Atheists and Agnostics don't believe in God but want spread their nothing word

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Yes. Agnostic atheist. They are not mutually exclusive. Look it up.

You seem to think, even though ive read several people on here try to explain, that atheism means someone believes for certain God doesn't exist. It doesn't. It just means a lack of belief. So someone could have a lack of belief and say they know for sure God doesnt exist, but another could say they dont believe and arent certain either way, in which case would be an agnostic atheist. They tend to not believe in something until there is enough evidence and suspend certainty either way.

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: MrConspiracy
So the theists haven't proved Gods exist. Therefore Atheists have every reason to have ....

disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

They (theists) haven't given enough reason for atheists to accept the claims for the existence of gods.

Therefore, yes. The whole reason someone would call themselves an Atheist is because they don't believe in a higher power/God etc.

Yes, they do not believe/accept the claims made by theists.

It's not a matter of word play. It's a matter of common sense. I'm not even sure how you got us here or what the reason was.

You said that atheists claimed that gods do not exist, and that is untrue.

Lets re-track. If you want to play word games.

Atheists have no evidence to lead them to believe in God. So they don't based on the lack of evidence. Is that phrase OK with you?

Whichever way you manipulate and switch sentences and use "believe vs belief" my point still stands - Preaching Atheism is redundant...

originally posted by: Reflection
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Yes. Agnostic atheist. They are not mutually exclusive. Look it up.

You seem to think, even though ive read several people on here try to explain, that atheism means someone believes for certain God doesn't exist. It doesn't. It just means a lack of belief. So someone could have a lack of belief and say they know for sure God doesnt exist, but another could say they dont believe and arent certain either way, in which case would be an agnostic atheist. They tend to not believe in something until there is enough evidence and suspend certainty either way.

So they don't believe.

Also - LACK of belief (meaning absence of belief) means they have no belief in "God" Is that hard to see?

Agnostics aren't really in question here IMO. Agnostics would have an easier time preaching though. But it would probably end up as a debate with themselves and others. Regardless, I never spoke about agnostic preachers.

originally posted by: MrConspiracy
Preaching Atheism is redundant...

Talk about word games, you already admitted that you are only trolling the thread because the OP used the word "preach".

But, if you want to get technical, christianity comes down to "Jesus died for your sins" that isn't much more complex than "The evidence for the existance of god dosn't convince me that one exists".

Just how much filler each group can muster to keep their flocks interested is their problem, since you already said that you don't preach. Why go on about it?

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: MrConspiracy
Preaching Atheism is redundant...

Talk about word games, you already admitted that you are only trolling the thread because the OP used the word "preach".

But, if you want to get technical, christianity comes down to "Jesus died for your sins" that isn't much more complex than "The evidence for the existance of god dosn't convince me that one exists".

Just how much filler each group can muster to keep their flocks interested is their problem, since you already said that you don't preach. Why go on about it?

It's rude not to reply that's why I'm "going on". And i'm certainly not trolling.

I also mentioned I think religious preaching is also a little redundant. But more grounds than Atheist preaching.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Again, not mutually exclusive. The lack of belief is the atheist side and the not knowing for certain is the agnostic side. Atheism has to do with belief. Agnosticism has to do with knowledge. You keep trying to make this broad judgement about what atheism is, this absolute rejection of the possibility of a God, when it isn't necessarily that. Some are absolutely sure, but I would imagine most atheists are agnostic. It's an important distinction a lot of people miss I think.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Define grounds, because all I see is an appeal to the amount of material available.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Define grounds, because all I see is an appeal to the amount of material available.

What's to talk about?

"I don't believe in God"
- "Why?"
"There's no evidence for me to believe in God"
"Oh, ok so what are your ideas then?"

This is no longer a debate about Atheism. It's a debate about that person's opinions. Atheism took them to not believing in God. Outside of that it's not really an Atheism talk anymore.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

That isn't preaching, that is a discussion.

Besides:
"God loves you."
"Why yes he does brother."
"Amen."

Isn't any better.

originally posted by: Reflection
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Again, not mutually exclusive. The lack of belief is the atheist side and the not knowing for certain is the agnostic side. Atheism has to do with belief. Agnosticism has to do with knowledge. You keep trying to make this broad judgement about what atheism is, this absolute rejection of the possibility of a God, when it isn't necessarily that. Some are absolutely sure, but I would imagine most atheists are agnostic. It's an important distinction a lot of people miss I think.

So some are absolutely sure. These people are Atheists. The others are Agnostics.

