L
- Status
L
lkddav
Guest
No, you may not dispense with the physical evidence. Provide your sources for eye witness accounts not in the bible.
To my knowledge there are no eye witnesses to jesus christ. Please provide your sources.
les
L
lkddav
Guest
I’ll give 659 that !! 659 reminds me of those women who were enthralled with Charles Manson. For some reason.
les
A
Armor_of_God
Guest
The two terms are related, in that they both refer to one’s view concerning God’s existence.
According to my dictionary:
Agnostic: a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known about the existence of God or about things outside human experience.
Atheist: a person who believes that there is no God.
The former suggests that God could exist, but that there is no way we can know anything about Him, while the latter very definitively asserts that God doesn’t exist.
However, I suppose your comment could be taken to mean that you have no compelling reason to believe in God. My apologies – I did think you were joking around.
Phooney, it’s been about 1000 posts since you suggested the situation, and you originally posed it to Little Mary, and then you based your further questions on her response. I kind of feel like I walked in partway through a discussion.
May I ask … what was the point? Are you trying to elicit a specific response from me?
Well, I must say that I am a little disappointed, and I hope you do have something to suggest to me in a little while. I currently have a few on my list, but work doesn’t allow me much time for “recreational” or “developmental” reading, other than that which is work-related!
The book I would like to recommend to you is “Life of Christ” by Fulton J. Sheen. Please keep in mind that the goal here is to understand, not to believe. So, I ask you to read it with impartiality and with a clinical approach (which I think you will).
That’s alright if it takes a back seat to Kreeft - Sheen was a humble man.
A
_A
Guest
I disagree with your dictionary, AOG. Atheist simply means A(not)theist (Theism is the belief in the existence of one or more divinities or deities. - source Wiki)
Your (and your dictionaries) misunderstanding is understandable, since you are a theist.
Atheism makes no positive assertions (such as “there is no god”). Confusing the matter is the fact that atheists (of course) occasionally make such assertions (such as when I claim that the Yahweh story is simply poor fiction)
Just because someone does not believe in your god does not mean that they assert that there are no gods. It simply means that they don’t believe.
I hope I have helped you to clear up this misunderstanding. If anything is unclear about it, please say so.
1
1234
Guest
The earliest gospel, either Mark or Matthew, dates no earlier than about 63 AM, 30 years after the death of Jesus. This puts it in striking distance of the actual destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AM. Jesus’ predictions’ are felt to be intercalations after the fact.
Also the very nature of the language argues for a late addition. What did Jesus have against Jerusalem? It would welcome his entry on Palm Sunday, and he hadn’t even yet entered Jerusalem. But the Jews did reject Jesus as Messiah after his death, and the early Christians decided to evangelize uncircumcised Gentiles and Greeks after Jerusalem, i.e. the Jews, had rejected them. Whence the creation of Jesus’ rather gleeful ‘prediction’. This statement is like Jesus, an aramaic-speaking Jew, deciding to use a Greek name in a pun (“Peter” = “petras”, Greek for rock) to designate Simon Bar-Jonah as the leader of his band after his death. Did Jesus speak Greek? Know Greek? Did Simon know Greek? Why would Jesus use Greek in raising him to such an honor? Because this passage was written by a Greek speaker long after Jesus’ death, long after the early Christians decided to give up on the Jews and proselytize the Greek-speaking world.
1
1234
Guest
Thanks for the …atheistnetwork.org and www.skeptically.org sites, guys.
useful sources, er…WITH attribution, of course!
useful sources, er…WITH attribution, of course!
P
phooney
Guest
@Armor of God
As A has already pointed out, Atheist merely means without belief in a god, due to the “A” in front of “theist”, which negates the “theist” part of the word.
You’ll notice that Agnostic also has an “A” in front of it, this time negating “Gnostic”, which is derived from some old word(s) regarding knowledge.
Here’s what this means for all of us today:
Agnostic Atheist: “I have no knowledge of a God, and I don’t believe in a God”
Gnostic Atheist: “I know there is no God”
Agnostic Theist: “I have no knowledge of a God, but I believe in a God anyway”
Gnostic Theist: “I know there is a God”
So, just recapping “atheism” and “theism” are 2 different ranges on a scale of belief, “agnosticism” and “gnosticism” are two different ranges on a scale of knowledge.
I am an Agnostic Atheist, no joke, and no apology needed I happily concede that common usage is veering away from the origins of the words.
The second prong was to highlight the point that it makes me feel uneasy that many theists claim to get their ultimate benchmark of right and wrong and overall purpose in life from what is (potentially) a brutal dictator at worst, an uncomprehensible, unknowable entity at middle and a ficticious being at best.
I give these three options because as far as a “brutal dictator” is concerned, I disagree with the overall actions depicted in the bible and I don’t think there has yet been a satisfactory answer to the problem of evil. As far as an “uncomprehensible, unknowable entity” is concerned, a God of Deism is irrelevant to us. And I am currently unable to discern a difference between a God and a ficticious character. I don’t mean for these three options to spawn this thread going off on another tangent, just as explanation for the point I was making.
They are related in their common usage, it is true. However, even your dictionary hints at their meanings in wider applications.
