This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Iwantyourhotwife · 22-25
What leaves you as agnostic rather than antitheist?
@Iwantyourhotwife
Well i'm not antitheist because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative.
I'm agnostic because while i don't believe a god exists i don't think it's possible to know that no god exists.
Well i'm not antitheist because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative.
I'm agnostic because while i don't believe a god exists i don't think it's possible to know that no god exists.
Iwantyourhotwife · 22-25
@Pikachu what tools will help you indicate about such an entity?
@Iwantyourhotwife
I think it would have to be a miracle. Like the words " I am your god" appearing in the sky all over the world and legible in the language of the observer no matter how many different people are looking at it at the same time.
I think it would have to be a miracle. Like the words " I am your god" appearing in the sky all over the world and legible in the language of the observer no matter how many different people are looking at it at the same time.
Iwantyourhotwife · 22-25
@Pikachu are there any other examples besides words in the sky?
And suppose ya came across that tomorrow. Those words in the sky. What would you think next?
And suppose ya came across that tomorrow. Those words in the sky. What would you think next?
@Iwantyourhotwife
I don't think more examples are necessary. Something miraculous. Something supernatural.
If such an event occurred then i'd have to take seriously the notion of a god
I don't think more examples are necessary. Something miraculous. Something supernatural.
If such an event occurred then i'd have to take seriously the notion of a god
Iwantyourhotwife · 22-25
@Pikachu ah, I see
So, would you believe that you are compelled to follow the purpose your god would have made you for?
So, would you believe that you are compelled to follow the purpose your god would have made you for?
@Iwantyourhotwife
Do you mean compelled like destiny, duty or having all the first-born sons in my country killed?
Do you mean compelled like destiny, duty or having all the first-born sons in my country killed?
Iwantyourhotwife · 22-25
@Pikachu I'm talking more like duty but now you got me curious about the first-born sons 👀
And where this comes from now
And where this comes from now
@Iwantyourhotwife
Oh that's a biblical reference to the *ahem* judgements that the god of the bible places on people in order that they should behave in the way he wants.
I wouldn't feel compelled by duty though, necessarily. It's really impossible to tell unless we know exactly the deity we are describing. If it were the god of the bible then definitely not lol
Oh that's a biblical reference to the *ahem* judgements that the god of the bible places on people in order that they should behave in the way he wants.
I wouldn't feel compelled by duty though, necessarily. It's really impossible to tell unless we know exactly the deity we are describing. If it were the god of the bible then definitely not lol
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu You keep saying that it is impossible to know gods exist? For the thousandth time (give or take) look it up. A god can be anything.
1. It doesn't have to exist.
2. It doesn't have to be supernatural.
3. There are countless gods who do or have in the past existed.
4. So, you need to be more specific (i.e. supernatural, Biblical, by name etc.)
1. It doesn't have to exist.
2. It doesn't have to be supernatural.
3. There are countless gods who do or have in the past existed.
4. So, you need to be more specific (i.e. supernatural, Biblical, by name etc.)
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu [quote]Well i'm not antitheist because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative.[/quote]
The term atheist means without gods. When you look at the Greek or Japanese gods probably more of them were negative than not, so I'm not sure what you mean.
[quote]I'm agnostic because while i don't believe a god exists i don't think it's possible to know that no god exists.[/quote]
Nonsense. It's just nonsense.
The term atheist means without gods. When you look at the Greek or Japanese gods probably more of them were negative than not, so I'm not sure what you mean.
[quote]I'm agnostic because while i don't believe a god exists i don't think it's possible to know that no god exists.[/quote]
Nonsense. It's just nonsense.
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu Jesus said the unbelievers wouldn't believe if the rocks came to life and told them to their face. I think that's pretty accurate.
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu Why would God do such a thing? In the past in Egypt, for example.
@AkioTsukino
[quote]A god can be anything.[/quote]
Nah. Not without broadening the definition to a point where it loses all meaning.
[quote]The term atheist means without gods[/quote]
Certainly. But the term under discussion there is not "[i]a[/i]theist" but "[i]anti[/i]theist".
[quote]Nonsense. It's just nonsense.[/quote]
Nah. It's logical reasoning:
a) I am not convinced that a god exists and therefore i am without gods (atheist)
b) Given the proposed nature of gods, it is not possible to prove objectively that they do not exist and therefore i accept the impossibility of knowing for certain that no god exists. On this claim i am without knowledge (agnostic).
