'Shock' atheists
Options
Comments
-
I dont know... I think your approach is noble and honest...But I dont think its the only way to make a valiant point.
I think theres a hint of satire thats always necessary. I think people respond to irony even if it's somewhat of a ridicule. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »...............I could care less what religion someone is, but once someone starts preaching some ? in front of me I will make fun of them. Or debate them, depending on my mood. And I'm not atheist either.
i kno, ive seen you do that, if thats how you entertain yourself, go for it. im no atheist either or whatever other label people try to box others in -
For people saying that others' beliefs don't have any impact on the rest of us, let's not forget about all the violence brought about in the name of religion, including terrorism and worse full blown wars. Or the attempts to corrupt our young people, whether mentally through the attempted removal of science from the schools or physically in the backrooms of rectories (n/h)
-
PPLSIntiative wrote: »Human Beings are composed of three parts, body soul and spirit this includes those who would deny the existence of the latter two. In my opinion, I believe shock atheists as you call them offend people purposefully because deep down their spiritual nature is restless. Man literally cannot live by the mere material things of the world, they don't sustain him because his soul still thirsts after things.
You see it everyday in the world whether from the rich on down to the lowest of low, people who live solely for the material things have a miserable existence. They are never satisfied, content with what they have even. This is why you see a lot of drug abuse, ridiculous purchases made for the sake of it, and brutal activities. No matter what a man does he cannot quiet his soul even if he denies his existence.
This is why I believe that shock atheists do the things they do. Their spirit is so disquieted, especially in the presence of other spiritual people, no matter what religion, but especially Christians. It is an uncomfortable feeling so in order to alleviate it they must hush the spirituality of others, and take joy in causing doubt where they can.
Offending people is akin to raising a brick wall. They equate atheism to intelligence and spirituality to ignorance. If you can't see it, touch, weigh, measure, hear then it can't possibly exist. Even though through physics we learn that there is more that exists than what a man can measure. However, if you look throughout history of man, many intelligent people were also very spiritual. I won't say Christian , but they acknowledged their spiritual man.
If an atheist were truly what they believe, it wouldn't matter if someone was Christian, buddhist, muslim, or whatever because it doesn't matter. You can rest comfortably in your position because you know at the end of it all it means nothing, everyone fades to black. They can't though because as ludicrous and un-quantifiable and undefinable as it is, the spiritual man still exists and that uncomfortable feeling is because that spirit knows at the end of the mortal life it must return to ? and give an account.
Shock atheist is basically mr grinch, who wants to squelch everyone's spirituality because they cannot face their's. My apologies for the long post, I meant to keep it quick with a simple analogy.
OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You cut me to the soul and I believe! I can't even imagine how a non-believer would receive your words, especially the highlighted and especially the red-lettered words. The truth hurts! It's always right to hurt somebody with truth than to love somebody with lies! Amen. -
Jonas.dini wrote: »For people saying that others' beliefs don't have any impact on the rest of us, let's not forget about all the violence brought about in the name of religion, including terrorism and worse full blown wars. Or the attempts to corrupt our young people, whether mentally through the attempted removal of science from the schools or physically in the backrooms of rectories (n/h)
This is the crux of misunderstanding. None of the ills you mentioned are consistent with the self-professed believers beliefs. This becomes a sore spot dealing with the Hebraic based or Abrahamic faith systems because you have on one hand nut jobs who claim to be based in the afore-mentioned but cherry-pick scriptures as an excuse to exercise their nuttiness. Then on the other hand you have atheist who cherry pick the same scriptures to antagonize any one who takes serious stock in them. I would be generous to say they do this to bolster their positioning but then again a state of DISbelief is one of those absolutes that should not need justification or edification. Either way, the Hebraic texts in their various translations and mistranslations cite things we would consider atrocities in modern times such as indentured servitude, ? and wars. Yet in the same texts there are express prohibition against said activities for the modern reader. The bottom line of those texts is harmony with the Creator and our fellow man. Anything else is extended commentary to get to that point. This becomes obscured and marginalized when the yin and yang of religionists and atheists clash and twist the texts to suit their wants. -
This is the crux of misunderstanding. None of the ills you mentioned are consistent with the self-professed believers beliefs. This becomes a sore spot dealing with the Hebraic based or Abrahamic faith systems because you have on one hand nut jobs who claim to be based in the afore-mentioned but cherry-pick scriptures as an excuse to exercise their nuttiness. Then on the other hand you have atheist who cherry pick the same scriptures to antagonize any one who takes serious stock in them. I would be generous to say they do this to bolster their positioning but then again a state of DISbelief is one of those absolutes that should not need justification or edification. Either way, the Hebraic texts in their various translations and mistranslations cite things we would consider atrocities in modern times such as indentured servitude, ? and wars. Yet in the same texts there are express prohibition against said activities for the modern reader. The bottom line of those texts is harmony with the Creator and our fellow man. Anything else is extended commentary to get to that point. This becomes obscured and marginalized when the yin and yang of religionists and atheists clash and twist the texts to suit their wants.
