Total Posts:447|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Rejecting atheism without affirming belief

zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.
Pollux
Posts: 241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 5:59:28 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Yes. You can "reject atheism" exactly as you can reject non stamp collecting. It can be done, but it's a ridiculous stance. I've never heard of anybody rejecting the lack of something. I wonder if there are people out there who reject non bird watching?
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,609
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 6:54:32 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are.

And, you are not alone holding onto that fairy tale, it is shared by a great deal of folks who haven't the capacity for critical thought, logic or reason. The details of the fairy tale range far and wide from person to person, which is understandable considering the origins of such a notion; ignorance, incredulity and indoctrination.

I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

Yes, how unfortunate that you aren't open to the possibility of evidence, facts, theories, understanding, knowledge, information, logic, reason, rationale, etc.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

Then, you would also have to reject evidence, facts, theories, understanding, knowledge, information, logic, reason, rationale, etc.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 9:30:36 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

I reject matrixism (or whatever it is that you call your view). I am an "amatrixist", if you will.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I've seen your other threads so I'm not sure how much good it will do for me to attempt to fix your incorrect understanding of atheism, but atheism is disbelief in god or gods - not a rejection of the possibility.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 9:47:34 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:59:28 PM, Pollux wrote:
Yes. You can "reject atheism" exactly as you can reject non stamp collecting.

That's an inaccurate comparison.

If you want to use stamp collecting, atheism would be akin to refusing to collect stamps rather than simply not collecting them.

Following the analogy further, my rejection would be like rejecting the idea of refusing to collect stamps.

It can be done, but it's a ridiculous stance.

Given that atheism is quite ridiculous, to reject it is the opposite.

I've never heard of anybody rejecting the lack of something.

And you still haven't, since I'm rejecting real atheism (disbelief) NOT the idea of being undecided, which is an entirely different concept.

I wonder if there are people out there who reject non bird watching?

Again, inaccurate analogy.

If you compare it to bird watching, atheism is like refusing to watch birds rather than simply not watching them.

Following the analogy further, my rejection would be like rejecting the idea of refusing to watch birds.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 9:52:14 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 6:54:32 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are.

And, you are not alone holding onto that fairy tale,

Given the vague nature of what I said, I may not be alone. I'm not sure if anyone shares my specific beliefs, but then, I didn't offer them here, so you can't comment on that.

Your attempts to label what I've stated as a "fairy tale" are ridiculous and easily dismissed as the offerings of someone who disagrees but has no real argument.

it is shared by a great deal of folks who haven't the capacity for critical thought, logic or reason.

That's exactly what I think of atheism.

The details of the fairy tale range far and wide from person to person,

Now you're grouping people together based on an incredibly vague idea at best.

Once again, your attempts to label what I've stated as a "fairy tale" are ridiculous and easily dismissed as the offerings of someone who disagrees but has no real argument.

which is understandable considering the origins of such a notion; ignorance, incredulity and indoctrination.

Wow, once again, that's exactly what I think of atheism.

I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

Yes, how unfortunate that you aren't open to the possibility of evidence, facts, theories, understanding, knowledge, information, logic, reason, rationale, etc.

Odd that you would say this since UNLIKE ATHEISTS, I *AM* open to the possibility of evidence, facts, theories, understanding, knowledge, information, logic, reason, rationale, etc.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

Then, you would also have to reject evidence, facts, theories, understanding, knowledge, information, logic, reason, rationale, etc.

No, in order to do that I'd have to be an atheist, and as I said, I reject atheism.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 9:56:43 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 9:30:36 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

I reject matrixism (or whatever it is that you call your view).

You can reject only what you know of my view. You know preciously little, so perhaps you shouldn't be so hasty.

Then again, most atheists are quite closed-minded.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I've seen your other threads so I'm not sure how much good it will do for me to attempt to fix your incorrect understanding of atheism

If you've seen my other threads, then you're aware my understanding of atheism isn't incorrect a all. I suspect you're likely in denial about that as admitting it would ruin your own personal viewpoint on the matter.

but atheism is disbelief in god or gods - not a rejection of the possibility.

