• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The default position...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thief

Thief

Rogue Theologian
leibowde84 said:
I would suggest a class in linguistics. You obviously don't understand the fact that something that is merely included under a terms definition does not define the term.

Also, I would suggest looking up the term "ignorant" while your at it. It appears you don't have the hang of that one either.
Click to expand...
It fits your 'implication'
 
L

lstan135

Member
Hello. Have you all ever heard of the term 'Cellular memory' or DNA? That is if your parents have certain diseases like breast cancer, stroke, diabetes. etc. they most likely pass on to you? Even in characteristics, habits and sins. So, a baby or a child is not that ignorant as you might thought. It is just a matter of time that they will be inclined to believe what their parents believe. Just like a leopard, the baby is born with their spots similar to that of its parent. Got it?
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
lstan135 said:
Hello. Have you all ever heard of the term 'Cellular memory' or DNA? That is if your parents have certain diseases like breast cancer, stroke, diabetes. etc. they most likely pass on to you? Even in characteristics, habits and sins. So, a baby or a child is not that ignorant as you might thought. It is just a matter of time that they will be inclined to believe what their parents believe. Just like a leopard, the baby is born with their spots similar to that of its parent. Got it?
Click to expand...
Are you for real? No one has argued against any of this so far. Straw man big time.

Kids are inclined to believe in God. I don't know about genetically, but it could be. We are only making claims about kids who have not been introduced to the idea/concept/word/inkling/thought of God or gods yet.

Got it?! LOL
 
Bunyip

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
lstan135 said:
Hello. Have you all ever heard of the term 'Cellular memory' or DNA? That is if your parents have certain diseases like breast cancer, stroke, diabetes. etc. they most likely pass on to you? Even in characteristics, habits and sins. So, a baby or a child is not that ignorant as you might thought. It is just a matter of time that they will be inclined to believe what their parents believe. Just like a leopard, the baby is born with their spots similar to that of its parent. Got it?
Click to expand...
Yes, and until that time the baby is ignorant of God claims - and hence atheist.
 
Awkward Fingers

Awkward Fingers

Omphaloskeptic
lstan135 said:
So, you are also saying:: until that time, not human yet. Perhaps an animal?
Click to expand...
What conversation does this even go with?!?!?!?!

Where are you getting human, or animal.
I'm honestly wondering if you're even keeping up with the conversation, or just tossing out random thoughts that are unrelated to this thread.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
leibowde84 said:
Theism = the belief in the existence of God or gods.
Atheism = the lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

They are both incredibly general terms including a multitude of subcategories. What is the problem?
Click to expand...

Theism isn't an incredibly general term. It means, the belief in a deity. The dictionary definition seems to be more strict; whatever, we can use the broad definition. The definition itself, is specific. One has to actually believe in a deity. One is not a theist, if one does not actually believe in a deity.
Atheism, the way you are proposing it, would mean not only a disbelief in deity, buck also, an ambivalent or even non-knowledge of, the concept of deity. You are proposing a definition that is not only //more than one meaning//, but one that does not have an implicit meaning when written alone. We call words like that ''meaningless''.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
leibowde84 said:
This is an absurd argument. "Theism" is a general term too. Under "theism" there is monotheism, polytheism, deism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, etc. Why would anyone expect "atheism" to be so specific, when "theism" is anything but.
Click to expand...
'theism', means a specific thing. The names of the religions, are not the 'same' thing, as saying theism. It would be the same for atheism. One wouldn't say 'atheism', if they meant to say 'Buddhism', /an atheistic branch of Buddhism/.

You are mixing up, what can be included in a description, of something, for ''meaning the same thing''.
 
Awkward Fingers

Awkward Fingers

Omphaloskeptic
disciple said:
Theism isn't an incredibly general term. It means, the belief in a deity. The dictionary definition seems to be more strict; whatever, we can use the broad definition. The definition itself, is specific. One has to actually believe in a deity. One is not a theist, if one does not actually believe in a deity.
Atheism, the way you are proposing it, would mean not only a disbelief in deity, buck also, an ambivalent or even non-knowledge of, the concept of deity. You are proposing a definition that is not only //more than one meaning//, but one that does not have an implicit meaning when written alone. We call words like that ''meaningless''.
Click to expand...
OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!! A definition with more than ONE MEANING?!?!?!
Think of the precedence that would be set!!!!!!!!!!!!
Suddenly the dictionary would have to number different meanings on the SAME WORD!!!

Think of how many words that would change!!

..oh yeah... none... most of them have that.

btw. congrats, you ended your post with a great definition of atheism.
that has been shown time after time after time after time after time.
Even on this site... go search the MULTIPLE polls on what atheism covers.
there's a lot of them.. here... don't even have to change sites...
this has been covered.
 
Bunyip

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
Awkward Fingers said:
OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!! A definition with more than ONE MEANING?!?!?!
Think of the precedence that would be set!!!!!!!!!!!!
Suddenly the dictionary would have to number different meanings on the SAME WORD!!!

Think of how many words that would change!!

..oh yeah... none... most of them have that.

btw. congrats, you ended your post with a great definition of atheism.
that has been shown time after time after time after time after time.
Even on this site... go search the MULTIPLE polls on what atheism covers.
there's a lot of them.. here... don't even have to change sites...
this has been covered.
Click to expand...
Believers tend to stick to 'debating' definitions - mainly I assume because of the absence of any evidence or logical argument to engage on. It is just a deflection.
 
D

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Awkward Fingers said:
OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!! A definition with more than ONE MEANING?!?!?!
Think of the precedence that would be set!!!!!!!!!!!!
Suddenly the dictionary would have to number different meanings on the SAME WORD!!!

Think of how many words that would change!!

..oh yeah... none... most of them have that.

btw. congrats, you ended your post with a great definition of atheism.
that has been shown time after time after time after time after time.
Even on this site... go search the MULTIPLE polls on what atheism covers.
there's a lot of them.. here... don't even have to change sites...
this has been covered.
Click to expand...

This is nonsense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top