I don't understand the question.

I'm both. The two conditions aren't mutually exclusive.

Absent is absent, as in not there.

If you answer no to this question:
when you have heard of the possibility, then you are not absent to the idea, you just lean towards one side.

wtf does evolution have to do with the existence of a God? Gunth, just because you cant understand the dictionary, doesnt mean that everyone has to use *your* definition of words just because it makes you feel better.

Sorry, I speak English, not Gunthanese. I've already explained why this is wrong. You are either too stupid to understand it or too dishonest to acknowledge it. I'm past caring which. Goodnight.

It doesn't matter, you know very well it could of landed on heads. Therefore the possibility is not absent.

Yea, that was just so hard to understand. I understand you have to run along now.

Same difference. The point is that it's NOT a belief.

Thinking that there is a 1% chance for god is not believing in god. Man, you really need to get your logic straightened out dude. I hope posting here is at least helping you a little with that.

If I think there is a 1% chance of rain today, I do not believe it will rain today. Insomuch as I will not prepare for rain. I will keep my tee time and dress as though it won't rain. How is that NOT a lack of belief?!! Now if things change, I reserve the right to change my opinion. So the fact that I think there is <.001% probability that your god exists, doesn't mean I believe in your god. (btw- don't hold me to that percentage. It's off the top of my head).

In other words, I'm not willing to say there is definitely no god just as I'd never say it definitely will not rain. I might say, I highly doubt it will rain today. I mean, I really really doubt it will rain. I say the same thing about the existence of your god. Again, that is more a LACK of belief that something is true! Hope that helps.

That's why he's explained to you that he's agnostic several times already. This is a very common position amongst atheists.

'k, Gunth moves to official troll status.

Uh duh.

Lestat, what % of belief in God do you need to believe in God? It is not my logic that need straightening out here.

That's the thing, the chance it will rain is not absent. The chance that God doesn't exist is not absent for him. It may not be all there, it may barely be there, but it is not absent. Therefore, not an atheist.
Atheism is not the lack of belief, it is the absence or rejection of belief that God exists.

I am not trolling and you are well aware of that. So don't stoop to the lies now, that is for the newbies.

Too many posts since I read last, anyone want to tell me if anything interesting was said? Any posts worth reading?

See? Definitely a troll. No-one that stupid could possibly operate a computer. Save yourselves the effort, guys.

Just because someone is lacking in money, does not mean they have no money.

No offense, but get real.

So RGT isn't an atheists den anymore its an agnostic den?

You are an agnostic.

It's an 'absence of belief' den, which is somehow different from a 'lack of belief' den as Gunth is struggling to explain.

No, it is the 'lack of belief den' which is different then the 'absence of belief den' which you guys are struggling to understand.

Perhaps you don't know what the term atheism means. It's not entirely your fault, because there are different accepted definitions. Basically, theism or atheism refers to belief, and gnosticism or agnosticism refers to knowledge. I am actually an agnostic atheist. That is, I do not believe in god, but concede I don't have definitive knowledge to know for sure.

It is my opinion that most rational atheists fall into this category. While there are some who claim 100% certainty that there is no god, I find that almost as illogical as those who claim 100% certainty that there is.

I do reject your claim that the Christian god exists. I can do this while acknowledging the possibility that he does. If you claimed that you were a 2010 gold medal Olympic champion, I would reject that claim while acknowledging there is some small chance that it is true. However, I remain completely absent of the belief that I am currently discussing god with a gold medal champion.

You might be arguing semantics here, but that's a bad thing for you to do, since you have enough trouble even with things that are not so subtle. I suggest staying away from semantics for a while if that's what you're doing.

Not necessarily depending on your definition of agnostic.

ag·nos·tic (g-nstk)
n.
1.
a. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.


I dont know knowledge of God is unknowable i only know idk.

So im not an atheist and possibly not an agnostic depending on which version of agnostic your using. Now what?

Please provide an example if you make a claim like this.

b. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism. (i don't know how you can just leave this definition out)

No belief in 'x' vs belief in 'not x.'

I am the one explaining the difference...

Yet you don't even know the difference.