So under that flawed reasoning, atheists would be open to the possibility of a god or gods, but that doesn't line up with atheism at all, since atheism wouldn't be atheism without disbelief. Looks like you're in quite a paradox there.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 10:19:51 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

That depends on whether you want to be rigorous about validating your beliefs, or just rhetorical about their veracity.

Rigorous validation requires a high level of accountability, e.g. for ensuring independently that your beliefs:

1) employ definitions that are coherent, meaningful and grounded in shared experience;
2) are grounded in reliable and accountable investigation techniques, so they can actually be explored;
3) account for all the evidence coherently and consistently, rather than just cherry-picking observations;
4) at least sketch mechanisms for how things occurred, so if proven, they would be useful;
5) make specific, significant, unambiguous, time-bounded predictions so that they can be practically verified.

If you uphold this sort of practice, you'll have a very rigorous basis for rejecting atheism. However, you'll need to stump up some specific claims.

If you don't, then your rejection of atheism may be purely rhetorical. The virtue of rhetoric is also its vice: you can waffle endlessly and unaccountably, you can focus on veracity while ignoring validity, and it's possible that you'll say things that aren't worth considering. :)
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 10:56:26 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 9:56:43 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/20/2015 9:30:36 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

I reject matrixism (or whatever it is that you call your view).

You can reject only what you know of my view. You know preciously little, so perhaps you shouldn't be so hasty.

What evidence do you have for existence as we know it being an illusion? I suspect you will provide none, and continue to suggest my rejection is unreasonable.

Then again, most atheists are quite closed-minded.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I've seen your other threads so I'm not sure how much good it will do for me to attempt to fix your incorrect understanding of atheism

If you've seen my other threads, then you're aware my understanding of atheism isn't incorrect a all. I suspect you're likely in denial about that as admitting it would ruin your own personal viewpoint on the matter.

but atheism is disbelief in god or gods - not a rejection of the possibility.

So under that flawed reasoning, atheists would be open to the possibility of a god or gods, but that doesn't line up with atheism at all, since atheism wouldn't be atheism without disbelief. Looks like you're in quite a paradox there.

Let's say you tell me you have a chrome colored car. I'm skeptical (I don't believe), but I am open to the possibility should you provide some evidence. If you do, then "skeptical" would no longer describe my position. If someone provides evidence of god, then "atheist" would no longer describe my position. It's not really that complicated.

As I said, I've seen your other threads, and I have a pretty good idea you won't understand this. I have seen many people correct you in many different ways. I think the problem is either that your a troll or unable to imagine yourself being wrong. Either way, there is little chance of a productive conversation.

Oh, and if you are a troll - impressive work, sir, impressive!
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
FaustianJustice
Posts: 6,208
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 11:01:01 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
This post reminds me of that chick in the mall (you know the one) that stands in the food court looking at all the options, himming and hawwing over the pros and cons...

Then summing it up with "I don't even think I am hungry..."

But still stands there anyways, looking at all the options.
Here we have an advocate for Islamic arranged marriages demonstrating that children can consent to sex.
http://www.debate.org...
aquilla
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/20/2015 11:05:36 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods. : :

I have known the Creator of the simulation we're in for 36 years now. He's the one who revealed to me how He created everything by speaking it into computing technology that is much more advanced than anything He taught us to build through His program called the Beast.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 4:13:43 AM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 9:56:43 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/20/2015 9:30:36 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
but atheism is disbelief in god or gods - not a rejection of the possibility.

So under that flawed reasoning, atheists would be open to the possibility of a god or gods, but that doesn't line up with atheism at all, since atheism wouldn't be atheism without disbelief. Looks like you're in quite a paradox there.

I am an atheist. I am open to the possibility of a god or gods, yet I still disbelieve the claim that a god exists.

No paradox there.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 1:34:23 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 10:19:51 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

That depends on whether you want to be rigorous about validating your beliefs, or just rhetorical about their veracity.

I am quite rigorous in validating my beliefs, which have scientific backing. I haven't shared all of that here because it is somewhat beside the point.

