At 2/14/10 05:12 PM, JohnnyWang wrote:

At 2/14/10 04:47 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Jesus christ, why do i keep coming back here?

You come for NG's version of /a/, don't lie.

Quick question, what the hell happened to earfetish?

I remember when he was posting in here daily.

At 2/14/10 06:33 PM, Brick-top wrote: Quick question, what the hell happened to earfetish?

I remember when he was posting in here daily.

Maybe he just left and didn't tell anyone? Who knows?

Guess this thread is done then.

Is earfetish still an atheist?

You guys cannot simply shit on Agnostics. We just make more sense then both religious and atheist kids. Why? Because we want evidences or proofs. We don't just jump to conclusions.

This is the way I first explained to atheist the way agnostics think:

There are three guys in front of a locked door. None of them can see through the door and none of them ever went into the other room.
One of them, claims that there is a basketball in the other room because he met someone who told him that he knew someone who once said that he went in the room and knew what was in the other room. Sad thing is, the guy who went in the other room is now dead.
The second guy claims that there is nothing behing the door, that there just cannot be anything behing the door because it is locked and that he doesn't know who owns the key and he also doesn't know anyone who ever went into the room.
Then there is the third guy. When the two others ask him if he thinks there is a basketball in the room or if there is no basketball in the room, just answers that he doesn't know. He never went in there, doesn't know anyone who went in there, and he cannot say if it's true that the first guy really knew someone who ever went in there and came back. And since he has no proofs of wheter or not there is a basketball in the other room, he doesn't want to get involved in this fight.

What is rather interresting about agnostics is that they are not stuck with convictions and are not blinded by faith. While religious people believe a hundred percent that there god is THE god and that nothing else is true, atheists are a hundred percent convinced that there cannot be anything afterlife.

So there are agnostics who would tend to believe in some kind of divinity and there are others, like me, who would tend to say that there is no god and no afterlife because it would make more sense for a reason or another.

Agnosticsm = possibilities

I missed something. I just got here. Is there like a war between you two groups of people?

At 2/20/10 09:52 PM, WhoIsPaul wrote: I missed something. I just got here. Is there like a war between you two groups of people?

Seriously, I didn't get the memo. Can't we all just get the fuck along?

At 2/20/10 09:54 PM, Zakkles wrote:

At 2/20/10 09:52 PM, WhoIsPaul wrote: I missed something. I just got here. Is there like a war between you two groups of people?

Seriously, I didn't get the memo. Can't we all just get the fuck along?

I'm scared. You can cut the tension with a spoon.

At 2/14/10 02:11 AM, JohnnyWang wrote:

At 2/14/10 01:33 AM, supperman2 wrote: WE DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUCK, AND WISH BOTH OF YOU FAGGOTS WOULD SHUT THE FUCK UP.

Cool story, bro.

Have I mentioned that I've found Agnostics far more unreasonable than casual christians? For someone who is against preachyness and "doesn't give a fuck" you sure do like to come yell in our faces.

In fact I was refering to this post JohnnyWang did to reply to the angry wannabe who tried speaking in the name of agnocism with is angry ways.

At 2/20/10 10:01 PM, HeavenDuff wrote:

In fact I was refering to this post JohnnyWang did to reply to the angry wannabe who tried speaking in the name of agnocism with is angry ways.

Oh. I responded to that, but i had no idea it was feud. My bad. I am on the fence.

this thread is just full of fail

Duff; if there's any proof of the supernatural, I'll believe. I'm agnostic to that extent. But I am, like Richard Dawkins is, agnostic and atheist at the same time. I accept the possibility of some higher power if there's proof, but with the fact that there's so far no proof, and these gods don't seem to interract with the world, in practical terms, they don't exist.

Agnostics tend to come across as smug to me "oh, we're not blinded by some dogma". Your room and basketball-scenario is a broken analogy; wherther or not there is a basketball in the room is irrellevant, the existance, or non-existance of god or gods isn't something trivial like sports utensils. Istead of talking about a locked room, we should be talking aboout roads to take; or actions that we should or shouldn't do.

