Do theists not comprehend the concept of disbelief in God? (Jews, miracles)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I think is funny is when a theist says Atheist don't believe in God the Atheist says "No! No! It's not that. It is we have a disbelief in God."
Of if you say "Atheist don't believe God exists" they exclaim "No! It's not that! It is we have a disbelief God exists." As if that is really any different.
You know why there should never be an atheist scientist? Because they can't prove God does not exist. At most, all scientists can only be Agnostic. In fact, all Atheists should be Agnostic because no one can prove God does not exist. The best they can do is to say "we just don't know if God exists or not." There must be a possibility He does.
What I think is funny is when a theist says Atheist don't believe in God the Atheist says "No! No! It's not that. It is we have a disbelief in God."
Of if you say "Atheist don't believe God exists" they exclaim "No! It's not that! It is we have a disbelief God exists." As if that is really any different.
You know why there should never be an atheist scientist? Because they can't prove God does not exist. At most, all scientists can only be Agnostic. In fact, all Atheists should be Agnostic because no one can prove God does not exist. The best they can do is to say "we just don't know if God exists or not." There must be a possibility He does.
Where you are messing up BCD is by getting mired down in the erroneous idea that "GOD" is limited to just Religious Deities. "GOD" is not limited to just Religious Deities.
You are even further stuck...by limiting your focus to just "BibleGod". There are many Religious Gods.
No one is named "GOD". "GOD" is a title that can be assigned to any entity that comports definitively and is perceived as such.
Everyone is aware of the objective existence of the "GOD" that I perceive. And it unequivocally and irrefutably comports with the known expert definition of "G-O-D".
True, there are many different definitions of God. The one you often use is so amorphous and far from what anybody else means as to be useless.
What I think is funny is when a theist says Atheist don't believe in God the Atheist says "No! No! It's not that. It is we have a disbelief in God."
Of if you say "Atheist don't believe God exists" they exclaim "No! It's not that! It is we have a disbelief God exists." As if that is really any different.
You know why there should never be an atheist scientist? Because they can't prove God does not exist. At most, all scientists can only be Agnostic. In fact, all Atheists should be Agnostic because no one can prove God does not exist. The best they can do is to say "we just don't know if God exists or not." There must be a possibility He does.
Or, you could use the words properly and understand that most atheists are, by strict definition, agnostic atheists. Which is to say that they are agnostic because they do not have complete knowledge because there is always some possibility of error, and they are also atheists because they believe that there is no God because of the lack of evidence.
The same holds for you. I suspect that you view yourself as a gnostic theist, or somebody who claims absolute knowledge that a God exists. It seems more reasonable to be an agnostic theist, somebody who admits that they might be wrong because of uncertainty, but believe God exists anyway.
Or, you could use the words properly and understand that most atheists are, by strict definition, agnostic atheists. Which is to say that they are agnostic because they do not have complete knowledge because there is always some possibility of error, and they are also atheists because they believe that there is no God because of the lack of evidence.
The same holds for you. I suspect that you view yourself as a gnostic theist, or somebody who claims absolute knowledge that a God exists. It seems more reasonable to be an agnostic theist, somebody who admits that they might be wrong because of uncertainty, but believe God exists anyway.
Still it is improper to make the claim by atheists that there is no God because of the lack of evidence.
You see, a scientist would never make such a blunder, or at least shouldn't because he/she knows that just around the corner, evidence could appear proving God exists. Or the proof may not come in his/her lifetime but maybe after they die proof could arrive. Or maybe the proof is right before their eyes but they just can't see it. It should always remain open-ended . . . just in case.
I have not heard of the group called Atheist/Agnostic. It was either Atheist or Agnostic.
I know I'm not wrong about God's existence because I have His spirit in me.
There was a big debate here about a year ago about someone saying "Atheists believe there is no God." And the Atheists jumped all over it and said its not like that. "We have a disbelief in God." I tried to show there is no difference. That if one has a disbelief in God that therefore it logically follows they believe there is no God. But it got nowhere because atheists come from knuckle draggers and that line of humans can't think things through like those who come from Adam and eve.
Still it is improper to make the claim by atheists that there is no God because of the lack of evidence.
You see, a scientist would never make such a blunder, or at least shouldn't because he/she knows that just around the corner, evidence could appear proving God exists. Or the proof may not come in his/her lifetime but maybe after they die proof could arrive. Or maybe the proof is right before their eyes but they just can't see it. It should always remain open-ended . . . just in case.
I have not heard of the group called Atheist/Agnostic. It was either Atheist or Agnostic.
I know I'm not wrong about God's existence because I have His spirit in me.
The problem you exhibit with this statement is that you don't know the definitions of the words Atheist and Agnostic.
An Agnostic is "a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable."
An Atheist is "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings."
Therefore, it is perfectly consistent to say Atheist/Agnostic. As an Atheist, a person does not believe that God exists, but, as an Agnostic, believes that ultimate knowledge about the existence of God is not possible.
From reading what the members say in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum, I have come to the conclusion that Atheist/Agnostic is the most common self-descriptor they have.
There was a big debate here about a year ago about someone saying "Atheists believe there is no God." And the Atheists jumped all over it and said its not like that. "We have a disbelief in God." I tried to show there is no difference. That if one has a disbelief in God that therefore it logically follows they believe there is no God. But it got nowhere because atheists come from knuckle draggers and that line of humans can't think things through like those who come from Adam and eve.
I remember that discussion differently. Someone started off by saying that Atheists say that there is no God, and were corrected by another member by inserting the word "believe" into the statement. There is certainly a difference between a belief and an absolute statement.
As a matter of fact, this is thoroughly discussed in the FAQ that the members asked me to post in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum. (It's a good place to go read and find out what they actually think.)
The problem you exhibit with this statement is that you don't know the definitions of the words Atheist and Agnostic.
An Agnostic is "a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable."
An Atheist is "a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings."
Therefore, it is perfectly consistent to say Atheist/Agnostic. As an Atheist, a person does not believe that God exists, but, as an Agnostic, believes that ultimate knowledge about the existence of God is not possible.
From reading what the members say in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum, I have come to the conclusion that Atheist/Agnostic is the most common self-descriptor they have.
But that is basically what I was saying concerning Atheists and Agnostics.
If a person states God's existence is unknown and unknowable, they are an Agnostic. That is basically what I was saying when I stated: ""we just don't know if God exists or not."
And the Atheists on these boards said: "We have a disbelief in God." If they got that wrong, you need to let them know that they don't know the definition of Atheist.
All you did was expand upon the definition I stated which does not disprove the definitions I gave for Atheist or Agnostic.
I remember that discussion differently. Someone started off by saying that Atheists say that there is no God, and were corrected by another member by inserting the word "believe" into the statement. There is certainly a difference between a belief and an absolute statement.
As a matter of fact, this is thoroughly discussed in the FAQ that the members asked me to post in the Atheism & Agnosticism forum. (It's a good place to go read and find out what they actually think.)
Tomato Tomawto.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
