Atheism Not A Religion?

[phaedrus ut]

This is the typical semantics problem that we cant get around. A non-belief(meaning one has no belief on the existence of God) in God is not the definition of an atheist. That definition is "agnostic". Atheists do have a belief in regards to whether or not God exists. What is that belief? That God does not exist, that is their true belief. Only agnostics can claim "no belief" on whether or not God exists.

 

That is incorrect.  Agnostic belief is that knowledge about the existence or non-existence of god(s) is impossible to know. Someone who is a Theist believes in a god(s), someone who is an Atheist has no god(s) that they believe in.  Atheism isn't disbelief in god, it's non-belief. Some Atheists define them self as Strong or Positive Atheists and actually disbelieve in all gods but active disbelief isn't universal.

 

For example, someone who does not presently have any supernatural beliefs in gods but has never heard of the Hindu goddess of wisdom Saraswati isn't a disbeliever in Saraswati.  They have non-belief in this goddess just like they may have a non-belief in various elohim of the ancient near east.

 

Phaedrus

[thesometimesaint]

That is incorrect.  Agnostic belief is that knowledge about the existence or non-existence of god(s) is impossible to know. Someone who is a Theist believes in a god(s), someone who is an Atheist has no god(s) that they believe in.  Atheism isn't disbelief in god, it's non-belief. Some Atheists define them self as Strong or Positive Atheists and actually disbelieve in all gods but active disbelief isn't universal.

 

For example, someone who does not presently have any supernatural beliefs in gods but has never heard of the Hindu goddess of wisdom Saraswati isn't a disbeliever in Saraswati.  They have non-belief in this goddess just like they may have a non-belief in various elohim of the ancient near east.

 

Phaedrus

 

Not quite.

 

From the dictionary

 

ag·nos·tic

agˈnästik/

noun

noun: agnostic; plural noun: agnostics

1.

a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

[phaedrus ut]

 

Not quite.

 

From the dictionary

1.

a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.

 

Exactly as I said in the quote you responded to. "Agnostic belief is that knowledge about the existence or non-existence of god(s) is impossible to know".  Are you suggesting there is a difference?

 

Phaedrus

[Rob Osborn]

That is incorrect.  Agnostic belief is that knowledge about the existence or non-existence of god(s) is impossible to know. Someone who is a Theist believes in a god(s), someone who is an Atheist has no god(s) that they believe in.  Atheism isn't disbelief in god, it's non-belief. Some Atheists define them self as Strong or Positive Atheists and actually disbelieve in all gods but active disbelief isn't universal.

 

For example, someone who does not presently have any supernatural beliefs in gods but has never heard of the Hindu goddess of wisdom Saraswati isn't a disbeliever in Saraswati.  They have non-belief in this goddess just like they may have a non-belief in various elohim of the ancient near east.

 

Phaedrus

I dont care how you break it down atheists do have a belief that God doesnt exist- that is their belief. You keep mentioning the term "non-belief" but it is out of context and thus confusing. The question is what belief is it that one has- 1. that god esists, or 2. that god doesnt exist. All atheists and theists have to have either the one belief or the other. A non-belief means literally that a person has no belief regarding gods existence and thus making them defined as agnostic. The question has to be phraseds this way to make sense-

What is your belief regarding the existence of a god?

 

1. That he does exist

2. That he does not exist

3. No belief one way or the other

 

Only #3 can claim a non-belief on the question of gods existence.

[Robert F. Smith]

Of course atheism is a religion, it is the religion of unbelief. The religon of the communist state. The true religion of Satan, one that discounts God and denies the Holy Ghost, one that mocks all that is sacred and holy, that reduces man to a mere animal that evolved by chance and tries to prove itself claiming "reason" as it's foundation. It is the concept that man is the "measure of all things" and it tries to prevade all of society. It is a philosophy that likes to sit in judgement of all other beliefs as an Anti-Religion, an Anti-belief. It sits in judgement blaming all the ills of mankind, war, hatred, vice, ignorance on religion (believers in a god or gods) and I believe it is a pathetic view that deludes itself of it's own supposed superiority and is really inspired of Lucifer from the very beginning in his own words: "believe it not!" There is nothing in my estimation of value in it's ideals or concepts. That is why I usually chose to not have dialogue with those who aspire to this "unbelief" dogma.