You can't just sit on the fence. Notice that you're more or less talking about some dichtomy betweeen atheism and christianity, without necessarily thinking so. But waht about other faiths? They contradict eachother. Are you gonna claim they're all equally valid, with eachother and Atheism? But those faiths have STRONG implications to society. Hinduism claims all people are born into social classes; castes, and belong to the one they are born into without change. Islam (and Christianity and Judaism too, actually) say the woman is a man's property. Sikhism says they're equals.

At 2/20/10 09:51 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: You guys cannot simply shit on Agnostics. We just make more sense

Also, can you spell "hypocrite"?

AND, I wasn't making a blanket statement about Agnostics, I said that I have far more often gotten into arguments with agnostics than religious people, because these particular agnostics that I have gotten into arguments with, tend to be extremely arrogant.

At 2/20/10 09:51 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: Agnosticsm = possibilities

Have you been drinking moron juice this morning? Oh yes, you have.

Firstly, Atheism doesn't make a conclusion you idiot! It's not accepting the claim there is a God or Gods. That's all, it makes no mention of an afterlife so you can have a nice strawman sticker for your stupidity.

Secondly, why are you saying "proofs"? The context you're using it in doesn't require it to be plural. The term 'proof' refers to mathematics, what you're referring to is evidence.

Lastly, in your example the third guy will not make a conclusion if there is a basketball behind the door, which is implying agnostics are unsure about the existence of a God or Gods. Then you make a conclusion by saying "to say that there is no god and no afterlife". By your OWN logic, you can't call yourself an agnostic.

At 2/21/10 11:36 AM, Brick-top wrote:

By your OWN logic, you can't call yourself an agnostic.

Well. Your logic is impenitrable until someone comes along and tears it down. That person is not me.

At 2/21/10 02:37 AM, JohnnyWang wrote: Duff; if there's any proof of the supernatural, I'll believe. I'm agnostic to that extent. But I am, like Richard Dawkins is, agnostic and atheist at the same time. I accept the possibility of some higher power if there's proof, but with the fact that there's so far no proof, and these gods don't seem to interract with the world, in practical terms, they don't exist.

I share this with you. The belief in gods for me is exactly like believing in Santa or Leprechauns.

Agnostics tend to come across as smug to me "oh, we're not blinded by some dogma". Your room and basketball-scenario is a broken analogy; wherther or not there is a basketball in the room is irrellevant, the existance, or non-existance of god or gods isn't something trivial like sports utensils. Istead of talking about a locked room, we should be talking aboout roads to take; or actions that we should or shouldn't do.

I really don't see why my analogy should be wrong. I used it cause its a far more simply situation than the existence of gods.

You can't just sit on the fence. Notice that you're more or less talking about some dichtomy betweeen atheism and christianity, without necessarily thinking so. But waht about other faiths? They contradict eachother. Are you gonna claim they're all equally valid, with eachother and Atheism? But those faiths have STRONG implications to society. Hinduism claims all people are born into social classes; castes, and belong to the one they are born into without change. Islam (and Christianity and Judaism too, actually) say the woman is a man's property. Sikhism says they're equals.

Of course, faiths do contradict with eachother, but since they are almost all saying that they have the only thruth, they cannot be classified as "equally valid". In fact I was not talking about christianity, but more like deist beliefs and atheism. There is no need to choose a specific religion when talking about this.

Also, religions do not say these things. Man say these things. You can be christian and hate the christian church. The argument you will ear whenever you say that kind of thing to a christian that is not blinded by some kind of bullshit, is that God never said that, Men have decided to make up these rules. If you read the Bible carefully there is no kind of rule talking about women being the property of men. In fact there are 10 commandments, none of them mentionning what you said.

What is atheism if not a conviction that there is no god? Because that is pretty much what all atheist I've ever met say.

Also this

Where I may have been prooved wrong is that I thought atheists didn't believe in an afterlife and there is a difference between this and the existance of gods.

At 2/21/10 11:36 AM, Brick-top wrote:

Firstly, Atheism doesn't make a conclusion you idiot! It's not accepting the claim there is a God or Gods. That's all, it makes no mention of an afterlife so you can have a nice strawman sticker for your stupidity.

