I have some questions for the posters here.

[Frank Apisa]

I weigh 150 pounds if soaking wet...and have almost no weight in muscle. If I played a rugby half...I'd be dead before "coming here."

You win that one.

And I weigh 15 and 5 (dry), and if I were to ever play a round of golf, I’d kill myself to save the family honour.

Boru

Well, then, you are welcome to join me for a round at any time, Boru.

---

Oh... he's Murrican!!
That explains it.

The murrican dictionary of "englich", aka, Merriam webster https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist:

Code:

atheist
noun

athe·ist | \ ˈā-thē-ist
\
Definition of atheist

: a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism

So far, it looks like what most people here are saying...
But wait!
There's more

Code:

More Definitions for atheist

atheist noun
English Language Learners Definition of atheist

: a person who believes that God does not exist

See the full definition for atheist in the English Language Learners Dictionary

atheist noun
athe·​ist | \ ˈā-thē-ist
\
Kids Definition of atheist

: a person who believes there is no God

I'm under the impression that in parts of Murrica only these latter definitions are taught and so people become convinced that they can say "I do not believe in the existence of any god and I'm not an atheist".


But you know that Mr Webster made his dictionary on purpose to distinguish Murrican englich from the Queen's English, hence the changes
Color, instead of colour
Neighbor, instead of neighbour
Side walk, instead of pavement
Underground, instead of subway
Tiger, instead of tigre
Meter, instead of metre
Fries, instead of chips
Chips, instead of crisps (not sure this one would have been a thing in the 1800s)
Realize, instead of realise
etc... you get the gist.

Aluminum vs aluminium is a different matter. I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader.  

Yup...some reference works define it one way...some define it differently.

So...better to actually write out your position...and screw the descriptors that are ambiguous.

---

Is there anyone here who asserts, “No gods exist?”
I assert that from time to time. For me it holds the same value when I assert "There are no full size pink elephants in my car"

Is there anyone here who asserts that he/she KNOWS that no gods exist?
I know that no gods exist in much the same way that I know that no flying mermaids exist.

Is there anyone here who asserts that it is impossible for gods to exist?
I would assert that some definitions of certain gods are logically impossible.

Thank you for your response, Rahn.

---

But since we're asking questions of posters I have two for you Frank;

1: What makes your definition hold more weight, and importance than others?

I do not think my definitions hold more weight than others. I simply indicate that my definition of ambiguous words are MY definitions. That makes it easy for intelligent people to respond.  

2: How do you manage to get banned from (so far) every forum I've found you on?

You have found me on this forum...and I am not banned. Do you write what you mean...or do you just type words?[/quote]

---

Then you believe in god, lol. We can go round and round all day long!

Methinks he fails to grasp the distinction between gnostic/agnostic and theist/atheist.

If you people would just say what your position is...you would not have to do this descriptor dance...although I will acknowledge, is very amusing to watch the dances.

---

If you want to think you KNOW there are no gods...

You're tilting at straw men. Atheism has exactly fuck all to do with knowledge. Anyone who does not believe in gawd(s) is an atheist. That includes you. Agnosticism says exactly fuck all about belief. It's about the knowledge position.

I do not believe in any gawds. That makes me an atheist. I do not claim to know that there are none. There simply isn't enough evidence to support the claim the theists make. That makes me agnostic as well as atheist. This is the reality of atheism. Like most everything else about humans, there's a spectrum.

Welcome to reality, Frank.

---

 
Atheists essentially want to assert that the word “atheism” derived from “a” without + theism “a belief in a god” = without a belief in a god.
 
But it did not!
 
In fact, if you check an etymological dictionary, you will see that “atheism” arrived in the English language almost 100 years BEFORE theism. It could not have derived that way.
 
Atheism comes to us from the Greek through the French…and actually means (approximately) "a" without + “theos” a god = without a god…NOT without a “belief” in a god.
 
Check it out…you will see I am correct on this.

Is English, like Latin, a dead language?

If you think there are no people who assert "there are no gods"...you are detached from reality. No way you can welcome me  to reality from where you are.