Originally posted by @fmfOk. Let's revisit the OP.
I disagree. I've managed to stick closely - in terms of substance - to the OP and thread topic..
"To my way of thinking, atheism is a lack of belief,.."
Is that true? An atheist believes there is no God. That's a belief. It can't be a "lack of belief" because that would be irrational. An atheist believes there is no God. He doesn't know there is a God, and he doesn't know there isn't a God. An atheist doesn't "lack belief". He believes there is no God.
If an atheist lacked belief he wouldn't have a word to say about the existence of God because he wouldn't have a basis upon which to form a belief about the existence of God one way or the other, but since the atheist does form an ideology about the existence of God he does so based on the tenets of atheism, which is first and foremost the belief that there is no God.
"Furthermore, it is unaffected by the claims of religionists who insist their folklores offer a "persuasive message". "
It is unaffected, i.e. the atheist, by the claims(beliefs) of those that hold to the tenets of their particular religious belief systems is unarguably true. Nevertheless, if the atheist is wrong about the existence of God, notwithstanding the error of any particular religious belief system and its ineffectually persuasive message, if there be a God, and He has communicated His will and purposes, it would be incumbent upon the atheist to stop fooling himself by amassing spurious information about what he obviously believes is true and denying the existence of God.
But instead the dyed-in-the-wool atheist has an agenda to promote the ideological belief system that denies the existence of God, and endlessly argues against that which he can neither affirm nor disprove.
"=Why do some people ~ not atheists, mind you ~ suggest that atheism should have a "persuasive message".."
That's simple. If one is going to promote an idea, in this case atheism, then they should have a rationally sound argument in favor of their belief that there is no God.
So, they do. But they don't have a message that is rational that they use to deny the existence of God. But they do have a message that condemns belief in God and attacks believers.
"...when, in fact, propagating messages is surely a matter for people operating in the realm of competing religious doctrines?"
In fact that is true, but only because much of what is propagated is false, made up of by man, promoted by liars and hypocrites and is used as a means to an end, which is ultimately the promotion and empowerment of unscrupulous and deceptive individuals.
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeWisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:
You could supplant 'Google' with 'wisdom' and nobody would object.
Proverbs 1:20
Originally posted by @secondsonI have never claimed "there is no God". That is something you have made up. Or perhaps you are confusing someone else's posts with mine.
Ok. Let's revisit the OP.
[b]"To my way of thinking, atheism is a lack of belief,.."
Is that true? An atheist believes there is no God. That's a belief. It can't be a "lack of belief" because that would be irrational. An atheist believes there is no God. He doesn't know there is a God, and he doesn't know there isn't a God. An atheist doe ...[text shortened]... nd, which is ultimately the promotion and empowerment of unscrupulous and deceptive individuals.[/b]
Originally posted by @fmfI didn't say anything about you having claimed there is no God in the post you replied that objection to.
I have never claimed "there is no God". That is something you have made up. Or perhaps you are confusing someone else's posts with mine.
Originally posted by @secondsonI am an atheist. I don't claim "there is no God". Your attempts to generalize what atheists believe or claim or "denounce" or "condemn" or "attack" or what "message" they propagate in some monolithic way are false.
I didn't say anything about you having claimed there is no God in the post you replied that objection to.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @fmf<<I am an atheist. I don't claim "there is no God".>>
I am an atheist. I don't claim "there is no God". Your attempts to generalize what atheists believe or claim or "denounce" or "condemn" or "attack" or what "message" they propagate in some monolithic way are false.
This makes no sense, Kiddo. Are you trying to redefine “atheist?”
Originally posted by @fmfThat is just silly. "I am an atheist" is akin to saying there is no God no matter how you slice it.
I am an atheist. I don't claim "there is no God". Your attempts to generalize what atheists believe or claim or "denounce" or "condemn" or "attack" or what "message" they propagate in some monolithic way are false.
Atheist : one who believes that there is no deity. Marriam-Webster
Originally posted by @secondsonAn atheist is someone who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of a god or gods. Some atheists claim that there is no god or gods while other atheists, like me, do not claim that there is no god or gods but simply do not hold a belief in their existence. An atheist is someone who is not a theist.
