-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Atheists: Please sell me on atheism
- Thread starter Sand Dancer
- Start date
I'm not sure I understand what you're asking, but I wager it depends on the religion and more importantly on the individual adherent and how they choose to practice.
I don't agree with this perspective, but from what I recall, you and I have rather different understandings of what "religion" is.
If you haven't decided to believe that some god(s) exist or to believe that gods don't exist you are already an agnostic atheist.
Make up your own then and it'll be the perfect one for you.
The word atheist literally means "not theist". You are an atheist (not theist) until you decide to believe in the existence of one or more gods and at that point you become a theist.
This does deserve a lot of consideration. Adherence to a religion is not really a very clear-cut matter at all.
While many would like to say that belief in a certain doctrine, scripture or prophet as being "true" is the decisive factor, the truth is far more subtle and complex. It is not at all unusual for people to be nominal adherents to doctrines that they do not understand, do not care for or that do not even respect their actual beliefs simply because they can't find a way for challenging social expectations without causing more trouble than they are ready to handle. I would bet that literally millions do not even have a good understanding of the idea of even having the choice to disbelieve or change beliefs. Or, for that matter, of holding their own nominal beliefs in the first place.
In practice, adherence to a specific religion is usually at least as much about establishing effective shared language and protocols of communication for mutual support and understanding in a community as it is about actual matters of belief.
As it turns out, far as I can tell that is a legitimate concern and probably trumps having "correct" beliefs about such inconsequential things as how many deities there are, which people they favor, and which scriptures if any are worth reading.
What it is not is a good reason to continue accepting the bad (religious hypocrisy, widespread self-deception about one's beliefs, repression of voicing questioning and disagreements) with the good.
That is the definition of a strong atheist not a (weak) atheist.
"Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods. Older dictionaries define atheism as "a belief that there is no God." Some dictionaries even go so far as to define Atheism as "wickedness," "sinfulness," and other derogatory adjectives. Clearly, theistic influence taints dictionaries. People cannot trust these dictionaries to define atheism. The fact that dictionaries define Atheism as "there is no God" betrays the (mono)theistic influence. Without the (mono)theistic influence, the definition would at least read "there are no gods."
https://atheists.org/activism/resources/what-is-atheism
Dictionaries are descriptive, Baseman. They present the usual, colloquial and, sometimes, the historic usages of words.
In technical discussions dictionary definitions can confuse an issue. In technical discussions all must agree on the meanings of the terms used.
In this and similar threads involving actual, contemporary atheists, awareness of deity is not definitive. An atheist need not have any concept of God to be an atheist.
An example: an observant Catholic might not spend all her time saying "yes, yes, the Eucharist is literally the body and blood of Christ" to herself, but ask her if the rituals she performs involving the Eucharist would be appropriate if it wasn't literally the body of Christ, and she'd say no - they wouldn't be. Her beliefs and practices assume certain facts as given, even if she isn't dwelling on those facts.
I'm not sure what your understanding is. All I know is that, for instance, if I want to make a free meal for my community like a Sikh langar, I have no obligation to adopt the other aspects of Sikhism like I would if I chose to become a member of the religion.
For any idea that I hear of in a religious context, I'm perfectly free to say "yes, that stands on its own and strikes me as a good idea. I think I'll do that"... but doing this doesn't actually make me religious; it just makes me willing to accept good ideas.
First Baseman
Retired athlete
Thanks, guys. I'll stick with Merriam Webster, though. You may define terms as you see fit. Good luck with that.
Nobody will take you seriously ever again if you claim like Merriam Webster that an atheist is "a person who believes that God does not exist". Everybody who knows the first thing about atheism know that atheists don't believe in the existence of any gods (plural) not just God.
First Baseman
Retired athlete
Check what it says below that under full definition. It's got you covered.
Do you mean "one who believes that there is no deity"? Deity is singular. The plural of deity is deities. A strong atheist isn't a person "who believes that there is no deity" a strong atheist is a person "who believes that there are no deities."
First Baseman
Retired athlete
So you think that Merriam Webster simply is saying an atheist is a person that doesn't believe in one deity. You are not reading it right. It obviously means a person that believes in no deity, as in none.
I'm not reading it right when in the English language "God" is singular and "deity" is singular while "gods" is plural and "deities" is plural? They made two mistakes in the simple definition of atheist:
1. They use the definition of strong atheist instead of the definition of just atheist.
2. They use singular instead of plural.
The correct simple definition of an atheist is "a person who doesn't believe in the existence of gods". Simple as that.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
How did you decide to be agnostic? It seems to me that's not something you decide, but that you realize. I never decided to be an atheist; I just decided to use the correct terminology for myself.
As for being agnostic, that doesn't tell us much. If you don't believe in a god, you're already an atheist. If you do believe in a god, you're a theist (or subset thereof like pantheist) or deist.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
Thus the reason you cannot be "enlightened" and that your asking to be "enlightened" is nothing but a lie.
First Baseman
Retired athlete
When did I ask to be enlightened by an atheist? I have been enlightened by Him who is light.
First Baseman
Retired athlete
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
Who said anything about the enlightenment being asked from an atheist?
I mean, other than you?
Since you seem to have memory issues:
Enlighten me.Come on, Baseman, you know better than this