Re: What is your religious position?

[commonsense]

See my point?

Yes. Semantics. Either you believe that a god exists, for whatever reason (some form of theism) or you don't, for whatever reason (some form of atheism).

Either way, whether we agree or not, the "nothing" option isn't there and isn't likely to be added since Hermes no longer posts here.

Do you see my point?

I am of exactly the same opinion as Nam and can clearly explain my standpoint , hopefully you will also understand Nam's.

Atheism is the only term used in the world to describe a "non belief"

I do not believe it's the "only" one but it is the most common one used.

...stating you are an atheist gives credibility to theism as being something tangible to be apposed too.

This isn't necessarily accurate, either.  From my standpoint, "atheist/atheism" is defined as holding a non-belief in something, and in this point: God/god -- which, in my opinion, implies that there's such a being not to believe in. However, the definition itself has changed slightly over the past 6 hundred or so years to be specifically about one thing, and then be about another[1].  People usually add additional definitions to a word rather than just change the definition of the word -- as one can note in almost any dictionary.

We do not need to label ourselves for not believing in boogie men

"boogie men" are actually based on real people; theives in the night, murderers, etc., like some fairy tales are actually based on something that was real at one point and just rewritten to create a fictional story.

...god has no more credibility to me than a boogie man .

Stating it this way, in which you have, implies that there's a "god".  See my point?

If someone tells me they are a christian , I ask them if they are getting help for their mental condition

I disagree with this.  There's no need for such hostilities towards people; it's like feeding fire fire.  Christians are mainly who/what they are because of "Jesus" (who may or may not have existed), rather than the deity that they hold above him or as him.

,I also feel obligated to explain that while I may care about them as human beings ,I am not a qualified psychologist so sharing their condition with me will be of no benefit.

If you cared about them, then would you not insult them by implying that they are crazy for being a Christian?

-Nam

1.	this change mainly came in the 18th century

Fair enough sorry I tried to support your view.

[Azdgari]

The view you tried to support wasn't his, so why respond like that?

[commonsense]

The view you tried to support wasn't his, so why respond like that?

I read every response in this thread before replying , Nam claims he is not an Atheist or any of the things listed in the Poll , I feel the same way and don't accept any of those labels , , it was genuine attempt to support his position while stating mine.
I don't know about yourself but when someone attempts to support me in some way , my natural response is "thanks for your support" or "thanks for trying to help" but instead he responded by picking to pieces everything I said , hence my response "Fair enough sorry I tried to support your view".

[Azdgari]

You could not support his position without understanding it.  Nam's post was (among other things) a way of letting you know that you don't understand it.

[commonsense]

You could not support his position without understanding it.  Nam's post was (among other things) a way of letting you know that you don't understand it.

Are you Nam's father or keeper ? , there was really no need for your post either as it was none of your concern, unless you also don't think Nam explained himself well enough , Operator_011 doesn't seem to understand either but as you claim to understand Nam's position better than he is able to explain or Operator_011 and Myself can understand, maybe you could do something more constructive to increase your post count and explain it for all of us!

[Azdgari]

Posts on this forum are not by invitation from others.  I felt like responding with my 2 cents, so I responded.

I don't claim to fully understand Nam's objection myself, but I also know enough not to pretend to.

[Nam]

, , it was genuine attempt to support his position while stating mine.

You obviously didn't understand my position to its full extent; or there would have been no need to comment on particular parts of yours, the way I did, no?

I don't know about yourself but when someone attempts to support me in some way , my natural response is "thanks for your support" or "thanks for trying to help" but instead he responded by picking to pieces everything I said , hence my response "Fair enough sorry I tried to support your view".

This isn't about support; it's a discussion on what is, and what isn't. Period.

-Nam

[Nam]

I don't claim to fully understand Nam's objection myself, but I also know enough not to pretend to.

I wish I knew how to explain it more to one's basic understanding but, at this time, I do not.  Perhaps in the future.

-Nam

[commonsense]

, , it was genuine attempt to support his position while stating mine.

I don't know about yourself but when someone attempts to support me in some way , my natural response is "thanks for your support" or "thanks for trying to help" but instead he responded by picking to pieces everything I said , hence my response "Fair enough sorry I tried to support your view".

This isn't about support; it's a discussion on what is, and what isn't. Period.

-Nam

I get it Nam , You are so deeply intellectual you can't explain yourself , How Dare I even attempt to assist , what a disgraceful act I commited.
 
Gratitude is obviously as foreign to you as your ability to explain your position ., I do understand for some people saying thank you is a vastly complex challenge and comes at great personal expense.

If you do find a way to explain yourself I'm already not interested , it appears no one else is either anymore.

[Azdgari]

The whole idea of offering moral support to someone's point militates against the principle that things should be accepted if true, and rejected if false.

[Nam]

I get it Nam , You are so deeply intellectual you can't explain yourself , How Dare I even attempt to assist , what a disgraceful act I commited.

If I were "deeply intellectual" then I'd be able to explain myself better, no?[1]
 

Gratitude is obviously as foreign to you as your ability to explain your position., I do understand for some people saying thank you is a vastly complex challenge and comes at great personal expense.

I am not a nice person.  I do not pretend to be otherwise.  Perhaps you should learn about those you try to defend or insult before siding with them; the discussion would go much further in the future.

If you do find a way to explain yourself I'm already not interested , it appears no one else is either anymore.

Who cares if they are or you are?

-Nam

1.	note: I get your snard remark.