Atheists Trusted As Much As ....... Rapists. According to a recent study.
Options
Comments
-
And_So_It_Burns wrote: »What you just described is called weak and strong atheism....
I know, I already said that earlier -
And_So_It_Burns wrote: »agnosticism has NOTHING to do with belief.
With agnosticism, you fail to believe in a ? because you take the stance not to fall on the end of 'belief in a ? '. Even though you have not yet chosen to bounce to the other end of the spectrum and deny gods existence, you fail to believe in a ? either way -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »With agnosticism, you fail to believe in a ? because you take the stance not to fall on the end of 'belief in a ? '. Even though you have not yet chosen to bounce to the other end of the spectrum and deny gods existence, you fail to believe in a ? either way
? dude seriously??? How can you be so stubborn it's not even a matter of subjective opinion? It’s a fact that you're wrong. Just concede.
"With agnosticism you fail to believe"
No you don't. there are plenty of agnostic theist (people who believe in ? ) it's NOT a belief system.....Most agnostics aren’t even atheist they're deist or moderate Christians who think ? (s) lie outside our realm of knowledge.....By definition science can only evaluate NATURAL phenomenon therefore it cannot say anything that lies beyond the realm of nature and ? fits into the definition of super natural. Therefore the system we use to discover things about our world (science) can never say anything about ? and if you believe this than you are an agnostic. This doesn't affect your belief in if a ? exit or not.
Is the status of ? knowable or discoverable by human means: How you answer this question determines if you're agnostic or not
Do you believe that one exist: this is a yes or no question that determines if you’re an atheist or theist -
so far, so good.Jaded Righteousness wrote: »When it comes to ? (s) they are two forms of non belief.
wait, why are we doing this? earlier, you used a dictionary to address the terms. so let's do it again:Jaded Righteousness wrote: »Again,
Passage taken from book, Atheism Explained, David Ramsay Steele:ag·nos·tic
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as ? ) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of ? or a ?
looks like we can definitely use those two different words for two different schools of thoughtathe·ist
: one who believes that there is no deity -
so, i'm trusted as much as. . . Catholics? that's not good.
-
why are we doing this? earlier, you used a dictionary to address the terms.
I didn't use the dictionary. Someone pulled those definitions from an online dictionary and I responded to it. I'm doing that because I'm giving you another opinion plus history and background on the word -
And_So_It_Burns wrote: »"With agnosticism you fail to believe"
No you don't. there are plenty of agnostic theist (people who believe in ? ) it's NOT a belief system.....Most agnostics aren’t even atheist they're deist or moderate Christians who think ? (s) lie outside our realm of knowledge.....By definition science can only evaluate NATURAL phenomenon therefore it cannot say anything that lies beyond the realm of nature and ? fits into the definition of super natural. Therefore the system we use to discover things about our world (science) can never say anything about ? and if you believe this than you are an agnostic. This doesn't affect your belief in if a ? exit or not.
What you're saying is not that you're agnostic on the theory of ? itself but the question of whether or not ? is understandable by human minds. If you've reached that question, most likely you've come to the conclusion that a ? exists. As you said, most of what you're describing are deists or theists who have already decided that a ? exists but are undecided on the question: Is ? understandable? If you're just agnostic on the ? question alone, then you don't claim to believe in a ? , otherwise you would be a theist/deist/whatever. -
well, look, opinion is what it is. the problem with the history/background is that it still doesn't change the fact that there's a clear difference between the positions and that using the different terms allows us to clearly describe what someone's position is.Jaded Righteousness wrote: »I'm doing that because I'm giving you another opinion plus history and background on the word -
i would really like it if you'd express that in a way other than just calling him names in random posts, thoughpsychothug wrote: »I really like it if Jaded would stop ignoring me -
so nobody gon mention that christopher hitchens "the based atheist gawd" just died?!
-
so nobody gon mention that christopher hitchens "the based atheist gawd" just died?!
have you noticed that all the most famous athiests are all near genuis level, Chris hitches, Rich Dawkins, Matt Dillahunty
and all top thiests are retards, Rev Jesse Jackson, Ted Haggard, Stephen Baldwin, Dane Cook -
how was this list of "top theists" compiled?Ajax McJones wrote: »and all top thiests are retards, Rev Jesse Jackson, Ted Haggard, Stephen Baldwin, Dane Cook -
lmao at naming Dane Cook before naming the ? Pope
-
I'm actually at a celebration of Chrisopher Hitchens life with my atheist group right now
-
spiritual rapists physical rapists not a huge leap...
-
Ajax McJones wrote: »have you noticed that all the most famous athiests are all near genuis level, Chris hitches, Rich Dawkins, Matt Dillahunty
and all top thiests are retards, Rev Jesse Jackson, Ted Haggard, Stephen Baldwin, Dane Cook
don't forget steve harvey -
Steve Harvey takes an L (along with most of you people)
http://community.allhiphop.com/showthread.php?105836-Steve-Harvey-takes-an-L-%28along-with-most-of-you-people%29 -
Fazeem Blackall wrote: »spiritual rapists physical rapists not a huge leap...
No such thing as a spirit....
