an argument for "not guilty". Not guilty and innocent are two different arguments.

The burden of proof is determined by which side of the dilemma is being addressed. Since the prong being addressed is "guilty" then the alternative becomes "not guilty", forcing the prosecution to bear the burden. If the choice was between innocent and not innocent that that would place the burden on the defense.

Theism is the belief in deity. It is one prong of the dilemma. Atheism addresses the same prong, and simply means "not a theist".

Not particularly. That's why this there's this term called "non-theism". THAT means "not a theist".

And since theism is the side that asserts the positive claim, it is theism that has the burden. If an atheist wants to go the extra mile and claim that God does not exist, then that is a claim which requires justification and demands a burden of proof, but that would be the opposite side of the dilemma and therefore be a separate debate. However, you do not need to hold that position to be an atheist.

If you are a non-theist, that means you are an atheist.

Non-theism =/= not coextensive with atheism. So, no. It doesn't.

What do you think the "a" means in atheism?

It could mean "no".

"Sometimes the use of the term "atheism" to mean "lack of theistic belief" is supported by an appeal to etymology. For example, Martin, in the book mentioned above, says the following:

" In Greek a' means without' or not' and theos' means god.' From this standpoint an atheist would simply be someone without a belief in God, not necessarily someone who believes that God does not exist. According to its Greek roots, then, atheism is a negative view, characterized by the absence of belief in God.[4]

This argument is rather unsatisfactory for at least two reasons. First, it is not completely clear that the correct translation of the Greek prefix "a" is "without." It might also mean "no," in which case "a-the-ism" could be translated as "no-god-ism," or "the view that there is no god." Note that there is no "ism" in Greek. Second, even if the etymology of the word "atheism" did indicate that it once meant "without belief in God," that is still not a good guide to current usage. It is quite common for words to acquire new meanings over time. It seems far more important what people mean by a word today than what it once meant long ago."

....

"In place of the expression "negative atheist," I shall use the term "nontheist." That seems to be a better term (than "atheist") for capturing the more general concept of "one who is without belief in God," for several reasons:

(1) Almost everyone who employs the term "nontheist" already uses it in the given way.

(2) As indicated in dictionaries, most native speakers of English use the term "atheist" for the more definite concept of "one who denies that God exists." It is desirable that we abide by common usage and it is foolish (and probably futile) to try to reform people's usage of terms.

(3) It would be more natural to call infants and fetuses "nontheists" than to call them "atheists."

(4) It is desirable to have a system in which the familiar three classes, theists, atheists, and agnostics, are mutually exclusive, and that would not be possible if the term "atheist" were instead used for the more general concept."

http://infidels.org...
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2013 7:38:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 6:06:47 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/20/2013 12:49:02 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
What do you think the "a" means in atheism?

It could mean "no".

Exactly. No-theism. That doesn't mean "no god", because theism is not god, it is the belief in god.

"In place of the expression "negative atheist," I shall use the term "nontheist." That seems to be a better term (than "atheist") for capturing the more general concept of "one who is without belief in God," for several reasons:

(1) Almost everyone who employs the term "nontheist" already uses it in the given way.

(2) As indicated in dictionaries, most native speakers of English use the term "atheist" for the more definite concept of "one who denies that God exists." It is desirable that we abide by common usage and it is foolish (and probably futile) to try to reform people's usage of terms.

(3) It would be more natural to call infants and fetuses "nontheists" than to call them "atheists."

(4) It is desirable to have a system in which the familiar three classes, theists, atheists, and agnostics, are mutually exclusive, and that would not be possible if the term "atheist" were instead used for the more general concept."

http://infidels.org...

1) Very few people use this term, so I don't care.

2) No dictionary definition I have ever seen has defined atheism as a positive belief in any proposition.

3) That's only because of your preconception of what the the word means.

4) That is true, but I find it to be irrelevant.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 12:46:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/20/2013 7:38:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 12/20/2013 6:06:47 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/20/2013 12:49:02 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
What do you think the "a" means in atheism?

It could mean "no".

Exactly. No-theism. That doesn't mean "no god", because theism is not god, it is the belief in god.


O..kay? Distinction without a difference? It'd be the view that there is/are no god(s).

"In place of the expression "negative atheist," I shall use the term "nontheist." That seems to be a better term (than "atheist") for capturing the more general concept of "one who is without belief in God," for several reasons:

(1) Almost everyone who employs the term "nontheist" already uses it in the given way.

