<p>A or B are not the only options/positions.</p>
<p>Then what are the other options? There’s basically theism and atheism. It’s in the roots of the words, even. It’s like vertebrate or invertebrate. You either have a spine or you don’t. There’s no in between. Some people say they’re agnostic, but usually people who say that are agnostic atheists (sometimes they’re agnostic theists) as agnostic itself isn’t really much more than the belief that you don’t or can’t know.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The bottom line is – I believe you are able to make critical statements about something without revealing your own philosophy. Secondly, any speculation you make is simply an assumption. People are allowed to be critical about their own faith. Branches of protestantism were formed from ‘flaws’ in former churches (ie. Martin Luther/Protestant Reformation). Also, I never made any pro-theist arguments, my criticism was of the negative attitudes/arrogance that atheists frequently possess in my experience.</p>
<p>Also, I think the differences in the subdivisions of theism are vast. There are large difference between deism (unactive God), polytheism (multiple Gods), pantheism (we are all God), and traditional monotheist religions.</p>
<p>I don’t really think anyone’s overdoing anything, but that people, atheists, and religious people (mostly Christians) are both starting to get more sensitive to the other…they’re more apt to argue with each other and belittle each other. I think the conflict between atheists and theists has increased over the years, but one side is not overdoing “it” anymore than the other side.</p>
<p>“pantheism (we are all God)”</p>
<p>Does anyone else think that this is just the same as saying there is no God? If everyone and everything is God, the term “God” loses value and meaning.</p>
<p>
I never that you can’t. But when someone categorically says that “all of group X is <insert something=”" bad=“”>"… well, I suppose you could be criticizing yourself…</insert></p>
<p>
Hence my analogy - you never made any pro-theist arguments, but you DID insult all atheists. You were either insulting yourself or you’re a theist.</p>
<p>
That doesn’t sound much like “negative attitudes.” But hey, maybe you ARE an atheist and you just think that you’re only what you are because you want to feel important. That’s some impressive honesty, at least.</p>
<p>
But they’re still all theist.</p>
<p>jarn i got your back yo</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In my experience, you’re acting as though all atheists are the silly caricature that you described via your highly subjective “experiences.” What you’re saying is no better, and no more convincing, than the supposed words of the people you ridicule. </p>
<p>[url="<a href=“http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Main_Page"]Intelligent,[/url">http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Main_Page"]Intelligent,[/url</a>] [url=”<a href=“http://www.positiveatheism.org/“]respectful,[/url”>http://www.positiveatheism.org/"]respectful,[/url</a>] and [url=”<a href="http://www.secularhumanism.org/“]progressive[/url”>http://www.secularhumanism.org/"]progressive[/url</a>] discussions of atheism are easy to find. But if you’d rather keep on trotting out your trite, vaporous opinions on things you haven’t bothered to learn anything about, carry on.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think you are starting to flip-flop. Initially, you said if someone says A is wrong, that you “would find it obvious they prefer B”. However, now you are “supposing” that it is possible for people to be self-critical (ie. Martin Luther, etc.). </p>
<p>Also, many people consider agnosticism a “third option” – even if theism is based on faith, and agnosticism on knowledge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t try to pretend you know me. I’ve read lots of literature on all ends of the spectrum.</p>
<p>I’m not flip-flopping, thanks. I never said it’s not possible to be self-critical. But, again, if someone says that A is wrong they probably are not A. If they say “this part of A” is wrong, that’s an entirely different story. If they say “Everyone who is A is <bad>” they either are NOT A or think that they’re <bad> and don’t care. You are completely misrepresenting everything I have said. Whether it is willfully or just failing to understand, I don’t know, but you are. And just because some people consider agnosticism a third option doesn’t mean their right. Some people still think the Earth is flat.</bad></bad></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you honestly believe there are not significant differences among these groups? That the similarity (in theism) is not obscured by the vast differences (belief everyone is God, belief in multiple Gods, belief in an inactive God). If you think there are differences there is more than “option A” and “option B”. If you sincerely believe in the ‘umbrella term’ without significant differences, we can agree to disagree – no point in wasting time. