-
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!
What does it mean to be an Atheist ( not a mocking thread)
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
My response to a theist will depend on a number of factors, and thus? They may see me as a very different sort of non-theist depending on my answer(s).
So it varies, but something like 9 of 10 times? I don't even think about gods existing or not-existing, no more than I worry about Voldemort jumping out of the Harry Potter Universe, directly into the Tower Of London. It's just not on my Thought-Radar.
That being said? I do participate in several social media venues, wherein "atheism" or "theism" is the Main Subject: Thus, the discussion remains topical, and this effectively concentrates one's Attention to the Subject At Hand.
RF is one such venue-- and since I came here as an Atheist, my main point will be Atheism-- my attention is artificially concentrated to that Subject.
...
So what is "atheist"? A response to the claim(s): "God Is Real". The response? "Prove it, or I don't believe you".
To date? None of the theistic responses have managed to get past "Prove it", or else I'd be a theist.... !
It's that simple.
What is "proof"? Well, that's a Cat of a Different Eye Color, is it not?
Proof to one, is nonsensical rambling to another.
Bottom line: All gods, as described, are in one or more ways, highly superior to the most superior example of "human". Smarter, faster, more powerful, wiser, more knowledgeable, etc, etc, etc.
So. This sort of being? Automatically knows what would Satisfy "Prove it". And could easily -- if it desired to-- produce such proof as needed, If It Really Wanted To Disprove Atheism.
The fact that this has Never Happened?
(as there are still atheists running around, unfettered) ...
Says Quite A Lot---- none of it is GOOD, or FAIR, or JUST.
IF
IF this "god" being is Real.
The only sane conclusion-- if you don't want to consider the god(s) in question to be malicious and sadistic?
Is that they simply cannot provide proof-- because they all suffer from fatal existence flaws.
A Vestigial Mote
Well-Known Member
It is a bit interesting, because to apply the term "atheist" to yourself, I suppose you do have to assume that all deities and "gods" presented to you would not be believed outright. And I can see where that would seem a bit presumptuous - because how can one claim to have heard of all possible "gods" to make such a blanket statement? But then, the simple fact of the matter is, if someone could actually provide a strictly compelling demonstration of their god, it would clear everything up. The fact that no one has ever done so, and no one is talking about how someone has done so, and no matter where I look I can't find anyone able to do so is one of the main reasons I feel I have no good choice but to remain atheist.
For the record... I am discounting any ideas in which objects that manifest in reality are considered "gods." This type of "entity" is not something I choose to recognize under the term "god", as I am applying it.
For the record... I am discounting any ideas in which objects that manifest in reality are considered "gods." This type of "entity" is not something I choose to recognize under the term "god", as I am applying it.
Shantanu
Well-Known Member
I can speak of my experiences having been a theist then an atheist then back again to being a theist then on to Consciousness being the Entity that I am. Does that make me an atheist? I think it does because I will never say that in the ultimate reality there is any God at all, it is all to do with Consciousness.
American Atheists has got it just about right, IMO.
There are those who find it desirable to define atheism as something a bit more positive or affirmative.
I am not among those people, myself. I have no problem whatsoever in pointing out that stones and the like are atheistic.
To do otherwise, by my perspective, would bring little to no benefit. It would encourage misleading understanding, such as that of atheism as some form of motivational force, which it inherently can't be. Most significantly, it would bring to us atheists the duty to define what qualifies as a "proper" deity. I think that no atheist has the need to hold such a bizarre responsibility. It falls to believers to decide and, if they see fit, to express what they believe in.
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
You are a theist actually. Deism is a subcategory under theism, not atheism.
That is actually arguable, and IMO has to be arguable, even arbitrary.
One of the many counter-intuitive consequences of reliance on an inherently arbitrary concept such as that of deity.
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't call myself an atheist if it wasn't such a popular and needed distinction. Similarly, you don't need the distinction between non-bowlers or non-cricket players,etc. In fact, it would be silly to start distinguish and classifying people like this. However, because religions are so aggressive, especially in the past, they make it important.
Atheism, for me, means a reaction to those who deem this distinction important. If these more aggressive religions didn't exist, I wouldn't require this term.
Last edited:
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
Yes it's arbitrary to me but it's correct, as far as I know. If you wanna argue it that's fine, but can you give some references
Hej.
I think we atheists spend too much time on the defensive. We are anxious to show that we do not believe that There is no God, but that we simply lack belief that there is , at least, one. Maybe because we do not want to be grouped with believers without evidence.
I personally dont care. I openly admit that I have beliefs without evidence. For instance, I believe there is life on other planets.
And I am not afraid to admit that I do not only believe that there is no God, but I have knowledge that there is no God. The caveat here is that knowledge does not equal certainty.
So, to keep things simple: I dont believe God because I dont believe Mother Goose. And if we laught at anyone showing agnosticism towards mother goose, it is not clear why we should not laugh at who shows agnosticism towards god. Since the two have the same exact evidence.
Ciao
- viole
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
I don't believe in Theism. An involved and interested God? Not me!
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
You don't believe in theism. Theism, the word, just describes what's going on, and deism falls under theism.I don't believe in Theism. An involved and interested God? Not me!
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
Errr, surprise, you're a theist.I don't believe in Theism. An involved and interested God? Not me!
The way I see it, that would be inherently pointless.Yes it's arbitrary to me but it's correct, as far as I know. If you wanna argue it that's fine, but can you give some references
Deity-beliefs, of all kinds, are unavoidably personal and, frankly, free-styled.
Generally, it is for the people to validate the deity-related labels regarding themselves, not the other way around.
Anyone who is a deist is a theist. Deism (belief in a non-interventionist god) is a subset of theism (belief in gods generally).
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
Yes, so a theist.
Bob the Unbeliever
Well-Known Member
Indeed not-- I must agree with you, here.
And, does not the very bible that so many theists point to as "proof", claim that rocks would cry out to god, if people were absent? Luke 19:40.
So, really-- pointing out that rocks, being insentient, are atheistic on a basic level, is quite apt, IMO.
charlie sc
Well-Known Member
Sure, people can believe whatever they want.
Yes, they can name their deity anything they want, but they would be going against the conventional and mainstream use of the word atheism if they were to believe in a deity.
People would just talk passed each other in this case.