Evidence for a god. Do you have any ?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

'I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.' - Stephen Roberts  

Boru

[Deesse23]

He's a complete unknown variable X.

Au contraire.
He is a known troll.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

I haven't looked.  Maybe they do, maybe they don't.  Not an atheist.

If you currently are not convinced that any god or gods exist, you are an atheist, by definition. Stop being so hung up on the word/label, and try to understand the concept.

If you are convinced that at least one god exists, you are a theist, by definition.

There is no middle ground between being convinced, and not being convinced.

I do understand the concept.  I would suggest you are the one being ignorant of it.  If you're not sure of an aspect of my position on it, then you are welcome to ask and more times than not. I will be happy to address the matter to clarify further.  But for the sake of simplifying, I'll provide my position on the perceived problem as to hopefully alleviate the need to apply the term "atheist" to myself.

I believe in "God" as supreme.  The etymology of the word "atheist" originally applies to the Judeo-Christian God, which is who I view as "God", so on that basis I don't attribute the term "atheist" to myself, because the opposite would apply.  The modern day application you are applying of "no god or gods" existing, and on that basis I don't attribute that term to myself, because I accept a supreme God exists, as well as believe various "lesser gods" may exist defined and described differently and on an individual basis.  Based on the Rhan's two question that I was addressing, and in regard to those "gods" or "belief in them" being loosely defined, I provided my response that "I haven't look for them all", "maybe they do and maybe they don't", because it wouldn't make sense to respond conclusively to his question to the entire premise of his questions, which would still not make me an atheist, and maybe agnostic to those subjects at bests.

No problem with using any of the definitions within their context, but none apply directly to me.

[Simon Moon]

If you currently are not convinced that any god or gods exist, you are an atheist, by definition. Stop being so hung up on the word/label, and try to understand the concept.

If you are convinced that at least one god exists, you are a theist, by definition.

There is no middle ground between being convinced, and not being convinced.

I do understand the concept.  I would suggest you are the one being ignorant of it.  If you're not sure of an aspect of my position on it, then you are welcome to ask and more times than not. I will be happy to address the matter to clarify further.  But for the sake of simplifying, I'll provide my position on the perceived problem as to hopefully alleviate the need to apply the term "atheist" to myself.


I believe in "God" as supreme.  The etymology of the word "atheist" originally applies to the Judeo-Christian God, which is who I view as "God", so on that basis I don't attribute the term "atheist" to myself, because the opposite would apply.  The modern day application you are applying of "no god or gods" existing, and on that basis I don't attribute that term to myself, because I accept a supreme God exists, as well as believe various "lesser gods" may exist defined and described differently and on an individual basis.  Based on the Rhan's two question that I was addressing, and in regard to those "gods" or "belief in them" being loosely defined, I provided my response that "I haven't look for them all", "maybe they do and maybe they don't", because it wouldn't make sense to respond conclusively to his question to the entire premise of his questions, which would still not make me an atheist, and maybe agnostic to those subjects at bests.

No problem with using any of the definitions within their context, but none apply directly to me.

So, you are theist then.

That doesn't seem how you portrayed yourself when you first joined and started posting.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

M4X has quite a few unique posting quirks I've noticed, Simon Moon.....

[T0 Th3 M4X]

I do understand the concept.  I would suggest you are the one being ignorant of it.  If you're not sure of an aspect of my position on it, then you are welcome to ask and more times than not. I will be happy to address the matter to clarify further.  But for the sake of simplifying, I'll provide my position on the perceived problem as to hopefully alleviate the need to apply the term "atheist" to myself.


I believe in "God" as supreme.  The etymology of the word "atheist" originally applies to the Judeo-Christian God, which is who I view as "God", so on that basis I don't attribute the term "atheist" to myself, because the opposite would apply.  The modern day application you are applying of "no god or gods" existing, and on that basis I don't attribute that term to myself, because I accept a supreme God exists, as well as believe various "lesser gods" may exist defined and described differently and on an individual basis.  Based on the Rhan's two question that I was addressing, and in regard to those "gods" or "belief in them" being loosely defined, I provided my response that "I haven't look for them all", "maybe they do and maybe they don't", because it wouldn't make sense to respond conclusively to his question to the entire premise of his questions, which would still not make me an atheist, and maybe agnostic to those subjects at bests.

No problem with using any of the definitions within their context, but none apply directly to me.

So, you are theist then.

That doesn't seem how you portrayed yourself when you first joined and started posting.

I'm a person, not a label.  I don't know that I portrayed myself under any specific label.  I just say what I think.  No need to conform to special groups.

---

At work.

M4X has quite a few unique posting quirks I've noticed, Simon Moon.....

Yep, quirky 24/7.  Glad I am too.

[Simon Moon]

So, you are theist then.

That doesn't seem how you portrayed yourself when you first joined and started posting.

I'm a person, not a label.  I don't know that I portrayed myself under any specific label.  I just say what I think.  No need to conform to special groups.

---

I'm not labeling you. I am making a statement about one aspect of your beliefs/knowledge.

Calling you a theist, because you accept the premise that at least one god exists is true, does not label you as a person. It only describes your position on one proposition.

Calling myself an atheist is not a label, it is a position that describes whether or not I am convinced gods exist. I also do not believe that: bigfoot, Loch Ness monster, alien abductions, reptilians running the planet, etc are true, and none of those positions on those claims label me either.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

I'm a person, not a label.  I don't know that I portrayed myself under any specific label.  I just say what I think.  No need to conform to special groups.

---

I'm not labeling you. I am making a statement about one aspect of your beliefs/knowledge.

Calling you a theist, because you accept the premise that at least one god exists is true, does not label you as a person. It only describes your position on one proposition.

Calling myself an atheist is not a label, it is a position that describes whether or not I am convinced gods exist. I also do not believe that: bigfoot, Loch Ness monster, alien abductions, reptilians running the planet, etc are true, and none of those positions on those claims label me either.

Fair enough.  I was responding to someone else's position that we are all atheists.  I'm not an atheist, but acknowledge your right to identify as such.