Put them together and what have you got? Bingo, baby😉
If you think that is nonsense then feel free to explain why.
I think you'll struggle to find a more rational position from an atheist perspective.
[quote]Why would God do such a thing? In the past in Egypt, for example.[/quote]
Well at least in some cases with the stated purpose of swinging his dick around so everyone could see how powerful was the god of the Israelites and that the Israelites would know he was god.
Exodus 10:1-2
[quote]A god can be anything.[/quote]
Nah. Not without broadening the definition to a point where it loses all meaning.
[quote]The term atheist means without gods[/quote]
Certainly. But the term under discussion there is not "[i]a[/i]theist" but "[i]anti[/i]theist".
[quote]Nonsense. It's just nonsense.[/quote]
Nah. It's logical reasoning:
a) I am not convinced that a god exists and therefore i am without gods (atheist)
b) Given the proposed nature of gods, it is not possible to prove objectively that they do not exist and therefore i accept the impossibility of knowing for certain that no god exists. On this claim i am without knowledge (agnostic).
Put them together and what have you got? Bingo, baby😉
If you think that is nonsense then feel free to explain why.
I think you'll struggle to find a more rational position from an atheist perspective.
[quote]Why would God do such a thing? In the past in Egypt, for example.[/quote]
Well at least in some cases with the stated purpose of swinging his dick around so everyone could see how powerful was the god of the Israelites and that the Israelites would know he was god.
Exodus 10:1-2
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu I gotta' go one at a time with you, kiddo. We've already hashed that out and along with the evolution discussion, I have to pick my battles with you. They go nowhere because, I feel, you don't listen to me. To be objective you have to look at both sides. And you won't.
@AkioTsukino
lol no, no.
No excuses, please. No dishonesty.
You chose to respond to this old post. You chose to make [i]several[/i] responses, in fact.
You thought you had something to say and now that i push back suddenly you have to pick your battles?
lol i agree you're picking your battles. You are retreating from the ones you don't feel confident about.
Too bad.
You started here. Finish it, if you can....
lol no, no.
No excuses, please. No dishonesty.
You chose to respond to this old post. You chose to make [i]several[/i] responses, in fact.
You thought you had something to say and now that i push back suddenly you have to pick your battles?
lol i agree you're picking your battles. You are retreating from the ones you don't feel confident about.
Too bad.
You started here. Finish it, if you can....
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu Okay. Do any gods exist? Do gods have to literally exist to be gods? What makes a god a god.
Since you won't listen to me I have to ask you. BUT. You have to give answers that are in line with the etymological and practical use of the word in every language according to man. Here's the thing, though, they're all the same. So you get one right you get them all. You say my definition is meaningless, but you're wrong. How do you know?
Simple.
Look here
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/god.
And here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity
Take what you learn there and try and match it up with your definition then mine. Which is complete and which isn't. I'll give you a hint. This is me, not you . . .
[media=https://youtu.be/IogYoyS6upA]
Since you won't listen to me I have to ask you. BUT. You have to give answers that are in line with the etymological and practical use of the word in every language according to man. Here's the thing, though, they're all the same. So you get one right you get them all. You say my definition is meaningless, but you're wrong. How do you know?
Simple.
Look here
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/god.
And here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity
Take what you learn there and try and match it up with your definition then mine. Which is complete and which isn't. I'll give you a hint. This is me, not you . . .
[media=https://youtu.be/IogYoyS6upA]
@AkioTsukino
No, gods don't have to exist to be gods. They just have to be believed to exist.
And of course the last two definitions are colloquial. No one thinks of a baseball star in the same context as Allah or Yahweh. You'll agree to that.
Suffice it to say that when we're discussing gods in the context of this thread, we are talking about gods in the supernatural sense, not Taylor Swift sense.
This is actually the least interesting part of the discussion so let's move on.
I trust we cleared up the atheist/antitheist confusion so let's get on to your thoughts as to why my reasoning for being an agnostic atheist are illogical.
You'll agree that "Nonsense. Just nonsense." is not a particularly compelling or well thought out argument lol
And then we get to another example of how the god of the Bible is a villain when we look at Exodus 10:1-2.
So to me that is straight up a thing a monster would do. Killing every firstborn son in the country, not only of the oppressors but also of the salves and even the livestock just to show how big their dick is, is unequivocally monstrous.
And remember: at least some of the time, god caused Pharaoh not to let the Israelites go so that he could perform his signs.