Rigorous validation requires a high level of accountability, e.g. for ensuring independently that your beliefs:

1) employ definitions that are coherent, meaningful and grounded in shared experience;
2) are grounded in reliable and accountable investigation techniques, so they can actually be explored;
3) account for all the evidence coherently and consistently, rather than just cherry-picking observations;
4) at least sketch mechanisms for how things occurred, so if proven, they would be useful;
5) make specific, significant, unambiguous, time-bounded predictions so that they can be practically verified.

I can do these things with my beliefs, but haven't done so here because again, it's a bit beside the point.

If you uphold this sort of practice, you'll have a very rigorous basis for rejecting atheism. However, you'll need to stump up some specific claims.

Atheism is accepted all too easily by many, yet it is just as easily rejected (and many people do so, either implicitly through expression of other religious faith or explicitly as I have done).

If you don't, then your rejection of atheism may be purely rhetorical.

No, it's based upon the simple fact that I am open to the possibility of a god or gods, while atheism rejects such.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 2:04:38 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 10:56:26 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2015 9:56:43 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/20/2015 9:30:36 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

I reject matrixism (or whatever it is that you call your view).

You can reject only what you know of my view. You know preciously little, so perhaps you shouldn't be so hasty.

What evidence do you have for existence as we know it being an illusion? I suspect you will provide none, and continue to suggest my rejection is unreasonable.

There is a great deal of evidence, and I won't take time to list it all.

It is based upon the central idea that we are limited in what we can experience, both by our physical capabilities as well as mental restrictions.

We know scientifically there are things our eyes cannot see, in terms of light (much of it is not visible to the human eye), in terms of size (we need microscopes and other tools to see the very small) and in terms of distance (we need telescopes and other tools to see that which is far from us).

Similarly, there are sounds our ears cannot hear. We can detected a limited range of sound, yet clearly sound exists outside this range.

There is also the pitfall of believing things take place in the absence of humans (and other creatures) the same way they do when we are present, which science shows is incorrect.

For example, there is the classic philosophical question "If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound?"

This question is easily answerable by using science: If no living creature can hear it, then NO, it does not make a sound, because sound waves are merely vibrations of the air and without an "ear" to hear them, they don't exist as sound. Note that an "ear" can also be represented by a microphone or similar device set up to record the vibrations.

Yet this question stumps many people who do not understand the science of the matter.

Similarly, when we look to the world of quantum physics, science notes the position of an electron exists as a possibility, not an actual state. Only through observation does it collapse to a verifiable position.

If we extrapolate this idea to a larger scale, we could hypothesize the entire world works this way - everything exists only as a possibility, and collapses to what you see when you actually observe it.

Further, one could hypothesize that perhaps everything in the universe is designed for us to observe it, since it may require such observation to exist in a defined form.

Also, while I don't necessarily prescribe to everything he says here, I will now link you to a video of a Nobel laureate (winner of the Nobel prize in physics) discussing the possibility we are in a simulation: https://www.youtube.com...

but atheism is disbelief in god or gods - not a rejection of the possibility.

So under that flawed reasoning, atheists would be open to the possibility of a god or gods, but that doesn't line up with atheism at all, since atheism wouldn't be atheism without disbelief. Looks like you're in quite a paradox there.

Let's say you tell me you have a chrome colored car. I'm skeptical (I don't believe), but I am open to the possibility should you provide some evidence. If you do, then "skeptical" would no longer describe my position. If someone provides evidence of god, then "atheist" would no longer describe my position. It's not really that complicated.

It's actually quite complicated, and is based upon what you would consider to be ample evidence to move you from your atheist position.

Also, if you're atheist, you don't believe a god or gods exists at all, even as a possibility. If you're merely skeptical or unsure, you're not actually atheist. Agnostic, skeptical, undecided, or something else, maybe, but not atheist.

As I said, I've seen your other threads, and I have a pretty good idea you won't understand this. I have seen many people correct you in many different ways.

