I don't believe in God, so why is it that I don't want to be labelled an atheist? | Ian Jack

Because you are not an atheist. You know there is a God and eventually you will realize that you are lying to yourself about there being no God.

It's so sad to see a person lying to themselves in order to get the false comfort of being able to sin and think they are getting away with it.

Your an agnostic. You have a right to feel and believe what you want. Its when you preach it to others that you are out of line.

Atheist - Theism = Belief.

Agnostic - Gnosticism = Knowledge.

An atheist does not know god/s does not exist, we just don't believe god/s exist. In fact as we cannot "know" whether or not god/s exists everyone, believer and non-believer is agnostic.

Believers are also "atheists' to all the gods of religions other than the one you believe in. A christian does not believe in Thor, Mithrus and Horus. A muslim does not believe in Venus, Zeus and Zoraster. Atheists just believe in one less god.

High beams wrote:

It's so sad to see a person lying to themselves in order to get the false comfort of being able to sin and think they are getting away with it.

This says more about your morality or lack there of than it does about atheists. What sort of scumbag is only good because they believe their imaginary friend will punish them if they are bad?

Mark wrote:

Atheist - Theism = Belief.
Agnostic - Gnosticism = Knowledge.
An atheist does not know god/s does not exist, we just don't believe god/s exist. In fact as we cannot "know" whether or not god/s exists everyone, believer and non-believer is agnostic.
Believers are also "atheists' to all the gods of religions other than the one you believe in. A christian does not believe in Thor, Mithrus and Horus. A muslim does not believe in Venus, Zeus and Zoraster. Atheists just believe in one less god.

I can say that there is no god until evidence appears to the contrary. The claim is falsifiable. You can believe in any myth like god or santa or Thor but can only claim that you believe. You are the claiment so proof is required by you. Atheism is a poor word. Realist is better.

Mark wrote:

<quoted text>
This says more about your morality or lack there of than it does about atheists. What sort of scumbag is only good because they believe their imaginary friend will punish them if they are bad?

Like children during xmas season. The little scumbags.

FBOMBER wrote:

Aussie Mark doesn't believe vaccines cause autism, that makes him a twit.

Whereas your belief in BS is so complete that it is the only thing you speak.

redneck wrote:

<quoted text>I can say that there is no god until evidence appears to the contrary. The claim is falsifiable. You can believe in any myth like god or santa or Thor but can only claim that you believe. You are the claiment so proof is required by you. Atheism is a poor word. Realist is better.

I am quite content with referring to myself as an atheist because it states exactly what I don't believe in. I think a lot of this arguement is due to believers not understanding what it means and making retarded statements like "you believe in nothing?" or "whats stopping you from murdering and stealing?". These questions just show how morally deficient these people are and that there own motives for belief in gods is for personal gain, not because its the right thing to do.

Our claim "there is no god" can never be verified, mainly due to the aspects of god/s made by their followers that make it unfalsifiable. For example Christians, by placing their god outside the universe, have made him/she/it untestable so we cannot know it doesn't exist. The best I can claim is that I am 99.9% convinced there are no gods.

Other terms such as realist are not satisfactory because a lack of belief doesn't neccessarily make you believe in reality. Take Bill Maher. On one hand he makes the excellent doco Religulous and on the other he has some unrealistic views on health.

Mark wrote:

<quoted text>
Whereas your belief in BS is so complete that it is the only thing you speak.

So I take it you are an expert in B.S. yourself to pass judgement.

FBOMBER wrote:

Aussie Mark doesn't believe vaccines cause autism, that makes him a twit.

One doesn't need to believe vaccines cause autism when the objective evidence proves they don't. Belief in the face of strong evidence is called ignorace - something that fbumber is.

Actually I think he knows the truth but admitting it would ruin whatever scam alt med con he sells.

You can get infected from vaccinations, they are not 100% effective.

Many people received Small Pox from that vaccination.

God says fools say in their hearts that there is no God.

Pastor Richard Dawkins wrote:

God says fools say in their hearts that there is no God.

No, actually it's just something written in your buybull. But then it also says something in Matthew about what happens to people who call other "fools" now doesn't it?

I found the whole essay quite interesting.

"http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/... ;

And made me long for the days to come, when religion in the USA is as diminished and low-key as it is in Great Briton.

Alas, I probably shall not live that long-- evil is what it is, and religion certainly thrives on and perpetuates more evil than anything else.

Pastor Richard Dawkins wrote:

God says fools say in their hearts that there is no God.

Who says? He spoke to you? You just don't get it.

Christian witness wrote:

You can get infected from vaccinations

This rarely occurred in the past but does not happen now due to better understanding of immunology. Also the percentage who were infected was minute and usually had a less severe form of disease.

Christian witness wrote:

they are not 100% effective.

This is called the 'nirvana fallacy'. As parachutes are not 100% effective would you jump out of a plane without one?

Christian witness wrote:

Many people received Small Pox from that vaccination.

This is just nonsense. You cannot get smallpox from the vaccination as it was based on cowpox. Get you head out of your bible and read something useful like a science textbook.

Here is a puzzle for the believers off god/s:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

Pastor Richard Dawkins wrote:

God says fools say in their hearts that there is no God.

Did he set in your living room and tell you that?

When that moment comes and your at deaths door, you WILL believe in god buddy.. Believe THAT!

starringuandi wrote:

When that moment comes and your at deaths door, you WILL believe in god buddy.. Believe THAT!

So fear is the only argument you've got. Pathetic.

And Pascal's Wager is a stupid argument to begin with. Even if you consider belief is better than non-belief, you still have done nothing about deciding which god is the right one. I bet you spent more time deciding which car to buy than deciding which god to worship.