As A has already pointed out, Atheist merely means without belief in a god, due to the “A” in front of “theist”, which negates the “theist” part of the word.
You’ll notice that Agnostic also has an “A” in front of it, this time negating “Gnostic”, which is derived from some old word(s) regarding knowledge.
Here’s what this means for all of us today:
Agnostic Atheist: “I have no knowledge of a God, and I don’t believe in a God”
Gnostic Atheist: “I know there is no God”
Agnostic Theist: “I have no knowledge of a God, but I believe in a God anyway”
Gnostic Theist: “I know there is a God”
So, just recapping “atheism” and “theism” are 2 different ranges on a scale of belief, “agnosticism” and “gnosticism” are two different ranges on a scale of knowledge.
I am an Agnostic Atheist, no joke, and no apology needed
I happily concede that common usage is veering away from the origins of the words.It was a two-pronged point. The first prong was to see if your current level of interactive communication with God was enough evidence for you to do something that is against your (otherwise) better judgement.
The second prong was to highlight the point that it makes me feel uneasy that many theists claim to get their ultimate benchmark of right and wrong and overall purpose in life from what is (potentially) a brutal dictator at worst, an uncomprehensible, unknowable entity at middle and a ficticious being at best.
I give these three options because as far as a “brutal dictator” is concerned, I disagree with the overall actions depicted in the bible and I don’t think there has yet been a satisfactory answer to the problem of evil. As far as an “uncomprehensible, unknowable entity” is concerned, a God of Deism is irrelevant to us. And I am currently unable to discern a difference between a God and a ficticious character. I don’t mean for these three options to spawn this thread going off on another tangent, just as explanation for the point I was making.
Now you’ve made me feel guilty! I have added your suggestion to my wishlist so I can keep an eye out for bargains on the amazon marketplace. 688 pages, nice! For you, I guess I will suggest “Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors” by Carl Sagan. I originally read it purely for enjoyment, but over the course of these three threads, it has been the work I have referenced most often. It has nothing to do with atheism at all, you understand, but it has been indispensable as a source of examples to give to people who think humans are somehow so far removed from animals.
A
_A
Guest
Thanks, phooney. That is better than I put it. I think that there is a similar misuse (it sometimes seems downright disingenuous) of the words ‘faith’ and ‘belief’. I have often been accused of having faith that there is no god. Indeed I conduct my life without checking with a god, but I don’t have ‘faith’, since my actions are not based on belief, but on what I do know.@Armor of God
They are related in their common usage, it is true. However, even your dictionary hints at their meanings in wider applications.
As A has already pointed out, Atheist merely means without belief in a god, due to the “A” in front of “theist”, which negates the “theist” part of the word.
You’ll notice that Agnostic also has an “A” in front of it, this time negating “Gnostic”, which is derived from some old word(s) regarding knowledge.
Here’s what this means for all of us today:
Agnostic Atheist: “I have no knowledge of a God, and I don’t believe in a God”
Gnostic Atheist: “I know there is no God”
Agnostic Theist: “I have no knowledge of a God, but I believe in a God anyway”
Gnostic Theist: “I know there is a God”
So, just recapping “atheism” and “theism” are 2 different ranges on a scale of belief, “agnosticism” and “gnosticism” are two different ranges on a scale of knowledge.
I am an Agnostic Atheist, no joke, and no apology needed
Some folks have been blurring the distinction between the two words, but I think any theist would agree, anyone can believe, faith takes something more.
I have looked at it with the following (admittedly crude) analogy.
If two men are standing atop a high building and both claim that they believe that their god will save them if they jump, they both have belief. If one of them jumps, he has faith.
This worries me, too. I hope that NE or S4J or some other friendly will address this for us.
P
phooney
Guest
The way you seem to define faith is as a “more certain belief than belief alone”. Would you agree with that?
I still don’t see it being used with that meaning anywhere though. I still think the way I defined it as “belief without evidence” fits better with their usage, despite protests! lol
I still don’t see it being used with that meaning anywhere though. I still think the way I defined it as “belief without evidence” fits better with their usage, despite protests! lol
P
phooney
Guest
@A
Indeed, I value their thoughts highly as well!
P
Paul_Munger
Guest
Atheism is not " a lack of a belief in God, nothing more." To discuss topics we are not free to make up our own definitions of words. An atheist is defined as " a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." Atheism is defined as “the doctrine or belief that there is no God.” Randon House Dictionary Second Edition Unabridged 1987.
There is a world of difference between a “lack of a belief” and a “disbelief.” A disbelief in God or a belief that there is no God is an affirmative deliberate act of the intellect; a disbelief is a judgment based on the consideration of some evidence. A mere lack of a belief is not Atheism. Dogs have “a lack of belief in God, nothing more” but they do not have a disbelief in God (or a supreme being) and they do not deny that there is a God.
An atheist does not claim that he does not know if God exists; he claims to know that God does not exist.
There is a world of difference between a “lack of a belief” and a “disbelief.” A disbelief in God or a belief that there is no God is an affirmative deliberate act of the intellect; a disbelief is a judgment based on the consideration of some evidence. A mere lack of a belief is not Atheism. Dogs have “a lack of belief in God, nothing more” but they do not have a disbelief in God (or a supreme being) and they do not deny that there is a God.