Atheism is not an absolute belief like religion is, that is a false equivalency. In fact, atheism rejects absolute belief. Saying you don't believe in ? is not the same as saying you believe there is no ? .
And cherry pick or not, the scriptures are full of superstitious and supernatural nonsense that doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny in the least. And to say the truth of these scriptures is harmony and peace is a subjective claim in the same sense that it would be to say that they advocate the ? /murder/molestation of nonbelievers/children. -
Jonas.dini wrote: »Atheism is not an absolute belief like religion is, that is a false equivalency. In fact, atheism rejects absolute belief. Saying you don't believe in ? is not the same as saying you believe there is no ? .
And cherry pick or not, the scriptures are full of superstitious and supernatural nonsense that doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny in the least. And to say the truth of these scriptures is harmony and peace is a subjective claim in the same sense that it would be to say that they advocate the ? /murder/molestation of nonbelievers/children.
I said an absolute DISBELIEF so the first paragraph you wrote does not pertain to what I wrote. if the DISBELIEF is not absolute then you are an agnostic not an atheist.
There are literally scriptures that advocate peace and harmony and there are scriptures that directly prohibit ? , murder and molestation. This is not subjective. This is fact.
Either way, you're arguing against something that can either be viewed as a religious text or a spiritual tool. This has nothing to do with belief or disbelief in the Creator directly and its amusing how much it threatens you to the point that you would attempt to distort realities plainly viewed by anyone with a 4th grade level of reading comprehension and enough patience and honesty to actually read the book(s) they choose to comment on.
Why do you have such strong convictions and comments about something you obviously have not thoroughly and objectively investigated? You shouldn't have to make up stuff about something you don't believe in to affirm your disbelief. There are plenty of atheist forums you can go to. But alas I've visited a few myself and all it is a bunch of high-fiving on gross misinterpretations and distortions of scriptures that everyone in them either never read, partially read or read but did not understand. -
I said an absolute DISBELIEF so the first paragraph you wrote does not pertain to what I wrote. if the DISBELIEF is not absolute then you are an agnostic not an atheist.
There are literally scriptures that advocate peace and harmony and there are scriptures that directly prohibit ? , murder and molestation. This is not subjective. This is fact.
Either way, you're arguing against something that can either be viewed as a religious text or a spiritual tool. This has nothing to do with belief or disbelief in the Creator directly and its amusing how much it threatens you to the point that you would attempt to distort realities plainly viewed by anyone with a 4th grade level of reading comprehension and enough patience and honesty to actually read the book(s) they choose to comment on.
Why do you have such strong convictions and comments about something you obviously have not thoroughly and objectively investigated? You shouldn't have to make up stuff about something you don't believe in to affirm your disbelief. There are plenty of atheist forums you can go to. But alas I've visited a few myself and all it is a bunch of high-fiving on gross misinterpretations and distortions of scriptures that everyone in them either never read, partially read or read but did not understand.
First of all, belief and disbelief are not intellectually equivalent. Second, to be an agnostic is to say that you don't know if it is possible to know if ? (s) exist, to be atheist is to reject absolute belief. There is a subtle but critical difference between rejecting belief in ? (s) and believing ? (s) don't exist.
It is also fact that scriptures, including abrahamic scriptures, have passages that advocate violent and corrupt behavior. So yes they are a mess of contradictions, which is part of the reason that they don't hold up to scrutiny on philosophical grounds.
Seems like you're the one who's threatened, since you have to resort to petty accusations and unfounded assertions. Not that it particularly matters but I've read the abrahamic scriptures and in addition to being bored to tears, I found them not at all compelling on intellectual or philosophical grounds.
Theism and religiosity are not the same, I never said they are, just that in the name of theism religious people do hateful and ignorant things. I think you're actually the one that conflated them by dragging the contradictions of religious texts into a more general point I was making about the disgusting things people do in the name of their ? (s), whether in line with your interpretations of religious texts or not.
