Discussion: com_dotnet
Afficher un message
Vieux 18/09/2007, 16h23   #123
Steve
Aucun Avatar
 
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur:
Par défaut Re: OT - Oh, so OT.


"Shelly" <sheldonlg.news@asap-consult.com> wrote in message
news:13evm5v1at70h21@corp.supernews.com...
> Steve, I know that atheists like to claim that it is "lack of belief", but
> go to websters at www.m-w.com. It specifically states that it is
> "disbelief in the existence of deity". What you call "atheism" is really
> "agnosticism". Again, from Websters:


negative, ghost rider.

i am without belief in god. remember your latin. i am without belief in god.
whatever you want to call that, that's what i am. i see no evidence for god,
and in such a state, i cannot be agnostic. i do not allow for the
possibility of god's existence due to lack of evidence. agnostics believe
that god could possibly exist, we just cannot know for sure. that is NOT me.

i don't know where i'm losing you here, shelly. perhaps we have different
versions of websters. perhaps as she aged, meriam couldn't herself
either and started using disbelief - which means there is evidence there is
something in which to believe...a gross presumption. try other dictionaries.
they all differ. hell, dictionary.com definition shows many sources. here's
what i love seeing...it shows complete lack of understanding which is why we
are having this discourse.

american heritage:

disbelief or denial of the existence of god or gods.

right next to:

a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

doesn't denial mean there is unequivically something in evidence for me to
deny? are you getting my point?


  Réponse avec citation
 
Page generated in 0,05088 seconds with 9 queries