It takes a big pair to make the claim of atheism.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

A very nice post. Good work!

The OP seems to be taking the position the burden of proof is on the atheist to prove God does not exist. It is a complete mischaracterization of the atheist position. Not only that but simple rules of logic state you can never prove negative. I can't prove "I will never die."

a reply to: dfnj2015

Would it affect you at all if you found out that 90%+ of the self labeled atheists out there don't believe in any higher power? That they think we are just electric signals and our consciousness/being ceases to exist when we die. They believe that with conviction and do not allow even a simple 'I don't know' to enter their thought process.

Would that change your willingness to be associated with the term 'atheist'?

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
There are only two possibilities 1. God does exist. 2. God does not exist.

I would like to posit that there is a 3rd option, that a God ( more Designer/Engineer) is not what we think its existence is.

This statement I guess blurs the line between the first 2 however hear me out, the older religions all herald multiple Gods or Polytheism. Be it Egyptian with Osiris, Ra and Horus or Sumerian with Nammu. An and Ki, these earliest of recorded civilizations had more than one giving them honour for duty to the creation of the worlds.

No man can truly know the Nature Of God.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: dfnj2015

Would it affect you at all if you found out that 90%+ of the self labeled atheists out there don't believe in any higher power? That they think we are just electric signals and our consciousness/being ceases to exist when we die. They believe that with conviction and do not allow even a simple 'I don't know' to enter their thought process.

Would that change your willingness to be associated with the term 'atheist'?

I'm sorry your faith in God is so weak that you feel compelled to ask this question. If having faith were easy then we would not have any atheists and we would not be having this conversation.

a reply to: dfnj2015

Atheist are NOT asserting there is "no god".

Yes they do. They just realized that they couldn't prove the assertion in a formal sense and that their belief wasn't necessarily any more rational than theism. It apparently gravely discombobulated some of them.

Actually, made them feel positively religious, which of course they were and continue to be in their metaphysical materialism. But you know, they couldn't stand that feeling, that sense that they weren't actually superior to theists, that they might actually live on the same plane as mere theists just couldn't be endured.

So some of them, not being able to face reality, chose to create their own reality and attempted to change the meaning of the term "atheist" so that their position wasn't so irrational and/or require that they "prove" an unprovable position, which solved some problems, created a few more; chief among which is, as they currently define atheism, it isn't actually their position anymore. Many of them think this is all quite clever, and it is, but only in the same sense that a troll is clever.

And of course they seem positively furious and shocked that theists won't accept their redefinition of terms mid debate.

All pretty funny stuff actually.

But yeah, so, for the majority of history, inherent in atheism is the assertion that there is no God. Some subset of self proclaimed atheists "believe" there is no God, but they're embarrassed by the realization that this position is just as faith based/rational/ and so on as the assertion that there is a God, and they panic. Start this nonsense about they "merely lack" belief and the like. Start screaming about how they don't have to provide proof because they aren't asserting anything, yeah right. Cravens.

Anyway, It's a very popular position among the hee haw jamboree variety of atheist. I've seen more sophisticated atheists shy away from it and warn their brethren against adopting the position. They're concerned about integrity, I think, both moral and structural.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: dfnj2015

Atheism is a belief system...

Thus faith. I didn't say religion.

Atheism isn't a belief system either though. There are no set of beliefs for one to have at all. Theism is not simply a belief in God either. It's a belief in one or more specific God(s). Atheism makes no positive claims. Theism does.

Atheism is basically what many people call agnostic. There are two positions to have. Theist or Atheist. If you're not a Theist then you're Atheist. Agnostic isn't a third option. It's the second option between Gnostic and Agnostic.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The bible and koran and vedic texts and ALL MAJOR DOCTRINES and their writings support that there is no god....especially if you put them all back together as one history which is how they belong.

All in all atheism is disbelief, which is nothing if you ask them.

Essentially, atheists that redefine the term atheist to mean merely a lack of belief, are fundamentalists. Fundamentalists in the same sense as the Creation Science folks.

Same mind sets: same inability to cope, same close mindedness, and same panic over non-essentials.

Does the number 4,325,124,511,983 exist? Perhaps not until I created it myself. Never seen it before anywhere that exact number, so how did I know it could even exist?