Back in the Summer of 1970, I think, a Univ of Utah law school student showed up at the house where the Jerusalem LDS Branch met on Sabbath.  I can't recall why he dropped by, but I vividly recall his explanation as to why he was an atheist.  When he finished explaining his ideology, I commented: "So that's your religion."  He was deeply offended.

 

One of the ironies of so-called "communist" states and "communist" parties is that none of them was ever communist.  They were totalitarian dictatorships which snuffed out any sign of free agency (the true purpose of Satan), and they talked of a future, millennial day when the state would wither away, and when there would be automatic harmony, all of which would constitute true communism, but none of them ever practiced communism.  Their structure was a one party state capitalist society run by the "dictatorship of the proletariat" (in order to eliminate the bourgeoisie).  As Milovan Djilas pointed out so effectively and authoritatively in his The New Class, this was a complete fraud, while the great philosopher Bertrand Russell recognized so-called "communism" as just another dangerous "religion."  Of course, Karl Marx considered religion to be "the opiate of the people,"  never recognizing that his own dream of a future communist state with automatic harmony was merely one more religion -- which the leaders of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union finally saw as completely bankrupt, so ending the whole affair, even though many Russians (including Putin) hanker for those orderly totalitarian days.

[Analytics]

Yes, of course.  The term "God" refers to the  most supreme being in all of existence, if there is such a thing, and in reality there is such a thing with our kind of being as it.  There isn't a kind of being that is more supreme than our own kind, collectively speaking.

 

 

 

No, the reason is not because we can "capture" all other kinds of beings but because we are the most supreme.  That is reality.

 

So, atheists are people who think that people don't exist.

[phaedrus ut]

I dont care how you break it down atheists do have a belief that God doesnt exist- that is their belief. You keep mentioning the term "non-belief" but it is out of context and thus confusing. The question is what belief is it that one has- 1. that god esists, or 2. that god doesnt exist. All atheists and theists have to have either the one belief or the other. A non-belief means literally that a person has no belief regarding gods existence and thus making them defined as agnostic. The question has to be phraseds this way to make sense-

What is your belief regarding the existence of a god?

 

1. That he does exist

2. That he does not exist

3. No belief one way or the other

 

Only #3 can claim a non-belief on the question of gods existence.

 

You'll always be correct if you get to make up your own definitions.  The etymology of the words themselves show the definition.  Theist=Belief in god(s), Gnostic=Can know about god(s), A=without so to negate the root word.  Here is a easy illustration :

 

 

 

 

Just like the early Christian Gnostics claimed to have secret knowledge, only a Gnostic Atheist would be someone who believed that god(s) didn't exist. 

 

Phaedrus

[pogi]

You'll always be correct if you get to make up your own definitions.  The etymology of the words themselves show the definition.  Theist=Belief in god(s), Gnostic=Can know about god(s), A=without so to negate the root word.  Here is a easy illustration :

 

 

 

 

Just like the early Christian Gnostics claimed to have secret knowledge, only a Gnostic Atheist would be someone who believed that god(s) didn't exist. 

 

Phaedrus

 

Speaking of making up definitions, gnostic does not = "can know about Gods."  Gnostic simply means "knowledge" or, pertaining to knowledge. Therefore, agnostic simply means without knowledge.  I have never heard agnostic defined as "can't" know if God exists.  It's not that they believe that they can't know if God exists (maybe some do, but that is not the proper use of the term), it's that they don't know, and therefore don't believe one way or the other.  Atheists on the other hand, tend towards disbelieving in the ability to know if God exists. 

