Total Posts:205|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Is atheism the belief that there is no God?

gcfloyd
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 9:47:07 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Atheism is the disbelief in a God. This is a probability statement rather than an arrogant outright claim of certainty. A very important distinction most people do not realise. After all, one cannot prove a negative.

However, this inability does not prevent us from judging based on evidence, reason and experience the likeliness of any given God. It is not a 50/50 scenario. In the exact way we conclude unicorns are probably a hoax, we so conclude with God also.

I should add there is a minority of atheist who do make the claim we can prove God does not exist, however this is an unfashionable opinion in the community.
Jerry947
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 9:58:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Atheists used to say/claim that there was no God. But then atheists realized that they couldn't support the claim (some could...the atheists that exist now can't).

So now atheists try to redefine what atheism is. Now it supposedly means to have lack of belief in God (rocks have lack of belief as well) which gets us no where intellectually.
gcfloyd
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 10:15:46 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:58:48 PM, Jerry947 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Atheists used to say/claim that there was no God. But then atheists realized that they couldn't support the claim (some could...the atheists that exist now can't).

So now atheists try to redefine what atheism is. Now it supposedly means to have lack of belief in God (rocks have lack of belief as well) which gets us no where intellectually.

No intellectually honest atheist would ever make the claim God does not exist with the 100 per cent certainty and you will find the vast majority follow this trend. That would be the kind of arrogance we mainly see from theists.

I also recommend you open almost any dictionary worth the time and look up the definition. It is consistently the same. Also, we are under no obligation to propose arguments against your beliefs. You are the one making the positive claim that an immaterial, transcendent, all-powerful being exists and wants to have a personal relationship with one species of primates on a single planet in the universe so you are the one that bares the burden of presenting at least some sort of proof. This is philosophy 101.

Not quite sure what the rock analogy is suppose to show other than even rocks have a more reasonably deduced position than yourself.
ILoveSitarMusic
Posts: 225
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 10:25:19 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:47:07 PM, gcfloyd wrote:
Atheism is the disbelief in a God. This is a probability statement rather than an arrogant outright claim of certainty. A very important distinction most people do not realise. After all, one cannot prove a negative.

However, this inability does not prevent us from judging based on evidence, reason and experience the likeliness of any given God. It is not a 50/50 scenario. In the exact way we conclude unicorns are probably a hoax, we so conclude with God also.

I should add there is a minority of atheist who do make the claim we can prove God does not exist, however this is an unfashionable opinion in the community.

You can't spell disbelief without belif. Atheists believe that there is no God.
Jerry947
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 10:27:03 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
No intellectually honest atheist would ever make the claim God does not exist with the 100 per cent certainty and you will find the vast majority follow this trend. That would be the kind of arrogance we mainly see from theists.

My favorite atheists who actually had arguments did make these kind of claims. And they had some decent arguments. And I can also tell you that many atheists now make those same claims except the problem is that they don't know how to support what they say.

I also recommend you open almost any dictionary worth the time and look up the definition. It is consistently the same. Also, we are under no obligation to propose arguments against your beliefs. You are the one making the positive claim that an immaterial, transcendent, all-powerful being exists and wants to have a personal relationship with one species of primates on a single planet in the universe so you are the one that bares the burden of presenting at least some sort of proof. This is philosophy 101.

If you aren't making a claim then I guess you just listen to the evidence provided and then rightly (plus respectively) question it.

Not quite sure what the rock analogy is suppose to show other than even rocks have a more reasonably deduced position than yourself.

I didn't know that rocks could take positions...is that something that atheists are taught?

That said, I find it interesting that you claim my position is unreasonable. If you find belief in God to be unreasonable...then wouldn't this mean that you would say that there is no God?
gcfloyd
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 10:44:30 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 10:27:03 PM, Jerry947 wrote:


My favorite atheists who actually had arguments did make these kind of claims. And they had some decent arguments. And I can also tell you that many atheists now make those same claims except the problem is that they don't know how to support what they say.


Please entertain us with some examples rather than making vague comments which unsurprisingly support your opinions.


If you aren't making a claim then I guess you just listen to the evidence provided and then rightly (plus respectively) question it.


Indeed, I have listened and read a plethora of theist evidence and arguments, questioned it and concluded belief in God is not reasonable.

