|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 05, 2006 11:21 am
[ Message temporarily off-line ]
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 5:18 pm
atheist means: someone with no diety.
That guy mentioned things that were not dieties:
heaven & hell for example. you can believe in Heaven, Hell, Valhalla or some sort of afterlife, and still have no diety. Therefore being atheist.
And this strict/soft thing is stupid. your either atheist, or your not.
I am Atheist but that isn't it. I'm a Logical Realist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:19 am
Confession time.
I don't follow any organized religion, but I have very strong belifes in life after death. When I first got to college I started hanging out with this guy who was strict atheist, he believed in no god and no life after death, and for some reason that confused the heck out of me. So we discussed and debated a few times, but then one day I went a little too far and realized I was acting just like those preachy people. I felt horrible and haven't brought up the subject with him since.
Preaching doesn't change people's ideas, they have to figure things out on their own. In most cases it only makes the person and their belifes seem worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 10:14 am
Ejak And this strict/soft thing is stupid. your either atheist, or your not. Now, I disagree. Just like one can have strict Christans and open Christians, I do feel you can have strict Atheists (belief in absolutely nothing) and open Atheists (those that do not believe in not a higher but equal force). I find it insulting to group the two together, just as it would be insulting to group terrorist Muslims with other normal Muslims. confused
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 7:10 pm
People tend to include a lot of extras with atheism.
if you have no god(ess)(s/es), then you are atheist. ghosts and evil demons and heaven and hell, are not listed under atheism but are coupled to it as it's usually the case. but it doesn't make it a true definition. In my dictionary, which is very big, says...
a-the-ist n. one who denies or disbelieves the existance of God or gods
Hmmm...why does it point out the christian god?
HMMMM!!!...why does it word it as 'denies'...it should be: ...doesn't buy into the obviously false idea of...
anywho...you never stated if you have a deity. if you don't: you are an atheist
you can still believe in heaven and hell. (ghosts, spirits and evil demons too mrgreen )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:11 pm
I know that. I'm saying that there are Atheists that go beyond the basic idea, in both directions. The one's that do not believe in anything, where we're just a pile of matter, and rub this in people's faces, are the one's I'm considering strict Atheists (well, right now I've described them as fundamentalist Atheists, but they fall in the strict category).
And you definition was not dictionary-neutral either. razz It should simply read "does not believe in the concept of a higher being, such as God or a pantheon of deities."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:32 pm
Let us call them self-absorbed instead of strict atheists. Strict sounds like a word you would use if there was a doctrine or a set of rules.
And I'm just pointing out that if your an atheist, you dont believe in gods, godesses, etc. All of that other stuff, whether you believe it or not, makes no difference. Someone should make a new term that means you don't believe in anything that doesn't scientifically 'add up'. (Unfortunately scientology is already taken.)
And that definition is almost exact from my dictionary. (My keyboard doesn't have all those little pronounciation letters.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Ejak Let us call them self-absorbed instead of strict atheists. Strict sounds like a word you would use if there was a doctrine or a set of rules. And I'm just pointing out that if your an atheist, you dont believe in gods, godesses, etc. All of that other stuff, whether you believe it or not, makes no difference. Someone should make a new term that means you don't believe in anything that doesn't scientifically 'add up'. (Unfortunately scientology is already taken.) And that definition is almost exact from my dictionary. (My keyboard doesn't have all those little pronounciation letters.) And I'm stating I understand that they do not have to believe in a higher force, but adjectives can help some individuals define various groups. A Christian can be self-aborbed and not be a fundamentalist, just as one can be strict with a concept, but have no dogma. And what dictionary do you have? I suggest getting a new one if it has that type of tone. neutral
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 7:06 pm
But the adjectives dont make sense. let us just call them mislead...
or lets say that the person over complicates every thing and in this instance believes there are way too many levels to something that really has one. so they are strict and atheist...but not strict atheist...theres a difference.
and my dictionary is by some person who ill look at later, but i know it says: unabridged dictionary of the english language.
its a dictionary, not a grammar related book, so it doesn't have to have perfect sentence structure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 10:34 am
Ejak But the adjectives dont make sense. let us just call them mislead... or lets say that the person over complicates every thing and in this instance believes there are way too many levels to something that really has one. so they are strict and atheist...but not strict atheist...theres a difference. and my dictionary is by some person who ill look at later, but i know it says: unabridged dictionary of the english language. its a dictionary, not a grammar related book, so it doesn't have to have perfect sentence structure. They make sense to me. Oh well- it's really not that big of a deal; I'd need to clarify what I was speaking of, anyways, if I was to get in another discussion about this with others. And I was confusing your definition with the original definition you posted. Sorry for not catching up on that. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time-traveling Shapeshifter
|
Posted: Fri Apr 07, 2006 2:08 pm
Re: the first post
Absolute philosophies just so utterly fail.... rolleyes
...most of the time. wink
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 08, 2006 10:18 pm
Jameta Ejak But the adjectives dont make sense. let us just call them mislead... or lets say that the person over complicates every thing and in this instance believes there are way too many levels to something that really has one. so they are strict and atheist...but not strict atheist...theres a difference. and my dictionary is by some person who ill look at later, but i know it says: unabridged dictionary of the english language. its a dictionary, not a grammar related book, so it doesn't have to have perfect sentence structure. They make sense to me. Oh well- it's really not that big of a deal; I'd need to clarify what I was speaking of, anyways, if I was to get in another discussion about this with others. And I was confusing your definition with the original definition you posted. Sorry for not catching up on that. sweatdrop That isn't much of a problem, and it is a webster's dictionary. I'm am beginning to become bored of this issue...are you too?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 3:28 am
Ejak atheist means: someone with no diety. That guy mentioned things that were not dieties: heaven & hell for example. you can believe in Heaven, Hell, Valhalla or some sort of afterlife, and still have no diety. Therefore being atheist. And this strict/soft thing is stupid. your either atheist, or your not. I am Atheist but that isn't it. I'm a Logical Realist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 11, 2006 3:33 am
Jameta Ejak And this strict/soft thing is stupid. your either atheist, or your not. Now, I disagree. Just like one can have strict Christans and open Christians, I do feel you can have strict Atheists (belief in absolutely nothing) and open Atheists (those that do not believe in not a higher but equal force). I find it insulting to group the two together, just as it would be insulting to group terrorist Muslims with other normal Muslims. confused
No. You either are or are not an Atheist.
People who believe in absolutely nothing are called Nihilists. They doubt every form of knowledge and information given to them, on the grounds that they believe no knowledge has any real foundation to be 100% true. In some ways they have a point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:53 am
just because that person can't spell doesn't mean he or she is not right.
stop the hypocrisy.
wiki says about it:
A classic example of a hypocritical act is to denounce another for carrying out some action while carrying out the same action oneself.
The term hypocrisy is also commonly used in a way which should be more specifically termed a double standard, bias, or inconsistency. An example would be when one honestly believes that one group of individuals should be held to a different set of morals than another group.
Hypocrisy also refers to the act of criticizing others for behavior which one engages in as well, or in other words, not practising what you preach.
which is just what is going on there.
what could be worse than a preachy atheist telling people to go to a nonexistent hell?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
