Ask an Atheist (no flamaing or trolling please)

[iLogos]

Ever wonder if you could be wrong and are simply missing out on what billions of believers enjoy and experience daily?

 

[Timelord2408]

Ever wonder if you could be wrong and are simply missing out on what billions of believers enjoy and experience daily?

I do sometimes wonder if I'm wrong yes which is why i try to read up on other religions however the same could be asked of you as well I guess.

I look at the "what if" kind of question this way:

I'm a good person, I try to live my life as best I can and help others when I can... If there is a God and when I died he would deny me entry into whatever version of heaven there was, simply because I was a non-believer then he's not worth worshipping in my opinion.

 

[Timelord2408]

We don't. We answer for our sins. The ones we commit. Ironically, we put ourselves before God because of natural selection.


What you are arguing with here is not theism, but against a literal reading of Genesis 2-3. And a literal reading is not valid. You can argue this on logical grounds like you are doing, on the grounds of God's Creation that we arose as a population by evolution rather then a man formed from the dust, or you can argue it textually in that there are 2 creation stories in Genesis 1-3. When each is read literally, they contradict on every major point and several minor ones. This is a clear indication that they are not meant to be read literally.

So, if you are arguing against theism based on a literal reading of Genesis 2-3, you are committing the Strawman Fallacy.

So let me get this straight... You admit that there are contradictions in the bible but this doesn't affect your belief in it? Furthermore you suggest that this means you have to not take certain parts literally in order to get it...?

I'm sorry but surely you ,seeming like an intelligent person, can understand why this might just sound a TINY bit ridiculous?

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Addressing A) first, thinking there is no evidence for God is not "Hard Atheism" An Atheist simply has no belief in God usually due to lack of evidence for his existence, there is no "Further level" of Atheism from that point.

As for B) I'll basically run it down as to how I see the difference between Atheism and Agnosticism...


Atheist: Believes there is no God Period.
Agnostic: Believes there is no God but the possibility for ones existence is there.
Agnostic Atheist: Agnostic but leaning more towards the non-existence of a God due to lack of evidence.

Several atheists (and a few theists) have argued that there are "levels of theism". In this case a "hard atheist" (link) would be defined as someone who asserts God(s) do not exist. Other places have different definitions.

Some say that we're all atheists, because even though I believe in the God of Abraham I don't believe in Zeus or Ra or Thor. Personally I don't find this a very convincing argument.

Agnostic too has different definitions, depending on your source. It can either be a position ("I am an agnostic - I don't know / cannot prove whether God exists") or it can be an attitude. Technically I'm an agnostic Christian. I believe God exists, but I don't think it's possible to prove it.


Don't worry, you're not the first person to get into an argument over the definition of atheism.

 

[razeontherock]

I'm sorry but surely you ,seeming like an intelligent person, can understand why this might just sound a TINY bit ridiculous?

It's called understanding. Try it. Beats the heck outta ignorance.