"An atheist lacks faith in God, believes there is no god, or lacks awareness of gods. An agnostic either believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a god"

a reply to: MrConspiracy

So someone preaching the bible is somehow more than just someone's opinion?

Pretty sure an atheist could "preach" about a lot of relevant things beyond just disbelief. Like all the damage that religion has done over thousands of years and continues to this day. Trying to pursuade people to think for themselves and help make this a better world. Seems pretty legitimate to me.

a reply to: Reflection

Just because someone is religious or spiritual, doesn't mean they aren't thinking for themselves. And just because someone is an atheist, doesn't mean they are.

Atheism is as vulnerable to groupthink as any other group.

we've seen various cliques emerge, some of which have largely abandoned critical thinking for dogma. This mutual admiration society strikes me as being antithetical to free thought, as similar ideas are rewarded through promotion while diverse perspectives receive less attention. This sets the stage for a type of groupthink that runs counter to big tent atheism. www.atheistrev.com...

👣

a reply to: BlueMule

So someone starts another church. Yay, atheist denominations.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Dude, you keep trying to make them mutually exclusive when they are not. Its really not that hard to understand. You can have a lack of belief in something and not be for certain at the same time.

"I don't know for certain, so i will choose to not believe until I have more evidence."

Doesn't mean someone can't have suspicions one way or the other. Agnostic atheists just suspend belief. And suspension of belief is the same as not believing.

Now if someone doesn't believe in God and know for sure there is no possibility, that person could be considered a gnostic atheist.

But again, i suspect the majority of atheists are agnostic.

All I gotta say is people need to look up the definition before using a word they don't understand. On topic: If they guy wants to stand in an airport and spread his belief, then good on him. Religious "Nuts" like to invade my personal space by knocking on my door to share their belief. I guess next time I'll just stand there and call them stupid.

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: Reflection

Just because someone is religious or spiritual, doesn't mean they aren't thinking for themselves. And just because someone is an atheist, doesn't mean they are.

Atheism is as vulnerable to groupthink as any other group.

we've seen various cliques emerge, some of which have largely abandoned critical thinking for dogma. This mutual admiration society strikes me as being antithetical to free thought, as similar ideas are rewarded through promotion while diverse perspectives receive less attention. This sets the stage for a type of groupthink that runs counter to big tent atheism. www.atheistrev.com...

👣

All atheism means is lack of belief in a God or gods. It's not an ideology. There are ideologies that may involve atheism, but that's up to the individule to decide.

But come on. You're making it out like there is an equal amount of dogma and lack of critical thinking from atheists as there are theists. I just can't imagine that's the case.

Like I pointed out earlier in the thread, i suspect most atheists are agnostic, which means they are taking a very scientific approach involving critical thinking and reasoning. There is no dogma in that. To them, it takes a lot of emperical evidence to come to a highly probable conclusion or belief.

Are there some atheists that are jumping to conclusions and being close minded? Im sure there are. But i cant imagine the percentages are anywhere near theists.

originally posted by: Reflection

But come on. You're making it out like there is an equal amount of dogma and lack of critical thinking from atheists as there are theists. I just can't imagine that's the case.

👣

originally posted by: Reflection
a reply to: MrConspiracy

So someone preaching the bible is somehow more than just someone's opinion?

Pretty sure an atheist could "preach" about a lot of relevant things beyond just disbelief. Like all the damage that religion has done over thousands of years and continues to this day. Trying to pursuade people to think for themselves and help make this a better world. Seems pretty legitimate to me.

That isn't preaching Atheism. Those things don't fall under the definition of Atheism.

a reply to: MrConspiracy



I remember when this song first came out, and how "all up in arms" the Christian leaders were that this "teen idol" was preaching atheism.

Do you see how some would see the atheist sentiment of this song as a noble teaching, that should be spread?

originally posted by: Reflection
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Dude, you keep trying to make them mutually exclusive when they are not. Its really not that hard to understand. You can have a lack of belief in something and not be for certain at the same time.

"I don't know for certain, so i will choose to not believe until I have more evidence."

Doesn't mean someone can't have suspicions one way or the other. Agnostic atheists just suspend belief. And suspension of belief is the same as not believing.

Now if someone doesn't believe in God and know for sure there is no possibility, that person could be considered a gnostic atheist.

But again, i suspect the majority of atheists are agnostic.

Suspending belief and being open to the idea of God makes you an Agnostic. IF you want to define as an "Agnostic Atheist" then of course, they are allowed. But I struggle to see how you can "not be sure" and be an Atheist. Whom, by their nature, lack belief in a higher power.

I think i'm starting to understand you. But by your definition of Atheism there would be no Atheists. Because you can't disprove God....