The Faith of Atheists and Agnostics

[RickD]

My point was that an atheist is one who believes God doesn't exist. Some atheists change the definition to mean one who doesn't believe in God. And I think they change the definition because they don't want to admit to a belief system, and then have to justify that belief system, thereby trying to put the onus on the believer to prove his(the believer's) belief system.

I'm going to lay this out as well as I can and then I'm going to do my best to move on, since it's pretty much guaranteed that we'll all get carpal tunnel syndrome long before we reach a consensus.

I'm not sure why you get to define what it means to be an atheist, but I'm not inclined to accept it. I imagine that you'd react the same way if I tried to tell you what it means to be a Christian.

Your definition is a semantic game aimed at shifting the burden of proof so that it's shared equally by theists and atheists. That would be wrong. The burden of proof invariably lies with the party making the claim, and theism is not an exception to that rule. Since "Gods exist" obviously came before "Prove it," the burden of proof lies with the theist. In other words, it's your job to prove that you're right, not my job to prove that you're wrong.

It really makes no difference whether an atheist says "I don't accept your assertion" or "Your gods don't exist." The burden of proof remains firmly with the person making the initial claim, regardless of how the atheist chooses to express his or her skepticism. If I say gods don't exist I'm not making a claim of my own, I'm still just dismissing yours.

Also, atheism isn't a belief system. Religions are vast and complex belief systems. Atheism is the rejection of religions and the gods they're founded on. Calling atheism a belief system is akin to calling bald a hair color.

Some atheists do feel the need to create or find a system of beliefs to help provide a framework for their lives, since "Religion is BS" falls short in that regard. That's where philosophy and rational humanism come in. I also know atheists who practice Buddhist meditation or attend Unitarian church. Personally, I'm content to live my life without any formal system of beliefs, apart from a few vague guiding principles - be kind to people, be a good husband and father, tell the truth, if you screw up do your best to make it right, and so forth.

An atheist may believe God doesn't exist because of a lack of knowledge on his part. Or just because he refuses to want to be accountable to someone besides himself.

Do you seriously believe that being accountable to no one but myself is easier than being accountable to a just and loving god who will forgive my mistakes?

Wow, that was easy! You proved my point for me. I rest my case.

[Kenny]

So in reality, an atheist doesn't just lack a belief in God, an atheist has a positive belief that God doesn't exist.

So what do you call someone who just lacks a belief in God, but does not have a positive belief that God doesn't exist?

Ken

In your case Kenny, you're not being realistic. You say the idea of a monotheistic God, is not God.[/quote]
I never said anything like that.

Or at least not a God you can believe in.

I never said anything like that either. Go back and read what I said; that way if you gonna put words in my mouth, make sure they are MY words.

So, while you say you don't have a positive belief that God doesn't exist, you really have no idea about who God really is.

You aren't going to answer my question are you.

Ken

[Kurieuo]

I'm not sure why you get to define what it means to be an atheist, but I'm not inclined to accept it.

Have you defined what it means to be an Atheist?
If not, are you able to define what you believe it means?

Also, atheism isn't a belief system. Religions are vast and complex belief systems. Atheism is the rejection of religions and the gods they're founded on. Calling atheism a belief system is akin to calling bald a hair color.

Is mere belief in God a belief system?
Does that count as religion?

[Kenny]

My point was that an atheist is one who believes God doesn't exist. Some atheists change the definition to mean one who doesn't believe in God. And I think they change the definition because they don't want to admit to a belief system, and then have to justify that belief system, thereby trying to put the onus on the believer to prove his(the believer's) belief system.

I'm going to lay this out as well as I can and then I'm going to do my best to move on, since it's pretty much guaranteed that we'll all get carpal tunnel syndrome long before we reach a consensus.

I'm not sure why you get to define what it means to be an atheist, but I'm not inclined to accept it. I imagine that you'd react the same way if I tried to tell you what it means to be a Christian.

Your definition is a semantic game aimed at shifting the burden of proof so that it's shared equally by theists and atheists. That would be wrong. The burden of proof invariably lies with the party making the claim, and theism is not an exception to that rule. Since "Gods exist" obviously came before "Prove it," the burden of proof lies with the theist. In other words, it's your job to prove that you're right, not my job to prove that you're wrong.