An atheist does not claim that he does not know if God exists; he claims to know that God does not exist.
P
phooney
Guest
Well, I’ll have to disagree.
P
Paul_Munger
Guest
Your disagreement with the truth does not change it. To obstinately disagree with the definition of a word is no sign of intellect. You have conceded defeat before you ever entered the auditorium. I leave you to your pain and confusion. Call yourself Humpty Dumpty.
P
phooney
Guest
I agree, my disagreement with the truth wouldn’t change it. Though, you’re hardly giving a fantastic demonstration of intellect if you think the purpose of dictionaries are to dictate all possible meanings of words, also there is hardly a consensus about what these words mean.
Here’s a relevant article for you:
religioustolerance.org/atheist4.htm
And a quick relevant quote from the overview:
“Most of the North American public define an “Atheist” is a person who believes that no deity exists: neither a God, nor a Goddess, nor a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses. This definition is reflected in American dictionaries – not just because most publishers are Christian, but because it is the purpose of dictionaries to follow the public’s word usage. Some individuals who consider themselves Atheists mesh well with that definition. But they may be in the minority. Many, perhaps most, Atheists simply have no belief about deity. For them, Atheism is not disbelief in a deity or deities; it is simply a lack of belief in any of them.”
I’ve already conceded that common usage is veering from the definition I use, but I’ve told you the definition I use and why.
I’m not sure if your 21 year old dictionary has a section on etymology, but it would be worth you looking into, in regards to these words at least, if you want to discuss them.
I’m not in pain or overly confused. Call yourself… the mad hatter?
A
_A
Guest
I agree. Along those lines, would you care to define ‘theism’ for us? Also, could you please tell us what is meant in the English language when an ‘a’ is placed before a word (such as moral/amoral)?
emphasis mine
As you can see, in your dictionary, an atheist can be one who denies. It can also be one who disbelieves.
That is what ‘or’ means in that context.
As your own reference shows, ‘atheist’ can mean either. I still say your dictionary is wrong though. If you look to phooneys signature, you will see a more clear definition.
Yes it is. Belief is theism, non-belief is atheism. Simple, right?
But if we could know the mind of that dog, we would know if it were an atheist or not. Infants are atheist until someone inculcates them with one religion or another.
We disagree, but as I pointed out, your own references agree with me, if you had read them more carefully, you would have seen that.
P
phooney
Guest
Also, I’m pleased to note that the total IQ of the forum has increased by about 100 points, now that the intelligence dampening field generated by a “hyper intellectual” is gone:
CalmDownWisWins
Banned
CalmDownWisWins
Banned
H
Hastrman
Guest
Wrong.
The A- prefix in Greek means None or Not, in a sense contingent on the Greek understanding of binary logic. Acosmicism means “no universe,” not “lack of a belief about the universe”; Agnosticism means “denying knowledge,” not “lacking an opinion about knowledge”. Atheism, then, is “No-God-ism”, the position that there is no God, not, “not being a God-ist-ism”. Sanskrit, which is closer to Greek than Latin is and has the same prefix, has words like “Advaita”, which means “not dualist,” not “lack of a belief about dualism”, and “Anatman” which means “no soul,” not “lack of a belief about souls”.
What many self-described atheists think is irrelevant; they’re using the word wrong.
Of course it’s not surprising to me that people whose philosophy is a bad retread of the Lucretian Atomists (“Nothing exists but particles and space,” in modern terms), and the Epicureans, don’t know any Greek. If they did they might have noticed Socrates and Aristotle refuted their cosmology 2400 years ago.
“Nontheist” means what you think Atheist means.
P
phooney
Guest
Despite how much more you might like to argue against those who positively affirm that there are no gods, all atheism implies is a lack of belief in gods, because all theism implies is a belief in at least one god. The “A” prefix in itself has nothing to do with belief.
A few examples of my own, if you please. Apathy (which I think you originally used, but I see have edited, perhaps because you saw this coming) lack of emotions, not the belief that there are no emotions. Asymmetry, a lack of symmetry, not the belief that there is no such thing as symmetry. Bald, a lack of hair, not a hair colour. Not collecting stamps, a lack of a hobby, etc.
Agnosticism, not “lacking an opinion about knowledge” and by no far stretch of your imagination “denying knowledge” simply the assertion that they, at least, and others perhaps, lack knowledge, with some, admittedly, denying the existence of knowledge by saying it is unknowable. The one thing that all agnostics have in common from those that just don’t know, to those that say it is impossible to know, is the lack of knowledge.
Likewise with Atheism, some say there is no god, the rest of us simply lack a belief in any gods. The one catch-all that all have is a lack of belief in gods. Those that make a positive claim are called “strong atheists”
Socrates and Aristotle, while I give them plenty of credit for their brilliance with the available information, are hardly cutting-edge cosmologists. You might be surprised to learn that there have been advancements in the last 2400 years.
As far as I know, I’d say non-theist sounds pretty much synonymous.
- Status