Evil.
Prove me wrong without special pleading.
No, gods don't have to exist to be gods. They just have to be believed to exist.
And of course the last two definitions are colloquial. No one thinks of a baseball star in the same context as Allah or Yahweh. You'll agree to that.
Suffice it to say that when we're discussing gods in the context of this thread, we are talking about gods in the supernatural sense, not Taylor Swift sense.
This is actually the least interesting part of the discussion so let's move on.
I trust we cleared up the atheist/antitheist confusion so let's get on to your thoughts as to why my reasoning for being an agnostic atheist are illogical.
You'll agree that "Nonsense. Just nonsense." is not a particularly compelling or well thought out argument lol
And then we get to another example of how the god of the Bible is a villain when we look at Exodus 10:1-2.
So to me that is straight up a thing a monster would do. Killing every firstborn son in the country, not only of the oppressors but also of the salves and even the livestock just to show how big their dick is, is unequivocally monstrous.
And remember: at least some of the time, god caused Pharaoh not to let the Israelites go so that he could perform his signs.
Evil.
Prove me wrong without special pleading.
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu [quote]No, gods don't have to exist to be gods. They just have to be believed to exist.[/quote]
Nice thinly veiled insult. A little bit narcissitic, but that's to be expected. They do not have to be anything except mighty/venerated. You don't have to believe they exist. The Shinto Amaterasu, for example, well most Shinto gods. To say they have to be believed is ambiguous. Believed to exist? Obviously not. Believed in like you would believe in anything (money, politicians, spouses, ones children, etc.) No. A god doesn't have to be believed in that regard. Believed as in trust specifically in regard to promises, etc. No.
The flaw in atheistic thinking is that a god has to be anything but venerated. Which is why you say . . .
[quote]And of course the last two definitions are colloquial. No one thinks of a baseball star in the same context as Allah or Yahweh.[/quote]
They don't have to.
[quote]You'll agree to that.[/quote]
Not at all.
[quote]Suffice it to say that when we're discussing gods in the context of this thread, we are talking about gods in the supernatural sense, not Taylor Swift sense.[/quote]
No. If someone says gods that means anything or anyone who is venerated. That isn't colloquial, that's definitive. To suggest otherwise is like saying queer can't mean strange or car has to mean railroad.
[quote]I trust we cleared up the atheist/antitheist confusion so let's get on to your thoughts as to why my reasoning for being an agnostic atheist are illogical.[/quote]
I don't even know what the atheist/antitheist reference was about, thought it irrelevant, and I didn't say your reasoning was illogical but nonsensical. Your logic is nonsensical.
[quote]You'll agree that "Nonsense. Just nonsense." is not a particularly compelling or well thought out argument lol[/quote]
Lol. No.
[quote]And then we get to another example of how the god of the Bible is a villain when we look at Exodus 10:1-2.[/quote]
I wouldn't argue that the god of the Bible (I must assume you mean Jehovah since the Bible mentions many gods) is or isn't a villain because it's subjective. But I can see the logic in perceiving Jehovah as villainous. Atheists see the Bible as folklore, mythology, fables like Aesop's fables. So, to them the events at Exodus 10:1-2 are . . . random, arbitrary. The question becomes, does the atheist/agnostic not understand the motive and intent of the actions or do they simply not agree with the solution of the "god" in the narrative.
They can't see or won't accept the narrative in any way. So, it's a moot discussion. Always a moot discussion.
[quote]So to me that is straight up a thing a monster would do. Killing every firstborn son in the country, not only of the oppressors but also of the salves and even the livestock just to show how big their dick is, is unequivocally monstrous.[/quote]
God doesn't have a dick. You simply don't understand God's objective, his motivation, in the examples you give. I could explain them to you but that would be moot because you would cling doggedly to your god with a dick perspective. People say that God works in mysterious ways when they are, in fact, themselves only myopic, but in order to understand God's ways you make a mistake in perceiving him as human.
[quote]And remember: at least some of the time, god caused Pharaoh not to let the Israelites go so that he could perform his signs.
Evil.[/quote]
Again. Evil is subjective. In order to be accurate and objective you have to first be fair.
[quote]Prove me wrong without special pleading.[/quote]
[b]Special Pleading:[/b] argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavorable to their point of view.
