it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
Atheism isn't a statement, it is a response.
BS - it is a statement, to wit, that "no deities exist". Perhaps it's not your brand of atheism, but it is certainly the main claim it makes. If you're skeptical, that doesn't make you an atheist, you're perhaps closer to being an absentheist. Otherwise you too have to back up your grandiose atheist claims with overwhelming evidence.
eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
This is factually incorrect.Is it? Aten, the ancient egyptian sun-god is a good example. It is merely a solar disc, with no human traits associated with it, no anthropomorphic representation of is, but was believed that all light, heath and life emanated from it. It was worshipped as a God.
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
The problem of atheism is that it makes a grandiose claim about any and every deity, when in fact they need a very precise definition of what constitutes a deity in order that their claim may have the slightest chance to logically succeed. If a deity escapes that narrow definition, atheists find themselves in boiling water, just as theists they love to trump. That's why "absentheism" adheres to the available evidence, while theism plays on a probability.
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
I just defined a deity for you. I said, to them they took the sun at face value, they didn't think of it as a person with a personality. They took it for what they received from it and worshipped it as their God.
are you telling me that said God doesn't exist? You're going against evidence.
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
So, in this case:
a) The sun exists
b) Humans thought of the sun as their God and worshipped it.
c) Therefore, God exists.
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
OneEyedJoe: What's the point in having a god that deserves neither worship, nor respect?
I would add another question to yours: if God exists, does he want and require our worship? Does he care for that? Why would he, anyway?
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
You want a definition? Let me play your game.
Ancient tribes worshipped the sun. To them it was the source of light, heat and the nurturing of life. They didn't think of it as a person, an intelligence. They accepted it at face value. For them, it was their God. In this case, does God exist or not?
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
An atheist is somebody who doesn't accept the grandiose claims of theism.
An atheist does that by making yet another grandiose claim, this time about the inexistence of deities.
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
Again, don't put words in my mouth that I didn't say. I said: "The only thing that can be said about God (or deity or deities) is that it's absent, hence I'm an absentheist". I didn't say "There is a God and it's absent". Stop putting words in my mouth so that you can argue against them.
Eden
it just dawned on me.
the existence of god can't be proved, neither is there evidence of god's inexistence.
so, i'm neither theist neither atheist.
Why not just say there is absolutely no evidence for god and leave it at that?
Because that is absolutely NOT the same thing as saying "God doesn't exist". There lies the fallacy. I agree with you on the lack of evidence. But that only proves the absence of the deity, not its inexistence. There's a logical leap on your reasoning that doesn't adhere to reality, and indeed is a spectacular claim that demands overwhelming evidence from atheists - as much as the evidence demanded from theists.
Eden
