New There could be a form of religious Atheism, while claiming to beleive in God.
No there couldn't,the very idea contradicts the definition of atheism
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
New There could be a form of religious Atheism, while claiming to beleive in God.
No there couldn't,the very idea contradicts the definition of atheism
Various kinds of Atheism
I had to post this in the 'General Religious' debates section because this debate is intended for anybody to respond to.
A thread about various churches within Christianity has led on to this question.
I cannot think of many kinds of Atheism myself, but here is my short list.
Please do add to the list, argue about it, deny bits of it....... as you please.
Religious Atheism (Henotheism. Christianity. etc )
Implicit Atheism (I don't see how God could be real)
Direct Atheism (There is no God!)
Religion Mythers (God and everything in the bible etc is myth!)
Deism (God is unaware and uninvolved, so there is no Theistic God)
Agnosticism (I don't believe in God but am open minded)
Apatheism (I don't actually care about God, one way or t'other)
Ignosticism/Igtheism. (I don't accept any ideas or definitions about God.
Over to you all.......
I'll make it simple.
You can have types to theism because there are multiple ways you can believe in at least one deity.
As for atheism, you cannot have multiple ways to not believe in any deity.
Either you do or you don't (not believe).
If theism is the set of natural numbers, atheism is set zero. You can arrange natural numbers in an infinite number of ways. You can arrange zero in one way.
Strong atheism is a subset of atheism (not to be confused with the example I provided). Not a type.
Well I am seeing half the brain says one believes in One God, then the other half is saying all those that do not choose my view of One God are false gods or true god godless.
Maybe not, yes, let's go with maybe not.
Regards Tony
Interesting.
For me, it seems that A-theism is indeed, as expressed by the word, a position. It is a position in respect of theism.
Interesting.
For me, it seems that A-theism is indeed, as expressed by the word, a position. It is a position in respect of theism.
Yes, I agree.That position is "without" theism
Lucifer lived by faith in the unseen Father of the Paradise Sons until he didn’t. Lucifer fell in love with his own bs.Lucifer's atheists?
Does this mean that Satan Lucifer is real but God is not?
In fact, yes, that fits.Wow.... I'm learning something about atheism for sure.
Before this thread I had no clues.
Question. Could it be said that when you were young you were an Apatheist? I'm just showing off what I've learned now.
For me, it seems that A-theism is indeed, as expressed by the word, a position. It is a position in respect of theism.
It's a myth in Ameristand.Pure fantasy fiction.
You must have been hypnotised.
Haggis is a total myth.
Ask any peer reviewed Haggis researcher.
And one of the problems @oldbadger has with the definition. He's a deist, so he's without theism. But then the atheists move the goalposts and say "atheism is not believing in any gods". So he is stuck between those two definitions.That position is "without" theism
I agree. I should've used a non-sequencial set as an example. In any case, the point made it across.But that's like saying there are many definitions of color. There are many types of color, but color itself has one definition. So, we don't say brown is color1 and red is color3. We just say they are both colors. The nature of the shade is irrelevant in the definition.
Same with atheism. The nature of the word (strong/weak/whatever) is irrelevant to the definition of atheism: disbelief in god's existence.
Meh....... that photo was undoubtedly photo-shopped by some crazed Haggis follower.A rare shot of a wild haggis
View attachment 47934
Unfortunately you cannot see the edible left back leg in that shot. The left leg grows fat and succulent because of the haggis's habbit of only running one was round and round its home hill, being on such a slope exercises the muscle in that leg to a fine degree. Haggis spotters will point out those with the most succulent back leg to the hunters who run round and round the hill after the haggis until the haggis gives up from exhaustion
I went to a buffet, and, while eating, two reverends were dining together. One was selling his ministry, and the other was buying it. It was very important for the new minister to make strange movements and hand gestures, because in order to get their parishioners to part with mammon, they had to be convinced that it was God speaking through the ministers to the people. So, the two reverends were rehearsing how to fool the people who put their faith in them.
It was clear that the two reverends were atheists. They had attended divinity school, as atheists, with the idea to bilk a lot of mammon from people behaving like hapless sheep. They were their con artist marks....their pigeons....their targets.
When phony reverends are torn down (like Reverend Tex Watson of the murderous Manson Family, and Reverend Jim Bakker, and Reverend Jimmy Swaggart), it hurts religion, because it destroys the faith that people had in God. Losing faith in one's minister causes one to lose faith in God and faith in the religion. Many turned away from the teachings of Jesus because they no longer had faith that they were on the right path.
It is far more honest for an atheist to admit that he/she is an atheist rather than bilking money from the naive people who blindly give.
Hello Tony....... have you come to save us all?Well I am seeing half the brain says one believes in One God, then the other half is saying all those that do not choose my view of One God are false gods or true god godless.
Maybe not, yes, let's go with maybe not.
Regards Tony
Absolutely!But that's like saying there are many definitions of color. There are many types of color, but color itself has one definition. So, we don't say brown is color1 and red is color3. We just say they are both colors. The nature of the shade is irrelevant in the definition.
Same with atheism. The nature of the word (strong/weak/whatever) is irrelevant to the definition of atheism: disbelief in god's existence.