Ebionite
Well-Known Member
No, it's more than that. It's the rejection of the idea that they exist. An infant doesn't believe, but they haven't asked the question, either.
Last edited by a moderator:
-
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!
Damn Atheists!!
- Thread starter Nimos
- Start date
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Because it's not relevant. The answer to the question is only meaningful once the question has been asked.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
No, it isn't more than that.
Atheism is merely the lack of belief in a god.
Rejection is NOT required.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
Except that it is relevant.
It exposes your Humpty Dumpty of the word atheism.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
If that were true atheism would be the default condition, but the default condition is that the question is not asked.Your definition conflates denial with ambivalence or inquiry.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
The fact that you can't demonstrate relevance proves my point.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
It is not "my" definition.
It is the definition.
Thus it is YOUR definition that does not conform to the norm.
Thus the reason for the Humpty Dumpty.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
I did demonstrate the relevance.
That you dislike it is not my concern.
You have a Humpty Dumpty definition of the word.
I did not provide that Humpty Dumpty definition, I merely pointed it out.
Seems to me tht the question: "What deity does an infant believe in" revealed to you a hole in thinking and instead of stopping, regrouping, and starting again, you have elected to plow forward.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
You are completely wrong.
atheism (n.)
"the doctrine that there is no God;" "disbelief in any regularity in the universe to which man must conform himself under penalties" [J.R. Seeley, "Natural Religion," 1882], 1580s, from French athéisme (16c.), with -ism + Greek atheos "without a god, denying the gods," from a- "without" (see a- (3)) + theos "a god"
atheism | Search Online Etymology Dictionary
No, arguing "Humpty Dumpty" is not the same thing as showing relevance.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
*yawn*
Atheism
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
Ignoring the parts of the definition you dislike does not help your agenda.
I do notice how you skipped over the meat of the posts you quote.
McBell
Resident Sourpuss
The fact that you are so willing to run off into what you claim is a tangent instead of simply answering the question demonstrates my point.
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
Sorry, but you are WRONG. Atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in any gods. It is NOT an assertion that no gods exist. There are some atheist who take it a step further who not only lack a belief in any gods but ALSO assert that there are no gods. But that ASSERTION that no gods exist isn't a component of atheism.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
What makes you think that I dislike them?
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
No, that's only your religion. The etymology of atheism refutes that.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
I didn't claim it was a tangent. The point remains that the etymology of atheism refutes your position.
At the end of the day, however, what is really the difference you're trying to suggest between the courtroom and open discussion -- in terms of what people believe, and why they should believe otherwise?
I have had many people tell me that I should believe in God, and I've asked all of them, "why?" It's a simple enough question. I've never seen anything that suggested that something "godlike" was busy in the world, so I ask others what they see that I might have missed. And they never, ever, not once come even close to showing something that says "here is evidence of God." Instead, the entreat me to consider such ludicrous notions as Pascal's Wager.
Well, I could do the same thing. I could threaten that "if you don't properly placate Chupacabra, he will come and tear the entrails out of you and your children." So don't you think you should offer whatever it is that Chupacabra wants, just to be on the safe side? Why, or why not?
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
Actually that's the words DEFINITION.
a·the·ism
/ˈāTHēˌizəm/
Learn to pronounce
noun
- disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
Rubbish!
The etymology of atheism means "without God belief." That is not the same thing as "against God acceptance." However you might construct the word that means that, it would at very minimum have to begin with "anti" (against) rather than "a" (without or absent).
You're trying to hard to insist that everybody has to believe what they can't understand -- I presume in order to make yourself feel better for being in that position yourself.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
That's an expansive interpretation of the original meaning of atheism. If atheists were honest about it they would identify simply lack of belief as agnosticism, not atheism.
The interpretation conflates rejection of belief with the default state, which is a way of hiding a particular kind of hypocrisy.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
The facts are definitely not on your side.
atheism (n.)
"the doctrine that there is no God;" "disbelief in any regularity in the universe to which man must conform himself under penalties" [J.R. Seeley, "Natural Religion," 1882], 1580s, from French athéisme (16c.), with -ism + Greek atheos "without a god, denying the gods," from a- "without" (see a- (3)) + theos "a god" (from PIE root *dhes-, forming words for religious concepts). A slightly earlier form is represented by atheonism (1530s) which is perhaps from Italian atheo "atheist." The ancient Greek noun was atheotes "ungodliness."
In late 19c. sometimes further distinguished into secondary senses "The denial of theism, that is, of the doctrine that the great first cause is a supreme, intelligent, righteous person" [Century Dictionary, 1897] and "practical indifference to and disregard of God, godlessness."