Christianity

[BigMike]

Thank you for sharing your perspective. I understand that you view atheism as simply a lack of belief and not a belief system, and that you do not feel the need for a specific label to describe your approach to life. I agree that individuals should not be forced to conform to stereotypes or labels, and that it is important to allow people the freedom to express their beliefs or lack thereof.

However, I would argue that the term "atheist" can still be useful in promoting discussions and debates about religious belief and its role in society. While it is true that you do not actively reject Christianity or any other religion, the fact that you do not accept the assertion of the existence of God does make you part of the broader category of non-believers. This category encompasses a diverse range of individuals with different backgrounds and beliefs, and the term "atheist" can help to bring these individuals together and promote a sense of community.

In addition, while you may view atheism as the logical default position, there are still many individuals who hold religious beliefs, and it is important to promote respectful and open discussions between individuals with different perspectives. The term "atheist" can help to facilitate these discussions, and to promote understanding and tolerance between individuals with different beliefs.

In summary, while I understand your perspective, I believe that the term "atheist" can still be useful in promoting discussions and debates about religious belief and its role in society, and in promoting a sense of community among non-believers.

The problem is that words ending in "ist" imply participation in some activity or other. In this case, one who practices theism. Now, although the prefix "A" is meant to negate "theist", the gravity of the "ist" is what attracts the most attention, creating the false impression that the referent of the word is a practitioner, rather than an abstainer. There are many things that I don't believe but others do believe, and my non-belief in the existence of God is but one of them. I consider it a trivial thing, but that damned word, "atheist", makes the matter appear far more significant than it is.

I have identified as an atheist throughout my entire adult life. Very unlikely to abandon this designation. I don't want to risk being mistaken for a god-believer.

[Harbal]

I have identified as an atheist throughout my entire adult life. Very unlikely to abandon this designation. I don't want to risk being mistaken for a god-believer.

I have to admit that the label hasn't caused me any real problems. If I appear to be making an unnecessary fuss over the issue, it is merely a reaction to IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

[BigMike]

I have identified as an atheist throughout my entire adult life. Very unlikely to abandon this designation. I don't want to risk being mistaken for a god-believer.

I have to admit that the label hasn't caused me any real problems. If I appear to be making an unnecessary fuss over the issue, it is merely a reaction to IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

This is his modus operandi.

[Immanuel Can]

...you haven't a clue as to what atheism is...

Great. Let's have your definition.

Atheism is the belief of a human being that no god exists or that there is no God.

Yep. That's it.

It is also sometimes defined as lacking belief in a god or gods.

No, that one includes rocks and trees as "Atheists." That's not plausible.

Take your preferred pick.

I'll take the one that has a chance of making some sense, or at least manages to seem it does, at first. The "lacking" definition just doesn't work.

Next question: Is Atheism just a wish, or is it knowledge?

In other words, does it mean, "I don't want there to be a God," or "I know there is no God?"

An agnostic either lacks or purposely withholds belief regarding things unless he feels there is good and sufficient reason to believe so.

Well, if he just "lacks," then you've tried to use exactly the same definition for both agnostic and Atheist. So that isn't right. But if you say he doesn't "feel" there's reason he knows to believe anything, that's fine. But it's just a feeling.

If you want to stick with C.S. Lewis and paint all Atheists with the same brush, then knock yourself out.

I didn't, actually.

I said "many," not "all." That doesn't tar everybody with the same brush. It admits differences exist. My characterization surely fits people like Dawkins, Hitchens, Marx, Freud, and C.S. Lewis, among others who were Atheists. But I don't deny that there are "any" people who become Atheists in other ways.

[Immanuel Can]

IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

Show that.

My definition is "One who says God does not exist." What's "distorted" about that definition of Atheist? It seems perfectly fair to me.

It can't include people who say they don't know, or don't care, or haven't thought about it. It can't be mere "lack of belief," since that's agnosticism. So where's the distortion?

[Immanuel Can]

An atheist is someone who lacks a belief in a deity or deities,

Nope.

Rocks, trees and chimpanzees "lack belief." They are not "Atheists."

Furthermore, atheism does have a position relative to other people's belief or disbelief in a deity.

You mean an Atheist has to be a "mal-evangelist"? Or can he keep his view to himself?

However, it is important to note that atheism is not a belief system that focuses on hating or punishing God, as I previously mentioned.

The "system" doesn't, no. But many Atheists do.

There's a difference between what the "system" of belief they hold requires, and what they, in real life, often choose to do. And quite a number of Atheists are motivated by a kind of irrational hatred of that which they "pay back" by insisting it doesn't exist. '

A recent researchgate study https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Age ... _233052461 indicated that 75% of Atheist respondents had to come to their Atheism before age 24. This confirms other studies, which have shown that Atheists overwhelmingly tend to have become Atheists as adolescents, to be male, and of middle intelligence.

What this clearly suggests is that far more than half of them are making the decisions of a very young person, not the considered judgment of the mature. Thus, their motivation is unlikely to be sophisticated, and very likely to be highly charged with rebellious emotion. And this phenomenon is borne out in many of the Atheist biographies, as well.