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obviously people can believe in anything. We have photographs from space that shows the Earth is round. I think you are trivializing the agnostic position with this comparison. If we use your logic – “just because some people (x)… doesn’t believe they are right” could be used against your argument/belief system. The bottom line is there is a sizable faction of agnostics and most people give them this classification even if you disagree with the definition/their existance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>so cite literature instead of your personal experiences, silly.</p>
<p>
No, I don’t. But this is not a discussion about pantheism vs. deism vs. anything. It’s about atheism vs. theism. I am saying that atheism and theism are mutually exclusive. The fact that there are many subtypes of theism does not matter. There are also many subtypes of atheism (strong, weak, implicit, explicit, etc.) You’re setting up a straw man and using that to base your argument on when it is wholly inconsequential. If you do NOT believe that atheism and theism are mutually exclusive when it’s even in their name, then you are wasting my time, your time, and the time of everyone reading this thread.</p>
<p>
I don’t think I am. I am not saying that agnosticism is not perfectly acceptable. I am saying that it cannot stand on it’s own since all it makes a statement to is knowledge, not belief. If you don’t/can’t know but believe, you’re an agnostic theist. If you don’t/can’t know and don’t believe, you’re an agnostic (strong) atheist. If you don’t/can’t know and don’t give it a lot of thought, you are, again an agnostic (weak) atheist.</p>
<p>I want to post a lawlcat going nomnomnomnomnomnomnomnomnomn</p>
<p>Write here…</p>
<p>just imagine it…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never intended to debate the existence of God. I merely made an anecdote that many atheists are arrogant and believe they are superior/smarter for not believing in God. Many refuse to believe that theists think critically and that they are all part of some crazy “herd mentality”. </p>
<p>In short:being a theist doesn’t make a person less intelligent.</p>
<p>
You also said:
Many theists refuse to believe that atheists are just normal people and that they all just want to be smarter and so claim they’re atheists.</p>
<p>You’re one of them. Or, at least, you exhibit that trait. As to if you’re a theist… signs point to yes. You have said nothing. It is irrelevant, anyway.</p>
<p>Some atheists are complete bigots, probally less intelligent and more stupid than any christian believer out there on Earth, but most are very reasoned and suitable for proper conversation and manner. Bad apples in a big barrell.</p>
<p>
You don’t think that there are just as many Christians who are stupid and complete bigots? Like, say, the Ku Klux Klan?</p>
<p>Jarn – if we use your definitions (differentiating between ‘belief’ and ‘knowledge’) – you would agree with my statement (many agnostics are atheists, or vice-versa). Some atheists like to claim that definition is “lack of God belief” which would include agnostics. </p>
<p>Also, my original comment comes back to original sentiments. Most agnostics I have met have been open-minded and willing to discuss philosophy. While the vast majority of atheists I’ve met tend to be condescending and believe they are superior/smarter for not believing in God.</p>
<p>Again, I don’t believe being a theist makes a person less intelligent.</p>
<hr>
<p>Jarn, I agree some fundamental Christians (and other faiths as well are equally condescending). But in my experience they are less arrogant. I never heard a Christian say “I am smarter than atheists for my belief”. But I have heard many atheists insult the intelligence of theists (simply for their belief).</p>
<p>yea, atheists are obese…'nuff said</p>
<p>
They’re not my definitions. They’re the actual definitions. Again, it’s in the words. Theism: belief in god. Gnosis: knowledge. A: prefix expressing negation.</p>
<p>
No one has said it does. However, what has been said - both by you and others - is that being an atheist makes people arrogant. You base that on your experiences. Well, in my experiences most of the theists I’ve met are utter fools. They are far less willing to discuss philosophy or anything that touches on their religion than anyone else. And if you say something they don’t agree with? Their response is “Well, you’re just not capable of understanding because you’re not a <insert christian=”" denomination=“”>."</insert></p>
<p>
I have. Things like “You’re stupid to not accept Jesus. You’re going to burn in hell,” etc.</p>
<p>
Err… that’s a bit childish.</p>