Answerer

Well, is it the habit of the people here to bully newcomers?

Eudaimonist

What's an antitheist?

David Gould

theist plus antitheist gives us syntheist...

'syn' from synthetic, meaning 'manufactured' or 'made up'

the syntheist becomes the new theist, thus we have a manufactured or made up theist.

If we then apply this to the ism form (theism plus antitheism gives us syntheism) we get 'made up religions'.

As Christianity is not the orignial 'theism' it must be a 'syntheism' - made up, or false religion.

Draygomb

Diggler

One need not have All knowledge to know things 100%. Logic can show that there are no square circles with 100% accuracy. Likewise Logic can show that God doesn't exist.
<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000081" target="_blank">Click Here For Proof</a>

tronvillain

Well, some god hypotheses may be logically impossible, but not all of them are.

Draygomb

The ones that are logically possible wouldn't be worthy of the title. You can define god as toasted marshmallows but I'm not going to follow a religion based on that.

Diggler St.

David Gould:

I'd like to comment about your statement.

You're right about antitheism! I hade a recent explanation given to me by Zero Angel concerning being antitheist and being agnostic. I believe that something (who knows...) started everything, some infinite source. I don't believe, however, it is this God Xians are ranting about. Apology to all.

Megatron

Seems to me you are using the term "antitheist" where "nontheist" would fit better, or (since you state you believe in the possibility of first cause, but do not define the cause) the more appropriate term "agnostic".

Nevermind - crossposted.

[ February 27, 2002: Message edited by: Zero Angel ]</p>

Megatron

Now, the definition questions being out of the way, for the time being, I will take the use of "antitheist" and translate it to the intended meaning, that being "nontheist".. and reply forthwith.

Told you this is the place you'd learn.

So, with this statement you are confirming a belief in first cause, but not in a conscious deity, such as the Xian "God".

First cause is not a real subject of contention here, and not directly relevant to the existence of God at all, as long as it is not used as some farfetched method of proving the existence of God. (Fundies love to do this...)

So there's no bad logic here either.

Again, belief or lack of belief in first cause is not directly relevant.

The only real problem is when faulty logic is used to link first cause to God's existence, which you haven't done here.

As far as the statement being true or false, there is no proof for or against first cause. One chooses to believe or not to believe in it... or in my case, chooses indifference, as it is, as stated above, irrelevant.

It is your choice to believe or disbelieve in a first cause, but you must logically accept that there is no proof.

</strong>

Non-sequitur, really - however, true.

Note, however, that atheism does not dictate that there is absolutely no possibility that a god exists.

It is simply a lack of belief that one exists.

There is a subtle, but strong regardless, difference between the following statements:

"God does not exist"
"I don't believe God exists"

Atheism, by definition, is the second, but not the first.

</strong>

Agreed. One can assert and/or believe it to be fact, but I can (and will) assert that it would be impossible to prove beyond any doubt.

</strong>

All true statements.

</strong>

No lack of belief can be self-refuting (nor can a lack of belief refute anything else).

Again, atheism is the lack of belief, not the denial of possibility.

</strong>

Absolutely.

</strong>

Good, because then you would be doing what the fundies do: Giving an absolute definition to an unproven, unknown, and undefined "absolute being" in the image which best serves the one giving the definition.

If there is a god, he's probably rather offended by this... wouldn't you be?

I think my lecture on "antitheism" vs. "nontheism" should take care of that.

And welcome to the boards, bro.

Blu

Hi,

I think I understand what Diggler St. was trying to say. How can an atheist say there is no God when an atheist just like all human beings do not have enough knowledge to say there is not...

Could there be a inherent reason why "God" or "Gods" is deeply imbedded in human culture? Could there be a possibility that we need to believe in a deity or creator as a species?

I would be interested to know what created Atheism or why atheism is for you as an individual.