Check out some similar questions!

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 05:47 AM

Yeah and we did establish that so I suppose this 'topic' is unofficially closed

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 05:59 AM

Originally Posted by N0help4u

yeah and we did establish that so I suppose this 'topic' is unofficially closed

Hmmmmm I wonder why you are so eager for this topic to be closed...
If it is closed for you : fine. Than we won't see you back reacting here anymore.
And - although you may think that would be a great loss to humanity - many will feel otherwise.
Why would others not be allowed to continue here in this discussion ?

:D :rolleyes: :p ;) :D

·

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 06:05 AM

I did use the word UN[officially AND I DID state that there is nothing more to add to my question which has gone off topic which YOU yourself criticize me for on YOUR posts
SO
Hmmm I wonder why you want to keep this topic open when there is nothing more to add to
Answering my question without being off topic or repetitious??
So continue with your discussion but if it is off topic then DON'T criticize my being off topic on your posts or
I WILL refer back to this post:rolleyes: :D

NeedKarma · Jul 15, 2008, 06:09 AM

NOhelp,
You can ask a mod to close the question since you are the original asker.

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 06:11 AM

BUT I am waiting with great anticipation to hear Cred0's great words of wisdom :D

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by N0help4u

I did use the word UN[officially

Hereby my apologies. I did not realize it was your question.
Still I find it an interesting subject...

:rolleyes:

·

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 06:26 AM

Basically I started this to get Christians to realize that their going on and on trying to prove God is a waste of time because as I have always said you can not prove God but as you can see a few here DO try to. As has been stated AND I have stated many times God could be standing right in front of some non believers and atheists and they would STILL deny he exists so what is the point of debating objective/subjective.

I will not even argue the age of the earth because as I have said before I believe the earth and whatever else was created before the 6 day creation. Like a phase 1 and 2
That is my belief and to me it adds up.

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by N0help4u

.... could be standing right in front of some non believers and atheists ....

Non believers are atheists !

And yes : a most probably non-existing entity could stand in front of someone and be invisible. Everything is possible, though not very likely.

:)

·

NeedKarma · Jul 15, 2008, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Credendovidis

Non believers are atheists !
·

Not entirely true. NOhelp is also a non-believer: there are many gods that she does not believe in.

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 06:42 AM

I believe in God I just don't care to get into all the debates and I see no need to try and prove anything.
I will state what I believe every now and then. I will say the Bible says every now and then. I just don't see the point in the endless disagreeing and everybody going away still believing what they did in the first place.

I figured Cred would be the first to say there is a distinction between non believer and atheist because when people say "I knew an atheist that became a Christian" he is the first to say that they were not really an atheist then. So if they weren't really an atheist and they became a Christian what would they have been then?

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 07:02 AM

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Not entirely true. NOhelp is also a non-believer: there are many gods that she does not believe in.

Atheism
A Theism
A= no or without
Theism is belief in god/gods
Atheism means no belief in a god or gods or being without belief in a god or gods.

The term Non-believer does NOT refer to only one (Christian) god. It refers to all gods.
The term means : no belief in god/gods.

Hence therefore a Non-believer is an Atheist, and an Atheist is a Non-believer.

:)

·

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 07:11 AM

Originally Posted by N0help4u

I figured Cred would be the first to say there is a distinction between non believer and atheist because when people say "I knew an atheist that became a Christian" he is the first to say that they were not really an atheist then. So if they weren't really an atheist and they became a Christian what would they have been then?

Why do you - once again - try to put words in my mouth ?

People can change their mind... Agnostics are actually acknowledging that they do not know what is "true".

But in essence : if people are really fully convinced of their world view, they would never change it. That goes for both theists and atheists !

:)

·

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 07:16 AM

I remember you saying that years ago on Answerway when somebody said something about atheists someday believing in God. Your reply was about real atheists would never become Christians.
So, at any rate, however you want to word things... wouldn't an agnostic be considered a non believer and distinguished from non believing atheists --which was my point of distinction in the long run.

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by N0help4u

I remember you saying that years ago on Answerway when somebody said something about atheists someday believing in God. Your reply was about real atheists would never become Christians.

But where is the context of that statement ?
And yes : really convinced Atheists will remain Atheists, just as really convinced Theists will remain Theists (well : in general of course).

Originally Posted by N0help4u

So, at any rate, however you want to word things......wouldn't an agnostic be considered a non believer and distinguished from non believing atheists --which was my point of distinction in the long run.

There are three different groups in respect to religion :

1 - Theists : those who believe in god/gods.
2 - Atheists : those who do not believe in god/gods.
3 - Agnostics : those who can not decide if god/gods exist.

