I increasingly think this way too.
However, it's useful shorthand when I get asked the religion question. I seem to less commonly be asked about which fairy I hail as Queen.
-
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!
Just Addressing Yet Another Absurd, Dishonest Atheistic Argument
- Thread starter 1137
- Start date
I increasingly think this way too.
However, it's useful shorthand when I get asked the religion question. I seem to less commonly be asked about which fairy I hail as Queen.
KBC1963
Active Member
There is no strong or weak version of atheism. Atheism is a positive belief system and has been so defined by the supreme court. If a person wishes to align themselves with the position that there simply is not enough evidence for god then they would be agnostic like me.
Atheism and religion
Contrary to the opinions of evangelical atheists, atheism is a religion which has repeatedly attempted to take away the religious liberties of Christians in order to support their false religion.
Although atheists claim that atheism is not a religion the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that atheism is a religion as it fits in with its definition, distinguishing between “religions based on a belief in the existence of God [and] religions founded on different beliefs."
History of Atheism - Conservapedia
Effect of atheism on societies
Atheism has a negative effect on societies culture (see: Atheism and culture).
Various social science studies, historical data and other data, demonstrate that atheism often has a harmful effect on individuals and societies (See: Atheism statistics and Christianity vs. atheism statistics).
History of Atheism - Conservapedia
According to conducted studies it really won't matter what Atheists believe or assert to take a stand on;
Atheists as a percentage of the world's population have declined since 1970 and atheism is expected to face long term decline.
On July 24, 2013, CNS News reported:
“Atheism is in decline worldwide, with the number of atheists falling from 4.5% of the world’s population in 1970 to 2.0% in 2010 and projected to drop to 1.8% by 2020, according to a new report by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Mass."
If it wasn't for the Christians that founded this country and who made the initial rules for this society to be founded on then we would not likely see anyone with the freedom to even try to claim an atheist stance. It is my firm position that if you don't want to deal with theistic people then you should not be afforded the rights that the country was founded on whose basis was on their belief that;
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
If you feel there is no possibility for a creator to exist then you should live by the governing rule of evolution where "the strong survive" and the weak are eliminated. Assemble an army of atheists and take the US out then form your own rules to live by and you won't be arguing against their belief system while enjoying a freedom based on that belief system.
Atheism and religion
Contrary to the opinions of evangelical atheists, atheism is a religion which has repeatedly attempted to take away the religious liberties of Christians in order to support their false religion.
Although atheists claim that atheism is not a religion the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that atheism is a religion as it fits in with its definition, distinguishing between “religions based on a belief in the existence of God [and] religions founded on different beliefs."
History of Atheism - Conservapedia
Effect of atheism on societies
Atheism has a negative effect on societies culture (see: Atheism and culture).
Various social science studies, historical data and other data, demonstrate that atheism often has a harmful effect on individuals and societies (See: Atheism statistics and Christianity vs. atheism statistics).
History of Atheism - Conservapedia
According to conducted studies it really won't matter what Atheists believe or assert to take a stand on;
Atheists as a percentage of the world's population have declined since 1970 and atheism is expected to face long term decline.
On July 24, 2013, CNS News reported:
“Atheism is in decline worldwide, with the number of atheists falling from 4.5% of the world’s population in 1970 to 2.0% in 2010 and projected to drop to 1.8% by 2020, according to a new report by the Center for the Study of Global Christianity at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in South Hamilton, Mass."
If it wasn't for the Christians that founded this country and who made the initial rules for this society to be founded on then we would not likely see anyone with the freedom to even try to claim an atheist stance. It is my firm position that if you don't want to deal with theistic people then you should not be afforded the rights that the country was founded on whose basis was on their belief that;
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
If you feel there is no possibility for a creator to exist then you should live by the governing rule of evolution where "the strong survive" and the weak are eliminated. Assemble an army of atheists and take the US out then form your own rules to live by and you won't be arguing against their belief system while enjoying a freedom based on that belief system.
Beliefs generally don't have 100% certainty.
Obviously I disagree. But I understand and acknowledge your terms, which is all I was suggesting to 1137.
There is no logical way that two of the three terms, as I described them, could apply to you. All are mutually exclusive.
"Zork" might have actually been a better choice, since it doesn't have any previous connotations to confuse communication.
You are free to use any words you like. But then, you shouldn't expect us to feel bad for your frustrations when you are misunderstood. Language isn't a dictatorship. It's a democracy, a relationship between the speaker and the listener.
And lastly, I am an atheist too. Why should I not have a voice at the table as well?
Last edited:
You got what I was saying backwards. Certainty doesn't make something true. But if you say something is true (knowledge), then you must be certain.
Your link worked beautifully.
Thank you for the explanation of the Monty Hall problem. I am familiar with it, but it is always a little mind blowing.
I am not quite sure how it applies to my question, however.
Monty hall involves 3 choices, a pick, then information that one choice is not correct.
