Atheism, under the popular definition, denotes a firm belief in the lack of a god in any sense. This is sheer hypocracy in many cases, seeing as the most common argument in favour of atheism is that it is impossible to directly prove that a god exists. The calling yourself "atheist" says that you assume that you know enough about what you yourself said was impossible to know to know the truth about it all. I am a Christian, but I do believe that agnosticism is the most logical option, being the only belief that does the rational thing and acknowledged the fact that you may be, and in many cases ARE, wrong.
Atheism itself is impossibly illogical and hypocritical. If you say you believe in nothing, it means you literally put your faith in "nothing" as a substance. Nothing is a state of mind that can most certainly be worshiped and revered as a god. So atheists do, in fact believe in something.
Atheism claims to be a "scientific and logical approach to explanation" but after speaking to a lot of atheists, they quantify religion and superstitions as being one and the same. This is simply wrong. Atheists continually shoot themselves in the foot with their lack of understanding of religion, and history. In fact, I found myself in situations where I don't know whether to laugh or cry when listening to atheists' reasoning. Many times, they just simply dismiss the reasoning of theists, the "this simply cannot be accepted no matter what!" many times, they try and make you go round in circles with their reasoning, no clear and logical way in approaching the questions imposed, just make you go round in circles with no particular point. And many times they have this "science vs religion war zone" attitude to theists, when in fact, this notion is media invented. As long as what they hear sounds appealing to atheism, they take it without researching it first, and knowing the facts.
Atheism is not just using logic, it is the deliberate resistance of a god or God. If atheists actually used logic even in the most basic of sense they can see that God is completed necessary to creation. Instead of just arguing because you feel threatened research unbiased facts and use logic and then come back to argue.
(if you actually believe that this is my belief i assume with your intelligence your religious)
my belief is that we are inside or a art of magical tortoise what floats around smoking weed, my evidence is this:
Like the standard embryonic development of any eukaryotic life form, it occurs from a single entity (similar to the big bang in the sense of a point of singularity) it has contentiously grown throughout its life time (the expansion of the universe)
if i couldn't be bothered to laugh at people who waste hours creating false hope for themselves i might try and continue with this false belief more, but as i actually help people through charity work rather than thinking i do by putting my hands together and asking a false image in my mind questions, i have to leave now. No doubt this opinion wont be posted and no doubt the person who determines whether it is aloud believes in freedom of speech #onlyslightlyhypocritical "I believe in freedom of speech, as long as it agrees with my opinion"
It is the default position, thus the only logical position because there is no objective proof for any GOD whatsoever. NO OBJECTIVE PROOF. And all forms of logic support the atheistic conclusion. The belief is god is based on faith, which has shown time and time again to be a bad thing. Thus making the belief in god illogical.
Atheists, at least for the most part, do not outright deny the existence of a god or gods. They merely lack belief in a god due to the lack of evidence. As anyone would agree that lack of belief due to lack of evidence is a completely logical stance to take. Religious people can argue that there is evidence all they like, but I remain thoroughly unconvinced that any of their arguments can be classed as proof of a god. And then of course there is the problem of what religion to follow? The fact is that we Humans cannot comprehend the truth of the origin of the Universe. Atheists make no claims of the specific origins. Religions make very specific claims of the origins. The burden of proof lies with the religion to back up their bold claims, and all of them fail at this. It is easy to assume that all that is around us must come from a creator, but this opens up an issue that anything intelligent enough to create the Universe needs an even more complex explanation than this Universe. We atheists do not claim to know how the Universe came to existence, but simply do not believe there is enough evidence that it came from a divine creator.
Saying atheism doesn't have logic is like saying Buddhists have no logic. Most people don't see atheism like monotheism and polytheism but like Christianity and Judaism. Buddhists don't have a god, but it makes perfect sense. Atheism just says there is no all powerful being that created the universe and everything in it. It just says that a different solution is more likely than those set by mono- and polytheistic religions.
Contrary to theist belief, atheism is the lack of belief in a god, not the belief that no gods exist. Let's give an example: court. The question asked in court is are they guilty or not guilty based on the known information. Atheists say "not guilty", for there is no evidence supporting either side. A belief is held to not be true until supported.
Atheism is the only logical (that is- fact-supported) religious belief to hold.
It doesn't matter how you look at it, there is NO EVIDENCE for the existence of God. So the only logical belief you can have is atheistic.
When there is evidence of a God, it will be logical to believe in God, but until then atheism is the only logical belief.
In the same ways as any religion. Atheism, under the popular definition, denotes a firm belief in the lack of a god in any sense. This is sheer hypocracy in many cases, seeing as the most common argument in favour of atheism is that it is impossible to directly prove that a god exists. The calling yourself "atheist" says that you assume that you know enough about what you yourself said was impossible to know to know the truth about it all. I am a Christian, but I do believe that agnosticism is the most logical option, being the only belief that does the rational thing and acknowledged the fact that you may be, and in many cases ARE, wrong. -Notyou7789
You do realize atheism is just the lack of belief in any higher power right? It doesn't say you can prove it, it just says that you don't believe there is one based on the lack of evidence.
Atheism is a thought-process based entirely on logic. It lacks when religion has, faith, which by definition is the belief in something without evidence. Instead of subscribing to something based on faith and the words and writings of, let's face it, ancient civilizations, Atheists seek truth through reason and understanding. One doesn't have to not be open to the idea of God to be an Atheist, simply not believe in something that doesn't make sense to them or cannot be proven. That seems pretty logical to me.
I have met extremely intelligent atheists and the majority of scientists today are atheists. But lets put it this way, atheism is purely the disbelief in 'God' sooooooooo (if i can quote Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens) 'Today people normally only have one God or one Religion, Christian, Muslim, Scientologist, Mormon.... So you hold closely to your Religion and believe strongly in your and are basically Atheist to the rest of the Religions. No-one today believes in Thor or Odon? We are Mount Olympus Atheists' hahaha :P
I don't agree with atheism but just because I dislike their point of view does not mean they have gotten there without having any logic behind what they believe.
We need to live in peace and harmony with others even when their points of view differ from our own, I don't know many people that don't believe in God but that doesn't mean I would tell them they lack logic for their belief system.