That's you. Not me. I can't prove you wrong (not that proof means much more than agreement anyway) because you can't be objective. I have no problem with disagreeing with Jehovah's actions, and I have no interest in a perception that is subjective. I consider truth above God, meaning that if I have to choose God over truth I will choose truth. Easy. I've actually made mistakes in which I've erroneously done that.
So, what I can prove to you is my own accepted interpretation (there are no original interpretations) of the events you call into question using the Bible. I can be wrong, but I can tell you what is happening more than your perception as the Bible as mythological from a human perspective will allow.
Since you can't allow that, it's pointless. Unless it's for some intellectual or academic intent.
Nice thinly veiled insult. A little bit narcissitic, but that's to be expected. They do not have to be anything except mighty/venerated. You don't have to believe they exist. The Shinto Amaterasu, for example, well most Shinto gods. To say they have to be believed is ambiguous. Believed to exist? Obviously not. Believed in like you would believe in anything (money, politicians, spouses, ones children, etc.) No. A god doesn't have to be believed in that regard. Believed as in trust specifically in regard to promises, etc. No.
The flaw in atheistic thinking is that a god has to be anything but venerated. Which is why you say . . .
[quote]And of course the last two definitions are colloquial. No one thinks of a baseball star in the same context as Allah or Yahweh.[/quote]
They don't have to.
[quote]You'll agree to that.[/quote]
Not at all.
[quote]Suffice it to say that when we're discussing gods in the context of this thread, we are talking about gods in the supernatural sense, not Taylor Swift sense.[/quote]
No. If someone says gods that means anything or anyone who is venerated. That isn't colloquial, that's definitive. To suggest otherwise is like saying queer can't mean strange or car has to mean railroad.
[quote]I trust we cleared up the atheist/antitheist confusion so let's get on to your thoughts as to why my reasoning for being an agnostic atheist are illogical.[/quote]
I don't even know what the atheist/antitheist reference was about, thought it irrelevant, and I didn't say your reasoning was illogical but nonsensical. Your logic is nonsensical.
[quote]You'll agree that "Nonsense. Just nonsense." is not a particularly compelling or well thought out argument lol[/quote]
Lol. No.
[quote]And then we get to another example of how the god of the Bible is a villain when we look at Exodus 10:1-2.[/quote]
I wouldn't argue that the god of the Bible (I must assume you mean Jehovah since the Bible mentions many gods) is or isn't a villain because it's subjective. But I can see the logic in perceiving Jehovah as villainous. Atheists see the Bible as folklore, mythology, fables like Aesop's fables. So, to them the events at Exodus 10:1-2 are . . . random, arbitrary. The question becomes, does the atheist/agnostic not understand the motive and intent of the actions or do they simply not agree with the solution of the "god" in the narrative.
They can't see or won't accept the narrative in any way. So, it's a moot discussion. Always a moot discussion.
[quote]So to me that is straight up a thing a monster would do. Killing every firstborn son in the country, not only of the oppressors but also of the salves and even the livestock just to show how big their dick is, is unequivocally monstrous.[/quote]
God doesn't have a dick. You simply don't understand God's objective, his motivation, in the examples you give. I could explain them to you but that would be moot because you would cling doggedly to your god with a dick perspective. People say that God works in mysterious ways when they are, in fact, themselves only myopic, but in order to understand God's ways you make a mistake in perceiving him as human.
[quote]And remember: at least some of the time, god caused Pharaoh not to let the Israelites go so that he could perform his signs.
Evil.[/quote]
Again. Evil is subjective. In order to be accurate and objective you have to first be fair.
[quote]Prove me wrong without special pleading.[/quote]
[b]Special Pleading:[/b] argument in which the speaker deliberately ignores aspects that are unfavorable to their point of view.
That's you. Not me. I can't prove you wrong (not that proof means much more than agreement anyway) because you can't be objective. I have no problem with disagreeing with Jehovah's actions, and I have no interest in a perception that is subjective. I consider truth above God, meaning that if I have to choose God over truth I will choose truth. Easy. I've actually made mistakes in which I've erroneously done that.
So, what I can prove to you is my own accepted interpretation (there are no original interpretations) of the events you call into question using the Bible. I can be wrong, but I can tell you what is happening more than your perception as the Bible as mythological from a human perspective will allow.
Since you can't allow that, it's pointless. Unless it's for some intellectual or academic intent.
@AkioTsukino
[quote]Nice thinly veiled insult[/quote]
...what? Nah man. I mean, surely there are gods that you don't think are real but that people believe in. That's all i'm describing. Not sure how that's insulting or narcissistic lol
[quote]I don't even know what the atheist/antitheist reference was about[/quote]
Oh you seemed confused earlier. Maybe you just misread the word.