I suppose I could go visit atheist forums, but really I'm not interested in spending my freetime discussing it, except when I come in here and see people grossly mischaracterizing atheism as a way to make themselves feel better about their silly religiosity. When that happens I like to set the record straight. -
*Puts on objectivity hat and gets out broadstrokes (n/h) brush*
If you ask me its a few reasons:
1. its because many people's atheism is intertwined with a desire to reject societal norms. A need to rebel. A need to be different and shake ? up.
2. Anger and repression that builds into resentment. Think about it, your one of very few people who don't think any sort of deity exists (so your already alienated), your perceived as a "bad person" or fringe lunatic because of your stance. You constantly look around and see how religion (of course among other things) divides people; and is the basis for a good portion of ? beliefs, stances, laws, mores and taboos. And couple that with the fact that prolly most Atheists came from religious backgrounds; so they may have grown up ostracized and conflicted in their own homes.
3. Perceived intellectual superiority. Atheism, by and large, is considered a stance of the "overt leftists intellectual". Whenever humans hold a value sacred (consciously or subconsciously), whether it be intelligence," morality", sexual prowess, machismo, etc. , we often time are defensive about it and will go to great lengths to prove our mastery of this value. I think many shock atheists enjoy openly challenging and mocking religion because its their way of "proving" their intellectual superiority over theists, especially considering that atheists will know more about religion that theists do.
(and im an atheists by the way) -
this one of the best and most spiritually accruate posts I have ever seen here in the SL or R&R...PPLSIntiative wrote: »Human Beings are composed of three parts, body soul and spirit this includes those who would deny the existence of the latter two. In my opinion, I believe shock atheists as you call them offend people purposefully because deep down their spiritual nature is restless. Man literally cannot live by the mere material things of the world, they don't sustain him because his soul still thirsts after things.
You see it everyday in the world whether from the rich on down to the lowest of low, people who live solely for the material things have a miserable existence. They are never satisfied, content with what they have even. This is why you see a lot of drug abuse, ridiculous purchases made for the sake of it, and brutal activities. No matter what a man does he cannot quiet his soul even if he denies his existence.
This is why I believe that shock atheists do the things they do. Their spirit is so disquieted, especially in the presence of other spiritual people, no matter what religion, but especially Christians. It is an uncomfortable feeling so in order to alleviate it they must hush the spirituality of others, and take joy in causing doubt where they can.
Offending people is akin to raising a brick wall. They equate atheism to intelligence and spirituality to ignorance. If you can't see it, touch, weigh, measure, hear then it can't possibly exist. Even though through physics we learn that there is more that exists than what a man can measure. However, if you look throughout history of man, many intelligent people were also very spiritual. I won't say Christian , but they acknowledged their spiritual man.
If an atheist were truly what they believe, it wouldn't matter if someone was Christian, buddhist, muslim, or whatever because it doesn't matter. You can rest comfortably in your position because you know at the end of it all it means nothing, everyone fades to black. They can't though because as ludicrous and un-quantifiable and undefinable as it is, the spiritual man still exists and that uncomfortable feeling is because that spirit knows at the end of the mortal life it must return to ? and give an account.
Shock atheist is basically mr grinch, who wants to squelch everyone's spirituality because they cannot face their's. My apologies for the long post, I meant to keep it quick with a simple analogy. -
Jonas.dini wrote: »First of all, belief and disbelief are not intellectually equivalent. Second, to be an agnostic is to say that you don't know if it is possible to know if ? (s) exist, to be atheist is to reject absolute belief. There is a subtle but critical difference between rejecting belief in ? (s) and believing ? (s) don't exist.
It is also fact that scriptures, including abrahamic scriptures, have passages that advocate violent and corrupt behavior. So yes they are a mess of contradictions, which is part of the reason that they don't hold up to scrutiny on philosophical grounds.
Seems like you're the one who's threatened, since you have to resort to petty accusations and unfounded assertions. Not that it particularly matters but I've read the abrahamic scriptures and in addition to being bored to tears, I found them not at all compelling on intellectual or philosophical grounds. A rejection of absolute belief = ABSOLUTE DISBELIEF. Can we move past that point now please?
Theism and religiosity are not the same, I never said they are, just that in the name of theism religious people do hateful and ignorant things. I think you're actually the one that conflated them by dragging the contradictions of religious texts into a more general point I was making about the disgusting things people do in the name of their ? (s), whether in line with your interpretations of religious texts or not.
