"(I will vomit if I get the "killed Christ" argument). " LOL! Get ready dude I agree with you RS7. I've never complained about Judaism. Funny how they ruffle me the wrong way. Precisely for the reason you pointed out. They dont proselytize and run around calling me a P.O.S. sinner that is gonna burn in hell, or try to convert my 24/7. They are TOLERANT. All religions should follow their lead. peace axeman
Large fonts and large print for those who have difficulty reading. Atheism is an ism, a belief system. Agnosticism is a belief system, also an ism. Those who practice those respective belief systems are Atheists, and agnostics, in the same manner that Rationalists claim to practice Rationalism, Communists practice communism, Theists practice Theism, pragmatic people practice pragmatism and are called pragmatists, etc. Some eliteists try to claim that they don't practice a belief system, but rather a engage in a "philosophy" but that practice yet remains on the level of a belief in a particular philosophy without definitive and absolute proof that they have chosen the right philosophy. Since there is no definitive human philosophy, it is just personal choice, a belief system that people adopt for a variety of reasons. Human beings are not born with any belief systems, belief systems are adopted and can be changed. The mind has no inherent belief system. Unlike a non flashable programmed ROM which cannot be reprogrammed and always maintains the same processes of computation, the human mind is capable of adopting any number of belief systems and the computations that follow from that belief systems can be quite different. You are an example of someone who practiced Theism, failed to follow the instructions of Theism (thus you are a failed Theist), and then took up the practice and belief systems of Atheism. Consequently, those who never adopted the belief system of Agnosticism or Atheism, could never be a failed Agnostic, or a failed Atheist.
You continue to attack this strawman. You simply dont understand what atheism and agnosticism IS. Atheism/Theism deal in the realm of BELIEF. Agnosticism/gnosticism deal in the realm of KNOWLEDGE. An atheist does not BELIEVE there is a god. An agnostic does not KNOW there is a god. THAT is the crucial difference. Since we are all born NOT believing in god, we are by definition ATHEISTS. Here you show your ignorance: Human beings are not born with any belief systems, belief systems are adopted and can be changed. The mind has no inherent belief system. This fits the definition of ATHEISM perfectly. If you are born with NO belief system, then your belief system does NOT contain god and you are THEREFORE AN ATHEIST. The following article explains this difference nicely, and precisely why you are wrong. Atheism is NOT a belief system. It is the LACK of theistic belief. So in fact, YOU ARE A FAILED ATHEIST, SINCE YOU WERE BORN ONE ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The difference between atheism and agnosticism is often the subject of much debate. Indeed, many people are confused about the difference between the two. Hopefully Iâll be able to give a clear understanding about the relationship and difference between these two words, and heighten the overall awareness of the reader. Theism and atheism are dealing in the realm of belief. They pertain to what we do or do not believe. Agnosticism and gnosticism are dealing with knowledge, i.e., knowing or not knowing. Being aware of this seemingly obvious fact is critical to understanding the difference between atheism and agnosticism and the label you may or may not fall under. Itâs also important to be mindful that there are different types of atheists. Atheism itself is very broad; it is lack of god-belief. If youâre of the mindset that atheism is the positive belief that there are no gods, youâre wrong. Believing that there are no gods is a characteristic of some atheists, not atheism. Many atheists simply lack a belief in gods without having the belief that no gods exist. Therein lies the point of confusion between atheism and agnosticism for many. Atheism is the absence of belief in a deity; agnosticism is the absence of knowledge, in this context the absence of knowledge whether or not one or more gods exist. Atheism and agnosticism are two different spheres of thought and should be treated as such. Theism and atheism are not two different spheres of thought; they both consider whether or not god(s) exist and how one believes in regard. When dealing with belief, a person either (i) believes there is one or more gods or (ii) does not believe there is one or more gods. With knowledge, a person either (i) knows there is one or more god or (ii) does not know whether or not there is one or more gods. Hopefully at this point you are beginning to see where Iâm heading. Because agnosticism is dealing with knowledge and not belief, therefore being a separate school of thought, it is not a third option aside from theism and atheism. A person either has or does not have a belief in one or more gods. Accordingly, a person is either a theist or an atheist. Gnosticism and agnosticism are introduced when describing the theist or atheist. A theist or an atheist is either gnostic or agnostic. That is: either the theist or atheist knows there is or isnât a god (gnostic) or he or she simply believes there is or does not believe there is (agnostic), while admitting that he or she does not know. Let me step outside of the subject with in illustration using my well being tomorrow. I believe, though I do not know, I will not be killed tomorrow. The gnostic theist, usually simply called a theist, not only believes there is a god, but claims to know there is a god. This knowledge is usually obtained from some perceived evidence or revelation, such as a Bible filled with prophecies that are coming true with incredible accuracy today. With such evidence, this theist can go beyond simple belief and know with certainty. An agnostic theist believes that there is at least one god while allowing the possibility that he or she is wrong, due to lack of evidence or knowledge. He or she believes there is a god, but doesnât know for certain. The gnostic atheist (AKA strong atheist) knows there are no gods at all. This knowledge is usually obtained due to some perceived logical incompatibility with the existence of a god and reality. An agnostic atheist (AKA weak atheist) is an atheist who maintains a lack of belief in a god--and sometimes a belief that no gods exist--while having no knowledge that gods do not exist, due to insufficient evidence or some other reason. Summarizing: Agnosticism is not a third option to theism or atheism; it is a type of theist or atheist. ------------------------------------------------------------------ peace axeman
Actually, to be clear one actually can attack an argument AND attack a person. They are not mutually exclusive. This does not mean it is necessarily mature to do so, although clever insults and mocking illustrations have been used effectively at times by very bright people for thousands of years.
Yes, and last I checked we are humans, not computers and not vulcans. As humans, even the brightest people often get charged up and are passionate about certain topics. And when some people debate these topics with ignorant brick walls who lack logic and comprehension skills, some people might get frustrated. However, the most mature response would actually be to give up and ignore the person one cannot reason with, which is a type of response that you specifically mocked when you said, derisively, that this is what Axeman would eventually do. Well, I hope he does, cause he has been wasting a lot of time trying to reason with the unreasonable thus far!
In fairness, Darkhorse did not say that religion has not been perverted to fight wars. He rebutted my claim that there has not really been mass violence against religious people in general by atheists. China is a good example of oppression (although perhaps only limited violence) of the religious by a genreally anti-religious government. With Stalin, however, am I mistaken or did he not actually kill people just because they were religious. If I am correct, Stalin (like Hitler) did not like religion in general, but he tolerated it. Regardless, the claims by some here, like ARogueTrader, that it is atheists who are primarily guilty of pushing their views on others is absurd.
Please tell me this guy is GA/Thunderbolt or a close friend. Please tell me there are not this many people on the board who do not recognize a legitimate argument! :eek:
Fair enough. But you at least have to agree then that AARogueTrader and others make a rediculous claim when they suggest that it is atheists who are primarily guilty for single-mindedly pushing their views and not respecting opposing viewpoints. There are plenty of disrespectful religious and non-religious people to go around.