• 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!

The difference between an Atheist and Theist

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
The only difference between a theist and atheist is this:

It doesn't matter if you believe in creationism or evolution for this thought experiment lets go to the source of all things. I am going to call this SOURCE. For theists this SOURCE can be God and for atheists it can be the energy that made up the original big bang it really doesn't matter.

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.

How did this SOURCE of everything come into existence?

It is 2 possible ways SOURCE came into existence:

1. It has always existed with no beginning and no end.
2. Magically popped into existence from nothingness.

(it was Focusedintent who wrote this, in this tread: Proving logic can't explain existence | Religious Forums)

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us. very little difference really:)

A functional definition of atheism is

a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Not all if those gods are claimed as creator gods although, it has been said, around 3800 of them created the universe, most of whom were supposed to be "the one god"


And as i stated in @FocusedIntent thread, the 2 options are logically wrong

1 is a possibility, there are others
2 no magic involved in vacuum bubbles, they have been observed
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
The only difference between a theist and atheist is this:

It doesn't matter if you believe in creationism or evolution for this thought experiment lets go to the source of all things. I am going to call this SOURCE. For theists this SOURCE can be God and for atheists it can be the energy that made up the original big bang it really doesn't matter.

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.

How did this SOURCE of everything come into existence?

It is 2 possible ways SOURCE came into existence:

1. It has always existed with no beginning and no end.
2. Magically popped into existence from nothingness.

(it was Focusedintent who wrote this, in this tread: Proving logic can't explain existence | Religious Forums)

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us. very little difference really:)
I Understand, the Source is G-d or Allah, who has many other attributes that He himself has let us know in Quran without these attributes the Universe was impossible to exist reasonably. Right, please?
There is no other reasonable claimant, I understand. Right, please?

Regards
 

Starlight

Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
My point in this tread:

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us. very little difference really:)
What if someone believes there was some conscious creator of the universe but doesn't see it as a god? What if someone believes in beings they consider gods but not that they created the universe?

You seem to be creating a very restrictive definition on the "theo" that forms the root of those words that isn't consistent with or embracing any of the meanings commonly attributed to it.

Ironically, I am an even stronger believer in your conclusion, since I think two people could have almost exactly the same views of the universe and still be considered (by themselves or others) and atheist and theist. One person could be considered both atheist and theist by different people and in different contexts. It's almost as if the words are fairly useless in determining what the similarities and differences between us are. :cool:
 

Starlight

Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
A functional definition of atheism is

a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.

Not all if those gods are claimed as creator gods although, it has been said, around 3800 of them created the universe, most of whom were supposed to be "the one god"


And as i stated in @FocusedIntent thread, the 2 options are logically wrong

1 is a possibility, there are others
2 no magic involved in vacuum bubbles, they have been observed

Yes it it possible there are others options.
I Understand, the Source is G-d or Allah, who has many other attributes that He himself has let us know in Quran without these attributes the Universe was impossible to exist reasonably. Right, please?
There is no other reasonable claimant, I understand. Right, please?

Regards

Yes i believe a concious energy/spirit/god is creator of the universe/universes. One God only.
 

Starlight

Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
What if someone believes there was some conscious creator of the universe but doesn't see it as a god? What if someone believes in beings they consider gods but not that they created the universe?

You seem to be creating a very restrictive definition on the "theo" that forms the root of those words that isn't consistent with or embracing any of the meanings commonly attributed to it.

Ironically, I am an even stronger believer in your conclusion, since I think two people could have almost exactly the same views of the universe and still be considered (by themselves or others) and atheist and theist. One person could be considered both atheist and theist by different people and in different contexts. It's almost as if the words are fairly useless in determining what the similarities and differences between us are. :cool:

What if someone believes there was some conscious creator of the universe but doesn't see it as a god? Well i think they are theist. Because I think the very much of the difference between atheism and theism is this:

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.


What if someone believes in beings they consider gods but not that they created the universe? Hm. difficult question. But yes, they are theist too. But not very much theist in my opinion if they do not believe in a creator god in addition to the other gods.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Yes it it possible there are others options.


Yes i believe a concious energy/spirit/god is creator of the universe/universes. One God only.

It seems to me an extraordinary thing to
explain the really really big and super mysterious universe with something way bigger and more mysterious.
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
My point in this tread:

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.

That's not necessarily true in the case of agnostic atheists.

As an atheist, I'm not convinced of god claims I've seen yet. As anagnostic, I don't throw belief behind anything deeper than what I actually know or understand well enough.

Anything deeper than that, like the nature of the universe's creation/formation, I don't dwell too much on. I just like to follow where the evidence leads.
 
The only difference between a theist and atheist is this:

It doesn't matter if you believe in creationism or evolution for this thought experiment lets go to the source of all things. I am going to call this SOURCE. For theists this SOURCE can be God and for atheists it can be the energy that made up the original big bang it really doesn't matter.

