What am I?

[lrkun]

You misunderstand me again I am never defensive, I just like to ensure my point is understood.

When I engage in conversations of this type I try to remove as much emotion and ego as possible.

I am admittedly quite wordy and I do write sentences with a style that are meant to deliver my point with force, like a punch to the stomach, but I don't see the point in balling up and becoming defensive because someone may have misunderstood me, usually due to my own fault in explaining my myself. I just enjoy typing and conversing with a certain quantity of excitement and zeal.

Blame the aspiring author inside me.

Believe me, this is me at my least hostile.

I see. Well, words don't describe emotions, unless it's written to invoke such emotion.

 

[Andiferous]

In case of doubt, rest assured, you are human.

Not necessarily.

My pet hamster is an atheist.

 

[lrkun]

My pet hamster is an atheist.

It may think of you as god though. wehehe

 

[Commander Eagle]

I guess that makes me a negative atheist then, not an agnostic atheist, because I believe that the existence of god can be proven, if it does exist and that the term "The existence of God or god or gods are currently an unproven assertion" is true.

I don't like the term disprove, because if something is disproved it just means it wasn't properly proven in the first place.

If a god is out there, we should be able to find him with the scientific method.

Existing outside of physical reality is just another way of saying "doesn't exist".

Gnostic atheist, then.

 

[lrkun]

I have been grappling with this question for a long time, and I am hoping you guys can give me some insight:

I know that I am not religious: I do not believe in any of the mainstream gods (or any mystic power, for that manner).
I know that I am not atheist: While I do not believe in god's existance, I cannot absolutely say that god does not exist.
I know that I am not agnostic: While I agree that we currently do not know if god exists or not, I disagree with the agnostic belief that we will never know if god exists or not.

So, I am a non-religious being who believes that the human race currently does not know whether or not god exists, but I do believe that at some point in the future, we will be able to prove god's existance/non-existance.

What am I?

Faithless.

 

[DEXMachina]

Thanks for the input guys; I guess I am leaning towards an Ig-something here, but I can understand why labels can be quite a turn off for many out there. I guess I just want to know a little more about labels and what they represent.

 

[lrkun]

Thanks for the input guys; I guess I am leaning towards an Ig-something here, but I can understand why labels can be quite a turn off for many out there. I guess I just want to know a little more about labels and what they represent.

Labels can be a turn off, because sometimes it describes more or less than what a person is. It's like guilt by association. wee. ^-^ So, some of us may actually want to avoid labels. Ex. me, I don't like the label atheist, but hey, that's where I fall in. I prefer the label skeptic/faithless.

 

[Deleted member 619]

Thanks for the input guys; I guess I am leaning towards an Ig-something here, but I can understand why labels can be quite a turn off for many out there. I guess I just want to know a little more about labels and what they represent.

Whatever you're leaning to, you're an atheist. All those labels conerning possession and possibility of knowledge are largely useless, and mostly just a means by which people can avoid admitting that they are atheist, I suspect because of some perceived stigma associated with the word. That the credulous have their own, woefully non-rigorous, conception of atheism isn't my problem, it's theirs. I have no active belief in a deity, so I'm an atheist. It's a true dichotomy. You're one or the other.

 

[Andiferous]

Seriously, you are not us, and thank god for that.