I didn't know that rocks could take positions...is that something that atheists are taught?

That said, I find it interesting that you claim my position is unreasonable. If you find belief in God to be unreasonable...then wouldn't this mean that you would say that there is no God?

Rocks cannot take positions because they are not conscious beings capable of thought. I think you will find this to be an established area of expertise. To answer yours and OP's comment, yes indeed I would say there is no God. However, this completely different to saying the existing of a God is impossible. And this is exactly what I'm trying to get across. I may disbelief in unicorns, but I would not dare claim they are impossible beings in principle. This is an exercise you can perform yourself, simply by considering Gods of religions other than your's. Why is that you think that Allah, Zeus and Thor do not exist? Sure seems possible to me if we grant your God can exist. Clearly you are atheists in respect to all three of them, I have just gone one further.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 11:22:48 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.

Just wondering why do you consider her question bigoted? I can't see how you found it bigoted, please explain?
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Jerry947
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 11:23:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Please entertain us with some examples rather than making vague comments which unsurprisingly support your opinions.

The statement I made wasn't really an argument. But I have always liked atheists Nietzsche and John Paul Sartre. There are many others...but these two are my favorite.

Indeed, I have listened and read a plethora of theist evidence and arguments, questioned it and concluded belief in God is not reasonable.

Have you read the arguments against God's existence and have you ever been to a church if you don't mind me asking?

Rocks cannot take positions because they are not conscious beings capable of thought. I think you will find this to be an established area of expertise. To answer yours and OP's comment, yes indeed I would say there is no God. However, this completely different to saying the existing of a God is impossible. And this is exactly what I'm trying to get across. I may disbelief in unicorns, but I would not dare claim they are impossible beings in principle. This is an exercise you can perform yourself, simply by considering Gods of religions other than your's. Why is that you think that Allah, Zeus and Thor do not exist? Sure seems possible to me if we grant your God can exist. Clearly you are atheists in respect to all three of them, I have just gone one further.

a. If you make the claim "there is no God," you have to be able to support it.

b. The person who invented Allah originally thought that his text (the Koran) was demon inspired so I don't think it would that hard to show evidence against that god's existence.

c. Zeus and Thor are clearly myths and that wouldn't be that hard to prove.

d. Jesus on the other hand was a real person and has some great evidence backing him up.

e. Your argument about me being atheists to the other Gods is something Richard Dawkins uses and it is a ridiculous argument. An atheist is a person that rejects the existence of all Gods. Since I don't, I am not an atheist in any respect.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 11:46:49 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 11:22:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.

Just wondering why do you consider her question bigoted?
In English the word "bigot" refers to a person whose habitual state of mind includes an obstinate, irrational, or unfair intolerance of ideas, opinions, ethnicities, or beliefs that differ from their own, and intolerance of the people who hold them. [https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Chloe, I invite you to consider how many people who know anything about the history of irreligious thought also believe that atheism is -- historically or ontologically -- the belief that there is no god.

This view is born entirely of ignorance and intolerance. Ignorance because it doesn't withstand independent historical or sociological scrutiny; intolerance because: a) it shouldn't matter to the tolerant; and b) it matters to certain theists nevertheless because they want to cast atheism as the rejection of an extant being, rather than rejection of mythologies, religious authorities, or the validity of the claims.
Stronn
Posts: 318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2016 11:52:15 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 10:25:19 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:47:07 PM, gcfloyd wrote:
Atheism is the disbelief in a God. This is a probability statement rather than an arrogant outright claim of certainty. A very important distinction most people do not realise. After all, one cannot prove a negative.

However, this inability does not prevent us from judging based on evidence, reason and experience the likeliness of any given God. It is not a 50/50 scenario. In the exact way we conclude unicorns are probably a hoax, we so conclude with God also.

I should add there is a minority of atheist who do make the claim we can prove God does not exist, however this is an unfashionable opinion in the community.

You can't spell disbelief without belif. Atheists believe that there is no God.

Try nonbelief instead, or lack of belief, if it will help you understand.

