What does how you live you life have to do with anything? We are talking about atheism strictly and not agnosticism.

You said yourself before that if you don't believe in God your belief is that there is no God. That is why the hobby analogy is applicable and why I brought it up. It is exactly the same principle replacing one word. I would agree with you if we were not strictly discussing atheism point.

I would conditionally agree, but I think the definitions simply over-lap, like atheism does with non-theism depending on your choice of words.

I think we should agree to disagree. This is going nowhere and i've lost my cool. We are not achieving anything and I have no reason to desire to argue with you further.

Was that really necessary? Serious question are you under the age of 20?

I guess this is a place of all levels of intellect and background. Did I expect too much?

Again, you accuse Afro of elitism, yet say things like this?

Are you trolling me or something or are you actually THAT much of a hypocrite?

I'm trolling you. Should probably have put a smiley after that.

Serious question, does it make any difference?

You argue exactly the same way notorganic does.
"You didn't answer my irrelevant question"
*points a, b and c*
"But you didn't answer my irrelevant question"
*points d, e and f*
"But you still haven't answered my irrelevant question"
*points h, i and j*
"You don't know what you're on about fuckface, you're a moron and you still haven't answered my question, clearly I win"
*repeat points a through j while pointing out how ridiculous your question is*
"I'm going to repeat my first point over again".

:roll: Pot meet kettle.

That's like saying "football is not a sport. If it weren't for man's invention of balls, the game of football wouldn't exist". What a stupid statement.

Can you play nicely?

No, poor analogy. Generally, language doesn't define non-actions as an action.
Have you heard of atheiastrologists (people who don't believe in astrology)? Me neither, hence no such word.

Enough.

On topic?

It's "antiastrology". How did you manage to combine 'athism' and 'astrology' together and come out with that drivel? You're smarter than that, champ! Go back and read what I said about the etymology of 'atheism'.
And there are even books about antiastrology. And a quick google will disprove your assertion.

You've missed the point. Not sure what you don't get. Try it this way - have you heard atheleprechaunism? Me neither, as we don't need to define someone who doesn't believe in leprechauns.

Okay :lol:

So you're not going to say why you think everyone believes in something?

I think you'll find that KC is smart enough to realise that there's no point arguing with someone who is clearly not going to be swayed by anything.

A lesson you could perhaps learn

I didn't realise you asked me to say so, I thought you were just having a go at me. I don't really have a reason tbh, I just think that it's human nature for everyone to have a set of beliefs, whether or not they see them as beliefs. We all like to think that there's something out there that's bigger than us, some kind of logic or purpose or order to things. Beliefs are not solely related to religion. As RJL identified, I'm not looking for an argument, and I'm not really seeking to change your mind either, since you don't seem to be open to that.

What Kiwichick said.

Edited by jlm8695: 19/1/2013 01:58:32 PM

Ah shit it's spreading...

I'm not having a go at you. Apologies if you thought so, felt like I had been repeating myself for 2 pages.

I'm not looking to argue I was curious as to why you think what you do. I accept your opinion. I think it is hard to tell these days, it's impossible to ignore religion. I wonder if someone was born in a secure environment without any influence, whether they would develop beliefs. I would imagine finding out would be unethical though.

That's because athleprechaun isn't a word. Nor is Leprechaunism. #-o For fucks sake man, 'a-' meaning "without" or "not", and "theism" meaning "god". You can't just add "ath" to the start of words to suggest that you don't believe in it. I athyouropinion.

So what you're saying is that there's no such thing as atheism. Since we don't have words to describe things we don't do. Except we do. "What did you just do?" "nothing".
"did you sign up for that?" "I'm ineligible."

benelsmore, do you believe in god?

All good, I wasn't completely sober so I didn't really feel like reading the last few pages of people going around in circles.

I have to say, I'm hardly impartial in my opinion since I was born and raised a Catholic, and the majority of my extended family are pretty into religion.
I think that the presence of religion is something that's closely tied to humanity, and our curiosity of the world around us. We're constantly seeking to explain things that we can't possibly understand, and never will fully be able to comprehend. Anyway, I'm going off on a tangent here.

For lack of a better definition I guess i'd be agnostic or a non-theist. I see no evidence for or against God. I am open to evidence providing it doesn't come from an old book or someones dreams.

I have considered that people have made the claim of God, and cannot substantiate their claim without using evidence of absence by saying "I can't prove to you that God exists but you can't prove that he doesn't," or similar. I would think that God does not exist until it can be proven otherwise and in doing so placing the burden of proof on the person who makes a claim, but I don't know, torn on this. My life over the past year has been far too busy for me to explore my own spirituality. Work in progress.

I completely and utterly reject anything man says about God (bibles, Qurans etc.).

It was a yes or no question buddy.

Do you believe in god?

Whilst I agree with your explanation it does concern me. We seem to seek a quick fix to our problems. If it weren't for a select few, we'd probably still think the earth was flat, that thunder was god being angry and that the planet has been around for between 10000 and 40000 years. It's like these deities were invented to please those without much endeavor to consider whilst the curious considered other possibilities.

To answer either way would be grossly misleading one way or another and a poor reflection of my beliefs or lack there of.

Perhaps you'd like to re-think your question?

It just goes to show how much we've progressed though when things like that that were once commonly accepted now sound completely ridiculous to believe. Our knowledge will always keep expanding as we keep searching for answers and discovering more questions that need to be answered. In the past religion got in the way of science, and perhaps we would've progressed faster without it, but these days those who are religious don't have to present "because God made it that way" as an answer for everything, and those who are scientific don't necessarily have to reject the existence of a deity.

Some of the best scientists in the world are spiritual. Progress is good, but sometimes it seems as though the big 3 (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) get left behind by the progression of secular society. I guess the homosexuality is the debate of the day, much like slavery was during the American civil war.

It can only be a good thing that belief in God is not restricted to a yes or no answer.

Not really. I'm not asking for any context, I'm asking for a simple yes or no.

He can't give a simple yes or no, because it's not a simple question for him.