It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Atheist, why are you so offended at anothers display of faith?

page: 13
18
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

This is the topic: you telling me I am wrong when I tell you disbelief is a form of belief.

Not believing in something is agnosticism, believing in absence is atheism.

Simple




posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: TerryDon79

This is the topic: you telling me I am wrong when I tell you disbelief is a form of belief.

No. The topic is asking why atheists are offended by someone displaying faith.


Not believing in something is agnosticism, believing in absence is atheism.

Simple


You're still wrong. I'm an atheist. I don't have a belief as there is no evidence either way.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Prezbo369

You have expressed many times on these boards your belief in another mythology, of more recent formation, and claimed that since this particular one you happen to believe is based on extrapolation of observation (offspring differing from their progenitors in several ways not including species) other explanations as to the origin of both life and surroundings should be discarded, to paraphrase politely.


Ive accepted the scientific theory of evolution if that's what you mean, but this has nothing to do with claims of ghouls and ghosts (or 'creators') or how life formed. You're getting pretty desperate.....even more so



Therefore you belong to the subcategory of militant atheists and I keep reminding you that your own belief, while your prerogative to have and propose, is nothing more.

Atheism being the belief in the absence of god, it is a belief.


It's the lack of belief in whatever a 'god' is, and not the positive belief that 'gods' do not exist. This is basic logic....



"Atheism" as you later presented, in the angle of lack of anything beyond material phenomena, isn't atheism but agnosticism: www.oxforddictionaries.com...


Wrong....for the 6th or 7th time.....

In this context, agnostics are atheists as they lack belief in gods.....


Disbelief is to belief what dislexia is to lexia: an other form of lexia.


Your logic is so broken, is the lack of something also another form of that same something?

Is my lack of Lamborghinis a form of Lamborghini?
edit on 21-3-2016 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:10 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Your beliefs and lack thereof are your prerogative.

Atheism is a belief in the absence of the divine, theism is a belief in its presence, and agnosticism is the abstention from the question.

So your three sentences are contradictory: you don't have a belief for lack of evidence either way you describe agnosticism, yet identify as atheist, which is a clear cut position on the question, and claim that I'm wrong about my previous phrasing of the same.

This isn't a fun exercise for either of us, but I do feel responsible for pointing this out in case other people who base their opinions on language without understanding the structure thereof may be swayed into this semantic drift you're insisting upon.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369




It's the lack of belief in whatever a 'god' is, and not the positive belief that 'gods' do not exist. This is basic logic....


Your position from this very post is this




this has nothing to do with claims of ghouls and ghosts (or 'creators') or how life formed.


Which perfectly illustrates your "positive" belief that there is no god




Is my lack of Lamborghinis a form of Lamborghini?
.

I'm going to assume based on your use of the word "logic" that this is a sincere question:

no

similarly, your lack of theism is not a form of theism

However, if you believe this car does not exist, you express a belief



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: wisvol
Atheism is a belief in the absence of the divine, theism is a belief in its presence, and agnosticism is the abstention from the question.


Incorrect once again, you do realise that when you pull the definitions of words from your rear end they dont have any connection to reality right?


This isn't a fun exercise for either of us, but I do feel responsible for pointing this out in case other people who base their opinions on language without understanding the structure thereof may be swayed into this semantic drift you're insisting upon.


Ill agree that you are responsible for continuously spreading false and incorrect information purely because it's what you want to be true...



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

This has gotten rediculous.

From Oxford dictionaries
"Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods"



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   
It's probably more that we see all the evil done in the name of your gods and your solidarity with it.

You can't say you're not in solidarity with it, because if you weren't, you wouldn't have your name associated with such horror.