And please realize the absurdity of asking atheists how they define atheism, then arguing with them that their definition is not correct.
Fly
Posts: 2,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:00:35 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

It gets complicated, and atheists are not all unified under some godless pope-- far from it-- but I would explain it like this: atheists lack a belief in god or gods. Under that umbrella, they may believe certain more defined gods, like the God of the Bible or Quran, do not exist. Come to think of it, Christians generally believe that the God of the Quran (aka Allah) does not exist, either!
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
gcfloyd
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:01:09 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Have you read the arguments against God's existence and have you ever been to a church if you don't mind me asking?:

I have been baptised into the Christian faith and have been to church many times. And yes, of course I have examined and read the arguments against the existence of God. This is why, now, I am an atheist.
a. If you make the claim "there is no God," you have to be able to support it.


The claim is supported plenty by the fact no theist argument stands up to close scrutiny or conclusively shows God does indeed exist. It will always be an article of faith in the end whether you believe in God or not. Faith is not a rational mode of decision making.

b. The person who invented Allah originally thought that his text (the Koran) was demon inspired so I don't think it would that hard to show evidence against that god's existence.


Muhammad (the person you are referring to) thought no such thing. The texts (allegedly) were passed to him through Devine revelation by Archangel Gabriel. Perhaps you may heard of him from somewhere else....

c. Zeus and Thor are clearly myths and that wouldn't be that hard to prove.


I would sincerely love to see you attempt to prove that the worship of Zeus and Thor is any less real than the worship Yahweh. Many generations of people thought they were very real. What possible evidence can you give to show otherwise?
d. Jesus on the other hand was a real person and has some great evidence backing him up.


Jesus may very well have been a real person and this is somewhat of a concencus among biblical scholars. However I would strongly dispute him being the son of God or any attributed miracles he may have performed. That would be something there is certainly not a concencus on.
e. Your argument about me being atheists to the other Gods is something Richard Dawkins uses and it is a ridiculous argument. An atheist is a person that rejects the existence of all Gods. Since I don't, I am not an atheist in any respect.:

I would not be so quick to dismiss it. You're simply an atheist+1. That's pretty close, considering you have rejected literally thousands upon thousands of Gods.
Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:02:18 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 11:46:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:22:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.

Just wondering why do you consider her question bigoted?
In English the word "bigot" refers to a person whose habitual state of mind includes an obstinate, irrational, or unfair intolerance of ideas, opinions, ethnicities, or beliefs that differ from their own, and intolerance of the people who hold them. [https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Chloe, I invite you to consider how many people who know anything about the history of irreligious thought also believe that atheism is -- historically or ontologically -- the belief that there is no god.

This view is born entirely of ignorance and intolerance. Ignorance because it doesn't withstand independent historical or sociological scrutiny; intolerance because: a) it shouldn't matter to the tolerant; and b) it matters to certain theists nevertheless because they want to cast atheism as the rejection of an extant being, rather than rejection of mythologies, religious authorities, or the validity of the claims.

Interesting. I think i can see your point now. However if someone described my views as believing no gods exist I would not be offended. I wouldn't find technicalities over definitions offensive.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
Jerry947
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:21:20 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
I have been baptised into the Christian faith and have been to church many times. And yes, of course I have examined and read the arguments against the existence of God. This is why, now, I am an atheist.

It is impossible for people who had a relationship with God (Christians) to become Atheists (people who deny God's existence). But the information is still good to know.

The claim is supported plenty by the fact no theist argument stands up to close scrutiny or conclusively shows God does indeed exist. It will always be an article of faith in the end whether you believe in God or not. Faith is not a rational mode of decision making.

Absence of evidence is not support of anything. That said, I completely disagree with what you are saying about theistic arguments. As for faith, I assume you have faith in many people and I would assume that your faith (like mine) is based on evidence.

Muhammad (the person you are referring to) thought no such thing. The texts (allegedly) were passed to him through Devine revelation by Archangel Gabriel. Perhaps you may heard of him from somewhere else....

No. Muhammad originally thought that the Koran's words were demon inspired. It wasn't until later when one of his many wives convinced him otherwise. You should look it up if you have some time.

I would sincerely love to see you attempt to prove that the worship of Zeus and Thor is any less real than the worship Yahweh. Many generations of people thought they were very real. What possible evidence can you give to show otherwise?

I have no doubt that people worship Zeus just like people worship Yahweh. I have no interest in disproving that. On the other hand, providing evidence against the existence of Zeus is not something I think would be too difficult.

