Atheists and theists are the same.

[cookieduster]

There is no distinction to be made between atheists and theists as they both assert something that neither can prove.

Let’s hear for the agnostics!

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

One really quite noticeable difference between theists and atheists is that atheists never seem to make statements like the one above. I cant imagine any reason for this asymmetry.

 

[Alc]

One really quite noticeable difference between theists and atheists is that atheists never seem to make statements like the one above. I cant imagine any reason for this asymmetry.

Nor why the same comment was copied and pasted onto two threads.

 

[cookieduster]

Cute, but you fail to address the issue.

Atheists and theists are ontologically the same.

 

[Alc]

Cute, but you fail to address the issue.

Atheists and theists are ontologically the same.

Nice long word and also pointless.
You could also say that atheists, theists and agnostics are all the same because they're all human.

You also failed to address the issue - why post the same pointless remark on two different threads. For that matter why start a new thread for the poor joke when there's already a joke thread?

Edit: My mistake, you copied and pasted the same comment onto three threads, not two. Even more pointless.

 

[cookieduster]

Perhaps the word "ego" is a long word for those not knowing the definition.

Most of my friends are atheists and unlike yourself we have temperate exchanges.

Is it that you just like a quarrel or you actually interested in an exchange of ideas?

 

[Alc]

Perhaps the word "ego" is a long word for those not knowing the definition.

Most of my friends are atheists and unlike yourself we have temperate exchanges.

Is it that you just like a quarrel or you actually interested in an exchange of ideas?

So because I point out that your use of the word is pointless that means I don't know it's meaning? I hope your friends are down at the same level, or they're going to get pretty bored with you, pretty fast.

If you wanted a discussion, you would have picked a thread and stuck to the topic. Since all you're going to do is smugly argue semantics and rehash arguments that have already been done to death, no thanks.

 

[Rabbie]

Perhaps the word "ego" is a long word for those not knowing the definition.

Most of my friends are atheists and unlike yourself we have temperate exchanges.

Is it that you just like a quarrel or you actually interested in an exchange of ideas?

You are not being fair to Alc who has made a lot of helpful and sensible contributions to this site. When you contribute something more than a bad joke in the wrong thread and a mindless post repeated at least 3 tims then people might start listening to you

 

[cookieduster]

Your reply clearly answers my question.

 

[Alc]

Your reply clearly answers my question.

Yes, it does. That was the point, you see.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

Cute, but you fail to address the issue.

OK, I'll address the issue to approximately the same depth as you.

Atheists and theists are ontologically the same.

No, they are not.

 

[speakers_86]

I don't understand the hostility in threads like these. By the title of the thread, I automatically disagreed, but then read this:

There is no distinction to be made between atheists and theists as they both assert something that neither can prove.

and figured there is not much to argue with there. However, I can't help but think that atheists are not the ones that should need to prove anything. We are not the ones saying that Jesus rose from the dead, or that Moses split the Red Sea (although I heard this is a misinterpretation that should read Reed Lake).

Here is my understanding of the definitions.

Theists Belief in a religion
Atheists No belief in anything supernatural.
Agnostics Belief in supernatural, but unclear as to what religion they believe.

 

[Brianwarnock]

Agnostics Belief in supernatural, but unclear as to what religion they believe

.

I don't think this is true.

I think agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve in the supernatural as there is no proof either way.
I do not know if there is a god or gods, but I'm damn sure that none of the religions that I've come across point the way. To me the mere fact that there are many religions and many sub sects of those suggests that there is no God, or atleast none that wants us to worship him.

Brian

 

[Rabbie]

Here is my understanding of the definitions.

Theists Belief in a religion
Atheists No belief in anything supernatural.
Agnostics Belief in supernatural, but unclear as to what religion they believe.

I belief that Agnostics cover a wide spectrum of beliefs incuding they are not sure if there is a supernatural or not

 

[Brianwarnock]

I belief that Agnostics cover a wide spectrum of beliefs incuding they are not sure if there is a supernatural or not

I think Wiki gives several sub divisions of Agnostic.

Brian

 

[Mike375]

I belief that Agnostics cover a wide spectrum of beliefs incuding they are not sure if there is a supernatural or not

Yes.

There is also agnostic/atheist, agnostic/theist, agnostic/deist. In each case it is a "I don't know" but with a leaning to the second part.

In a strict sense everyone is probably agnostic as no one knows. However, the theist fills in the gap with faith. The atheist fills in the gap by elimination of any and alll supernaturals. There is a key difference and it is where the thread starter is incorrect. The theist's position is one of a postive and the atheist is a negative position.

 

[Mike375]

.

I don't think this is true.

I think agnostics neither believe nor disbelieve in the supernatural as there is no proof either way.
I do not know if there is a god or gods, but I'm damn sure that none of the religions that I've come across point the way. To me the mere fact that there are many religions and many sub sects of those suggests that there is no God, or atleast none that wants us to worship him.

Brian

That is heading to agnostic/deist, that is, there might be a supernatural (s) but if so it does not involve itself in any way with us.

I think Paul Davies is a deist and so was Einstein.

 

[Rich]

The theist's position is one of a postive and the atheist is a negative position.

Define negative in the context you have used it

 

[Mike375]

Define negative in the context you have used it

For a theist, God exists. For an atheist, God does not exist.

An agnostic theist is unsure if God exists. An agostic atheist is unsure God does not exist.

To the question...does God exist, the theist says Yes and the atheist says No.

 

[Atomic Shrimp]

For a theist, God exists. For an atheist, God does not exist.

An agnostic theist is unsure if God exists. An agostic atheist is unsure God does not exist.

To the question...does God exist, the theist says Yes and the atheist says No.

A lot of the atheists I've spoken to would actually answer "I see no reason to suppose so", rather than 'no' (although they might shorten their answer to 'no' for the sake of clarity, in some cases).

Atheism isn't (as far as I understand it) the state of having looked everywhere for God, and found him absent.
It's more like the state of considering the idea of the existence of God not nearly credible enough to bother with.