Should Atheism be a thing????

a reply to: Akragon

The bible teaches christians grow, learn and change their whole lives, with their beliefs.

Science is a religion when it is used and manipulated by men. Science, or, at the very least what they learn of it is always changing, always will
Some even worship the scientists, there are ample websites and links explaining how science is becomming to,some people a religion

Science itself is the order or disorder, human interpretation of that order has been manipulated many times

a reply to: MotherMayEye

I don't believe that monkeys are going to fly out of my butt and shower the world with glitter. Do you?

No?

Is that a belief system we share?

Well... no

You don't actually believe such things are going to happen...

but ya... belief system is an extremely broad term... and almost meaningless

The idea of course comes from religious fanatics that have to label everything as a religion to defend their own

In any case... Everyone, without exception... has beliefs

a reply to: Akragon

Because you are far superior to everyone arnt you ak

I don't understand your fear of flat earthers, it's ok, I promise they won't harm you ak, I will look after you from the scary flatters

Why the hate for their beliefs, for my money, your beliefs arnt logical either

a reply to: Raggedyman

The bible teaches christians grow, learn and change their whole lives, with their beliefs.

i don't seem to recall that part

Nor anything saying your belief is allowed to change...

Science is a religion when it is used and manipulated by men.

no its not...

Some manipulate it for gain... it does not become religion or religious

Some even worship the scientists, there are ample websites and links explaining how science is becomming to,some people a religion

Sure... sites made by fanatical religionists that hate science...

people spew all sorts of garbage to defend their religious doctrines and dogma

a reply to: Raggedyman

Because you are far superior to everyone arnt you ak

your usual response to me... as expected

I don't understand your fear of flat earthers, it's ok, I promise they won't harm you ak, I will look after you from the scary flatters

Its not a fear... its a dislike for stupidity...

Why the hate for their beliefs, for my money, your beliefs arnt logical either

again, no hate...

I don't hate... theres no room for it in my life

i have a genuine dislike for stupid people...

i can't fix that

a reply to: Akragon

Yeah, it's just arrogance and smarmy I am better than you

That's really sad you call people you,disagree,with names

But, I think it's all you are

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Akragon

Yeah, it's just arrogance and smarmy I am better than you

That's really sad you call people you,disagree,with names

But, I think it's all you are

Well you are welcome to your opinions of me... and i of you of course

and just so you know, i don't call people names when i disagree with them... thats more your style, and many of the people of your religion's style

i only use the appropriate names for certain things...

For example... IF you consider a dog to be a chicken... you're a moron lol

a reply to: DISRAELI

Anyway, my point was that an opinion held in the mind might reasonably be given an "-ism" suffix, if we need a convenient label for discussing a group of people.

But that is the label churchians give to non believers, too.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Atheism is just the lack of belief in a god or deity. It's not a movement or 'a thing'...

I don't believe in lepreuchauns... are we gonna make a group for us too? I think "Nope-rechaunians" sounds pretty fitting.

I'm a nope-rechaunian.

A2D

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: intrptr

Agnostic accept some form of religious belief don't they?

They would be those that "don't know"... and except the possible existence of what they don't know

Atheists have no belief in gods/God... they want hard facts backed by evidence, something that religion can not provide...

Though, the hardcore religionists take advantage of the fact that everyone has some form of belief system, and call that belief in whatever it may be... religion. Which is just nonsense...

They also call non believers atheist to classify them. In their eyes it is a negative term. But many 'so called' atheists have a wide variety of beliefs.

On the contrary, Organized Religion is the corruption that destroys many peoples desire to know more about spirituality, even before they were to ask.

Thats designed that way.

Something about the 'standing at the very door, turning people away'.

originally posted by: madenusa
It is simply a "rejection" there is no gods they don't beleave either way....To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

LOL, that is not clear at all.

Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods

Here are some abridged definitions
-Disbelief: lack of faith in something
-Faith: belief in God

So that sentence would have the same meaning written, "Atheism is not a lack of belief in God..."

You follow that with the statement:

it is a lack of belief in gods.

That's about as clear as a brick wall.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Woodcarver
I can only repeat that I self-identified as an atheist, at the age of seventeen, when I recognised that I did not believe in the existence of God, and understood this to mean gods in general. Christmas Eve it was, at Midnight Mass, in the middle of the sermon. If people can use the word in different ways, it is best not to be too dogmatic about the definition.
I should warn you that the agnostic police are known to patrol this site, and If they see your post they will be down on you like a ton of bricks arguing that you should be calling yourself an agnostic. They can be amazingly persistent (I've had one of those arguments myself, in my atheist days).