Jesus may very well have been a real person and this is somewhat of a concencus among biblical scholars. However I would strongly dispute him being the son of God or any attributed miracles he may have performed. That would be something there is certainly not a concencus on.

Noted...though the writings (biblical/non-biblical) of the people the time period make the case for him being the Son of God pretty convincing.

I would not be so quick to dismiss it. You're simply an atheist+1. That's pretty close, considering you have rejected literally thousands upon thousands of Gods.

I have really good reasons for rejecting those other Gods. That said, I don't change definitions of words to make arguments. To be an atheist is to reject all Gods. Since I don't, I am not an atheist.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:28:54 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/21/2016 12:02:18 AM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:46:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:22:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.

Just wondering why do you consider her question bigoted?
In English the word "bigot" refers to a person whose habitual state of mind includes an obstinate, irrational, or unfair intolerance of ideas, opinions, ethnicities, or beliefs that differ from their own, and intolerance of the people who hold them. [https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Chloe, I invite you to consider how many people who know anything about the history of irreligious thought also believe that atheism is -- historically or ontologically -- the belief that there is no god.

This view is born entirely of ignorance and intolerance. Ignorance because it doesn't withstand independent historical or sociological scrutiny; intolerance because: a) it shouldn't matter to the tolerant; and b) it matters to certain theists nevertheless because they want to cast atheism as the rejection of an extant being, rather than rejection of mythologies, religious authorities, or the validity of the claims.

Interesting. I think i can see your point now. However if someone described my views as believing no gods exist I would not be offended. I wouldn't find technicalities over definitions offensive.

I'm not offended either, Chloe. But it's still bigoted, and how often does bigoted thought produce constructive discussion?
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:33:31 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Yes and no. Strong atheism is. Weak atheism is just disbelief (or "lack of belief") in God.
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
AWSM0055
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:37:38 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 10:25:19 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:47:07 PM, gcfloyd wrote:
Atheism is the disbelief in a God. This is a probability statement rather than an arrogant outright claim of certainty. A very important distinction most people do not realise. After all, one cannot prove a negative.

However, this inability does not prevent us from judging based on evidence, reason and experience the likeliness of any given God. It is not a 50/50 scenario. In the exact way we conclude unicorns are probably a hoax, we so conclude with God also.

I should add there is a minority of atheist who do make the claim we can prove God does not exist, however this is an unfashionable opinion in the community.

You can't spell disbelief without belif. Atheists believe that there is no God.

You can't spell irresponsible with responsible. Therefore anyone who is irresponsible is responsible *facepalm*.
"Evolution proves necessity is the mother of invention" - David Henson

"Calling my atheism a religion, is like calling my non-stamp-collecting a hobby" - MagicAintReal 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Matt8800: "When warring men kidnap damsels of the enemy, what do they do?"

Jerry947: "They give them the option of marriage."

Matt8800: "Correct! You won idiot of the year award!"

http://explosm.net...
Chloe8
Posts: 2,614
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:41:42 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/21/2016 12:28:54 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/21/2016 12:02:18 AM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:46:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:22:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.

Just wondering why do you consider her question bigoted?
In English the word "bigot" refers to a person whose habitual state of mind includes an obstinate, irrational, or unfair intolerance of ideas, opinions, ethnicities, or beliefs that differ from their own, and intolerance of the people who hold them. [https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Chloe, I invite you to consider how many people who know anything about the history of irreligious thought also believe that atheism is -- historically or ontologically -- the belief that there is no god.

This view is born entirely of ignorance and intolerance. Ignorance because it doesn't withstand independent historical or sociological scrutiny; intolerance because: a) it shouldn't matter to the tolerant; and b) it matters to certain theists nevertheless because they want to cast atheism as the rejection of an extant being, rather than rejection of mythologies, religious authorities, or the validity of the claims.

Interesting. I think i can see your point now. However if someone described my views as believing no gods exist I would not be offended. I wouldn't find technicalities over definitions offensive.

I'm not offended either, Chloe. But it's still bigoted, and how often does bigoted thought produce constructive discussion?

Agree bigoted comments hinder discussion. I see your point that the terminology used can be seen as provocative and the thread is effectively pointless as it makes no sense for a theist to want to impose their definition of atheism upon atheists.
"I don't need experience.to knock you out. I'm a man. that's all I need to beat you and any woman."