Why do you have to be a dick like this?
What would be the difference between agnocism and atheism if there was no kind of deep fucking belief that there is no God? And what the freakin hell is the difference? If there is no God what would your afterlife be? Some kind of magic universe with pokemons? The belief in an afterlife comes with the faith in something greater than the human being. Maybe you are one of the rare atheists who believe in an afterlife, but you obviously are not in the majority. Normally atheists will believe that there is nothing after their death. That there is no soul and therefore, an afterlife would be simply impossible as everything in you would just vanish when you die.

Secondly, why are you saying "proofs"? The context you're using it in doesn't require it to be plural. The term 'proof' refers to mathematics, what you're referring to is evidence.

Because I'm fucking french and I at least try to speak your language in order for you to understand me. Maybe you could give me some credits for this.

Lastly, in your example the third guy will not make a conclusion if there is a basketball behind the door, which is implying agnostics are unsure about the existence of a God or Gods. Then you make a conclusion by saying "to say that there is no god and no afterlife". By your OWN logic, you can't call yourself an agnostic.

That makes not sense at all.

And why do you have to be a complete dick to me? I'm trying to understand what you guys think and you act like a complete douche to me.

At 2/21/10 03:04 AM, JohnnyWang wrote:

At 2/20/10 09:51 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: You guys cannot simply shit on Agnostics. We just make more sense

Also, can you spell "hypocrite"?

Ok ok, sorry about that one, but I took your fist statement very personally.

AND, I wasn't making a blanket statement about Agnostics, I said that I have far more often gotten into arguments with agnostics than religious people, because these particular agnostics that I have gotten into arguments with, tend to be extremely arrogant.

Good, I don't think all atheists are dumb. I am in fact pretty sure that there is no god. I think that you cannot simply imply that something exists because you cannot proove it doesn't.
So for me, religions are dumb because they give very precise answers with very little evidences.
But Deism, isn't completely dumb.

At 2/21/10 10:09 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: Also, religions do not say these things. Man say these things. You can be christian and hate the christian church. The argument you will ear whenever you say that kind of thing to a christian that is not blinded by some kind of bullshit, is that God never said that, Men have decided to make up these rules. If you read the Bible carefully there is no kind of rule talking about women being the property of men. In fact there are 10 commandments, none of them mentionning what you said.

"Wives submit to your husbands, as is fitting to the Lord." Colossians 3:18 and other gems.

Just, so you know. I used to be christian myself, and active in my congregation. THen I kinda read through the bible and noticed what a crock it was.

At 2/20/10 09:51 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: You guys cannot simply shit on Agnostics. We just make more sense then both religious and atheist kids. Why? Because we want evidences or proofs. We don't just jump to conclusions.

Atheism doesn't necessarily describe a belief that is set in stone.

I consider myself an atheist. I don't believe there is a God. If somebody proved to me that there was actually a God, or gods then I would reconsider my beliefs. It is just my personal opinion at this time that there is none.

I'm going to make my own analogy:

I don't believe I'm going to get hit by a car the next time I cross the road. I might be hit by a car the next time I cross the road. It's certainly possible but, as it stands, I don't think I'm going to.

Not everyone is dogmatic in their belief system. People can just believe things and leave it at that.

If I put myself into your analogy (as the second person, of course), my reaction would be this:

"I don't think there's a basketball behind that door. I don't know why, I just don't. I suppose there could be a basketball behind the door, but I don't think there is."

"It's not because I don't know what's behind the door that I don't think there is a basketball there, it's just that a basketball doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would be behind that door."

I could stand around and go "no idea what's behind the door. Whatever." But I'm a little too decisive for that. I can't just stay on the fence. I have to have an opinion about things.

Before anyone gets in this argument, we should ask the agnostic to 'define God'.

For surely there are differing degrees of plausibility to different definitions. It wouldn't make sense to be equally agnostic to all definitions.

At 2/21/10 10:09 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: Why do you have to be a dick like this?

Because you're an arrogant moron.

What would be the difference between agnocism and atheism if there was no kind of deep fucking belief that there is no God? And what the freakin hell is the difference? If there is no God what would your afterlife be? Some kind of magic universe with pokemons? The belief in an afterlife comes with the faith in something greater than the human being. Maybe you are one of the rare atheists who believe in an afterlife, but you obviously are not in the majority. Normally atheists will believe that there is nothing after their death. That there is no soul and therefore, an afterlife would be simply impossible as everything in you would just vanish when you die.

