Religion is important because it teaches good values.
Peh said:
Well, you made a point there. But people spend resources regardless of them being true or not. It's what they think they are. But let us assume uber magical sky pony is real and all what he did in the past is real as well. I would still not be a fan of his. Hm.. so at one point it is important to know in order to adjust your life to it.
If someone would proof that the story in the gospel never happened, than I wouldn't consider them being called Christians but rather Jews.
Atheism is a disbelief. Atheists don't believe in a god or gods. They don't say that god does not exist. Well.. probably some do. But by definition, they simply don't believe. Atheist = átheos = Without God.
Atheism is not about an assumption on a specific question. And atheist can believe in spiritual beings like angels, ghost and other stuff. They just don't believe in Deities. |
But is that not hypocritical?
How can one say that they truly believe in a lack of God, meaning that to them there is no God, and yet say that some atheist may believe that God exists? This backtracks on nearly everything mentioned in the first sentence. You even state in the last sentence they don't believe in deities, and yet may acknowledge that God may exist. I'm no atheist, but that does not sound like atheism.
If you don't believe in God you can't acknowledge that there might be a God. I'm not trying to be hostile, but it comes off as a confused atheist or flat out agnostic.
Jumpin said: Atheism as "lacking belief in God" is an incredibly poor definition due to its broad/wishy-washy nature; it's fairly useless when defined like that. As Neil Degrasse Tyson put it, you don't define someone as an "aGolfer" because they don't golf. In addition, one who lacks belief in God or gods could be a deist agnostic rather than an atheist; since agnostics don't deny the existence of God or Gods, but they don't believe in them either. The most broadly accepted definition of Atheist is "One who denies the existence of God or gods." This is a useful definition, it is precise, and there isn't confusion about conflating its meaning with anything else. |
No.
By going with "atheists deny the existence of a god" or even saying that they believe god doesn't exists presumes that god actually do exists. In which case has to be defined which god exists.
By saying "I don't believe in god" can be seen as " I am not convinced by your concept of god".
That is also the official definition of the word atheism. The one you are using is one that is being used mainly by apologetics who also call atheism a religion. That is simply wrong.
Agnosticism is also used incorrectly. Agnosticism says 2 things. 1. We don't know if a god exists. 2. We cannot and we won't know that a god exists. Meaning its impossible to answer that question. Agnostics are also considered atheists, because they are not believing in one.
And a deist is someone who believes in a god who kickstarted the universe and been absence ever since. Meaning whereas theist believe god interacts with our world, a deists on the other hand says he doesn't.
So I don't know what you mean by "deist agnostic".
Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3
o_O.Q said:
LMAO can you describe to me how anarchy which is a state in which there is no government is compatible with communism which requires a very large government? i EAGERLY await your answer |
Why do you argue in this manner? You use lol and lmao in such a condescending way.
Have you studied these topics in-depth at school or something? Or read scholarly documents that we haven't? I don't understand how you expect to have a civilized discourse when you do nothing but talk down to everyone here and use phrases like "most," "many" and "pretty much" with little to no proof to back up any of your claims (except for other phrases like "I know better," against which nobody can really argue.)
Can you point me in the direction of some of the anarcho-communist literature you're reading so I know where you're coming from? Or where you're sourcing your information on atheistic motivations?
TH3-D0S3R said:
But is that not hypocritical? How can one say that they truly believe in a lack of God, meaning that to them there is no God, and yet say that some atheist may believe that God exists? This backtracks on nearly everything mentioned in the first sentence. You even state in the last sentence they don't believe in deities, and yet may acknowledge that God may exist. I'm no atheist, but that does not sound like atheism. If you don't believe in God you can't acknowledge that there might be a God. I'm not trying to be hostile, but it comes off as a confused atheist or flat out agnostic. |
Atheists don't believe in deities. Atheism is not a beliefsystem as theism is.
I don't say that some atheists say that god exists. Where did you get that?
I only said that there are people who are atheists by definition, but don't understand what it means when the make a claim about the existence of god. The correct way is to say that you don't believe that god exists.
But saying that god doesn't exist is a claim which has to be proven. And they can't. No one can. Thus it would be stupid to even say something like that. Same as some theists say, "prove that god does not exist". That's not possible. You can't prove a negative.
Hope that makes more sense now.
Hm...i guess I used disbelief wrong :/
Last edited by Peh - on 27 December 2017Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3
"Christianity, if false, is of no importance, and if true, of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important."
Sounds like something a religious person would say. Hmmm.
Peh said:
Atheists don't believe in deities. Atheism is not a beliefsystem as theism is. I don't say that some atheists say that god exists. Where did you get that? I only said that there are people who are atheists by definition, but don't understand what it means when the make a claim about the existence of god. The correct way is to say that you don't believe that god exists. But saying that god doesn't exist is a claim which has to be proven. And they can't. No one can. Thus it would be stupid to even say something like that. Same as some theists say, "prove that god does not exist". That's not possible. You can't prove a negative.
Hope that makes more sense now.
Hm...i guess I used disbelief wrong :/ |
I must of misunderstood the intial bolded quote where you said some probably do. I thought when you said that you were referring to atheists as a whole rather than those who did not understand atheism in general.
Either way, coming from the other side, now that I know what you meant to say it seems pretty reasonable and fair. And like you said, it's hard to prove God as a whole. I believe he's there and don't tend to question beyond that, but I instead tend to question tendencies in right and wrong. I do mostly understand the sort of atheist view as a whole though.
TH3-D0S3R said:
I must of misunderstood the intial bolded quote where you said some probably do. I thought when you said that you were referring to atheists as a whole rather than those who did not understand atheism in general. Either way, coming from the other side, now that I know what you meant to say it seems pretty reasonable and fair. And like you said, it's hard to prove God as a whole. I believe he's there and don't tend to question beyond that, but I instead tend to question tendencies in right and wrong. I do mostly understand the sort of atheist view as a whole though. |
Well, the atheistic view ends on the question, do you believe in a god?
All that comes after that or even before that are the arguments and such. And they have nothing to do with atheism in itself, but rather with other positions which one is holding.
Meaning, there is no doctrine, no teaching, no goal, no answers, nothing in atheism. Everything else has to be found somewhere else. Most people go to science for these answers. Thus, people associate atheism with science. And thus they try to debunk or disprove atheism by attacking scientific theories. And that....fails all the time. Simply because a scientific theory is proven to be true and is supported by a huge amount of evidence.
Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3
nanarchy said:
It would be nice if people just let people be, sadly everyone thinks they have a right to impose their beliefs on others, this is especially true of most religious groups. We have had a gut full of the various Christian groups in Australia trying to impose their beliefs in the laws of the land and from what I see it is the same the world over regardless of religion. |
I totally agree with you. That's why I said " people" have a choice. They (Christians) should not persuade others in the same light.
It's just a relentless case of pointing fingers and having fingers pointed at you....it will never change.
Insert Coin. Press START. You Died. Continue?
Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3