Not present, couldn't be found ... He/she/it ...
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.
Not present, couldn't be found ... He/she/it ...
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.
Defender of truth, thank you for the reference. You've been very helpful. I believe that the traits of agnostic atheist tick most boxes for me. I still don't think that the etymology of the term "atheist" describes properly the lack of belief in a God, as it suits more the rejection of God. I would much prefer the use of "skeptic", "skepticism", hence agnostic skepticism. But I can concede the current use of the term "atheist" will have to do for now.
Plus, for the sake of closing this thread and ending the bickering, it's a good closing.
**** turns around, whispering: "And yet, he is absent..." *****
grins and whistles on his way out towards the sunset.
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.
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.
Viviane:
assigning spirit power to a real thing no more makes that thing a god than does painting orange and black stripes on a poodle make it a tiger.
I agree with you. I was playing the devil's advocate here. But fact is, millions of people assign spirit power to objects, animals, other people. To them, that deity is real.
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.
(back from a terribly dry beijing duck. blahhrgh)
Cofty: I attack bad ideas, unlike you I don't attack people. If I am going to criticise somebody's character I do it by PM as you well know.
Is that so? Let's see if it holds truth. The first ad hominem came from you.
You lied about Aten.
Then
You are impervious to reason,logic and sensible use of language.
Your dishonesty is becoming intolerable
All the above came from you before I had my burst of rage against you. This makes you, objectively, the liar here. You attack ideas, but also the people who hold them. You deserve no compassion. And, by the way, you also lied when you PM'd me to inform me that I just had been inducted to your ignore list. Apparently that was another lie ... or did you simply change your mind? What's good for the goose....
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.
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.
Fear not, Viviane. I'm sitting at a chinese restaurant getting ready for some beijing duck, and will get back on track when I finish dinner.
Eden *chomping*
By the way, who is "we"?
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.
Jonathan Drake,
Even in writing, people can show restraint even when they disagree. I can tolerate a cold tone, but I cannot let misrepresentation and distortion of what I write to be used to attack me. Like I said, I normally apreciate Cofty's participation on threads that don't deal with theism / atheism. He's a sharp thinker and usually his interventions are well thought out. But on this particular area, he feels entitled to make all sorts of derrogatory remarks about the people who hold ideas he doesn't agree with. Not about the ideas, but ridiculing the people who have them. That's unacceptable, and at some point it will trigger a violent response. More, he freely twists and cherry picks quotes from my posts to pass the impression that I said something I didn't say and then attack me for it. It's a relentless and sneaky resort to strawman fallacy that gets quickly tiring.
I apologize for some excessive language towards Cofty. Is he able to do the same or does he have nothing to apologize for?
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.
Cofty,
My intention was indeed to end my participation on this thread because it was getting ugly with personal attacks and no one really benefited from that. However, since the tone came down and others were still willing to keep on discussing in a civilized way, I changed my mind. Don't make a tantrum out of it.
As for the seriousness of the thread. I said it was a light subject steming from a word play, that I didn't intended to become an academic debate. While the 'nonsense' and 'arguments demolished' are your subjective opinion of the output of the debate, and I won't even argue with you on that, calling me a liar isn't taken lightly. Of course, knowing how you operate in this forum, I suspected that your participation on this thread would be an inevitability. I welcome your participation, but when the subject is theism / atheism, you manage to make your intervention extremely unpleasant, bordering the insult, and you hijack the thread to suit your proselitizing agenda. Many in this thread disagreed with me, and they were able to do so without becoming obnoxious as you did and keep doing. In return, they have my respect and no incensed ad hominem took place. It did with you because you don't hesitate in misrepresenting my words, ignore inconvenient arguments, and freely calling me a liar.
Ideas are like children. They may be imperfect, silly, impetuous, intelligent or bratty, but they are our ideas and we defend them because they represent a small portion of us. And I'm perfectly capable of defending and debating one idea that I had formulated. In this case, I formulated an idea around the notion of absentheism and thought it was worth it to bring it out for discussion. Nothing too serious, but I was interested in debating it to see how it would stand up upon scrutiny. Naturally, you cannot resist the subject, but this wasn't done to bait you. However, you're boringly predictable. Like a predator fish, you thrust yourself into the bare unbaited hook. And sometimes, you deserve to be taken on a fool's errand. For the simple reason that when it comes to this particular subject, you behave like an anti-theist bigot who thinks he's entitled to insult whomever doesn't agree with your ideas; are you surprised to get some tough love back? Because the troll in this thread turns out to be you. I'm not in this forum to win or lose debates, I'm here to get and offer support, learn but not be lectured. And certainly not to be ridiculed for whatever my thoughts are. And if this is as nonsensical and you feel offended in your dignity, why are you still here debating?
But hey - take it to the moderators of the forum and file a complaint. Then tell me the outcome please.
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.
Viviane:
Aten was the disc of the sun depicted as a falcon headed man. Unless you show me a falcon headed man, I fail to see the relevance.
I don't know where you got that idea from. Aten was depicted as a solar disc with rays emanating from it. And the sun exists, I see it mostly every day here.
You don't personally consider it a meaningful deity, you do so because of cultural bias. So what? To millions of people in the past the sun is indeed a valid deity. To me it's just a sphere of burning gas. Yet, even today, people who know the sun is an orb of burning gas still worship the son, such as Wiccans and Druids, Go figure, deities do exist!
Eden