Again, if you've seen my other threads, then you've seen me successfully defend my positions against all comers. You have also no doubt seen people attempt to "correct" me only to be corrected themselves.

I think the problem is either that your a troll or unable to imagine yourself being wrong. Either way, there is little chance of a productive conversation.

Neither is true.

I am not a troll because I legitimately believe what I'm arguing.

I am also quite open to the possibility of being wrong, but I need to be shown evidence of this. People disagreeing, even strongly disagreeing, is not evidence.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 2:05:47 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 11:05:36 PM, aquilla wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods. : :

I have known the Creator of the simulation we're in for 36 years now. He's the one who revealed to me how He created everything by speaking it into computing technology that is much more advanced than anything He taught us to build through His program called the Beast.

Uh, ok. Can you explain a bit more about this program and its creator?
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 2:11:50 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 4:13:43 AM, Double_R wrote:
At 12/20/2015 9:56:43 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/20/2015 9:30:36 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
but atheism is disbelief in god or gods - not a rejection of the possibility.

So under that flawed reasoning, atheists would be open to the possibility of a god or gods, but that doesn't line up with atheism at all, since atheism wouldn't be atheism without disbelief. Looks like you're in quite a paradox there.

I am an atheist. I am open to the possibility of a god or gods, yet I still disbelieve the claim that a god exists.

You're using the term atheist incorrectly.

An atheist is someone who does not believe in a god or gods, even as a possibility.

If you merely reject a claim or claims of others regarding their particular god or gods, you're not an atheist, as someone who doesn't believe that a specific god or set of gods exist is merely someone who doesn't believe in that particular god or gods.

Example: I do not believe Zeus exists and reject the claim Zeus exists. This does not make me an atheist; I simply do not believe Zeus exists.

We can also see that this is true by examining the world's various religions. For example, if you are not a muslim, you would likely deny the existence of the specific god known as allah. However, this by itself doesn't make you an atheist, despite you rejecting the claim of allah's existence.

Bottom line, it takes more than a simple rejection of the claim or claims of someone else as far as the existence of their god or gods to be an atheist. You must reject the possibility.

Based on what you said, you're not an atheist, since you are open to the possibility of a god or god existing.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.
Pollux
Posts: 241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 2:54:37 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.

You're just wrong about what atheism is. If you'd start using the term correctly, you'd not have all these issues that keep coming up. It'd be like me telling people I reject mechanics, then having to explain that by "mechanics" I mean "people who wear orange striped shirts on Tuesdays."

I am open to the possibility of a god or gods existing but I am currently an atheist because I lack BELIEF in any gods at the moment.

As an agnostic, I claim to have zero spiritual KNOWLEDGE. So that makes me an agnostic.

So without spiritual knowledge, I an agnostic and without any belief in any gods, I am an atheist.

You're never going to get anywhere talking about "socks" but by that term you mean "long bar of steel slightly curved at one end to extract nails from wood."

So yes, you can reject atheism the same way you can reject no stamp collecting. Do you'd like to discuss crowbars, then that's a different topic.
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 2:56:42 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 2:54:37 PM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.

You're just wrong about what atheism is. If you'd start using the term correctly, you'd not have all these issues that keep coming up. It'd be like me telling people I reject mechanics, then having to explain that by "mechanics" I mean "people who wear orange striped shirts on Tuesdays."

I am open to the possibility of a god or gods existing but I am currently an atheist because I lack BELIEF in any gods at the moment.

As an agnostic, I claim to have zero spiritual KNOWLEDGE. So that makes me an agnostic.

So without spiritual knowledge, I an agnostic and without any belief in any gods, I am an atheist.

You're never going to get anywhere talking about "socks" but by that term you mean "long bar of steel slightly curved at one end to extract nails from wood."

So yes, you can reject atheism the same way you can reject no stamp collecting. Do you'd like to discuss crowbars, then that's a different topic.

What he said. As long as zoinks feels free to redefine words at his own pleasure discussing anything with him is meaningless.
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 3:04:11 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 2:54:37 PM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.

You're just wrong about what atheism is.