It really makes no difference whether an atheist says "I don't accept your assertion" or "Your gods don't exist." The burden of proof remains firmly with the person making the initial claim, regardless of how the atheist chooses to express his or her skepticism. If I say gods don't exist I'm not making a claim of my own, I'm still just dismissing yours.

Also, atheism isn't a belief system. Religions are vast and complex belief systems. Atheism is the rejection of religions and the gods they're founded on. Calling atheism a belief system is akin to calling bald a hair color.

Some atheists do feel the need to create or find a system of beliefs to help provide a framework for their lives, since "Religion is BS" falls short in that regard. That's where philosophy and rational humanism come in. I also know atheists who practice Buddhist meditation or attend Unitarian church. Personally, I'm content to live my life without any formal system of beliefs, apart from a few vague guiding principles - be kind to people, be a good husband and father, tell the truth, if you screw up do your best to make it right, and so forth.

An atheist may believe God doesn't exist because of a lack of knowledge on his part. Or just because he refuses to want to be accountable to someone besides himself.

Do you seriously believe that being accountable to no one but myself is easier than being accountable to a just and loving god who will forgive my mistakes?

Excellent points Edwardmurphy; excellent points

Ken

[Kurieuo]

I wonder what edwardmurphy would make of the following argument I happened to stumble upon Ed?

1) Lack of belief on a subject entails one is unaware to that subject of belief.
2) The moment one becomes aware to a subject of belief, they conceive of something about that subject of belief.
3) If you conceive something about a subject, then that something counts as a belief about that subject.
4) Therefore, one has a belief on any subject that they become aware to. (from 1, 2, 3)

Let's extend this argument...

5) The person who claims "to lack a belief in the subject of a belief" shows an awareness of that subject of belief.
6) It is not possible for a person to lack a belief in a subject that they are aware to (from 4).
7) Therefore, it is a contradiction to say "I lack a belief on some subject" since such presupposes an awareness to that subject.

And finally...

Atheists who claim that they lack a belief of God are full of doodoo. (from 7)

[edwardmurphy]

Wow, that was easy! You proved my point for me. I rest my case.

And you just met my expectations. I guess we both have something to smile about.

I'm not sure why you get to define what it means to be an atheist, but I'm not inclined to accept it.

Have you defined what it means to be an Atheist?

atheist - a person who does not accept the theistic proposition (that gods exist)

Also, atheism isn't a belief system. Religions are vast and complex belief systems. Atheism is the rejection of religions and the gods they're founded on. Calling atheism a belief system is akin to calling bald a hair color.

Is mere belief in God a belief system?
Does that count as religion?

1) No. A system is a bunch of parts that, together, form a whole.
2) It would be ridiculous, but I believe in freedom of religion so I if someone were to tell me that "I believe in god" was their entire religion I'd take their word for it.

[Kurieuo]

I'm not sure why you get to define what it means to be an atheist, but I'm not inclined to accept it.

Have you defined what it means to be an Atheist?

atheist - a person who does not accept the theistic proposition (that gods exist)

What would that look like?
For example, to someone who says to an Atheist: "I believe God exists as revealed in Israel and via Jesus."
The Atheist as you define would respond, "I do not accept... [insert words]"

And is "accept" really just synonymous for "belief" at the end of the day?

Also, atheism isn't a belief system. Religions are vast and complex belief systems. Atheism is the rejection of religions and the gods they're founded on. Calling atheism a belief system is akin to calling bald a hair color.

Is mere belief in God a belief system?
Does that count as religion?

1) No. A system is a bunch of parts that, together, form a whole.
2) It would be ridiculous, but I believe in freedom of religion so I if someone were to tell me that "I believe in god" was their entire religion I'd take their word for it.

I'm wondering what is it that defines religion to you?
Does one need to subscribe to a particular authority such as a church.
Dictionary definition is belief and worship of God, but I don't really consider myself religious.
I do believe in Christ, but that said, I don't subscribe to any religious body and consider myself quite free thinking.

The main point of difference I see between an Atheist and myself is that I believe in the truths Christ revealed.
Hmm, now I think on it that's not entirely true, because there's so much I believe points to God that I couldn't possibly believe God doesn't exist.
At the same time, short of Christ, I'd be lost about who the heck this God is.

