Magus55

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god


Main Entry: athe·ism
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-"i-z&m
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French athéisme, from athée atheist, from Greek atheos godless, from a- + theos god
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity

So lets see. Atheists disbelieve in the existence of a deity. Agnostics do not commit to the existence or the nonexistence of a deity. Nope sorry, not the same as atheism. Agnostics have no opinion on whether God does or doesn't exist, atheists and theists do. You can play word games all you want. Atheist and Agnostic are 2 entirely different worldviews.

And even if agnostic was included in with atheist, I still have proven that atheists and agnostics combined do not equal 25% of the worlds population, so either way, you are wrong.


Maybe you should read the dictionary, because yes you can be nonreligious and still believe in God.

Main Entry: 1re·li·gious
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Old French religieus, from Latin religiosus, from religio
1 : relating to or manifesting faithful devotion to an acknowledged ultimate reality or deity <a religious person> <religious attitudes>
2 : of, relating to, or devoted to religious beliefs or observances

Deists believe in a supreme being, but certaintly don't have faithful devotion to that being since that being has no impact on their life.


Well, adherents.com is the most commonly used source for statistics on religious adherents, so its good enough for our purposes of proving your argument wrong.


Good for western Europe. You would still need 500 million to a billion Christians to have all deconverted in the last couple years for your argument to be valid.


Good to hear. Although I have proven your personal estimate wrong, so you should probably retract that as well and just admit you don't have a clue how many atheists and Christians there are.

Magus55

Not the NTS fallacy, because I haven't stated who is a true Christian and who isn't, although that is a pretty dumb fallacy since the Bible does explain what to expect from a Christian.


So in other words, you're agreeing that adherents.com is completely wrong, and that all evidence I presented is invalid? The only argument in question that isn't correct in the first place is Yanjo's. I provided data and evidence that shows why his numbers are wrong. You could at least give some credit and get off the "ill support any atheist whether they are right or not, because theists suck regardless" bandwagon.

Magus55

Funny how it happens very rarely. And my point is the glaring bias on this board towards the opinion and arguments of atheists. Even if the theist does have a valid argument ( which I do believe I do in regard to Yanjo's incorrect statistics), its pretty much worthless since you're gonna get shot down anyway merely for being a theist.

Starboy

Why don't you try an experiment? Create a new login for IIDB under a different name and post under that name and then after a while reveal who you are and let us see if you get any different treatment.

Starboy

Magus55

Won't change anything unless I pretend to be an atheist.

Warthur

Under most circumstances, they do have a right.

However, supposing a child of theirs is sick, and will die without modern medicine. Do they really have the right to decide to let the child die?

DISSIDENT AGGRESSOR

OK! You "win" against Yanjo, * Now explain to me why I should believe you, Magus55, in regards to salvation?
How can I know for sure you are not someone just claiming to be christian? If these days are indeed the end of time, how can I be sure you are not a false prophet?
You claim God has spoken to you, how can I be sure it was really, truly Jesus and not Satan?

You see, alot of children tell me about Jesus, what they've learned from who ever may rule them.

So do alot of ex-drunks and drug abusers, who, to me have no credibility, I'm sorry to say.

I've also been around people who are mentaly ill and claim that they are Jesus!

Of course there are also people who are only in it for the money.

Being in belief that the world is only 6,000 years old and everyone [well a huge %] believe Christianity started 2,000 years ago should show that God has not revealed his existence like he once did, not counting rainbows and lolipops, except through an enormous amount of extremists in the three major faiths especially this and the last century is it any wonder noone is going to accept what you reveal on your say so?

Unless you have come here questioning what you think you know, your posts are going to be mocked and/or ridiculed, nobody here can be 100% sure of who or what you are about.

Yahzi

Then what the fark did they need Jesus for!!!

Here the fundies are telling us the reason our society is in moral decay is because we don't have Jesus, and the minute they find a society that isn't in moral decay, they deduce the problem is no Jesus!

reprise

How is this different than the rights which we allow to "civilised" people? People's argument with the few remaining people on this particular island who have quite consciously rejected both Islam (>80% of the people living on the island are nominally Muslim) and Christianity (17%) is that they are in some way depriving their children of access to modern technology and health benefits because they have rejected "civilisation".

This is not some primitive backwater about which we are talking. This if the fourth largest island in Indonesia. These are not "primitive tribes". If in the US people are allowed to accept or reject the "advantages" on the basis of their belief system, then why in the heck should we deny that same "right" to those who live in Indonesia? If you think that these people are "savages" who "don't know what is good for them", then perhaps you'd like to read up on the history of this particular island and the political protests which the "primitive people" have organised against the logging agreements made by the Suharto regime.

What makes you think that these people reject modern medicine? Their island - as one of the larger tourist islands in Indonesia - has quite excellent health care facilities compared to Indonesia in general.

I'm stunned, but not totally surprised, by the assumptions which have been made about these particular people who live on one of the most "civilised" islands in Indonesia. There is nothing in their belief system which prevents them from accessing the available "advantages" of "civilisation" - I find it incredibly rude that people make such assumptions about Indonesia.

Yangja Isuko

on the contrary, you are confusing weak and strong atheism. weak atheism, or 'standard' atheism, simply is the *lack* of belief in god and makes no claim as to knowledge on the matter, and as such is little different than agnosticism. i understand you like to have 'infallible' sources, such as adherents.com, dictionaries, or the bible. but the simply fact is there's no such thing. i can't think of any atheists/agnostics who would disagree with me on the definitions as i put them forth except those who are perhaps new to the disbelieving paradigm.




my dictionary defines it as the belief in a higher power(s), therefore, you cannot be non-religious and still believe in god.




most commonly used by who? you?





you have not proven my personal estimate wrong, you have simply dragged in the estimates of an organization who'se results in the matter are questionable. and until someone goes door to door to every person on the planet and beats the truth about their religious belief out of them, neither one of us will prove anything here.