Fatihah, in his delusion that he could knock out any woman while bragging about being able to knock me out. An example of 7th century Islamic thinking inspired by his hero the paedophile Muhammad.
gcfloyd
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:49:23 AM
Posted: 8 months ago

It is impossible for people who had a relationship with God (Christians) to become Atheists (people who deny God's existence). But the information is still good to know.


Believe me it is more than possible, I can testify to that myself. Many atheists come from religious backgrounds but lose their faith later in life. It is a very well know fact that even the clergy (priests etc) which are the people arguably closest to God become atheists. Interestingly, they often hide this fact since the only job they can do is preach. Check out www.clergyproject.org


Absence of evidence is not support of anything. That said, I completely disagree with what you are saying about theistic arguments. As for faith, I assume you have faith in many people and I would assume that your faith (like mine) is based on evidence.


Absence of evidence is absolutely support for something being false. You simply can't deny that fact. I accept your disagreement as I can completely see how you may find the arguments much more compelling than myself since grant the existence of God as a given. I'm going to have to completely disagree with you on the last sentence there. Faith is by definition (in religious context) - belief with any/good evidence. To believe in something based on no evidence or poor evidence is irrational and commits you to worldviews which are ridiculous.


No. Muhammad originally thought that the Koran's words were demon inspired. It wasn't until later when one of his many wives convinced him otherwise. You should look it up if you have some time.


I am aware of his supposed history of demon possession during childhood and yet it says nothing of the fact he was apparently visited by an angel to transcribe the Koran. If we apply faith in order to believe this, how does one go about disproving it happened.



I have no doubt that people worship Zeus just like people worship Yahweh. I have no interest in disproving that. On the other hand, providing evidence against the existence of Zeus is not something I think would be too difficult.

I challenge you to provide us with the conclusive knock down argument against the existence of Zeus. If it is so easy. I'm sure it will prove to be an interesting experience for you she you find it to be impossible.

Noted...though the writings (biblical/non-biblical) of the people the time period make the case for him being the Son of God pretty convincing.


The vast majority of the written accounts about Jesus are written generations after the actual events, passed through oral traditions. I really wouldn't characterise them as 'pretty convincing' in showing he is the son of God either, that claim would require a lot more.


I have really good reasons for rejecting those other Gods. That said, I don't change definitions of words to make arguments. To be an atheist is to reject all Gods. Since I don't, I am not an atheist.:

I really don't think you have good reasons for rejecting those Gods other than the geographic location, family and culture you have been born into. If you applied the same amount of time to investigating your own cult, you would find it to be just as implausible.
gcfloyd
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:52:26 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/21/2016 12:49:23 AM, gcfloyd wrote:

It is impossible for people who had a relationship with God (Christians) to become Atheists (people who deny God's existence). But the information is still good to know.


Believe me it is more than possible, I can testify to that myself. Many atheists come from religious backgrounds but lose their faith later in life. It is a very well know fact that even the clergy (priests etc) which are the people arguably closest to God become atheists. Interestingly, they often hide this fact since the only job they can do is preach. Check out www.clergyproject.org


Absence of evidence is not support of anything. That said, I completely disagree with what you are saying about theistic arguments. As for faith, I assume you have faith in many people and I would assume that your faith (like mine) is based on evidence.


Absence of evidence is absolutely support for something being false. You simply can't deny that fact. I accept your disagreement as I can completely see how you may find the arguments much more compelling than myself since grant the existence of God as a given. I'm going to have to completely disagree with you on the last sentence there. Faith is by definition (in religious context) - belief with any/good evidence. To believe in something based on no evidence or poor evidence is irrational and commits you to worldviews which are ridiculous.



No. Muhammad originally thought that the Koran's words were demon inspired. It wasn't until later when one of his many wives convinced him otherwise. You should look it up if you have some time.


I am aware of his supposed history of demon possession during childhood and yet it says nothing of the fact he was apparently visited by an angel to transcribe the Koran. If we apply faith in order to believe this, how does one go about disproving it happened.





I have no doubt that people worship Zeus just like people worship Yahweh. I have no interest in disproving that. On the other hand, providing evidence against the existence of Zeus is not something I think would be too difficult.

I challenge you to provide us with the conclusive knock down argument against the existence of Zeus. If it is so easy. I'm sure it will prove to be an interesting experience for you she you find it to be impossible.

