atheist by definition is a BELIEF THERE IS NO GOD. not a I KNOW THERE IS NO GOD. big difference in these two statements.for you the atheist to make the statement there is no god,you would have to be all knowing.100% knowledge in the universe.since mankind knows about 2% of all the knowledge in the universe the so called atheist must admitt that god could possibly exist in the other 98% knowledge that he or she doesn't know.so really ALL atheist are really agnostic.to say no is intellectual suicide.
2007-06-27 17:17:10 · 31 answers · asked by ronbo 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
show me your god
2007-06-27 17:20:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Debate Tip #1: Let your opponents define their position for themselves. They probably know it better than you.
Atheism. A-theism. Not theism, or without theism. So we don't believe in god. This is different from believing there is no god. This small detail renders the rest of your paragraph moot, but there are some other things I'd like to address on it.
I do think that believing there is no god is also a faith-based decision, but that doesn't mean it's not possible. If you're assuming that all atheists follow the scientific method, you're mistaken. We're an extremely diverse group. If you feel it's possible to believe there is a god, why is it not also possible to believe there isn't.
Also, by your assertions, it also seems like it would be impossible to actually be a theist. By analogy, you would have to know beyond any doubt that there is a god and that certain happenings weren't just chance. As it's impossible to physically detect god, you'd likely be working off of perceptions and interpretations. However, if you're only interpretting that 2% you mentioned earlier, why would you be so sure your conclusions are correct? If you only 'believe' in god, not 'know' him, isn't that also an agnostic position by your definition?
In my understanding, agnostic generally not only implies that you don't know whether or not god exists, but you also feel it would not be possible to learn this without some clear divine intervention. It's more of a 'without information' position than an 'undecided' one. So even if all of your other assertions held, not all atheists would fall into this group.
2007-06-28 01:41:54 · answer #2 · answered by Phil 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While I agree with you, there's no need to get worked up. This "question" is posted fairly often, though I think people ignore it.
The only intellectually honest position between atheism and theism is agnosticism. Those who say they are "pretty sure" there is or isn't a God are almost as bad as those who say there definitely is or isn't. With no evidence either way, since God could just be some grand supernatural being that we cannot perceive, there can be no certainty whatsoever.
HOWEVER...
Some Gods/gods can be disproven if they contradict themselves, and many of us firmly believe (to most others I'd say "know") that the Christian God does contradict itself, at least by traditional beliefs. The same applies to a few others, but since the definition of God is up for debate (see ignosticism), there can be no certainty about a generic God-force because the possible definitions of this are infinite.
Edit: Remember, people: an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. This is all the more true for a being that does not necessarily need to show itself. I would like to add, however, that I'm not sure about your use of percentages. I assume they were more to make a point than to be accurate, so I'll let it slide. I think people need to focus more on answering the question than picking apart its insignificant details.
2007-06-28 00:29:10 · answer #3 · answered by Skye 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
So you can read the dictionary. Good for you.
But see that no religion shares all the same beliefs either. Atheists have many different beliefs, the core of which is belief there is no god.
Atheism is also the doctrine that there is no god.
""I am an atheist, out and out. It took me a long time to say it. I've been an atheist for years and years, but somehow I felt it was intellectually unrespectable to say that one is an atheist, because it assumed knowledge that one didn't have. Somehow it was better to say one was a humanist or agnostic. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect that he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time."
--Isaac Asimov
2007-06-28 00:38:59 · answer #4 · answered by Rogue Scrapbooker 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I never claimed that there is no god.. but that i dont believe in him ... which is what you just said.. *tho i am no atheist* i'm pretty open minded. I'm just content .. content with life. and if there were a god.. i wouldnt' care..
but the same goes for you on your comment. Many Christians say THERE IS A GOD.. not just A GOD.. but THEIR god.
isn't that just the same ?
of the 100s of religions in the world.. and come claiming that THEIR GOD is the rightful one.. have you ever considered the possibility that you are JUST AS wrong.. or just as right as any other religion ?
2007-06-28 01:01:49 · answer #5 · answered by nola_cajun 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well lets see here, where did you go wrong? Well, lets not even touch spelling or grammar. Okay, Atheists don't claim that they know God doesn't exist, they just don't believe he does. Its an absence of beliefs. Do you know that Zeus doesn't exist? How could you possibly know such a thing? You can't! But you don't believe in him. You have no belief in Zeus just like I don't have a belief in your God. Get it?
2007-06-28 01:22:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
So what's your point?
Oh, and your "definition" is incorrect. Atheist by definition is a non-belief in God, not a belief that there are no gods.
People who believe there are no gods are a subset of atheism, not the definition of it.
Feel free to keep dredging up those Strawman arguments though.
2007-06-28 02:37:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You speaking for >all< mankind and their collective knowledge? Where are you getting your supporting data to validate the statement that mankind knows but 2% of all the knowable knowledge in the universe?
They don't have to be all knowing, they just have to believe the facts. There is no tangible proof of God anywhere.
So people (Atheists) need to accept your conjecture as the singular and absolute truth...because >you< say so?
2007-06-28 00:26:51 · answer #8 · answered by Always Curious 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I don't know of a nice way to say this, so i won't try:
YOU ARE F*CK!NG STUPID!
One, this isn't a question, so there is nothing to answer. Therefore I will just make statements too like the fact that a simple trip to the dictionary would give you a clue:
a·the·ist /Ëeɪθiɪst/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ey-thee-ist] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
By your retarded logic, there is a 98% chance that I could not know whether Santa Clause exists. You give christians a bad name by acting like a straight tard.
2007-06-28 00:34:36 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Did you know, 98% of statistics are made up?
Look, atheism is the belief there is no god. Agnosticism is the belief and acceptance that we can't prove there's a god or not. So, really, ALL atheists (well, most of 'em, anyway) are really atheist.
2007-06-28 00:22:17 · answer #10 · answered by Diavola 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Wrong again. Atheism means that you DO NOT believe that gods exist. I do not claim that only your god doesn't exist, I claim it of all gods. It is not so much a belief but waking up to reality.
And I suppose of course that you don't KNOW that pokémon don't really exist, it's merely your belief right?
2007-06-28 05:10:52 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