Post by Arlon10 on Dec 3, 2020 0:01:20 GMT
FilmFlaneur said: [full text here]
< clips >
- The dictionary definition of 'atheism' and 'agnosticism' in a religious context are quite clear,
- Here you are just being disingenuous
- you offer no substantiation
- Those would be the definitions which are arbitrary
- The essential point you still miss is that no matter how "clear" the definition is it remains just a label, not a fact. As I have explained to you changes in the world have made that label utterly useless. Your mental condition and that of many atheists and fundamentalists prevents you from distinguishing labels from facts. Have you noticed how fundamentalists are so determined for you to accept what is a label, "Jesus," without any clear idea to what facts that label attaches? The facts are that there are no more Gnostics. They died out after religion became sophisticated. They left no legacy. Everyone in the entire world is not a member of that extinct group. Everyone is agnostic by that definition. While the label is clear, your perception of reality is not and you cannot show any modern use for such a label. It does not distinguish one thing from another. My definition has modern use. The meaning "having no decision" distinguishes different existing people as some do and some do not have any decision. You are still trying to establish some "fact" by depending entirely on some "label." You absolutely need to stop doing that.
- No, I just have a larger, more versatile vocabulary than you do.
- That's just your delusion.
- While indeed definitions are arbitrary, reality is not. Here is your problem again distinguishing labels (arbitrary) and facts (not arbitrary). There is no "fact" in your label, and there is no use at all for your label, except to cloud the facts, which is rather obviously someone's intention. You absolutely must stop trying to establish facts with no more than a dictionary, which is merely a list of labels.