So I'm just believing what the data, and what the Atheists themselves, have said about how many of them made their choice.

So, atheism is a specific position on the question of the existence of a deity or deities, and it is not equivalent to ignorance or uncertainty.

We agree.

But if it's "not uncertain," as you say, then on what is it predicating its "certainties"?

Instead, atheism is a position that is focused on the lack of belief in a deity or deities,

Whoops! You just gave the definition of "agnostic" for "Atheist." But then, you also said Atheists were "not uncertain"...."? And you say they have a view of others' beliefs, as well?

Better clear that up, I guess. What's an agnostic, and what's an Atheist?

[BigMike]

IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

Show that.

My definition is "One who says God does not exist." What's "distorted" about that definition of Atheist? It seems perfectly fair to me.

That is another distortion of the truth. Perhaps this comment of yours will refresh your memory:

That's one of the ironies of many Atheists: that it's possible to express hatred for God by choosing to disbelieve in Him. In other words, not so much to disbelieve genuinely, but rather to invest one's energies in "punishing" God by refusing to believe in Him.

You may say, "That's incoherent." And it is. But that's Atheism for you.

[Immanuel Can]

...you haven't a clue as to what atheism is...

Great. Let's have your definition.

Please! Even if I wrote out word for word every definition I could find in dictionaries and philosophy books across the internet, you will still deny all of it...so why ask!

I'll make it easy for you.

believe "Atheist" means "A person who denies that God exists." What's your definition, if it's not that?

[Lacewing]

If I appear to be making an unnecessary fuss over the issue, it is merely a reaction to IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

That's true for me too.

Personally, I never would have called myself an atheist before coming to this forum. I simply moved on from my Christian upbringing with a different (and greater, for me) experience of spirituality which did not include the idea of God. I only began identifying with the atheist label in discussions here in order to distinguish myself from theists. I.C.'s completely mangled version of atheists, pitted theists against atheists, with absolute rejection of anything else.

I feel like a spiritual being having a human experience. I've discovered through discussions here that being a god-believer and being spiritual can be two very different attributes.

[Immanuel Can]

IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

Show that.

My definition is "One who says God does not exist." What's "distorted" about that definition of Atheist? It seems perfectly fair to me.

That is another distortion of the truth. Perhaps this comment of yours will refresh your memory:

That's one of the ironies of many Atheists: that it's possible to express hatred for God by choosing to disbelieve in Him. In other words, not so much to disbelieve genuinely, but rather to invest one's energies in "punishing" God by refusing to believe in Him.

You may say, "That's incoherent." And it is. But that's Atheism for you.

Do you understand the word "many," Mike, or do I have to give you a defiinition for that? It's different from "all."

But the studies of the subject all show the same. So I'm on solid ground for saying so.

[Harry Baird]

IC is right that atheism is not mere (passive) lack of belief in God, and that instead it is (active) belief that God does not exist.

I think it's neatest to switch out "belief" for something more generic, so that the definition becomes: "The epistemic conviction that God does not exist". Then, we can define "agnosticism" similarly: "The epistemic conviction that God might or might not exist; of uncertainty in God's existence; of the impossibility of knowing either way".

That way the distinction between the two is actually useful in terms of delineating degrees of epistemic conviction, and we avoid some of the more unhelpful claims some atheists like to make in which one can be both an atheist and an agnostic, given that the former supposedly refers to belief and the latter to knowledge.

[BigMike]

Show that.

My definition is "One who says God does not exist." What's "distorted" about that definition of Atheist? It seems perfectly fair to me.

That is another distortion of the truth. Perhaps this comment of yours will refresh your memory:

That's one of the ironies of many Atheists: that it's possible to express hatred for God by choosing to disbelieve in Him. In other words, not so much to disbelieve genuinely, but rather to invest one's energies in "punishing" God by refusing to believe in Him.

You may say, "That's incoherent." And it is. But that's Atheism for you.

Do you understand the word "many," Mike, or do I have to give you a defiinition for that? It's different from "all."

But the studies of the subject all show the same. So I'm on solid ground for saying so.

Sure I do. Like so many other Christians, you are all too willing to resort to lies and untruths to support and defend your so-called faith.

[Harbal]

It is also sometimes defined as lacking belief in a god or gods.

No, that one includes rocks and trees as "Atheists." That's not plausible.

So a person who lacks belief in God isn't an atheist?

[Lacewing]

IC's unscrupulous distortion of the word, "atheist", for his own dishonourable purpose.

My definition is "One who says God does not exist." What's "distorted" about that definition of Atheist? It seems perfectly fair to me.

Oh, c'mon I.C. All across this forum you've described/defined atheists and atheism with so many despicable characteristics. That's the distortion.

[BigMike]

It is also sometimes defined as lacking belief in a god or gods.

No, that one includes rocks and trees as "Atheists." That's not plausible.

So a person who lacks belief in God isn't an atheist?

IC has never heard of an atheistic rock before; he thinks they're all Christian.