Let me rephrase so you'll understand.

1. Atheism is the disbelief in a God or God(s).

Disbelief used in this context is none acceptance of a claim or statement. Therefore atheism is: Not accepting the claim there is a god.

I have TEN published, certified and reliable dictionaries stating this!! I'm not basing this on a half-baked online dictionary where the only consistency between them is....well actually nothing.

2. Atheism makes ABSOLUTELY NO claims about an afterlife.

A person can believe or disbelieve in an afterlife, tooth fairies, magic monkeys, talking pillows and still be an Atheist.

Because I'm fucking french and I at least try to speak your language in order for you to understand me. Maybe you could give me some credits for this.

Just because you speak French it doesn't mean you're French. Unless your profile information is wrong.

That makes not sense at all.

That's because you're an idiot and don't understand.

Agnosticism is the uncertainty about the existience of a God or God(s).

You said:
"like me, who would tend to say that there is no god"

Therefore by YOU OWN LOGIC you are not an Agnostic.

And why do you have to be a complete dick to me? I'm trying to understand what you guys think and you act like a complete douche to me.

No you're not.

You're bastardising what Atheism is.
You (evidently) don't know what Agnosticism is.
You're making bold assertions.
You're just as polite as we are to you.
You're constantly swearing.

Should I go on?

On the point of languages for a bit; I'm Finnish. French is at least related to English, Finnish is like Klingon of the European languages. And to top that off, not only did I have to learn English to operate in the era of global communication, I had to also learn Swedish because of our antiional history.

And then for fun, or the study points, I've studied French, German and Japanese.

This actualyl doesn't have anything to doo with the argument at hand, does it? But come on, like I'm gonna pass an ooppportunity to brag about being an amateur polyglot.

Well good job. You speak more languages than i do. Also, was German hard to learn?

At 2/22/10 03:07 AM, JohnnyWang wrote:

"Wives submit to your husbands, as is fitting to the Lord." Colossians 3:18 and other gems.

Just, so you know. I used to be christian myself, and active in my congregation. THen I kinda read through the bible and noticed what a crock it was.

Yes, but let's just say God exists ok? He didn't write this book. Men wrote this book.
This is why I said deism is better cause it's not a lot of bullshit based on no kind of evidence.

I shouldn't have taken the example of the Bible. But I'm pretty sure you get what I mean.

At 2/22/10 03:36 AM, Aigis wrote:

At 2/20/10 09:51 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: You guys cannot simply shit on Agnostics. We just make more sense then both religious and atheist kids. Why? Because we want evidences or proofs. We don't just jump to conclusions.

Atheism doesn't necessarily describe a belief that is set in stone.

I consider myself an atheist. I don't believe there is a God. If somebody proved to me that there was actually a God, or gods then I would reconsider my beliefs. It is just my personal opinion at this time that there is none.

I'm going to make my own analogy:

I don't believe I'm going to get hit by a car the next time I cross the road. I might be hit by a car the next time I cross the road. It's certainly possible but, as it stands, I don't think I'm going to.

They way you describe yourself is making you much more of an agnostic than an atheist.

And you pretty much did put in words what I was thinking in my mind. Sorry I couldn't express it this way.

I suppose their could be a God, but right now I feel more like there is no God.

At 2/22/10 02:24 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Because you're an arrogant moron.

You think I will respect anything you say if you keep acting like a douche?

1. Atheism is the disbelief in a God or God(s).

Disbelief used in this context is none acceptance of a claim or statement. Therefore atheism is: Not accepting the claim there is a god.

Ok, so reading what you say I realise that everybody in here as a different definition of atheism and I don't see you puking insults on them.

2. Atheism makes ABSOLUTELY NO claims about an afterlife.

A person can believe or disbelieve in an afterlife, tooth fairies, magic monkeys, talking pillows and still be an Atheist.

