(March 10, 2017 at 10:37 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(March 10, 2017 at 10:15 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Normally in my mind, I still think in terms of atheism as opposed to agnosticism (more specific meanings similar to theism as opposed to deism). However the less specific term is valid, and used by many who call themselves atheist. I don't have an issue with this. But do think it is a little ridiculous, when people demand only the one meaning, acting like the other isn't legitimate.
The important thing is that we are both both on the same page in a discussion. (which may at times require clarification).
Perhaps the more accurate and least contestable term would be godless. But really, the motivation behind all the fuss is the contention that theists alone have any burden of proof. The conceit of many here is that atheism is some kind of benign ignorance. In point of fact, most are incredulous, have reasons for being incredulous, and avoid defending the beliefs behind their incredulity. When their objections to the best explanation (Classical theism) are revealed as irrelevant or incoherent AND their multitude of alternative explanations are shown to be weak and inadequate, they run away like petulant children shouting, "Yeah, but you cannot PROVE God exists!"
So again, you have no evidence for your absurd beliefs but simply want to play Lily Von Schtup.
No good, son. you want a god you'll have to provide evidence for him.