Infinity Lover

Could we clear this up once and for all?:banghead:

A person is a person
A theist is a person who believes in god(s)
Atheist is basicly theist slang for person.

Not too complicated I hope? The term atheism exists, due to theism and not the other way around. Not believing there is a god, is not the same as believing there is no god.

It's Theists who believe there is a god others don't believe in.

We don't.

Amos

That's a good idea but must atheists not recognize that which theists call God before they can deny it?

I have no objection to atheistm rejecting the fancy footsteps of religious perversion but the concept that we call God must be acknowledged before it can be denied. Let's just say that atheist reject religion and its avenue towards enlightenment because they see too many religious people succumb to the slavery of their perversion. Moreover, especially since religion is puported to bring freedom it is obvious that just the opposite is true and that is a good enough reason for me.

Stephen T-B

“Faith,” I now think, is a consequence of conviction, and specifically, the conviction that there is a god. God worshippers don’t "believe" in god; they know there’s a god, and this knowledge then leads to areas of faith, such as faith in the grace of god, and the forgiveness of sins, and so on.
If you don’t know if there is a god, or you know there isn’t a god (as I do) then you need only have faith in your own ability to deal with the world, without the help of a supernatural being. But it is not an automatic requirement, and I'm not sure if it really counts as faith.

Amos

Sure, most of them have been send in the wrong direction. To have faith in yourself is very noble but it will never lead to the transcendance of human understanding and that should be the aim of religion. In Catholicism this is contained in the mystery of faith. In atheism it is the reason why they can have faith in themselves (if you truly know your own self all faith is redundant).

Stephen T-B

I wish I could understand what you're saying, Amos. I'm sure it is very profound but lots of it just whizzes straight over my head.
I'm taking a week away now; when I get back perhaps my brain will have sharpened up enough for me to engage with you more meaningfully.
best wishes
S.T-B

The Other Michael

Hi Amos,

Religion certainly transcends my ability to understand why people buy into it, so I guess it has met that goal.

cheers,
Michael

Infinity Lover

No, they only need to recognize theism; the god-belief. God and god-belief are not the same... just like thirst and beverage aren't the same either. Or perhaps message and source would be a better analogy.

No it doesn't, only the belief others have in that concept.

Is the distinction starting to dawn yet Amos? I'm trying to lay it out as christalclear as I can. If a theist were symbolicly represented by some god-symbol hovering over their head, that doesn't mean the "atheist" has a crossed out version of that same symbol hovering over their head... the symbol isn't there period.

hezekiah jones

How can one have "faith" in "no gods"?

Arvel Joffi

Exactly. I'm not saying that not believing in something takes faith, but that believing beyond the shadow of a doubt that that thing does not exist does.

I thought it was a fairly simple concept.


ps

Holy crap! I misspelled "atheist" in the thread title. I've lost faith in myself.

Psycho Economist

We've had several debates on whether or not one can affirmatively substantiate a negative claim. Sure, it's tautology to say you can't prove or disprove a hypothetical, perfectly inneffable god. But the gods people believe in aren't ineffable and they aren't hypothetical... fictional maybe, but that's another matter.

Strong atheism is not a form of, nor does it require faith. I (positively) believe that no gods exist. It is follows from a (negative) disbelief in broader supernaturalism that precludes the existance of any deities.