(2) As indicated in dictionaries, most native speakers of English use the term "atheist" for the more definite concept of "one who denies that God exists." It is desirable that we abide by common usage and it is foolish (and probably futile) to try to reform people's usage of terms.

(3) It would be more natural to call infants and fetuses "nontheists" than to call them "atheists."

(4) It is desirable to have a system in which the familiar three classes, theists, atheists, and agnostics, are mutually exclusive, and that would not be possible if the term "atheist" were instead used for the more general concept."

http://infidels.org...

1) Very few people use this term, so I don't care.


Actually a lot of people do. It's the correct term after all.

2) No dictionary definition I have ever seen has defined atheism as a positive belief in any proposition.


""Atheism" means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God. "

http://plato.stanford.edu...

"The term "atheist" describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists."

http://www.iep.utm.edu...

You were saying?

3) That's only because of your preconception of what the the word means.


Not really. Babies and infants aren't atheists.

4) That is true, but I find it to be irrelevant.

Ok....
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
bulproof
Posts: 25,184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 1:38:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/19/2013 8:55:36 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 7:27:24 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/19/2013 1:43:06 PM, Installgentoo wrote:
At 12/19/2013 5:20:48 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/18/2013 4:24:12 AM, Installgentoo wrote:
The atheists have not a shred of evidence to prove that God does not exist.

Deists are by definition theists.

Or didn't you know?

That's stupid, desits don't claim any revealed knowledge of God,, they just know him from the world around them.
Do you know how to use a dictionary?

Yes. Do you? They're different words for a reason.
Christian, Pagan, Hindu, Muslim are all different words to Theist as well, but they are all THEISTS.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2013 4:16:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/21/2013 12:46:22 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/20/2013 7:38:14 PM, Double_R wrote:
At 12/20/2013 6:06:47 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 12/20/2013 12:49:02 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
What do you think the "a" means in atheism?

It could mean "no".

Exactly. No-theism. That doesn't mean "no god", because theism is not god, it is the belief in god.


O..kay? Distinction without a difference? It'd be the view that there is/are no god(s).

What are you talking about? The view that there is/are no god(s) is a positive belief in a proposition. Atheism is not a positive belief in anything, it is the rejection of a proposition. Claiming otherwise is like claiming that a juror who rejects the prosecutions case must believe the defendant is innocent.

"In place of the expression "negative atheist," I shall use the term "nontheist." That seems to be a better term (than "atheist") for capturing the more general concept of "one who is without belief in God," for several reasons:

(1) Almost everyone who employs the term "nontheist" already uses it in the given way.

(2) As indicated in dictionaries, most native speakers of English use the term "atheist" for the more definite concept of "one who denies that God exists." It is desirable that we abide by common usage and it is foolish (and probably futile) to try to reform people's usage of terms.

(3) It would be more natural to call infants and fetuses "nontheists" than to call them "atheists."

(4) It is desirable to have a system in which the familiar three classes, theists, atheists, and agnostics, are mutually exclusive, and that would not be possible if the term "atheist" were instead used for the more general concept."

http://infidels.org...

1) Very few people use this term, so I don't care.


Actually a lot of people do. It's the correct term after all.

Actually a lot of people don't, and not it's not "the correct term". Your turn.

2) No dictionary definition I have ever seen has defined atheism as a positive belief in any proposition.


""Atheism" means the negation of theism, the denial of the existence of God. "

http://plato.stanford.edu...

"The term "atheist" describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists."

http://www.iep.utm.edu...

You were saying?

The exact same thing I have been saying (nice cherry picking BTW, and notice that your second definition makes my point). But after a second look there are some dictionaries who will throw in a second definition asserting that the term describes a person who believes that there is no god. So really, it comes down to this... which of the following do you disagree with?

1) Theism is a belief
2) Not holding a belief is not the same thing as believing the opposite
3) "A" before a word means "not", "no", or whatever other negative word you want to insert.
4) Placing "A" before "theism" therefore means "not a theist", in other words... "not belief"
5) Dictionaries simply follow how people commonly use terms.
6) Atheism is commonly used to describe a belief system by people who don't understand the difference between believing a proposition is false and rejecting the belief that a proposition is true.
7) Atheists should not have to change what they call themselves because people are too dumb to figure out what their position is.

"If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sexual position." - Bill Mauer