No. I'm using the term correctly; I don't subscribe to the atheist agenda movement that essentially calls everyone an atheist.

If you'd start using the term correctly, you'd not have all these issues that keep coming up.

I don't have any issues; it appears you and others have some, but they are yours, not mine.

It'd be like me telling people I reject mechanics, then having to explain that by "mechanics" I mean "people who wear orange striped shirts on Tuesdays."

Except that wouldn't make any logical sense.

Contrast that with the way I'm using atheism, which makes logical sense.

Just because you subscribe to the illogical atheist agenda way to describe atheism doesn't mean I have to agree with your illogical views.

I am open to the possibility of a god or gods existing but I am currently an atheist because I lack BELIEF in any gods at the moment.

Lacking belief isn't atheism.

This idea also comes from the atheist agenda's goal to essentially brand everyone an atheist.

Also, by definition, everyone's religion is "at the moment" since anyone can change their minds at any time. It is not something which is only a part of atheism.

As an agnostic, I claim to have zero spiritual KNOWLEDGE. So that makes me an agnostic.

This is the more accurate term - you are agnostic, NOT atheist. (You can't be both because such is illogical - it is impossible for someone to be unsure of the existence of a deity and also sure one doesn't exist.)

So without spiritual knowledge, I an agnostic

By believing you don't have the personal knowledge to answer whether there is a god or gods, you are agnostic.

and without any belief in any gods, I am an atheist.

You're simply (unsure, skeptical, etc.) of whether to believe in a god or gods. That's not atheist.

You're never going to get anywhere talking about "socks" but by that term you mean "long bar of steel slightly curved at one end to extract nails from wood."

Again, this doesn't make logical sense, but the way I use the word atheist DOES make logical sense.

As much as you wish that weren't true, it is.

So yes, you can reject atheism the same way you can reject no stamp collecting.

As already stated, this is inaccurate.

I reject atheism the same way I could reject the refusal to collect stamps.

(As a side note, atheism is just as ridiculous as someone stating they refuse to collect stamps.)
zoinks
Posts: 1,988
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 3:05:50 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 2:56:42 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:54:37 PM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.

You're just wrong about what atheism is. If you'd start using the term correctly, you'd not have all these issues that keep coming up. It'd be like me telling people I reject mechanics, then having to explain that by "mechanics" I mean "people who wear orange striped shirts on Tuesdays."

I am open to the possibility of a god or gods existing but I am currently an atheist because I lack BELIEF in any gods at the moment.

As an agnostic, I claim to have zero spiritual KNOWLEDGE. So that makes me an agnostic.

So without spiritual knowledge, I an agnostic and without any belief in any gods, I am an atheist.

You're never going to get anywhere talking about "socks" but by that term you mean "long bar of steel slightly curved at one end to extract nails from wood."

So yes, you can reject atheism the same way you can reject no stamp collecting. Do you'd like to discuss crowbars, then that's a different topic.

What he said. As long as zoinks feels free to redefine words at his own pleasure discussing anything with him is meaningless.

I'm not redefining anything. I'm using a logical definition of a word that actually makes sense, not some atheist agenda B.S. version whose claims can't be verified.

Don't tell me I'm redefining something just because you want to be illogical for the sake of defending your pathetic atheist agenda.
v3nesl
Posts: 4,476
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 3:06:31 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.


I think you sound quite reasonable.
This space for rent.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 3:14:58 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Atheism is the rejection of the man made claim that gods exist. By rejecting atheism you therefore affirm the man made claim that gods exist.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Pollux
Posts: 241
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 3:37:22 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
Zoinkster: I reject socks!! I reject them completely and totally!!!
Richardtionary: Why don't you like socks? They protect feet and whatnot.
Zoinkster: Because people shouldn't use bars of steel to pull out nails and do demolition projects!!! Down with socks!!
Richardtionary: ummmm?!? Are you talking about "crowbars?"
Zoinkster: NO!!!! Don't you know anything?!? I'm talking about socks!! You know bars of steel used to pull nails from wood and do demolition!!
dhardage
Posts: 4,545
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 3:44:07 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 3:05:50 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:56:42 PM, dhardage wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:54:37 PM, Pollux wrote:
At 12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.