You are annoying... really...
I don't care what is written in your books. The theory is absolutely not like what really happens in real life. If I wrote a science book and made no mention of fairies, you could say it's unclear if wheter or not I believe in fairies. But if I'm the kind of guy who really needs evidences and proofs of something to believe it does exists, you could still say that I probably don't believe in fairies, and you would most likely be right.

Just because you speak French it doesn't mean you're French. Unless your profile information is wrong.

I'm not French from France, I'm french-speaking. From Quebec. Sorry.

Agnosticism is the uncertainty about the existience of a God or God(s).

You said:
"like me, who would tend to say that there is no god"

Therefore by YOU OWN LOGIC you are not an Agnostic.

Not really dude. I'm just saying that by my own experience and my own thoughts about it. And by my very own logic, I don't think that there is a God. Still, their could be, how the fuck am I supposed to know.

You're bastardising what Atheism is.

And you apply it just like if the ideology in a book is the perfect reflection of what is really going on in the world

You (evidently) don't know what Agnosticism is.

Yes I do...

You're making bold assertions.

Fuck no

You're just as polite as we are to you.

Wait what? Go back and read.

You're constantly swearing.

I'd like it better if you could just stick to swearing instead of puking insults on me.

Should I go on?

No, your posts are just random. There is a difference between a theory or an ideology and what really happens in real life...

At 2/22/10 05:29 PM, JohnnyWang wrote: On the point of languages for a bit; I'm Finnish. French is at least related to English

What I meant is that I would express myself better and with more precise words if I would be speaking my mind in french.

I made the mistake of using the word proof instead of evidence (mistake that you also made, but your little friend didn't shit on you for it, but he did for me)

HeavanDuff, I agree on the bible was written by man. If current and past events prove anything, its that we are notorious for fucking shit up.

My understanding is:
Religious: Believe in God, blar, blar, etc.
Agnostic: Unsure of God, etc but not disbelieving either. Entertaining the possibility.
Atheist: Don't believe in God, etc.

I'm sure even the most stubborn atheist would believe in God if it was proven that there is a God. Cause if its there, its there, you'd be a fool and insane to not believe in that scenario.

But I think belief is the important thing here. I don't believe there is a possibility of a God. I don't think 'Ooh, there might be'. I just flat out think its not true.
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and I'll gladly grovel for a eternity of paradise :P.

At 2/22/10 09:00 PM, Nev wrote:

But I think belief is the important thing here. I don't believe there is a possibility of a God. I don't think 'Ooh, there might be'. I just flat out think its not true.
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and I'll gladly grovel for a eternity of paradise :P.

I really do think that there is no God, but I admit that there may be a possibility, even if it's slim, that there could be something after our lives.

In that way my point of view is very similar to yours. I mean, there are sociologic studies explainning why ancient tribes felt the need to create gods. Something to do with death and people not wanting to let their deads leave. Most common answer you will get is that people are to affraid of the unknown. So they have to make up a story to feel better and not feat death and also to accept that their friends and family members will eventually leave.

Deists would answer that there may be a supernatural power above us that could have made it that way so we could believe in some kinds divinity.

And also, concerning the "Atheists refuse the existence of a God" argument. I don't think that this is entirely true. If you take the example of Hinduism. They do not believe in a God that would be like... and individual... but what they believe in is the Brahman, which is kind of like... "the universe"...
which is not the same as the God of christians who is omnipresent.

At 2/22/10 08:50 PM, HeavenDuff wrote: You think I will respect anything you say if you keep acting like a douche?

You think I will care?

Ok, so reading what you say I realise that everybody in here as a different definition of atheism and I don't see you puking insults on them.

No. That IS the definition according to nearly a dozen fucking dictionaries!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What part of this aren't you getting?

You are annoying... really...
I don't care what is written in your books.

What books? What are you talking about?

I'm starting to wonder if you're being willingly ignorant because you're making very little sense.

The theory is absolutely not like what really happens in real life. If I wrote a science book and made no mention of fairies, you could say it's unclear if wheter or not I believe in fairies. But if I'm the kind of guy who really needs evidences and proofs of something to believe it does exists, you could still say that I probably don't believe in fairies, and you would most likely be right.

You're making no sense.

My point is: The DEFINITION of Atheism makes NO FUCKING MENTION of an afterlife therefore a person can believe in an afterlife and STILL BE AN ATHEIST.