Noted...though the writings (biblical/non-biblical) of the people the time period make the case for him being the Son of God pretty convincing.


The vast majority of the written accounts about Jesus are written generations after the actual events, passed through oral traditions. I really wouldn't characterise them as 'pretty convincing' in showing he is the son of God either, that claim would require a lot more.


I have really good reasons for rejecting those other Gods. That said, I don't change definitions of words to make arguments. To be an atheist is to reject all Gods. Since I don't, I am not an atheist.:

I really don't think you have good reasons for rejecting those Gods other than the geographic location, family and culture you have been born into. If you applied the same amount of time to investigating your own cult, you would find it to be just as implausible.

Sorry about the grammar. I'm writing in my phone.
Fly
Posts: 2,046
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 12:54:05 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/21/2016 12:28:54 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/21/2016 12:02:18 AM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:46:49 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 11:22:48 PM, Chloe8 wrote:
At 3/20/2016 10:45:18 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief
The term 'atheist' has been defined and redefined by religious majorities. It comes from two Greek words meaning 'living without (my) gods' [http://www.etymonline.com...], and has even been used in the past to describe Christians in pagan-majority Rome [https://en.wikisource.org...].

Just as there's no reason for the religious to call themselves atheist, there's no reason for atheists to call themselves atheistic, except to the extent that religious majorities want and expect them to believe. And to the extent that the religious care more about whether atheists accept their doctrines more than why they don't, the religious typically lump all atheists together regardless of their views, and then mischaracterise them in the manner that the religious have vilified one another since the ancient Israelites.

There is no reason for atheists to explain their beliefs to the religious who seek only to vilify them, ILSM, nor any reason to have to refute the misrepresentation of their beliefs to those who have no sincere interest in them.

Consequently, my suggestion is that you keep your bigoted opinions to yourself, and ask smarter questions instead.

Just wondering why do you consider her question bigoted?
In English the word "bigot" refers to a person whose habitual state of mind includes an obstinate, irrational, or unfair intolerance of ideas, opinions, ethnicities, or beliefs that differ from their own, and intolerance of the people who hold them. [https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Chloe, I invite you to consider how many people who know anything about the history of irreligious thought also believe that atheism is -- historically or ontologically -- the belief that there is no god.

This view is born entirely of ignorance and intolerance. Ignorance because it doesn't withstand independent historical or sociological scrutiny; intolerance because: a) it shouldn't matter to the tolerant; and b) it matters to certain theists nevertheless because they want to cast atheism as the rejection of an extant being, rather than rejection of mythologies, religious authorities, or the validity of the claims.

Interesting. I think i can see your point now. However if someone described my views as believing no gods exist I would not be offended. I wouldn't find technicalities over definitions offensive.

I'm not offended either, Chloe. But it's still bigoted, and how often does bigoted thought produce constructive discussion?

Hey, Ruv, this is precisely the sort of claim I was telling you about awhile back:

"It is impossible for people who had a relationship with God (Christians) to become Atheists (people who deny God's existence)."

It is one of the larger debates in Christendom (can salvation be lost?) and real life testimonies cause none too little cognitive dissonance for some, and those who believe it cannot be lost are forced to make rather large, invasive assumptions about the personal experiences of others.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 1:37:16 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Atheists have churches. Yes, it is a belief.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 1:51:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Ask an Atheist "Does God exist?"

If they say "Possible I don't Know" they are agnostic and honest.

If they say "No" they deny, reject God and use the definition of Atheism as a semantic escape route when challenged to support their anti-theistic claims.
Stronn
Posts: 318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 2:34:17 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/21/2016 1:51:01 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Ask an Atheist "Does God exist?"

If they say "Possible I don't Know" they are agnostic and honest.

If they say "No" they deny, reject God and use the definition of Atheism as a semantic escape route when challenged to support their anti-theistic claims.

Or they say, "Possibly, but all claims from religion to know God's nature are bullshlt."
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 2:44:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/21/2016 2:34:17 AM, Stronn wrote:
At 3/21/2016 1:51:01 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 3/20/2016 9:22:45 PM, ILoveSitarMusic wrote:
I say yes. Atheists believe that there is no God. I have no problem with this belief

Ask an Atheist "Does God exist?"

