m not trying to be confrontational. That's just my honest opinion.
Ok, here are some things that I wrote over the course of the thread. This should help to clear up my position so that new people here don't have to sift through my posts.
"God" of course, needs to be defined. But it is not up to me to define something that I don't even believe in. Other than in debates like this, "god" is not part of my vocabulary. It is up to the person who claims to believe in "god," to tell me what they mean. But let's go with "god" as the christian/jewish god (although it still needs to be defined further). I am an atheist with respect to this god. If someone says "god is everything," then I would just question weather "god" is the appropriate word to use.
In a court of law, the defendant is found either 'guilty or not guilty.' Not 'guilty or innocent.' This is because there is a claim being made that the defendant is guilty. This claim is either true or untrue. You could also make the claim that the defendant is innocent. And that claim is either true or untrue. So there are four potential positions to take, not two.
Of course, you can't prove someone's innocence. In finding someone 'not guilty,' it is not a statement that they are innocent. A jury member might have their hunch (with varying certainty depending on the case/evidence).
I find god "not guilty" of existing. That is, there is not enough evidence to verify the claim that "god" exists. I am not addressing the claim that "god doesn't exist".I am addressing those who claim that god does exist. The burden of proof is on them to show god's existence.
I can't claim to know there is no god, but I do personally believe there is no god. I believe this with the same level of certainty that I believe there is no tooth fairy. I don't like to call myself agnostic about god for the same reason you don't like to call yourself agnostic regarding the tooth fairy.
It seems that the word "atheist" is generally misunderstood. Over the course of this thread, I have heard that "atheists claim to know that there is no god" countless times. There might be a very small minority of self proclaimed atheists that claim this. But believe me, the most prominent atheists in the world are agnostic as well (if only as a technicality). It is those who have not taken the time to understand the atheist position who see it as dogmatic.
If the word "agnostic" was generally understood to mean someone who does not believe in " " until they see evidence for it, I would use the word "agnostic." And of course, that is what agnostic means. But if society understood it to mean that, then the word "agnostic" would have the same negative connotation as atheism. Society takes "agnostic" to mean "well ya never know." That's why you wouldn't feel comfortable (I'm assuming) calling yourself "agnostic" regarding the tooth fairy, even though you are one. You wouldn't feel comfortable saying "You never know" regarding the tooth fairy, even though you are agnostic about it. Yet you do feel comfortable saying you "don't believe" in the tooth fairy.
Now imagine someone coming along and trying to pigeonhole your beliefs - either you label yourself as "agnostic" regarding the tooth fairy, or you have an unreasonable disbelief in the tooth fairy. That's what it feels like to be an atheist.