That is not very analogous to 2 choices, with no effects messing with the probability.
Blackdog22
Well-Known Member
Why are you using the word "created"? It seems the bias you claim atheists have is far more abundant in your own posts. We have no idea how we came about. The end. We are attempting to discover this over the course of time. Anyone who claims to have absolute certainty is lying on this matter. Science has in no way said they know for certain, we have guesses and ideas that are possibilities. The only group of people who seem to be claiming absolute certainty are believers and they can only be lying to us and themselves seeing as a faith based position can never be a position of certainty.
Blackdog22
Well-Known Member
Yes, Polar Bears evolved from Brown Bears likely during the Ice Age. If you have any problem with evolution you have a problem with Pugs. Believe it or not Pugs didn't always exist. They are dogs which came from wolves that we changed by breeding over time.
The most interesting part of your post is how you are completely blown away by the concept of DNA forming on its own, but so easily gloss over the idea that a being infinitely more impossible could of just formed on its own or always been there. You cant hold such a position, and pretend to be confused by our Universe, without seeming completely ridiculous. If God can just happen, then from there it should be MUCH easier to think anything in our Universe could just happen. I still have no idea how creationists mentally block this out.
Are you certain of that?
Blackdog22
Well-Known Member
Show me the transitional fossils that show every step of a wolf to a pug. You wont find them. You will find similarities between the pug and wolf genetically, just like you would from an ape to a human. This is misunderstanding of how evolution actually functions on your part, not a problem with evolution itself. I see this so often I have to wonder if any anti evolutionist has ever remotely understood how the process actually works.
Yes.
Of course not. An atheist is a person who is not a theist. A strong atheist is a person who is not a theist plus believes gods don't exist. What dichotomy?
Try explaining in a little more detail.
How hypocritical can you get? Thomas Jefferson was a racist slave owner along with many other of the founding fathers... and everybody knows that secular societies fare better than religious societies. And for the US?
"If you are curious as to which states are the most/least religious, simply check out the Pew Forum’s Religious Landscape Survey. It’s all there. And then you can go ahead and check out how the various states are faring in terms of societal well-being. The correlation is clear and strong: the more secular tend to fare better than the more religious on a vast host of measures, including homicide and violent crime rates, poverty rates, [URL='https://www.psychologytoday.com/conditions/obesity']obesity and diabetes rates, child abuse rates, educational attainment levels, income levels, unemployment rates, rates of sexually transmitted diseases and teen pregnancy, etc. You name it: on nearly every sociological measure of well-being, you’re most likely to find the more secular states with the lowest levels of faith in God and the lowest rates of church attendance faring the best and the most religious states with the highest levels of faith in God and rates of church attendance faring the worst.[/URL]
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...lar-societies-fare-better-religious-societies
Secular Societies Fare Better Than Religious Societies
Curious George
Veteran Member
Someone lied to you.
serp777
Well-Known Member
There are many different kinds of atheists. Its not really logical to say that you can prove or disprove whether anythings in the box based on limited evidence. Saying I don't know is a valid position to have and it indicates you've hit the limits of what you can know. Anybody making the claim, whether it be a certain atheist saying its certainly empty or a theist saying is certainly full, is illogical and irrational.
Augustus
…
By the same logic, it is also 'literally' athe-ism (which is more accurate etymologically as well), thus it 'literally' is an adopted belief.
To interpret it a-theism simply reflects a subjective personal preference, just like favouring any other potential definition, rather than something more substantial.
All those religions have different concepts of god. Some even have multiple different concepts within a single religion.
You're also ignoring the huge amount of polytheism in the world, both in terms of number of religions and number of adherents.
IMO, assuming that classical monotheism is some sort of "standard" religious belief is usually an effect of cultural chauvinism. I personally see no reason to adopt this notion of "monotheism primacy" that seems so predominant in Christian-dominated parts of the world.
You're right: it doesn't sound right to
It isn't precise; the exact opposite, in fact.
And strong atheists - at least the way the term has been defined in this thread - would need to reject more than just God-with-a-capital-G; they'd need to reject every god. Even if you lower the bar so they only have to reject every "theistic god" (as you've described the category), this is still an impossible task for any individual human being. It still requires strong atheists to reject concepts they've never even heard of, let alone considered.
You said earlier that it was also about polytheistic gods.
You also still haven't explained what you mean by "theistic gods" clearly enough that I can know what you mean by "other such gods."
You don't need to make a case against the deistic god to argue against deism. The mere fact that the deistic god is unfalsifiable - and its existence or non-existence is impossible to demonstrate - is enough to establish that deism is unjustified and the deistic god ought not to be believed in.
Koldo
Outstanding Member
You have said:
Ghosts are covered by 2. Therefore, a strong atheist believes that ghosts don't exist.
Augustus
…
Definitions don't work like that.
A lion can be defined as a large feline found in Africa and Asia. This doesn't mean that all large felines found in Africa and Asia are lions.