"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important."

[JWeinCom]

VGPolyglot said:

JWeinCom said:

Apple and atheist are both labels that we give to things that have certain properties.  If the thing has that properties that fit the label, then that's what it is.  

I meant is not someone who does not believe got exists, which is an important distinction from someone who believes god doesn't exist.  I refer to a specific god in this case, because depending on the god you propose, I may or may not call myself an atheist.  

I'm aware that the baby doesn't reject yahweh, and that's the point I was trying to make.  That there is a difference between rejecting (which is active) and not accepting (which is passive).  Most (pretty much all that I've seen) atheists define atheist as someone who does not accept that a deity exists.

I think it does advance the debate, because you need to agree to the terms beforehand, so we don't wind up with the same argument about what atheist means like we did 50 fucking times in this thread.  Once you agree, then you could move on to something of more substance.

You have to be aware of a deity to accept it though? Isn't rejection the opposite of acceptance? I agree that there needs to be clear terms beforehand, but how are we going to determine which definition to use? By the one that has more people that agree to it?

In formal logic, the opposite of A is not A.  So, the opposite of accept is not accept, which is different from reject.

An atheist speaker I like uses this as an example.  Suppose I have a 10 lb jar of gumballs.  I tell you that the jar of gumballs has an even number of gumballs in it.

If you rejected my claim that the number of gumballs is even, then you would be saying that the number is odd.  But you have no way of knowing that.  So, I'm guessing you would instead just not accept the claim.  That doesn't mean you're saying it is wrong, you're just saying that you're not convinced.

As for what definition to use, it depends on what you're arguing.  If you're arguing about what an atheist is, I'd say using the definition that atheists typically accept would be best.