[On a thread asking if atheist is spelt 'Atheist' or 'atheist']
I have never met a true atheist. To me, to be an atheist you would have to have PROOF of the non-existence of God. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as an atheist. That would move them into the agnostic category.
58 comments
So...you've only met strong atheistic leaning agnostics who acknowledge that they cannot prove that God doesn't exist, but that that is scarcely relevant since you cannot do the same with any other god either, and that there is a vanishingly decreasingly chance that any given god exists, just like any other supernatural entity.
That you think that these people are significantly at odds with the definition of "atheist" and we should just abandon the label altogether due to this betrays your own ignorance.
We have absolute proof that god does not exist.
We all got together and decided to hide the truth from you, since we are such a large cabal.
If fact, your pastor has the proof that god doesn't exist.
I have never met a true aunicornist. To me, to be an aunicornist you would have to have PROOF of the non-existence of Unicorns. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as an aunicornist. That would move them into the agnostic category.
I guess by using your logic, there is no God because you have no proof, and no, a poorly written, cobbled together book written by goat herders over thousands of yrs ago isn't proof.
It's spelled atheist.
And I have proof - Your lack of proof.
And, as long as someone believes there is no God, they are an atheist, regardless of whether they have proof.
"I have never met a true Christian . To me, to be a Christian you would have to have PROOF of the existence of God. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as a Christian . That would move them into the agnostic category."
Now do you realize how stupid you sound?
Just because you are an idiot that doesn't understand the word, the meaning or the application of the word.. don't try to make yourself feel better by saying they don't exist. I'm here to tell you that we do.. and not only do we exist, we are gaining more numbers every day. Soon.. unfortunately not soon enough, your silly little myth will be relegated to where ALL myths should be.. in an English Lit class.
This atheist lives his life as if there were no gods. It's quite simple.
Yeah, I hear all the gawdy-god bibble-babble, but I have no use for the babble or the babblers. Deal me out, m'kay?
So, as a Christian, you can show proof of God's existence?
Atheists (capitol A because it is at the start of a sentence in this case) do not believe in any of the 6718 "one-true" gods invented by man, angels, devils, demons, heavens, hells or purgatories.
Under that logic, there is no such thing as Christians either, since they can't prove that god exists. So everyone is an agnostic, then? Fine by me.
PS: Burden of proof, fucker.
I have never met a true theist. To me, to be a theist you would have to have PROOF of the existence of God. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as an theist. That would move them into the delusional category.
Fixed.
I can't "prove" the non-existence of God. You can't "prove" the non-existence of atheists.
Are we at an impasse?
Not really. A negative cannot be empirically verified, simply because it would require that all possible observations had been made. This is Hume's problem of induction. However, statements can be assessed by two other criteria (see Karl Popper, 1956): falsification and corroboration. A negative can be falsified by a single positive observation. On the other hand, if many opportunities to make a positive observation have occurred without a single positive observation, this increases the corroboration of a hypothesis.
No that we have gotten that out of the way, I will have a Chicken Fiesta burrito, two crunchy tacos, and three packets of your "fire" sauces.
To me, to be an atheist you would have to have PROOF of the non-existence of God.
Are you truly so clueless? All that's required to be an atheist is to observe the lack of evidence of the existence of a deity. You theists started this game by claiming that a deity does exist and that you are intimately acquainted with his wishes and desires. So, since you claim there is a deity the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of its existence.
"I have never met a true agnostic . To me, to be an agnostic you would have to have PROOF of the non-existence of atheist and theist proofs. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as an agnostic . That would move them into the meta-agnostic (aka "agnostic about agnosticism") category."
Hey, this is fun.
Nobody can prove that God does or doesn't exist. You can only have faith. You're basically saying there's no such thing as Christians (or any other religion) either, since they can't prove God exists also. Therefore, that would make everyone on the planet agnostic, and religion nonexistent. Therefore you defeat the purpose in even calling yourself agnostic since religion wouldn't exist.
You fail.
Theoretically, he's right in some ways. Religion is a belief system. If you believe in God, then you are a Christian of some sort. If you believe there is no god at all, you are an Atheist. If you acknowledge there is no proof either way, that there might be or there might not be, you just really don't care either way, then you are agnostic.
Guess what buddy....there IS undeniable proof of the ultimate NON-existence of god.
The bablefish.
goes a bit like this.
"I refuse to prove that I exist" says god
and god instantly dissapears in a puff of logic.
THEREFORE - GOD DOES NOT EXIST
amen the end
Boom Shankar
Burden of proof..
It's yours!
And I'm sure you believe you can prove God exists, thereby making you a "true" Christian.
It's a matter of faith for you, it's a matter of lack of faith for them. That's all. You can't redefine someone out of existence in some weird schoolyard game.
one can't prove a negative in a finite time:
I am theoretically an agnostic, but for practical purposes, atheist. I can't accedpt a god so small as the Xian, muslim, or jewish one.
I can understand Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva as elements in the lifecycle of everything, but they're still human built.
one can't prove a negative in a finite time:
I am theoretically an agnostic, but for practical purposes, atheist. I can't even discuss a god so small as the Xian, muslim, or jewish one.
I can understand Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva as elements in the lifecycle of everything, but they're still human built.
Proof? OK, hey you almighty Yahveh, smiter of sinners and whatever, you have 10 seconds to smite me with a lightning bolt and make the Earth open up and swallow me whole and send me to hell (and that fundie-beloved lake of fire)..1..2..3..4..5..6..7..8..9..10..... hello? anybody there? no? ok
There's your proof, have a nice day.
Never met a true atheist? Don't get around much out of your own insulated clique, do you.
I have never met a true aatheist. To me, to be an aatheist you would have to have PROOF of the non-existence of the proof of the non-existence of god. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as an aatheist. That would move them into the agnostic category.
Well, in that case:-
I have never met a true theist. To me, to be an atheist you would have to have PROOF of the existence of God. Since you cannot prove it, therefore, there is no such thing as an theist. That would move them into the agnostic category.
Which takes us nowhere at all
But we don't need to disprove the God of the Bible. Since it's by far, the largest claimed proof for the Christian God, we just have to disprove it.
The Bible itself isn't consistant, therefor disagrees with itself, it also contains many right out falsehoods such as Pye being just 3 and Bats being Birds.
The Bible is a collection of fables, many collected from cultures who had no Jahoveh, some whom had pantheons of Gods. You can't wash Mithra away no matter how you try.
It's badly translated from Hebrew (and other ancients) to Greek and some cases badly translated again to English, worse, it's purposely rewritten and edited, further removing it from previous writtings.
So there is no reason to even remotedly believe in the God of the Bible or anything that's in the book.
An atheist is a person who BELIEVES there is no god.
We have as much proof as you have, but we also have the science that shows that a god is unnecessary. We win.
“I have never met a true atheist.”
“To me, to be an atheist you would have to have PROOF of the non-existence of God.”
"Since you cannot prove it,”
“therefore, there is no such thing as an atheist.”
“That would move them into the agnostic category.”
Modern misuse of agnostic means someone who thinks both sides have equally good arguments. That’s not me.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