If my group of friends were murdering pedo-cannibals and I never turned them in, but hung out with them, offered them recipes and cooking tips...you'd assume I was in total solidarity with them, right? It's only logical.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Prezbo369

Your position from this very post is this

Which perfectly illustrates your "positive" belief that there is no god



This may or may not be true, yet it changes nothing in regards to the definition of atheist or agnostic...a dishonest tactic for sure



I'm going to assume based on your use of the word "logic" that this is a sincere question:

no


Then how do you manage to conclude that a lack of belief is a belief????

edit on 21-3-2016 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369




Then how do you manage to conclude that a lack of belief is a belief????


I don't: lack of belief isn't belief, while belief in absence is.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Hushabye




You can't say you're not in solidarity with it, because if you weren't, you wouldn't have your name associated with such horror.


I have started a church that bears your name: how can you not be in solidarity with it, since your name is associated with it?



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

Nobody has argued for 'belief in absence'......except you....



This is so very typical of creationists......



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369


You have repeatedly stated your belief in absence, and therefore are this type of atheist.

Calling agnosticism atheism is now sanctioned by linguistic authorities, and that leaves this distinction veiled, however your own position of belief in absence is clear, and while your prerogative, does not diminish the quality of the position as a belief.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369

For precision's sake: the specific branch of atheism you belong to, with its own cosmology, fits the same dictionary's definition of faith perfectly.

And while your faith in the big bang and "evolution" taken as 1, as opposed to "evolution" as 2:


The process by which different kinds of living organism are believed to have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth

2The gradual development of something: the forms of written languages undergo constant evolution


is your prerogative and does not offend me, it is indeed interesting to note your reaction to other beliefs including mine.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Prezbo369
You have repeatedly stated your belief in absence, and therefore are this type of atheist.


Even if this is true....so what?

It has nothing to do with the definitions we've discussed and so is just an attempt at distraction on your part, very dishonest as I said...


Calling agnosticism atheism is now sanctioned by linguistic authorities, and that leaves this distinction veiled, however your own position of belief in absence is clear, and while your prerogative, does not diminish the quality of the position as a belief.


Once again my own personal position is irrelevant, your incorrect definitions and dishonest methods however are not.
Like I said, very typical and nothing that hasn't been seen over and over ad nauseam from other creationists as they have literally nothing else to offer.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369




Once again my own personal position is irrelevant, your incorrect definitions and dishonest methods however are not. Like I said, very typical and nothing that hasn't been seen over and over ad nauseam from other creationists as they have literally nothing else to offer.


Glad to know you too see it as irrelevant.

Incorrect definitions and dishonest methods, you say?

[citation needed]

As for creationists having nothing *else* to offer, we don't offer what you take from it, but do have gladly shared opinions anyone willing to consider if not accept may benefit from, be it only from a historical and sociological perspective.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: Prezbo369

Glad to know you too see it as irrelevant.


SO why bring it up at all?

Incorrect definitions and dishonest methods, you say?

What you don't want to change the topic to my personal beliefs when we're talking about definitions?

Oh you want to attempt to deny this is what you did and demand proof?....



As for creationists having nothing *else* to offer, we don't offer what you take from it, but do have gladly shared opinions anyone willing to consider if not accept may benefit from, be it only from a historical and sociological perspective.


So all creationists have to offer at all, is opinions?

Why on earth should anyone care about someone's opinion? especially those tainted by a deep desire for their magical beliefs to be true despite there being no evidence?

Makes sense that you'd be one....



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369




So all creationists have to offer at all, is opinions?


Yes, opinions based on our agreement with a written theory, not unlike your opinions based on your own agreement with another written theory.

Some opinions are closer to fact than others of course, and determining which without resorting to the peremptory attitude you constantly display is a prerequisite of the scientific study of any topic.



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   
a reply to: wisvol

Thank you for that...it got where it was supposed to go

I gotta be honest - you could've made up anything then thrown in a few Christopher Robin quotes and I wouldn't know the difference

Was interesting reading all the same

:-)



posted on Mar, 21 2016 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Thank you for the kind review, much appreciated.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join