I suppose I could go visit atheist forums, but really I'm not interested in spending my freetime discussing it, except when I come in here and see people grossly mischaracterizing atheism as a way to make themselves feel better about their silly religiosity. When that happens I like to set the record straight.
The prefix dis- implies a lack of something therefore belief and disbelief are polar opposites. Opposites need one another to exist. but this is something different. I don't understand why you continue to explain things about the nature of belief to me as I clarified in my last two posts that I am referring to DISBELIEF being absolute. You're basically trying to argue with me on this point but you're actually agreeing. Weird.
The Abrahamic texts have a sequence of events to them and I challenge you to find a point where corrupt and violent behavior is advocated. As so as you find that I can show you a passage that follows that in the sequence which nullifies future implementation of such dubious means...the future being now. And most instances of violence cited are advocated against people who at that time had ? , child molestation, human sacrifice and slavery as essential elements of their society and persuading surrounding tribes and nations to follow suit a swordpoint. But i know thats pretty archaic to you given that science and the secular humanist system of thought has solved those ills in modern times. Ooops...wait a minute....theres even more of that ? now. hmmmm.....
Name a contradiction and i will show you you're wrong and force you to resort to fallacy to refute me.
Theism and religiosity have nothing to do with the existence of the Creator. In particular, theism refers directly to the Greek concept of Theos whic cannot be applied to understanding the nature of spirituality wholesale as the sum total of the earth's people who subscribe to some form of spirituality are not Greek nor do they cognate according to a Greek cultural context. Hell, by that true understanding..i'm an atheist if we want to get all linguistic with it.
People can do wicked things because they say Mickey Mouse told them to or their family dog. This is a problem with individuals and the things in their environment that have influenced their perception. The blame falls on the person, not the excuse they give or the inspiration they cite. The basic texts they misuse encourage peace and harmony.
People like you like to debate ad infinitum about minutia like this to cover up the fact that after all snide remarks, intellectual snobbery and flawed analyses are uttered there is nothing that you can cite as a benfeit to your absolute disbelief. All you can say is it will be a lack of the disgusting things done in the name of religion, as if no religion will magically make people make better choices. Yeah right. Religion or lack thereof will not do it.
As for you going out of your way to come to a forum which is supposed to be halfway about religion to "set the record straight"- that is equivalent to me finding people who avoid black cats, pick four leaf clovers and carry horseshoes and ridicule them while asserting that I have good luck without following their beliefs. In reality, i dont give a ? what they think or do. My disbelief in superstition is absolute. Now if there happens to be an individual that believes collecting human heads brings good luck then we have a problem. That individual should be dealt with. The concept of luck that he believes in that I don't is inconsequential.
And you atheists are on the same level of stupidity as religious folks. Your snarkiness does not = intelligence. You are so convinced you are right but your mode of thought has yet to produce right results. -
The prefix dis- implies a lack of something therefore belief and disbelief are polar opposites. Opposites need one another to exist. but this is something different. I don't understand why you continue to explain things about the nature of belief to me as I clarified in my last two posts that I am referring to DISBELIEF being absolute. You're basically trying to argue with me on this point but you're actually agreeing. Weird.
The Abrahamic texts have a sequence of events to them and I challenge you to find a point where corrupt and violent behavior is advocated. As so as you find that I can show you a passage that follows that in the sequence which nullifies future implementation of such dubious means...the future being now. And most instances of violence cited are advocated against people who at that time had ? , child molestation, human sacrifice and slavery as essential elements of their society and persuading surrounding tribes and nations to follow suit a swordpoint. But i know thats pretty archaic to you given that science and the secular humanist system of thought has solved those ills in modern times. Ooops...wait a minute....theres even more of that ? now. hmmmm.....
Name a contradiction and i will show you you're wrong and force you to resort to fallacy to refute me.
Theism and religiosity have nothing to do with the existence of the Creator. In particular, theism refers directly to the Greek concept of Theos whic cannot be applied to understanding the nature of spirituality wholesale as the sum total of the earth's people who subscribe to some form of spirituality are not Greek nor do they cognate according to a Greek cultural context. Hell, by that true understanding..i'm an atheist if we want to get all linguistic with it.