Personally I am somewhere in group 2 leaning towards group 3 : based on the (lacking) evidence I do not believe in the existence of god/gods. I also do not see any need for their existence. The "Oxham's Razor" effect , I suppose...

And I doubt if ever there will be real objective supporting evidence for any of these positions.

:)

·

N0help4u · Jul 15, 2008, 07:42 AM

Okay points taken
But my point is that I used the word non believe instead of agnostic
Because I have a hard time thinking of the right word at times

michealb · Jul 15, 2008, 10:01 AM

"I contend that we are both atheists, I just believe in one less god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you'll understand why I dismiss yours".

sassyT · Jul 15, 2008, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by michealb

"I contend that we are both atheists, I just believe in one less god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you'll understand why I dismiss yours".

Why don't you give credit to Stephen Roberts for this quote?

a·the·ist (ā'thē-ĭst)
n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

According to the definition of atheist, I am not an athiests so I think Stephen roberts made a foolish statement. :rolleyes:

sassyT · Jul 15, 2008, 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by lobrobster

So let's just cut to the chase. Are you saying that YOU know more than 98% of scientists? Because it's a fact that AT LEAST that number will tell you the earth is 4 billion years old.

It's also a F-A-C-T that a similar percentage strongly supports the Theory of Evolution as the best explanation for the diversity of life we see today (although they would also admit to not knowing how life was first sparked into existence).

So what on earth makes you think that you, SassyT, knows more than 98% of all scientists? Don't you think you're being just a tad bit arrogant and full of yourself? It's like me claiming I could've hit more homers tonight than Hamilton's 29 in the derby. Please....

Lol... ***Sigh*** you really amaze me. I don't know why this simple concept is so hard for you to grasp. The majority of Scientists BELIEVE the earth is 4.3 billion years because they BELIEVE the assuptions they use as a basis for their investigation, are accurate. Are the assumptions used in the methods of dating the earth accurate?? NOBODY KNOWS and there is NO WAY of VERIFYING the VALIDITY OR ACCURACY of these ASSUMPTIONS.
Let me remind everyone what an assuption is

As·sump·tion (ə-sŭmp'shən)
n.
The act of taking to or upon oneself: assumption of an obligation.
The act of taking possession or asserting a claim: assumption of command.
The act of taking for granted: assumption of a false theory.
Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition:
Presumption; arrogance.
Logic. A minor premise

I am not arrogant, all I am saying is the 4.3 billion year date is not a 100% FACT and any honest scientist will tell you this. Many scientisits believe the SIX assuptions used are accurate.. they have no way of knowing.
IF the assuptions are in fact accurate then, yes the earth is 4.3 billion years however like I have said 100 times there is no way to verify the accuracy of these six assuptions. If all of the six assumptions are correct, then the resulting dates are correct. However if even one of these assumptions is wrong, then the resulting dates are erroneous.

So if you believe the earth being is 4.3 billion years old is a FACT that means you have FAITH that the assuptions used are accurate because you don't KNOW that they are accurate.

michealb · Jul 15, 2008, 03:30 PM

I didn't give him credit because I didn't remember who said it and I didn't have the time to look it up. I did however remember the quote. Didn't realise I had do to a bibliography for my work.

Showing again that you don't have a decent education. Which I guess it's not your fault, it's really the fault of our school systems and public policy. That's a topic for another time though.

a·the·ist (ā'thē-ĭst)
n.
One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods.

Let me explain in a way that you might understand.

SassyT disbelieves and denies the existence of Zeus. There for SassyT is an atheist when it comes to worshipping Zeus.

SassyT disbelieves and denies the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. There for SassyT is an atheist when it comes to worshipping FSM.

Do you understand the quote now?

Credendovidis · Jul 15, 2008, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by michealb

SassyT disbelieves and denies the existence of Zeus. There for SassyT is an atheist when it comes to worshipping Zeus.

It all depend on how you define a Non-believer and an Atheist.

Note that the term "denies the existence of" is not a correct description of either a Non-believer or an Atheist. This incorrect description may be caused by the pressure of the religious majority in mankind. Some Non-believers and Atheists indeed deny the existence of god/gods, but the majority of them does not.

The correct description of non-believer is "One who does not believe in god/gods".
That excludes all people who believe in one or more god/gods.

The correct description of an Atheist is "One who has no belief in god/gods or is without belief in god/gods. (There is a slight difference between these two).

Conclusion : a Non-believer is an Atheist, and an Atheist is a non-believer.

All that Christians do is believe in one more God than Non-believers/Atheists do. (Did I have to give credit to someone for this quote?? )

:rolleyes:

·