Why I'm an atheist...

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by 420Joey
I was not blathering anything intangable in terms of no physical or materalistic evidence and the protrude of naturalism in terms of something had to commence to begin...

"And this is your brain on drugs."

 

[LucidDreamer]

The rhetorical difference between disbelief and belief in a negative is not relevant to the definition of Atheism.

Theism/Atheism deal with belief. The Theist believes that a deity exists. The Atheist EITHER does not believe in the existence of a deity OR believes that deities do not exist.

Gnosticism/Agnosticism is a separate school of thought from Theism/Atheism.

Gnosticism/Agnosticism deal with knowledge. A Gnostic is one who claims to know that a deity exists. An Agnostic claims to have no knowledge about the existence of a deity.

Confused yet?

A Gnostic Theist is one who believes in a deity and claims to know that the deity exists. Typically devoutly religious people fall into this category. They claim their knowledge comes from fulfilled prayer, prophecy or miracles.

An Agnostic Theist is one who has a belief in the existence of a deity but does not claim to know this for sure. They are often skeptical about religious documents, such as the Bible, but refuse to accept the idea of an uncaused first cause, i.e. the Big Bang, without divine intervention.

A Gnostic Atheist is one who does not believe in a deity (or believes that no deity exists) and claims to know that no deity exists. This is sometimes referred to as Strong Atheism. Their knowledge derives from scientific evidence that refutes religious claims.

An Agnostic Atheist is one who does not believe in a deity (or believes that no deity exists) but does not claim to have knowledge regarding the existence of a deity. This is sometimes referred to as Weak Atheism. The Agnostic Atheist is content to leave the burden of proof (knowledge) on those who make the claims regarding the existence of a deity.

 

[wesmorris]

Originally posted by LucidDreamer
The rhetorical difference between disbelief and belief in a negative is not relevant to the definition of Atheism.

Theism/Atheism deal with belief. The Theist believes that a deity exists. The Atheist EITHER does not believe in the existence of a deity OR believes that deities do not exist.

Gnosticism/Agnosticism is a separate school of thought from Theism/Atheism.

Gnosticism/Agnosticism deal with knowledge. A Gnostic is one who claims to know that a deity exists. An Agnostic claims to have no knowledge about the existence of a deity.

Confused yet?

A Gnostic Theist is one who believes in a deity and claims to know that the deity exists. Typically devoutly religious people fall into this category. They claim their knowledge comes from fulfilled prayer, prophecy or miracles.

An Agnostic Theist is one who has a belief in the existence of a deity but does not claim to know this for sure. They are often skeptical about religious documents, such as the Bible, but refuse to accept the idea of an uncaused first cause, i.e. the Big Bang, without divine intervention.

A Gnostic Atheist is one who does not believe in a deity (or believes that no deity exists) and claims to know that no deity exists. This is sometimes referred to as Strong Atheism. Their knowledge derives from scientific evidence that refutes religious claims.

An Agnostic Atheist is one who does not believe in a deity (or believes that no deity exists) but does not claim to have knowledge regarding the existence of a deity. This is sometimes referred to as Weak Atheism. The Agnostic Atheist is content to leave the burden of proof (knowledge) on those who make the claims regarding the existence of a deity.

Very very well put. Would you mind reposting this in this thread?

 

[Redoubtable]

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
You're begging the question, but I'd expect nothing better from you.

The only distinction between the atheist and the fideist is the former insists on God's nonexistence while the latter insists on His existence. Neither of them have any evidence to present to validate their respective cases. I do not quite understand what you mean by compatibility. It seems as though agnostic approach and the fideistic/atheistic approach are very discordant.

 

[wesmorris]

Originally posted by Redoubtable
It seems as though agnostic approach and the fideistic/atheistic approach are very discordant.

No, you read too much into the athiest position. Check out that thread I asked luciddreamer to post in. This should be discussed there for the benefit of future arguments.