It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Indictment Of Atheists

page: 7
18
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Klassified

For that matter ... I would love to see a unicorn, or a dragon or a gryphon ... LOL.

At one point, I would have said I'd be glad to have proof of the existence of God (the Judeo-Christian-Islamic one).

That was another benefit of my realization ... when you realize that this God (YHVH/Father/Allah) doesn't actually exist, you're free to see what an absolute craven terror He was in the Old (and for that matter the New) Testament.

In my opinion, yours may vary, no disrespect meant, per se, to any Believer.




posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs

Also non religious folk make up way more than 3%. Plus Buddhism is an atheistic belief system so you have to count that. Basing it on what people arbitrarily describe themselves as on a survey doesn't do it justice.


I think a lot of people who refer to themselves as Spiritual are atheistic.

I consider myself a Spiritual Atheist. I've had too many "experiences" to deny there is more then what we see.

I lack belief in any God, in the religious sense. I do believe that everything is energy, that everything is connected through energy.

So, it depends on how you ask the question. Not all atheists are "hard" atheists.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369
This is why you see people posting things like 'I'm not an atheist, I'm agnostic'......


Most don't even know what agnostic really means.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: HorusChrist




That's me too, I just know from experience it upsets people, makes them freak out and scream at me, if they know I'm atheist.


Then don't call yourself an atheist. The baggage that comes with it is real. People burnt atheists at the stake like they did witches, but hilariously enough, atheists are considered real yet witches are not. Both the witch and the atheist are equally born out of superstition, and in the case of the atheist (or infidel, heretic, kafir, non-believer) based on the presumption that there is a god to not believe in. If you take the label, you allow others to continue thinking that way.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: HorusChrist




That's me too, I just know from experience it upsets people, makes them freak out and scream at me, if they know I'm atheist.


Then don't call yourself an atheist. The baggage that comes with it is real. People burnt atheists at the stake like they did witches, but hilariously enough, atheists are considered real yet witches are not. Both the witch and the atheist are equally born out of superstition, and in the case of the atheist (or infidel, heretic, kafir, non-believer) based on the presumption that there is a god to not believe in. If you take the label, you allow others to continue thinking that way.


Yeah the ignorance of theists can be truly astonishing, burning 'witches' and those that do not share the belief in god/s at the stake is a great example of how primitive their position is.

And yet in 2015 we still have theists claiming that to lack belief in their god is a superstition........sheer projection on your part.......again.....



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 11:53 AM
link   
I think there's often a conflation between atheism, materialism and scientism (dang-ism!) that may cause a lot of common misunderstandings.

Atheism simply means "no gods" as oft-repeated, it points to an absence of something.

The other two make claims of their own and so to me belong in a different category.

Materialism states that the observable physical (material) universe is all that exists.

Scientism is the belief that empirical science alone describes the entire universe and there is no other means of truth gathering available to us.

(These are my definitions, obviously.)

Although my world-view surely incorporates elements of the second two ... I reject the absolutism of either one.

I AM still looking for evidence, keeping in mind that matter and energy are fluid, that we understand basically jack-squat about the quantum level, that while science's tools have brought us farther than any previous method of gaining and evaluating knowledge about our world, science cannot tell you much of anything about the subjective human reality of touching a lover's hand, listening to Rachmaninoff, or seeing the ocean for the first time.

Hmm... sorry to blather.


edit on 11Mon, 09 Nov 2015 11:57:35 -060015p1120151166 by Gryphon66 because: Edited for grammar

edit on 12Mon, 09 Nov 2015 12:21:55 -060015p1220151166 by Gryphon66 because: CAPS noted



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So what's the best approach to the greatest understanding and fostering the same among others?

(I wanted to add " other than nit-picking semantics" but I thought that unkind and unpleasant, LOL.)

Show how a lack of belief actually creates a "presumption that there is a god to not believe in."

It is an honest request.
edit on 12Mon, 09 Nov 2015 12:22:35 -060015p1220151166 by Gryphon66 because: Clarification of confusing phrasing



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   
So if I don't believe the flat earth theory, I might accidently make it real? I better be careful.


Also OP, atheists on the internet are ****s, because people on the internet are ****s, because people are ****s. Even a really great person, on a really bad day, is a ****.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Barcs

Also non religious folk make up way more than 3%. Plus Buddhism is an atheistic belief system so you have to count that. Basing it on what people arbitrarily describe themselves as on a survey doesn't do it justice.


I think a lot of people who refer to themselves as Spiritual are atheistic.

I consider myself a Spiritual Atheist. I've had too many "experiences" to deny there is more then what we see.

I lack belief in any God, in the religious sense. I do believe that everything is energy, that everything is connected through energy.

So, it depends on how you ask the question. Not all atheists are "hard" atheists.

This would be similar to my own beliefs. I would also fit the "spiritual atheist" moniker.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


Show how a lack of belief actually creates a "presumption that there is a god to not believe in."