[quote]They don't have to ... Not at all ... No
[/quote]
lol blah blah[i] blaaaaaahhhh[/i]. I really don't care if you want to think of a god as a creator, a sports star or a block of cheese. In this thread, with reference to my beliefs and my identification as an agnostic atheist, i am referring to the more common and primary definition of god which is a supernatural being.
If you want to say i'm not one or more of those things because literally anything is a god and i must venerate something then bully for you but there's no discussion the be had here lol.
SO.
Given that understanding, can you do a little better for me than "Your logic is nonsensical." ?
Please?
I'll put it simple terms so you can respond directly to the thought:
a) I am an atheist because i am convinced that no god exists ( as in Jehova, not Wayne Gretzky lol).
b) I am agnostic in this belief because there are no means by which to prove that a supernatural being doesn not exist.
c ) I am therefore and agnostic atheist. Atheist because i am without a god and agnostic because i am without knowledge that no god exists.
Would you please show me the respect of explaining why that reasoning is non-sensical rather than expecting me to accept "nuh uh" as a valid rebuttal?
Thanks in advance.
[quote]because it's subjective. [/quote]
I'm glad you are not blind to how the god of the bible's actions can be viewed as villainous.
As for subjectivity, i'm just applying human morality which is the only sort we have to work with.
So can you explain as a non-villainous action god's decision to not only murder every fist born son in Egypt as a demonstration of his power (to whatever end) but to actively prevent Pharaoh from avoiding this condition?
I think you're using the definition of special pleading as it refers to law. I'm referring to the logical fallacy:
[i][b]Special pleading is an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception. It is the application of a double standard.[/b][/i]
So can you explain by any recognizable moral standard why this is not the act of a villain without making the special pleading excuse that god gets a pass because god?
[quote]Nice thinly veiled insult[/quote]
...what? Nah man. I mean, surely there are gods that you don't think are real but that people believe in. That's all i'm describing. Not sure how that's insulting or narcissistic lol
[quote]I don't even know what the atheist/antitheist reference was about[/quote]
Oh you seemed confused earlier. Maybe you just misread the word.
[quote]They don't have to ... Not at all ... No
[/quote]
lol blah blah[i] blaaaaaahhhh[/i]. I really don't care if you want to think of a god as a creator, a sports star or a block of cheese. In this thread, with reference to my beliefs and my identification as an agnostic atheist, i am referring to the more common and primary definition of god which is a supernatural being.
If you want to say i'm not one or more of those things because literally anything is a god and i must venerate something then bully for you but there's no discussion the be had here lol.
SO.
Given that understanding, can you do a little better for me than "Your logic is nonsensical." ?
Please?
I'll put it simple terms so you can respond directly to the thought:
a) I am an atheist because i am convinced that no god exists ( as in Jehova, not Wayne Gretzky lol).
b) I am agnostic in this belief because there are no means by which to prove that a supernatural being doesn not exist.
c ) I am therefore and agnostic atheist. Atheist because i am without a god and agnostic because i am without knowledge that no god exists.
Would you please show me the respect of explaining why that reasoning is non-sensical rather than expecting me to accept "nuh uh" as a valid rebuttal?
Thanks in advance.
[quote]because it's subjective. [/quote]
I'm glad you are not blind to how the god of the bible's actions can be viewed as villainous.
As for subjectivity, i'm just applying human morality which is the only sort we have to work with.
So can you explain as a non-villainous action god's decision to not only murder every fist born son in Egypt as a demonstration of his power (to whatever end) but to actively prevent Pharaoh from avoiding this condition?
I think you're using the definition of special pleading as it refers to law. I'm referring to the logical fallacy:
[i][b]Special pleading is an informal fallacy wherein one cites something as an exception to a general or universal principle, without justifying the special exception. It is the application of a double standard.[/b][/i]
So can you explain by any recognizable moral standard why this is not the act of a villain without making the special pleading excuse that god gets a pass because god?
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu [quote]...what? Nah man. I mean, surely there are gods that you don't think are real but that people believe in. That's all i'm describing. Not sure how that's insulting or narcissistic lol[/quote]
I take it to mean you use the word "believe in" in the atheistic sense of delusional. If it can't be proved then it is beneath your frame of reference because you only deal in concrete "facts," lol. To me, that is delusional and it is relevant topically because it is more atheistic than agnostic. If you are agnostic that either means that you think that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena. On one hand if nothing is known you have no argument or, well, knowledge to speak of, on the other hand you do express agnostic disbelief of anything beyond material phenomena.