People can do wicked things because they say Mickey Mouse told them to or their family dog. This is a problem with individuals and the things in their environment that have influenced their perception. The blame falls on the person, not the excuse they give or the inspiration they cite. The basic texts they misuse encourage peace and harmony.
People like you like to debate ad infinitum about minutia like this to cover up the fact that after all snide remarks, intellectual snobbery and flawed analyses are uttered there is nothing that you can cite as a benfeit to your absolute disbelief. All you can say is it will be a lack of the disgusting things done in the name of religion, as if no religion will magically make people make better choices. Yeah right. Religion or lack thereof will not do it.
As for you going out of your way to come to a forum which is supposed to be halfway about religion to "set the record straight"- that is equivalent to me finding people who avoid black cats, pick four leaf clovers and carry horseshoes and ridicule them while asserting that I have good luck without following their beliefs. In reality, i dont give a ? what they think or do. My disbelief in superstition is absolute. Now if there happens to be an individual that believes collecting human heads brings good luck then we have a problem. That individual should be dealt with. The concept of luck that he believes in that I don't is inconsequential.
And you atheists are on the same level of stupidity as religious folks. Your snarkiness does not = intelligence. You are so convinced you are right but your mode of thought has yet to produce right results.
Beautiful Post Brother powerful and Concise this thread is producing a lot of ether... -
Jonas.dini wrote: »lmao, foh with that third grade ? b
LOL. :)This is not something that I created. I first learned about this a couple of months about when I was debating someone on another forum. If you don't know about the belief of nothingness then maybe you should do some more homework.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/yellow_number_fire/science/5474
Stephen Hawking says universe created from nothing
http:www.feandft.com/59%20The%20Absurdity%20of%20Nothingness.htm
...The idea of "zero" or nothing, requires the existence of "something" in order for it to have meaning. -
And you atheists are on the same level of stupidity as religious folks. Your snarkiness does not = intelligence. You are so convinced you are right but your mode of thought has yet to produce right results.
they dont even realize how much they have in common. -
(1)The prefix dis- implies a lack of something therefore belief and disbelief are polar opposites. Opposites need one another to exist. but this is something different. I don't understand why you continue to explain things about the nature of belief to me as I clarified in my last two posts that I am referring to DISBELIEF being absolute. You're basically trying to argue with me on this point but you're actually agreeing. Weird.
The Abrahamic texts have a sequence of events to them and I challenge you to find a point where corrupt and violent behavior is advocated. As so as you find that I can show you a passage that follows that in the sequence which nullifies future implementation of such dubious means...the future being now. And most instances of violence cited are advocated against people who at that time had ? , child molestation, human sacrifice and slavery as essential elements of their society and persuading surrounding tribes and nations to follow suit a swordpoint. But i know thats pretty archaic to you given that science and the secular humanist system of thought has solved those ills in modern times. Ooops...wait a minute....theres even more of that ? now. hmmmm.....
Name a contradiction and i will show you you're wrong and force you to resort to fallacy to refute me.
Theism and religiosity have nothing to do with the existence of the Creator. In particular, theism refers directly to the Greek concept of Theos whic cannot be applied to understanding the nature of spirituality wholesale as the sum total of the earth's people who subscribe to some form of spirituality are not Greek nor do they cognate according to a Greek cultural context. Hell, by that true understanding..i'm an atheist if we want to get all linguistic with it.
People can do wicked things because they say Mickey Mouse told them to or their family dog. This is a problem with individuals and the things in their environment that have influenced their perception. The blame falls on the person, not the excuse they give or the inspiration they cite. The basic texts they misuse encourage peace and harmony.
People like you like to debate ad infinitum about minutia like this to cover up the fact that after all snide remarks, intellectual snobbery and flawed analyses are uttered there isnothing that you can cite as a benfeit to your absolute disbelief. All you can say is it will be a lack of the disgusting things done in the name of religion, as if no religion will magically make people make better choices. Yeah right. Religion or lack thereof will not do it.
(2) As for you going out of your way to come to a forum which is supposed to be halfway about religion to "set the record straight"- that is equivalent to me finding people who avoid black cats, pick four leaf clovers and carry horseshoes and ridicule them while asserting that I have good luck without following their beliefs. In reality, i dont give a ? what they think or do. My disbelief in superstition is absolute. Now if there happens to be an individual that believes collecting human heads brings good luck then we have a problem. That individual should be dealt with. The concept of luck that he believes in that I don't is inconsequential.