That is just silly. "I am an atheist" is akin to saying there is no God no matter how you slice it.
Atheist : one who believes that there is no deity. Marriam-Webster
"Agnostic theism is the philosophical view that encompasses both theism and agnosticism. An agnostic theist believes in the existence of a god or gods, but regards the basis of this proposition as unknown or inherently unknowable. The agnostic theist may also or alternatively be agnostic regarding the properties of the god or gods that they believe in." [wiki]
"Agnostic atheism is a philosophical position that encompasses both atheism and agnosticism. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact.." [wiki]
Here's another dollop of interesting, relevant definitionary from https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org...
"Strong Atheism
The strong atheist, also known as an explicit atheist or a positive atheist, denies the existence of God or any other deities. This person’s views are based solely on what can be found to be true using the scientific method. Since the existence of God cannot be proven using science, the strong atheist concludes that God doesn’t exist.
Weak Atheism
The second type of atheist is the weak atheist, also known as an implicit atheist or a negative atheist. This person does not deny the existence of God outright, but rather claims a religious relativism. That is, she would claim that anyone’s belief can be true for that person, but she doesn’t believe in God herself. "
I would identify myself as an "implicit atheist".
Implicit atheism and explicit atheism are types of atheism coined by George H. Smith. "Implicit atheism" is defined as "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it", while "explicit atheism" is "the absence of theistic belief due to a conscious rejection of it". Explicit atheists have considered the idea of deities and have rejected belief that any exist. Implicit atheists, though they do not themselves maintain a belief in a god or gods, have not rejected the notion or have not considered it further. [wiki]
A conservative critique of this https://www.conservapedia.com/Implicit_and_explicit_atheism
Originally posted by @secondsonBe that as it may, but...
Atheist : one who believes that there is no deity. Merriam-Webster
Atheist : A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods. Oxford Dictionary.
Atheist : someone who does not believe in any God or gods. Cambridge Dictionary.
Ho hum. So a dictionary duel isn't going to solve this.
It's clearly a more involved topic.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
uoOriginally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Christian. - "I'm important. My enemies will perish......I'm important."
Another silly attempt at a lampoon from you.
You never heard Christ's guidance on how believer's ought to pray?
"Forgive us our depts as we forgive our deptors."
Or if you will -
"Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.".
Never read that?
You never read this?
Proverbs 24:17-18 New King James Version (NKJV)
17 Do not rejoice when your enemy falls,
And do not let your heart be glad when he stumbles;
18 Lest the Lord see it, and it displease Him,
And He turn away His wrath from him.
Never read Christ's instructions concerning the disciples enemies?
Christian Standard Bible
But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (Matt. 5:44)
Here you come again.
Atheist. - "In the great scheme of things, I'm not that important. My enemies might prosper, but ultimately, we'll all perish."
In other words - no design, no justice or mercy, no purpose. But only blind, pitiless indifference.
Then why not live evilly all the more? For tomorrow we all die and there is no accounting to God.
Originally posted by @sonshipYou have talked about how [1] your faith makes you more and more like Jesus, [2] how torturing your enemies in flames for eternity "glorifies" your god figure (and acts as a warning to aliens from outer space) and [3] knowing that your enemies (the supposed children of Satan) will be tortured for eternity makes it easier for you to forgive them and makes your Christian life easier. So I think Ghost of a Duke's summary is rather more cogent and on-target than a mere "lampoon".Ghost of a Duke: Christian. - "I'm important. My enemies will perish......I'm important."
Another silly attempt at a lampoon from you.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28794
Originally posted by @fmfIt also comes on the back of him, yesterday, lampooning Einstein.
You have talked about how [1] your faith makes you more and more like Jesus, [2] how torturing your enemies in flames for eternity "glorifies" your god figure (and acts as a warning to aliens from outer space) and [3] knowing that your enemies (the supposed children of Satan) will be tortured for eternity makes it easier for you to forgive them and makes your C ...[text shortened]... So I think Ghost of a Duke's summary is rather more cogent and on-target than a mere "lampoon".
Einstein!!!