Hey, it sounded intelligent and insightful. That's proof enough.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
Not another one of those poor atheists are always being victimized threads?

If only atheists would just meet together in some kind of large building and express their shared beliefs and perhaps donate a small bit of money to keep that establishment solvent, they could organize enough to fight this kind of injustice.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Gryphon66


Show how a lack of belief actually creates a "presumption that there is a god to not believe in."

Hey, it sounded intelligent and insightful. That's proof enough.


Hmnmm ....

Is there a thread on "Spiritual Atheism"? That might be interesting.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Then don't call yourself an atheist.

That's a word to the wise. If you call yourself an atheist you give yourself a label for religious people to latch onto and judge you by. Don't give them a chance to define you by their narrow categories.

Not only that, I personally don't call myself an atheist because it's a bad description. For me, it's not that I don't believe in God, it's that I don't understand what "God" is even supposed to mean. How can I either believe or not believe in something nobody can even define? Do you believe in (----------*-----------)? What are we even talking about?

So "atheist" really isn't accurate in any way.
edit on 9-11-2015 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I fully admit I nitpick when it comes to semantics. I would consider it a compliment given the prevalence of the loose use of language nowadays.

It's tricky to wrap the head around, but here's my reasoning.

For one, to "lack belief" would be to take the position of an ignorant child. Believers don't say they "lack doubt". To believe or to doubt is the correct action taken towards any given proposition. Once we hear an argument we make a commitment towards its veracity. We believe it is true or false. A "lack of belief" is not any sort of commitment, but sounds more like extirpation of whatever beliefs were once there, almost like some void is left over. We don't lack belief that they are true, or lack doubt that they are false. We believe one way or the other.

Believers believe in god, and because of this, they believe there are people who do not believe in god (an actual god). They called these people many names and pejoratives, and atheist is one of them. If someone says they do not believe in god, that they are an atheist, they are supporting this narrative and pandering to superstitions. To the believer, it appears there are indeed people who do not believe in God. But if one is willing to admit that there is no god and that the bible is a myth of sorts, then it is only true that he doesn't believe in the myth. In other words, for me at least, there is no god to believe in or not believe in. There is only the evidence, the story, the myth, whatever, that we choose to believe or doubt.

This why I refuse to call myself an atheist. I choose to speak about my beliefs and commitments to knowledge and reality, and not my lack of them.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift
That's a word to the wise. If you call yourself an atheist you give yourself a label for religious people to latch onto and judge you by. Don't give them a chance to define you by their narrow categories.


Atheists merely lack the belief in god/s, theists have to embellish theat definition inorder to make any kind of negative judgement.


Not only that, I personally don't call myself an atheist because it's a bad description. For me, it's not that I don't believe in God, it's that I don't understand what "God" is even supposed to mean. How can I either believe or not believe in something nobody can even define? Do you believe in (----------*-----------)? What are we even talking about?

So "atheist" really isn't accurate in any way.


Unless you hold a belief in god/s, then it's an entirety accurate description.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Thanks for the detailed response.

I find your logic about the pattern of human mentation of confronting beliefs installed (or observed) a bit too mechanical in terms that I personally experience.

I do not blame you for denying the label of "atheist." I have pointed out before that I find no reason to say "I do not believe in unicorns, werebears or the Green Lantern" because .... well, those things don't exist (except as concepts or creative/artistic expressions, which are not the point here.)

Any label taken on as part of identity must be defended as you state. That's a fair point. On the other hand, to deny a title that fits in the general application of the term merely because you (or I or anyone) exceed the limited meaning of that term in our fullness ... well, to me, that's a cop-out of a different kind.

To me the term is utilitarian, but now I understand your position a bit better, which is always fortunate.

Thanks for the explanation.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

For one, to "lack belief" would be to take the position of an ignorant child.


NO.

It takes the position, "If you can prove it, I'll belief it".



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift
That's a word to the wise. If you call yourself an atheist you give yourself a label for religious people to latch onto and judge you by. Don't give them a chance to define you by their narrow categories.


But at the same time, nobody should be ashamed of who they are. They shouldn't have to hide who they are or what they believe (or don't believe) to avoid being judged by intolerant extremist religious folk. Be proud of who you are and what you believe, because you know the religious people won't hold that back. I get it if you fear bodily harm, but in reality no true Christian is going to judge you over it or harm you because you don't believe their religion.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369
Unless you hold a belief in god/s, then it's an entirety accurate description.

Come up with a consistent, non-paradoxical definition for "god" that incorporates all the various interpretations, and I might agree with you. Particularly the Christian god. That one is runs from "love" to a human prophet crucified a couple millennia ago, to a giant bearded Grandpa in the sky, to one's "best friend."



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee




NO. It takes the position, "If you can prove it, I'll belief it".


It doesn't. A lack of belief is a position like a lack of food is a meal. A lack of anything is literally nothing. So no, not a position, not an argument, but nothing.




top topics



 
18
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join