Friday, April 20, 2012 5:57:14 PM
Why complicate it? Why not just: atheist, theist, and agnostic?
Because they're *about different things*. They`re not three different positions on the same thing.
Why complicate it by giving a different meaning to a word that already exists, pretending that two different positions are the same position and pretending that faith and objective, provable knowledge are the same thing?
Here are 4 *different* positions:
Does not claim to know for sure about the existence of gods. Does not believe in them.
Does not claim to know for sure about the existence of gods. Does believe in one or some of them, as an act of faith.
Claims to know for sure that no gods exist.
Claims to know for sure that one or some gods exist.
4 different positions. Not 3.
Agnostic (no knowledge) atheist (no belief). Agnostic (no knowledge) theist (belief). Gnostic (knowledge) atheist (no belief). Gnostic (kn
Friday, April 20, 2012 5:47:19 PM
"The link I referred to defined 'atheist` as `a person who does not believe in any gods`."
Um, that would be all of my links, since that is what I`ve been saying from the start.
No, it isn`t. That`s what I`ve been saying. You`ve been saying that an atheist is a person who believes there are no gods.
It appears that you have not understood what you`ve read in dictionaries. Or what has been explained to you in great detail. You`re still thinking that two very different positions are the same position.
[quote]@Angilion: Either God exists (by faith OR reason), God does not exist (by faith OR reason) OR you don`t know (by faith OR reason).[/quote]
Unless you believe that humans create or uncreate your god by either believing or not believing in them, what you`ve just written makes no sense.
[quote]There is no "4th state" for the existance of God.[/quote]