(3) And you atheists are on the same level of stupidity as religious folks. Your snarkiness does not = intelligence. You are so convinced you are right but your mode of thought has yet to produce right results.
It would be a profound waste of my time to respond to all this, so I'll just go with the bolded:
(1) You have a way with semantics, yet don't seem to understand that it does not follow from the existence of linguistic yin and yang that the two are logically equivalent, which in this case they are not.
(2) Yes, a forum for talking about religion, including the many ways in which its adherents reject logic.
(3) Sad and failed attempt at equivalency. The fools c/sing you want to believe this is true so bad... and you can tell the people you roll with whatever you want but you and I know what's goin on.
Far as going back and forth with passages from scripture, that would be, as I noted above, a profound waste of my time. But that should be neither here nor there since the crux of your original statement was to say that theism and religiosity are not one in the same. -
LOL. :)This is not something that I created. I first learned about this a couple of months about when I was debating someone on another forum. If you don't know about the belief of nothingness then maybe you should do some more homework.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/yellow_number_fire/science/5474
Stephen Hawking says universe created from nothing
http:www.feandft.com/59%20The%20Absurdity%20of%20Nothingness.htm
...The idea of "zero" or nothing, requires the existence of "something" in order for it to have meaning.
Yea dogg, I get the reference, but your weak oversimplification and implication that this is a matter of faith is literally something that a third grader with half an ounce of critical thinking skills can see through. -
Jonas.dini wrote: »Yea dogg, I get the reference, but your weak oversimplification and implication that this is a matter of faith is literally something that a third grader with half an ounce of critical thinking skills can see through.
It's simple. Atheists use ambiguity, disinformation and intellectual prowness to confuse and belittle people of faith. But the facts all boils down to Atheist believing that the Universe were created by nothing and people of faith believing that the Universe was created by a ? who is eternal - having no beginning and no ending. IMO they are both hard to believe but I choose to believe in ? not because of the bible but because some of the tribes in Africa claim that they seen how ? created the world and the Universe with their own eyes through rituals -
atheists are as much devoted to their Beliefs as theists are to there own it is sad how they are just extremes of one another...Hyde Parke wrote: »they dont even realize how much they have in common. -
Fazeem Blackall wrote: »atheists are as much devoted to their Beliefs as theists are to there own it is sad how they are just extremes of one another...
good to see others realize this. i said that awhile back, they the opposites of the same stick, and got all kinds of backlash from the atheist. they'd like to "believe" that they have no belief, but they do just as much as the believers do, else they wouldnt have so much to say about it. -
Fazeem Blackall wrote: »atheists are as much devoted to their Beliefs as theists are to there own it is sad how they are just extremes of one another...
Atheism isn't a belief, it is the rejection of a belief -
It's simple. Atheists use ambiguity, disinformation and intellectual prowness to confuse and belittle people of faith. But the facts all boils down to Atheist believing that the Universe were created by nothing and people of faith believing that the Universe was created by a ? who is eternal - having no beginning and no ending. IMO they are both hard to believe but I choose to believe in ? not because of the bible but because some of the tribes in Africa claim that they seen how ? created the world and the Universe with their own eyes through rituals
Advocating something based on evidence (science) >>> making up something to explain the unknown -
I wish I could change my screenname to abraham, since I done sonned so many religious people in this thread
-
Jonas.dini wrote: »Atheism isn't a belief, it is the rejection of a belief
which is also a belief that holds its own concepts on the disbelief of a belief(s) that rejection in itself, is a concept, which is a belief -
Hyde Parke wrote: »which is also a belief that holds its own concepts on the disbelief of a belief(s) that rejection in itself, is a concept, which is a belief
False, but nice try...
Rejecting an unfounded belief does not constitute a belief.
noun /biˈlēf/
beliefs, plural
An acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists
- his belief in the value of hard work
- a belief that solitude nourishes creativity
Something one accepts as true or real; a firmly held opinion or conviction
- contrary to popular belief, Aramaic is a living language
- we're prepared to fight for our beliefs
A religious conviction
- Christian beliefs
- I'm afraid to say belief has gone
- local beliefs and customs
Trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something
- a belief in democratic politics
- I've still got belief in myself -
Jonas.dini wrote: »False, but nice try...
Rejecting an unfounded belief does not constitute a belief.
nice try at the smoke & mirrors act on posting definitions on belief, but failing to explain your own disbelief which is in question. now expound on your statement there^^^ what is the foundation for your rejection of said "unfounded belief"?
