Ways to Make The Forum Better - Suggestions

[PsYcHo]

An atheist is simply somebody who is not a theist. It doesn't mean that person believes a god doesn't exist, or believes a god is impossible.

The term "agnostic atheist" is a common one you'll see. Dawkins is an agnostic atheist.
.

I'm up way too late for my obligations tomorrow, but as you have often made me think critically of myself (in a positive way), I will respond briefly.

Atheism is a contraction of theism, and anti. Theism is a religious belief, and atheism is a rejection of religious beliefs. And before I typed this sentence, I realized the flaw in my argument.......dammit.

Dammit!

...........to be continued

[Unknownfromheaven]

Unknown, at first glance I assumed you said theism, and admittedly I know little of deism.

brimstoneSalad was writing to you at the same time i was responding..and he explained as well about deism, so i was thinking you have a clear mind about it, since he knows these topics very well.

extraterrestrial intelligence is not beyond what I would consider possible, (mathematically it is almost a certainty.) But I do not want to be grouped among those who believe tin-foil hats will prevent the star children from absorbing their thoughts.

There is a difference if you take in a side for the scientific community which in fact does admit the possibilty for it, As long as you are not engaging with pseudo-nonsense (channeling) There are persons who say they are aliens or that they talk to aliens...so there is some difference there and its not a case for you when you talk about extraterrestrial life....in my case when i talk about it, i know that i am not a tin foil hat persona.

i would not see them as Omnipotent. Thus my contention that as an Agnostic, I hold no loyalty to any "Creator", but even if the Christian were correct, and their (Multiple-versions) of God did exist, the bull-shit excuse of "I have always been, and always will be", still does not address the issue of "Well O.k., You are obviously God. How did you get here?!"

Me neither. Those cannot be correct for a number of reasons that were well expressed by Sam Harris stating ”that it may be the case for a malevolent entity or impotent” So the bible god cannot be true. I still think that we might be a giant experiment, it could very well be a neutral being with an unknown purpose to us.

As a deist i am often confused with an atheist while debating abrahamic religions...mostly christians where i am raising the following issues
1. The loving god, created eternal hell as punishment, send himself to sacrifice in order to save mankind (from himself)
2. The sacrifice is not valid since it implies ressurrection...because a true sacrifice is when you are dead for a cause.
3. No finite crime deserves eternal punishment when we talk about morality aspect.

The later argument can be explain if its made of energy. Our *bubbled*expanded universe bahaves just like a closed system, and according to the laws of thermodynamics, energy has no beginning or end. So that might explain it. there is no concept of time when we are talking about a being beyond our understanding.

Some deists fall in the pandeism, panendeism or pantheism labels which express that the creator might be unaware, unconscious, or the universe itself. All of those are still under the umbrella of deism.

(I get a little passionate about this topic, but even sentences punctuated with an exclamation are only to express my sincere frustration at the inability to prove it either way. Please understand I am not being angry, just passionate, and I thoroughly welcome rebuttals and differing views!)

I did not think you were angry for a second...i as well love these topics, and after watching fully TVA which is very reasonable convinced me to come at this forum. I think that where is variery and diversity, one can learn a lot of things, and now after some time that i spent in this place i am sure of this and gratefull for it.


Only one thing is certain...the fact that within matter itself, we are made of the same energy as a rock in a volcano..makes me say that we are indeed living in an incredible universe.

[brimstoneSalad]

Atheism is a contraction of theism, and anti.

Atheism is a combination of theism and "a", not "anti".

There are also antitheists. But an atheist is not necessarily an antitheist. Theists regularly confuse the positions, and mistakenly believe that all atheists are against theism.

It's like the difference between be asocial and antisocial; something you're probably already familiar with, but here's an explanation in case:
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/asocial.html

Someone who doesn’t enjoy socializing at parties might be described as either “asocial” or “antisocial,’ but “asocial” is too mild a term to describe someone who commits an antisocial act like planting a bomb. “Asocial” suggests indifference to or separation from society, whereas “antisocial” more often suggests active hostility toward society.

Here's a more extensive explanation:
http://www.differencebetween.net/scienc ... d-asocial/

Many atheists may actually look favorably upon religious belief, and consider it a good thing. Antitheists are opposed to theism, and may not even be atheists (sometimes they may worship the devil), but typically do not believe in a god and are in opposition to such belief as Hitchens was.

The Chambers Dictionary defines antitheism in three different ways: "doctrine antagonistic to theism; 'denial' of the existence of a God; opposition to God." To be clear, "opposition to God" is not in most meanings a statement that an antitheist believes in a deity but opposes the being in the manner of maltheism, but for various reasons the position that it would be bad or immoral for such a being to exist. All three match Hitchens' usage, not only a generally anti-religious belief and disbelief in a deity, but also opposition to a god's existence. The second is synonymous with strong atheism. The third and first, on the other hand, need not be atheistic at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism

Rationalwiki also has a pretty good article on this topic: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Antitheism

[PsYcHo]

Unknown and Brim, thanks for the thinking points and links! I'll check them out.

[PsYcHo]

Atheism is a contraction of theism, and anti.

Atheism is a combination of theism and "a", not "anti".

I should have gone to bed (and switched to water...) before I started this response. Stressed out from taxes, so I couldn't sleep.

[PsYcHo]

It's like the difference between be asocial and antisocial; something you're probably already familiar with, but here's an explanation in case:
http://public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/asocial.html

Someone who doesn’t enjoy socializing at parties might be described as either “asocial” or “antisocial,’ but “asocial” is too mild a term to describe someone who commits an antisocial act like planting a bomb. “Asocial” suggests indifference to or separation from society, whereas “antisocial” more often suggests active hostility toward society.

Here's a more extensive explanation:
http://www.differencebetween.net/scienc ... d-asocial/

Actually that was quite informative. (Been many years since I have been in a Psychology class.) And after checking out links and reading the thread more thoroughly, I did go with atheist.

[Cirion Spellbinder]

Could "The Tavern" be listed under General Discussion Forums on the Board Index?

[brimstoneSalad]

Could "The Tavern" be listed under General Discussion Forums on the Board Index?

Not sure what you mean. I think we need more new threads, so it's more searchable. Having things bundled together kind of gets topics lost.

The entire off topic fun section is supposed to be a tavern.

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

%5Bs%5D%5Bcode%5D%5Blist%5D%5Blist=%5D%5B*%5D%5Bcolor=#FF0000%5DCHANGE%20THE%20DAMN%20FORUM%20BACK%20I%20CAN%20NOT%20STRESS%20ENOUGH%20HOW%20COMPLETELY%20AND%20UTTERLY%20DISSATISFIED%20I%20AM%20CHANGE%20IT%20BACK%20CHANGE%20IT%20BACK%20CHANGE%20IT%20BACK%5B/color%5D%5B/list%5D%5B/list%5D%5B/code%5D%5B/s%5D

[brimstoneSalad]

I'm working on it Z, I have to change all the CSS and I'm kinda busy. It will take some time.

If you want, you can help by listing the changes that need to be made in order of priority.
Like, do you want the posts in a thread changed first, or the forum list in the directory?
Or maybe the font colors in the header bar? Or should I remove the rounded edges from things first?

Give me a list of the most important things.