You said earlier "I'm agnostic because while i don't believe a god exists i don't think it's possible to know that no god exists." And "I am not convinced that a god exists and therefore i am without gods (atheist)." Then you said "Suffice it to say that when we're discussing gods in the context of this thread, we are talking about gods in the supernatural sense, not Taylor Swift sense." So gods other than the one specific "God" you ambiguously refer to do, in your estimation, exist. Saying no gods exist is contradictory. You can say God doesn't exist, that's colloquial, but only contextually. If someone rejects Jehovah as a god but accept Zeus as God your reference doesn't fit outside of the occidental.
[quote]Oh you seemed confused earlier. Maybe you just misread the word.[/quote]
Atheism is without gods (which is ludicrous) and antitheism is against theism, which is rational. I don't see antitheism as being relevant here, and hadn't been suggested so I don't know why you brought it up out of the apparent blue, as they say.
[quote]lol blah blah blaaaaaahhhh. [/quote]
HEY! Yeah, well, I warned you.
[quote]I really don't care if you want to think of a god as a creator, a sports star or a block of cheese. In this thread, with reference to my beliefs and my identification as an agnostic atheist, i am referring to the more common and primary definition of god which is a supernatural being.[/quote]
That's part of the problem. Your objection seems to be to the supernatural. Supernatural doesn't necessarily imply theistic and theistic doesn't necessarily imply supernatural. Everyone has gods. Everyone is religious. And this coming from an irreligious person. Me. That is.
If you want to avoid confusion with me without all of the theistsplaining and bothersome dictionary, historic, theological, and logical excursions just say which god you specifically refer to. Yahweh. Jehovah. Yah. Jah. Jesus. Zeus, etc. I even reluctantly accept God so long as participation in the discussion is in all likelihood exclusively occidental.
Huh?
[quote]I'll put it simple terms so you can respond directly to the thought:
a) I am an atheist because i am convinced that no god exists ( as in Jehova, not Wayne Gretzky lol).
b) I am agnostic in this belief because there are no means by which to prove that a supernatural being doesn not exist.
c ) I am therefore and agnostic atheist. Atheist because i am without a god and agnostic because i am without knowledge that no god exists.[/quote]
I really don't care what stupid labels you put on me, let alone on yourself or the entire unbelieving masses.
[quote]Would you please show me the respect of explaining why that reasoning is non-sensical rather than expecting me to accept "nuh uh" as a valid rebuttal?[/quote]
That's what I'm doing. We have to agree on definitions for this to take place. That isn't a problem until you start fucking around with the definitions. Especially if you think your ignorance isn't subject to criticism. If you make the assumption that you are right while being, in every possible way, wrong. But like I said above. You want to give all of that a miss just be specific.
I take it to mean you use the word "believe in" in the atheistic sense of delusional. If it can't be proved then it is beneath your frame of reference because you only deal in concrete "facts," lol. To me, that is delusional and it is relevant topically because it is more atheistic than agnostic. If you are agnostic that either means that you think that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena. On one hand if nothing is known you have no argument or, well, knowledge to speak of, on the other hand you do express agnostic disbelief of anything beyond material phenomena.
You said earlier "I'm agnostic because while i don't believe a god exists i don't think it's possible to know that no god exists." And "I am not convinced that a god exists and therefore i am without gods (atheist)." Then you said "Suffice it to say that when we're discussing gods in the context of this thread, we are talking about gods in the supernatural sense, not Taylor Swift sense." So gods other than the one specific "God" you ambiguously refer to do, in your estimation, exist. Saying no gods exist is contradictory. You can say God doesn't exist, that's colloquial, but only contextually. If someone rejects Jehovah as a god but accept Zeus as God your reference doesn't fit outside of the occidental.
[quote]Oh you seemed confused earlier. Maybe you just misread the word.[/quote]
Atheism is without gods (which is ludicrous) and antitheism is against theism, which is rational. I don't see antitheism as being relevant here, and hadn't been suggested so I don't know why you brought it up out of the apparent blue, as they say.
[quote]lol blah blah blaaaaaahhhh. [/quote]
HEY! Yeah, well, I warned you.