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious.

How did this SOURCE of everything come into existence?

It is 2 possible ways SOURCE came into existence:

1. It has always existed with no beginning and no end.
2. Magically popped into existence from nothingness.

(it was Focusedintent who wrote this, in this tread: Proving logic can't explain existence | Religious Forums)

A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us. very little difference really:)

I think the simpler way of putting it would be that everyone, whether theist or atheist, has to take the existence of something as a basic, unexplained fact. Atheists take the universe as such, and theists take God as such. The problem I have is when theists accuse atheists of being irrational by not explaining the universe, but then posit an UNEXPLAINED god to explain the universe, and so have the exact same problem.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Yes many atheists do believe the universe/universes have a source. But they believe the source is an energy with no conciousness. Just like the the wind, gravity or electricity

They (those to whom this is appropriate) believe the universe is the source not has it. The big bang talks about the functions that bring about the physical universe.

It formed itself into being as the source and movement thereof. The physical universe which is the source atheists do believe exist. Just many don't believe there is a consciousness to it.

Everything that makes up the universe always existed. We are just byproducts of this result as we are part of the universe as well.

How is the universe conscious?

Is the wind conscious? The sun? A chair? (Made from the earth)
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I think the simpler way of putting it would be that everyone, whether theist or atheist, has to take the existence of something as a basic, unexplained fact. Atheists take the universe as such, and theists take God as such. The problem I have is when theists accuse atheists of being irrational by not explaining the universe, but then posit an UNEXPLAINED god to explain the universe, and so have the exact same problem.

Not exactly, the " god" as I noted bring an even bigger mystery for all that people claim to know of its motives, preferences, rules, quotations and all that rot.
 

Starlight

Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
They (those to whom this is appropriate) believe the universe is the source not has it. The big bang talks about the functions that bring about the physical universe.

It formed itself into being as the source and movement thereof. The physical universe which is the source atheists do believe exist. Just many don't believe there is a consciousness to it.

Everything that makes up the universe always existed. We are just byproducts of this result as we are part of the universe as well.

How is the universe conscious?

Is the wind conscious? The sun? A chair? (Made from the earth)

Wind is not concious. That was my point. Many atheist believe in a source of the universe/universes who is not concious just like wind.

Humans are concious, animals are concious, plants are a little concious. Wind, the sea, gravity, electricity is not concious.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us.

Since you believe the universe is concious you sound like theist. Since you wrote: "I think the universe and the energy that composes it is a product of (or more accurately, an appearance in) pure consciousness".

If you use that definition of theist, then I guess I would be, though I think most would disagree with you. Most state theism is the belief in a personal god or gods. I have no such belief.
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
Wind is not concious. That was my point. Many atheist believe in a source of the universe/universes who is not concious just like wind.

Humans are concious, animals are concious, plants are a little concious. Wind, the sea, gravity, electricity is not concious.

Eh... Not sure I'd say plants are necessarily conscious. They respond to stimuli, but actual consciousness requires a brain, no?
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Wind is not concious. That was my point. Many atheist believe in a source of the universe/universes who is not concious just like wind.

Humans are concious, animals are concious, plants are a little concious. Wind, the sea, gravity, electricity is not concious.

The point is the universe is the source not has it. There is no "source" in an atheist mind so consciousness of anything doesn't exist. They have to believe there's a source of the universe in order to determine whether or not it has consciousness.

People and animals (some say plants), have consciousness because we have a brain and mind. Trees do not neither does the wind. Each has it's on characteristics.

Source is an irrelevant word to atheists. It's just the physical universe which is the source/cause/formation thereof.

How is it conscious?
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
Not exactly, the " god" as I noted bring an even bigger mystery for all that people claim to know of its motives, preferences, rules, quotations and all that rot.

Yah... That's the thing. It's incorporating an extra element to an already unknowable thing, adding more unknowable things to that unknowable thing. At that point, you can just add whatever you like, and before you know it, you have a fully fleshed out mythology to explain those unknowable things. As we know more things, those mythologies seem to lose more credibility.

It really is as simple as that.
 

Starlight

Spiritual but not religious, new age and omnist
Eh... Not sure I'd say plants are necessarily conscious. They respond to stimuli, but actual consciousness requires a brain, no?
I don't know. I think plants are concious in their own way.

I don't think conciousness need a brain. I think conciousness came before the universe/universes and pysical laws. Because I believe God/the concious source/spirit is the source behind the universe/universes and pysical laws
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
A atheist believe the energy that made the universe is not concious. And theists believe the energy that made the universe is concious. Thats the only difference between us. very little difference really
There is another possibility you leave out, which is that God is not the universe and is transcendent which is probably more in line with traditional Philosophy. Thus you have theists who are neither atheists nor believe the universe is conscious.
 
Top