I have never had anyone say that to me. I think it is safe to say that none of the god concepts which have ever been presented on here can pass any tests of validity, and in my opinion, personal gods, and energy with consciousness are equally impossible concepts. Atheism should be the default position until otherwise is proven. The term is only relevant because so many people are willing to put rationale aside for the comfort of social acceptance. Atheists are still looked down upon by the majority of the world.

It really blows my mind how many people stick to their beliefs in things that have nothing to support it.

a reply to: Raggedyman

To be fair, saying "I don't believe" is a faith statement, atheists have a choice
Also there is a group of atheists who choose to believe without evidence other things

Not believing is a form of belief ? I believe people should have veracity and not believe anything blindly because they were told or read it somewhere.

Nothing wrong with holding in reserve until proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. This can only take the form of a spiritual encounter thats undeniable. Unlike others who tell us to believe or do something or read and believe something, because they say so.

I have more respect for those that examine the evidence, withholding judgement than in the blind follower.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: intrptr

I think agnostics are just all around “I don’t know” while atheists reject the presented forms of religious doctrine.

Atheists can include "I don't know. All I do know is I don't believe what you do."

originally posted by: scojak
-Disbelief: lack of faith in something
-Faith: belief in God

So that sentence would have the same meaning written, "Atheism is not a lack of belief in God..."

You follow that with the statement:

it is a lack of belief in gods.

That's about as clear as a brick wall.

I'll try to help clear it up, because it is very clear to me.

Disbelief:

dis·be·lief
ˌdisbəˈlēf/Submit
noun
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.

A 'god' is not something that exists. Atheists don't 'disbelieve' in a 'god' that actually exists. There is no evidence that any 'god' exists.

Evidence:

ev·i·dence
ˈevədəns/Submit
noun
1.
the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Does that help clear it up?

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually no. You conveniently left out the portion of the definition of 'disbelief' that I quoted.

dis·be·lief
disbəˈlēf/Submit
noun
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
...
-lack of faith in something.

I feel you are patronizing me in my defining of words. However, if by defining the words in a sentence I find it to be two statements that are the same, but are said to be opposites, how does that make sense?

ETA:

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
A 'god' is not something that exists.

Prove it.

There is no evidence that any 'god' exists.

There is also no evidence that any 'god' doesn't exist.

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually no. You conveniently left out the portion of the definition of 'disbelief' that I quoted.

dis·be·lief
disbəˈlēf/Submit
noun
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
...
-lack of faith in something.

I feel you are patronizing me in my defining of words. However, if by defining the words in a sentence I find it to be two statements that are the same, but are said to be opposites, how does that make sense?

ETA:

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
A 'god' is not something that exists.

Prove it.

There is no evidence that any 'god' exists.

There is also no evidence that any 'god' doesn't exist.

It is not actually the gods we disbelieve in, it is the claim that gods exist that we do not believe.

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually no. You conveniently left out the portion of the definition of 'disbelief' that I quoted.

dis·be·lief
disbəˈlēf/Submit
noun
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
...
-lack of faith in something.

I feel you are patronizing me in my defining of words. However, if by defining the words in a sentence I find it to be two statements that are opposite, but are said to be the same, how does that make sense?

ETA:

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
A 'god' is not something that exists.

Prove it.

There is no evidence that any 'god' exists.

There is also no evidence that any 'god' doesn't exist.

I wasn't meaning to be patronizing, at all. I actually thought you had legitimate reasons to not understand madeinusa's comment. I did understand and was trying to help.

Define 'god' according to your understanding. We'll go from there. You may be right or wrong that 'god' cannot be disproven depending on your definition.

a reply to: Woodcarver

Yes, that's a better explanation than I gave.

ETA: Wait...blerg...I believe people make claims about there being a 'god/s'. I just believe the claims are baseless.

originally posted by: scojak
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Actually no. You conveniently left out the portion of the definition of 'disbelief' that I quoted.

dis·be·lief
disbəˈlēf/Submit
noun
inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.
...
-lack of faith in something.

I feel you are patronizing me in my defining of words. However, if by defining the words in a sentence I find it to be two statements that are the same, but are said to be opposites, how does that make sense?

ETA:

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
A 'god' is not something that exists.

Prove it.

There is no evidence that any 'god' exists.

There is also no evidence that any 'god' doesn't exist.

It is impossible to prove that some thing doesn’t exist. Like you can’t prove that thor and zeus don’t exist. That is not a good reason to accept that they possibly exist is it?

Why does that need to be pointed out in every thread about this.