If they say "Possible I don't Know" they are agnostic and honest.

If they say "No" they deny, reject God and use the definition of Atheism as a semantic escape route when challenged to support their anti-theistic claims.

Or they say, "Possibly, but all claims from religion to know God's nature are bullshlt."

"all claims from religion to know God's nature are bullshlt"

You can argue for mankind epistemological ineptness if you want. but when challenged to support such a claim most Atheist will deny their burden of proof on such a matter.
Double_R
Posts: 4,886
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 3:23:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Atheism is not a belief. It is a lack of belief regarding the existence of a God. There are two main reason's for this:

1. Atheism as a belief is an incoherent label

Name one god that you do not believe in (Zeus? Thor? Allah?) then ask yourself... are you an atheist towards that God?

Of course not, that is silly. Theism/Atheism do not address particular versions of a god, they address the general idea. And within that idea falls deism, pantheism, or anything else that people call a god. I can understand why a theist might believe that the god they believe in is the only one worthy of discussion and consideration, but to an atheist there are thousands of gods that have been prayed to over the centuries so there is no reason to expect an atheist to even know what you are talking about when you use the word.

Once god is clearly defined perhaps then might the atheist be able to say that they believe the god described does not exist, but first of all now we're only addressing a specific position towards one particular god, which is not atheism. Second, calling atheism a belief before that point would require the atheist to believe in the non-existence of every god that has ever been conceived of, including those that they themselves have never conceived of before. That is absurd. There are some versions of god I will tell you do not exist. There are some versions I will tell you I don't know. So if you want a label that takes into account my position on all gods then the only one that fits is a lack of belief.

2. Atheism as a belief is impractical.

Imagine a criminal trial where the defendant will only face legal repercussions if found guilty. Now imagine that the defense is given the burden to prove innocence. Imagine that the prosecution succeeds in refuting the case for innocence but fails to make a counter case of their own. Consequently, the jury votes "not innocent". Now what?

Answer... we start all over because we wasted our time discussing the wrong question. If a defendant will only face repercussions if found guilty, then the question we ask ourselves is whether the defendant is guilty.

Now imagine we have three people: (1) Believes in God, (2) Doesn't hold a belief either way, and (3) Believes there is no God. Question: which one of these is not like the other?

Answer: (1) goes to church on Sundays, prays before going to sleep, allows religious views to shape his/her behavior (not looking at women with lust, etc.). The lifestyle of 2 & 3 are indistinguishable. Neither pray, neither go to church, both live their lives however they see fit. The philosophical difference between them has no meaningful impact on anything they do in any way. In other words, it makes no practical difference. So labeling atheism as a belief is useless.
bulproof
Posts: 25,272
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 3:45:30 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Men have told you that gods exist.
Got anything else?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
missmedic
Posts: 388
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2016 5:39:38 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/20/2016 9:47:07 PM, gcfloyd wrote:
Atheism is the disbelief in a God. This is a probability statement rather than an arrogant outright claim of certainty. A very important distinction most people do not realise. After all, one cannot prove a negative.

It is a fallacy to say that universal negatives cannot be proven. Indeed that is the main role of logic: proving universal negatives to remove all contradictions from thought. It would be surprising if universal negatives couldn"t be proven. In fact, the scientific method only admits for universal negatives " in science, you can only falsify something completely, not confirm it completely. Something is judged to be true because it stands to the test of falsifiability extensively enough to be unassailable. But failing one single test disqualifies a specific principle from being accepted.

However, this inability does not prevent us from judging based on evidence, reason and experience the likeliness of any given God. It is not a 50/50 scenario. In the exact way we conclude unicorns are probably a hoax, we so conclude with God also.

I should add there is a minority of atheist who do make the claim we can prove God does not exist, however this is an unfashionable opinion in the community.

To understand why "God does not exist" can be a legitimate scientific statement, it's important to understand what the statement means in the context of science. When a scientist says "God does not exist," they mean something similar to when they say "aether does not exist," "psychic powers do not exist," or "life does not exist on the moon."
All such statements are casual short-hand for a more elaborate and technical statement: "this alleged entity has no place in any scientific equations, plays no role in any scientific explanations, cannot be used to predict any events, does not describe any thing or force that has yet been detected, and there are no models of the universe in which its presence is either required, productive, or useful."