 

Your definition for "gnostic athiest" is strange.  The term itself is just weird.  It would literally mean knowledge (specificall esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters) that they have no belief in God.  That makes perfect sense!  A spiritually esoteric knowledge that they don't believe in a God or God's.  

Edited November 20, 2013 by pogi

[Ahab]

So, atheists are people who think that people don't exist.

Close.  More like atheists are people who think people are not the most supreme kind of being in all of existence.

 

The way some people act I can understand why they feel that way, but still our kind of being is the best kind that there is.

[pogi]

The problem that is happening in defining atheism is in the difference between the terms dis-belief and without-belief.  Disbelief is the opposite side of the same coin of belief, which is what Rob is saying.  Disbelief is actually an active belief that something does not exist.  Without-belief, on the other hand, does not claim to believe or disbelieve.  Most atheists that I know lean towards the disbelief in God, which is actually a belief that God does not exist.  This makes it difficult for us to know what is meant by atheism as people use it in so many different ways. 

 

Perhaps we need to create a new term called "distheist" to clarify where each atheist falls in the spectrum of dis-belief and without-belief. 

 

For example, It's not that I am without belief in the tooth fairy one way or the other, I have a very strong dis-belief in the tooth fairy. Most atheists come off as a "dis" sort of people.  Not only do they have a dis-belief in God, they "believe" that the world is better off without one (or at least the practice of worshiping one in religion). 

Edited November 20, 2013 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

No, the reason is not because we can "capture" all other kinds of beings but because we are the most supreme.  That is reality.

We're really not all that good at swimming.

 

Suppose we didn't need houses and could swim around and eat fish at will and had nothing to do with our large brains but sing songs to each other.

 

What would we worship?

[mfbukowski]

 

From the dictionary

Golly the smartest and most powerful people in the world must write dictionaries.

 

I sure hope I can be one of those when I grow up.

 

EVERYBODY listens to them and we don't even have to think for ourselves!!  Just look it up in the dictionary!!

[Ahab]

We're really not all that good at swimming.

 

Suppose we didn't need houses and could swim around and eat fish at will and had nothing to do with our large brains but sing songs to each other.

 

What would we worship?

You're not seriously trying to make a case for whales being the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, are you?

 

Worship is about emulation and while whales are intelligent they will never be as intelligent as our kind of being is collectively.

[mfbukowski]

You're not seriously trying to make a case for whales being the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, are you?

 

Worship is about emulation and while whales are intelligent they will never be as intelligent as our kind of being is collectively.

No, clearly dictionary writers are the most supreme kind of being in existence.

 

But I just talked to my whale buddy and he didn't agree with you.

[Ahab]

No, clearly dictionary writers are the most supreme kind of being in existence.

 

But I just talked to my whale buddy and he didn't agree with you.

 

Obviously being the most supreme kind of being has nothing to do with whether or not others are in agreement.

 

... whether we're talking about another person or a whale.

[pogi]

You're not seriously trying to make a case for whales being the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, are you?

 

Worship is about emulation and while whales are intelligent they will never be as intelligent as our kind of being is collectively.

 

I'm not sure if humans are the smartest or the stupidest creatures in existence.  Have you watched jack-***  I would not call those idiots "supreme"!

 

We have potential to become supreme beings but are currently the most wicked creatures that exist. 

[Ahab]

I'm not sure if humans are the smartest or the stupidest creatures in existence.  Have you watched jack-***  I would not call those idiots "supreme"!

 

We have potential to become supreme beings but are currently the most wicked creatures that exist. 

We're not all at the same level to be sure, but collectively, as a kind of being, there isn't anything more supreme than us.

 

... whether we're among the most evil or as good as we can possibly be.

[Stone holm]

We're not all at the same level to be sure, but collectively, as a kind of being, there isn't anything more supreme than us.

 

... whether we're among the most evil or as good as we can possibly be.

Well I certainly would expect that attitude towards whales by someone with the handle Ahab.