Did the caps help you understand? Or should I draw it in crayon to help?

Not really dude. I'm just saying that by my own experience and my own thoughts about it. And by my very own logic, I don't think that there is a God. Still, their could be, how the fuck am I supposed to know.

You fucking liar.

You said this:
"who would tend to say that there is no god and no afterlife"

If you think or believe or whatever there is no God YOU ARE NOT AN AGNOSTIC.

And you apply it just like if the ideology in a book is the perfect reflection of what is really going on in the world

Uh, no. You're bastardising atheism because you're trying to link it with an afterlife when there is nothing, anywhere ever to say that Atheism has anything to do with it.

Yes I do...

"I'm an Agnostic, there is no God"

Contradictions FTW!!!

You're making bold assertions.

Fuck no

Oh yes, you are.

You're just as polite as we are to you.

Wait what? Go back and read.

I did, many times. You're an ass and you will be treated like such. Which is why I'm giving you special treatment.

You're constantly swearing.

I'd like it better if you could just stick to swearing instead of puking insults on me.

How about both? (look up).

Should I go on?

No, your posts are just random. There is a difference between a theory or an ideology and what really happens in real life...

No, you're an idiot who can't even grasp a basic definition of the word "Atheism" and "Agnosticism".

Go to the Library, get a fucking dictionary and look it up you ignorant asshat.

At 2/23/10 02:11 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Ok, so reading what you say I realise that everybody in here as a different definition of atheism and I don't see you puking insults on them.

No. That IS the definition according to nearly a dozen fucking dictionaries!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You will have to name me these fucking books, give me fucking quotations from these books and stop acting like if all human beings could ever accept the exact same definition for a concept. I'm studying politic in University and for each concept we have at least 3 or 4 definitions by different others. So stop pretending to know what you are talking about. Unless you give me fucking facts your argument will have no fucking kind of value.

What books? What are you talking about?

Your fucking dictionnaries you keep mentionning every two seconds!! Holy balls!

You're making no sense.

And you are swallowing cum. Seriously. There is a fucking difference between a theory and the actual facts. It's not cause "in your dictionnaries" they make a specific definition of what atheism is... that REAL atheists are all the fucking same!

My point is: The DEFINITION of Atheism makes NO FUCKING MENTION of an afterlife therefore a person can believe in an afterlife and STILL BE AN ATHEIST.

Are you fucking dumb? Have you ever met a fucking atheist who believe in afterlife? Probably not. Why? Because in the freakin REALITY, not believing in God and not believing in an afterlife pretty much goes together in like 99% of the fucking cases.

Did the caps help you understand? Or should I draw it in crayon to help?

You see only what you want to see. You couldn't possibly try to understand my point of view.
Therefore I'm not the dumbass over here. I'm not stupid, stop acting like you are more intelligent than me. Cause you obviously cannot understand or even try to understand my point of view.

If you think or believe or whatever there is no God YOU ARE NOT AN AGNOSTIC.

Who told you that? Another one of your so called dictionnaries?
An agnostic can use is fucking brain and make assumptions.
And since Science gave the world a lot of informations on the human body and human brain, I would tend to believe that there is no god. Could I be wrong? yes.

I did, many times. You're an ass and you will be treated like such. Which is why I'm giving you special treatment.

And you are still the only moron reacting that way in the thread. Oh well...

Go to the Library, get a fucking dictionary and look it up you ignorant asshat.

Your basic definitions are just fucking words in books!!! Books written by humans!!! Why would there be 11 dictionnaries with definitions of atheism if, like you said, the definition was so obvious? Why would they waste their time re-writting it if it was already perfect?

What you just cannot seem to understand is that there is a difference between the theory (or the definitions) and what is really going on in the reality.

And yes, now I am using insults, cause you keep claiming I'm a moron, so go fuck yourself and try to get something to support your argument next time.

I'mm atheist and don't believe in any afterlife. Sure the possibility of one existing sin't entirely out of the question, but lack of any proof to me, means it effectively doesn't exist.

Also, I'd like to just ppoint out that your argument about the amount of dictionaries is just hilarious. Do you even know why people write different dictionaries?