In any case, just offering some further reflection here.
There seems to be a lot of baggage that I don't see of myself attached to the word "religion".
What are your thoughts?

[Mallz]

Mallz wrote:
I'd say your in a general category of Agnostic, Kenny. That's just what I see though.

Kenny:Agnostic is about knowledge; not belief.

As always, interesting. I believe the opposite. It is about belief based upon knowledge. Not knowledge without wisdom.

Kenny:I know the chunk of metal they worship and call God exists.

Mallz wrote:
So the question is..
Do you believe there could be anything existent such as God?


Kenny: There is nothing in existence that I call God.

But could there be?

[Mallz]

Sorry Kenny, my reply was before I read what was after what you addressed to me.

I get it. I'm pretty sure. It's kinda cool, actually. Your every being lives in reality where all reality is, is what is. Which is composed of our experiences and physical surroundings and their interconnections. All that is is expressed through mechanical expressions of this material universe unfolding it's existence. I'm trying to understand your philosophy. Am I close? Could you expound for me?

[Philip]

Having no belief that there is a God behind the universe is not just a rejection of religion, it's also an irrational rejection of massive scientific evidences and simple plain reason: NOTHING comes from NOTHING! NOTHING can't create, organize, design - ANYTHING! And, so, what can NOTHING actually DO? NOTHING!!! As Geisler says, "NOTHING is what rocks dream about!"

[RickD]

Having no belief that there is a God behind the universe is not just a rejection of religion, it's also an irrational rejection of massive scientific evidences and simple plain reason: NOTHING comes from NOTHING! NOTHING can't create, organize, design - ANYTHING! And, so, what can NOTHING actually DO? NOTHING!!! As Geisler says, "NOTHING is what rocks dream about!"

That's just your subjective opinion.

[Kenny]

Having no belief that there is a God behind the universe is not just a rejection of religion, it's also an irrational rejection of massive scientific evidences and simple plain reason: NOTHING comes from NOTHING! NOTHING can't create, organize, design - ANYTHING! And, so, what can NOTHING actually DO? NOTHING!!! As Geisler says, "NOTHING is what rocks dream about!"

How about if you start from the position that matter has always existed, always organized always had design, and never created?

Ken

[Philip]

Ken: How about if you start from the position that matter has always existed, always organized always had design, and never created?

Ken

But that is not the testimony of science and an enormous amount of scientific verification and data. Before the Big Bang, there was ZIP! Einstein even acknowledged that his former belief in the Steady State Theory was his greatest embarrassment and mistake. NO scientific observation or data supports ANYTHING that did not spring from something prior or have a prior cause. Ken, if you believe that, it's only based upon what you believe, and not on the extensive observations and tests that all agree that what you say is totally impossible! Before the Big Bang, NOTHING existed to SUBSEQUENTLY begin moving, and THEN (only AFTERWARD) to immediately begin organizing.

[RickD]

Having no belief that there is a God behind the universe is not just a rejection of religion, it's also an irrational rejection of massive scientific evidences and simple plain reason: NOTHING comes from NOTHING! NOTHING can't create, organize, design - ANYTHING! And, so, what can NOTHING actually DO? NOTHING!!! As Geisler says, "NOTHING is what rocks dream about!"

How about if you start from the position that matter has always existed, always organized always had design, and never created?

Ken

Let's see...

1) eternal matter
Still have to answer what caused this eternal matter to become the Big Bang. Something cannot cause itself.

2) matter that's not just eternal, matter that's always been organized(with no organizer), and had design(with no designer)

Eternal, uncaused, organized, designed matter. That makes sense, but an eternal uncaused cause is less logical?

3) matter that was never created(same as #1)

So...the Big Bang, in which all time, space, and matter came into existence, was created by eternal matter?

[Kurieuo]

Having no belief that there is a God behind the universe is not just a rejection of religion, it's also an irrational rejection of massive scientific evidences and simple plain reason: NOTHING comes from NOTHING! NOTHING can't create, organize, design - ANYTHING! And, so, what can NOTHING actually DO? NOTHING!!! As Geisler says, "NOTHING is what rocks dream about!"

How about if you start from the position that matter has always existed, always organized always had design, and never created?

Ken

Laws are contingent.