[quote]I really don't care if you want to think of a god as a creator, a sports star or a block of cheese. In this thread, with reference to my beliefs and my identification as an agnostic atheist, i am referring to the more common and primary definition of god which is a supernatural being.[/quote]
That's part of the problem. Your objection seems to be to the supernatural. Supernatural doesn't necessarily imply theistic and theistic doesn't necessarily imply supernatural. Everyone has gods. Everyone is religious. And this coming from an irreligious person. Me. That is.
If you want to avoid confusion with me without all of the theistsplaining and bothersome dictionary, historic, theological, and logical excursions just say which god you specifically refer to. Yahweh. Jehovah. Yah. Jah. Jesus. Zeus, etc. I even reluctantly accept God so long as participation in the discussion is in all likelihood exclusively occidental.
Huh?
[quote]I'll put it simple terms so you can respond directly to the thought:
a) I am an atheist because i am convinced that no god exists ( as in Jehova, not Wayne Gretzky lol).
b) I am agnostic in this belief because there are no means by which to prove that a supernatural being doesn not exist.
c ) I am therefore and agnostic atheist. Atheist because i am without a god and agnostic because i am without knowledge that no god exists.[/quote]
I really don't care what stupid labels you put on me, let alone on yourself or the entire unbelieving masses.
[quote]Would you please show me the respect of explaining why that reasoning is non-sensical rather than expecting me to accept "nuh uh" as a valid rebuttal?[/quote]
That's what I'm doing. We have to agree on definitions for this to take place. That isn't a problem until you start fucking around with the definitions. Especially if you think your ignorance isn't subject to criticism. If you make the assumption that you are right while being, in every possible way, wrong. But like I said above. You want to give all of that a miss just be specific.
@AkioTsukino
[quote]So gods other than the one specific "God" you ambiguously refer to do, in your estimation, exist[/quote]
Nope. I don't think Zeus exists, i don't think Vishnu exists, i don't think the FSM exists.
I am convinced that no gods exist. It is not a specific rejection of one deity but a rejection of the whole category (and because you're a pedantic twat about this, yes i am referring to supernatural beings and not Babe Ruth or chocolate covered pretzels lol)
[quote]l. I don't see antitheism as being relevant here and hadn't been suggested so I don't know why you brought it up out of the apparent blue, as they say.[/quote]
Nah i think you just misread earlier.
[b][c=005E2F]Iwantyourhotwife: What leaves you as agnostic rather than [i]antitheist[/i]?[/c][/b]
[b][c=665D00]Pkachu: Well i'm not [i]antitheist[/i] because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative.[/c][/b]
[b][c=4C0073]Scientiaratio:
" Well i'm not a[i]ntitheist[/i] because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative."
The term [i]atheist [/i]means without gods.
[/c][/b]
I agree that antitheism isn't relevant to the discussion you and i are having, I just wanted to be sure you knew that lol.
All cleared up?
[quote]If you want to avoid confusion with me [/quote]
I do. Which is why i defined my terms in the context of my belief and my identification as an agnostic atheist.
So just to be very clear: in this thread, when i reference a god, i am referencing a supernatural being.
If you can accept that context then we'll move forward. If you refuse to accept that concept then there is nothing to discuss because there will not be an agreement upon terms.
Are we understood?
[quote]I really don't care what stupid labels you put on me, let alone on yourself or the entire unbelieving masses.[/quote]
lol not sure what labels i put on you. But you attempted to dismiss my reasoning as nonsense and yet you continue to shy away from making your case as to why that is so, attempting instead to avoid that course by refusing to acknowledge that when i'm talking about atheism, i'm talking about a lack of belief in a supernatural entity and not in Britney Spears.
At this stage Y]you don't strike me as a good faith actor. You strike me as someone who wants to win a game.
I'm really not interested.
So since we both have the stated value of agreeing upon terms, here are your choices, bud:
1) Agree to the terms i have defined here describing the context for my belief and make your case as to why my reasoning for being an agnostic atheist is nonsense or
2) Insist that gods can be anything from Mr Rogers to neat cloud in the sky and that therefor i must believe on one of those and we'll both move on.
lol up to you.
[quote]So gods other than the one specific "God" you ambiguously refer to do, in your estimation, exist[/quote]
Nope. I don't think Zeus exists, i don't think Vishnu exists, i don't think the FSM exists.