When it comes to the belief in the existence of God, rationalist reason > empirical evidence.

Demanding empirical evidence for a being whose existence is completely beyond our comprehension in this life is silly at best.

a reply to: Justso

I have never seen any religious people get triggered by someone who says they don't know. In fact I haven't seen anyone get triggered even by those who say there isn't a God.

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The bible and koran and vedic texts and ALL MAJOR DOCTRINES and their writings support that there is no god....especially if you put them all back together as one history which is how they belong.

Wrong. The first 2 lines in the Qur'an translate as "1. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. 2. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds". Perhaps you should actually the Qur'an before making weird and easily disprovable statements like this.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The bible and koran and vedic texts and ALL MAJOR DOCTRINES and their writings support that there is no god....especially if you put them all back together as one history which is how they belong.

Wrong. The first 2 lines in the Qur'an translate as "1. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. 2. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds". Perhaps you should actually the Qur'an before making weird and easily disprovable statements like this.

I like your posts, you give an honest perspective such as admitting you cannot provide any evidence that any gods exist.
You are a breath of fresh air as a theist, of course I don't believe in anything unverifiable, but I'll damn well defend your right to believe. Every time.

a reply to: TJames

As long as people do no harm to others, it shouldn't matter what they believe in or refuse to believe in. To me, it's no different than when people believe in ghosts, youkai, fairies, ESP, dragons, chupacabras, bigfoot, parallel universes, wormholes, etc.

Now if someone started doing suicide bombings or military occupations because they believed it would please a tree nymph or bigfoot, we'd have a problem. But even then, the problem would be with the individuals who committed the actions, not with the unprovable characters they used as justifications for those actions.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: Out6of9Balance

The bible and koran and vedic texts and ALL MAJOR DOCTRINES and their writings support that there is no god....especially if you put them all back together as one history which is how they belong.

Wrong. The first 2 lines in the Qur'an translate as "1. In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful. 2. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds". Perhaps you should actually the Qur'an before making weird and easily disprovable statements like this.

The Koran and all major doctrines are written in parables ....you may take your defensive religous crap somewhere else......perhaps you should read and comprehend the entire doctrine before you make any negative commentary??......perhaps you should make more of an effort at striving for contextual creativity in your efforts to comprehend what you read.Your freedom to manicure your own interpretations based upon whatever status quo group you subscribe to will not change what is in the book....I can provide a baseline from which the Koran may be returned to its beginnings or origins......you are simply reading a book with others and are trying to make it fit your current focuses....you ply the documents looking for sympathetic contextual transition points you may manipulate....there simply is not that much room for interpretation.

a reply to: one4all

(yawn)
Have you actually read a Qur'an from beginning to end?

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: one4all

(yawn)
Have you actually read a Qur'an from beginning to end?

Who would read a bible and not look for a comparable?......what is the most printed and shared book on the planet?Maybe the bible?......I assume many many people would look or the Qur an or Vedic Texts or to any number of doctrines for comparables before subscribing to anything....right?......lol.....I have read the same words you have....IMHO Muhammad was likely an abductee as were catalysts of many religons.

FYI I enjoyed reading the qur an ...it is written using the Chaos Theory as a template.....lol....until I learned of the hadith and how it was used to propogate Sharia law.

a reply to: one4all

I seriously doubt you have because if you had, you'd know that there isn't a single biblical text that's in the Qur'an. There isn't a single book or scripture from the TaNaKh, Samaritan Pentateuch, Mishnah, or Talmud either (much less the Vedas). So no, it's likely that you have not read the same words that I have.

But I wouldn't be surprised if your spiel works with others who also haven't read the Qur'an. A lot of people prefer to listen to the interpretations of others, rather than check the sources for themselves.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance


You throw the word "god" around a lot, but you haven't defined it. How we agree to disagree if we don't know what the topic is? What is this "god" that you say it takes cajones to say, isn't?

a reply to: windword

I'm assuming Abrahamic god not Norse or Hindu.
This is ATS remember, it's cool to lack belief in Hindu gods but dare to question Abrahamic claims then you burn in hell lol