You're just wrong about what atheism is. If you'd start using the term correctly, you'd not have all these issues that keep coming up. It'd be like me telling people I reject mechanics, then having to explain that by "mechanics" I mean "people who wear orange striped shirts on Tuesdays."

I am open to the possibility of a god or gods existing but I am currently an atheist because I lack BELIEF in any gods at the moment.

As an agnostic, I claim to have zero spiritual KNOWLEDGE. So that makes me an agnostic.

So without spiritual knowledge, I an agnostic and without any belief in any gods, I am an atheist.

You're never going to get anywhere talking about "socks" but by that term you mean "long bar of steel slightly curved at one end to extract nails from wood."

So yes, you can reject atheism the same way you can reject no stamp collecting. Do you'd like to discuss crowbars, then that's a different topic.

What he said. As long as zoinks feels free to redefine words at his own pleasure discussing anything with him is meaningless.

I'm not redefining anything. I'm using a logical definition of a word that actually makes sense, not some atheist agenda B.S. version whose claims can't be verified.

Don't tell me I'm redefining something just because you want to be illogical for the sake of defending your pathetic atheist agenda.

I wasn't telling you anything, I was speaking to someone else. The fact is that you reject the definitions of words found in multiple authoritative references in favor of your 'logical' definitions without any tested methodology for making such changes. You call using a dictionary to define a word an ad populum fallacy. I suppose you'd call a physics text used to determined the proper formula for determining the energy discharge in a thermal reaction an ad populum too if you decided the value calculated was wrong. The simple fact is that you have abandoned all reason and just substitute your own chosen definitions to support your own agenda while everyone else uses the words as they are supposed to be used. And yes, the dictionary provides correct, not just common usage, but correct definitions as well as examples of those definitions put to use. You're nothing more than a stubborn child with his fingers in his ears saying "lalalalalalalala" when anyone tries to explain that you are wrong. Good day, sir.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 4:52:11 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/21/2015 2:13:19 PM, zoinks wrote:
At 12/21/2015 1:48:12 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

I do not reject atheism and also agree that it's a possibility that God exists.

You cannot accept atheism and also the possibility that a god exists, since atheism means you believe there is no chance a god exists.

Just google the definition, it does not mean that.

You may be skeptical or unsure or agnostic, but atheist you are not.
desmac
Posts: 5,078
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 5:53:54 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

Specifically, what are you rejecting when you say "The one thing I will say for certain Is I reject atheism"?
SNP1
Posts: 2,403
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 6:06:45 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

No, because it is a literal Dichotomy.
Disbelief=No belief
So, let's look at definitions.
Theist=Belief in god.
Atheist=Disbelief in god.

So, if one is not a theist then, by definition, they have:
*NO belief in god.

If one is not an atheist then, by definition, they have:
*No disbelief in god
Which is equal to:
*No no belief in god
Getting rid of the definition:
*Belief in god.

So it is a dichotomy. You either are an atheist or a theist.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

Atheism does not mean that there is certainly no god(s), it is simple rejection of theism.
#TheApatheticNihilistPartyofAmerica
#WarOnDDO
DanMGTOW
Posts: 1,144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2015 6:16:21 PM
Posted: 11 months ago
At 12/20/2015 5:53:36 PM, zoinks wrote:
It is possible to reject atheism (that being disbelief in a god or gods) and still go without affirming belief in a god or gods.

I believe what we see and experience is an incredibly complex simulation put together by a being much more advanced than we are. I am open to the possibility that this being is a god, but do not affirm that this is the case.

The one thing I will say for certain is I reject atheism, as I am open to the concept of a god or gods.

is there a specific god or gods that you believe in or the standard "god of the gaps"
the most common argument i've heard goes something like "i'm the smartest person on the planet, and i can't figure out how _________ happened, so it must have been caused by an undetectable wizard"
can you spot the logical fallacy? do you even know what logical fallacies are?