I am convinced that no gods exist. It is not a specific rejection of one deity but a rejection of the whole category (and because you're a pedantic twat about this, yes i am referring to supernatural beings and not Babe Ruth or chocolate covered pretzels lol)
[quote]l. I don't see antitheism as being relevant here and hadn't been suggested so I don't know why you brought it up out of the apparent blue, as they say.[/quote]
Nah i think you just misread earlier.
[b][c=005E2F]Iwantyourhotwife: What leaves you as agnostic rather than [i]antitheist[/i]?[/c][/b]
[b][c=665D00]Pkachu: Well i'm not [i]antitheist[/i] because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative.[/c][/b]
[b][c=4C0073]Scientiaratio:
" Well i'm not a[i]ntitheist[/i] because i don't think the belief in a god is necessarily a negative."
The term [i]atheist [/i]means without gods.
[/c][/b]
I agree that antitheism isn't relevant to the discussion you and i are having, I just wanted to be sure you knew that lol.
All cleared up?
[quote]If you want to avoid confusion with me [/quote]
I do. Which is why i defined my terms in the context of my belief and my identification as an agnostic atheist.
So just to be very clear: in this thread, when i reference a god, i am referencing a supernatural being.
If you can accept that context then we'll move forward. If you refuse to accept that concept then there is nothing to discuss because there will not be an agreement upon terms.
Are we understood?
[quote]I really don't care what stupid labels you put on me, let alone on yourself or the entire unbelieving masses.[/quote]
lol not sure what labels i put on you. But you attempted to dismiss my reasoning as nonsense and yet you continue to shy away from making your case as to why that is so, attempting instead to avoid that course by refusing to acknowledge that when i'm talking about atheism, i'm talking about a lack of belief in a supernatural entity and not in Britney Spears.
At this stage Y]you don't strike me as a good faith actor. You strike me as someone who wants to win a game.
I'm really not interested.
So since we both have the stated value of agreeing upon terms, here are your choices, bud:
1) Agree to the terms i have defined here describing the context for my belief and make your case as to why my reasoning for being an agnostic atheist is nonsense or
2) Insist that gods can be anything from Mr Rogers to neat cloud in the sky and that therefor i must believe on one of those and we'll both move on.
lol up to you.
AkioTsukino · M
@Pikachu [quote]Nope. I don't think Zeus exists[/quote]
Now? Of course he doesn't exist now! But the term, like our term God, was used in application to allegedly supernatural beings as well as Roman rulers. See? You aren't conversant.
[quote] i don't think the FSM exists[/quote]
See? You don't listen. The FSM doesn't have to literally exist to be a god. Like, as I said, Amaterasu isn't thought, by her worshipers, to exist. they knew she didn't exist. She didn't have to. How many times have you used the term "Good luck." Luck is a well known god in many cultures. "Oh, well I don't mean it that way." Because you don't know any better.
[quote]I am convinced that no gods exist. [/quote]
But only a certain kind, right? A relatively select few of them are allegedly supernatural, you just mean those, right? Most of the gods that have ever been have been persons, places or things. You don't doubt the existence of those gods, correct? Just the ones that you can't scientifically test.
Now? Of course he doesn't exist now! But the term, like our term God, was used in application to allegedly supernatural beings as well as Roman rulers. See? You aren't conversant.
[quote] i don't think the FSM exists[/quote]
See? You don't listen. The FSM doesn't have to literally exist to be a god. Like, as I said, Amaterasu isn't thought, by her worshipers, to exist. they knew she didn't exist. She didn't have to. How many times have you used the term "Good luck." Luck is a well known god in many cultures. "Oh, well I don't mean it that way." Because you don't know any better.
[quote]I am convinced that no gods exist. [/quote]
But only a certain kind, right? A relatively select few of them are allegedly supernatural, you just mean those, right? Most of the gods that have ever been have been persons, places or things. You don't doubt the existence of those gods, correct? Just the ones that you can't scientifically test.
@AkioTsukino
[quote] A relatively select few of them are allegedly supernatural, you just mean those, right?[/quote]
Yes.
lol yes.
I thought i'd made that abundantly clear.
But evidently you don't have an issue with my description of being agnostic atheist with reference such gods.
Cool. Glad we could get there eventually.
[quote] A relatively select few of them are allegedly supernatural, you just mean those, right?[/quote]
Yes.
lol yes.
I thought i'd made that abundantly clear.
But evidently you don't have an issue with my description of being agnostic atheist with reference such gods.
Cool. Glad we could get there eventually.