Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How can you be sure that there is no God? Do you know the whole universe and are you all-knowing? If not, you cannot be sure that God doesn't exist. And if you can't be sure, well then you're in fact an agnostic.
I don't hold a belief with respect to a supreme being. So what belief of mine can Christians understand?The problem we have here is that a Christian can understand what you believe, but you can't understand what a Christian believes, or at least that he believes it.
What does that have to do with atheism?I comprehend the definition of many things without agreeing with them, as do you. Pedophelia, beastiality, you know what they are, but that does not mean you can even stomach the thought of those horrendous activities.
What is it you think I believe that you think I want Christians to believe?You want us to believe what you believe, and we want you to believe what we believe.
True. But you can't provide any evidence that a god exists. Without evidence, why do you claim a god exists?You can't persuade me to not believe that God exists, and no matter how many documentations of miracles I show you, present or historical, you will always say it was some kind of a scietific phenomenon.
This particular thread is for Christians to be able to get a better understanding of what atheism is.So, why are you here? Not meant to be a deep question about life; why are you on a religious forum trying to persuade it to not be religious? Are you looking for answers? Do you want to know more about Christians to learn or to laugh?
Unfortunately you were taught wrong. Atheism is not a bad word. Nor is being an atheist a bad thing. We are what we are. And if we pretend to believe a God exists when we don't really believe such a thing exists, then we are being deceptive to both ourselves and to others.As a child I was taught not to use the word atheist, or to call other children atheists, as it was a bad word. It was essentially a synonym for evil, heretic, cruel, etc. I didn't know what it really meant, but just taught that an atheist was something evil.
Atheists don't reject God or the "narrow gate". They simply don't hold a belief that God and what you call the "narrow gate" exist. Just as you don't reject Bigfoot or the tooth fairy, atheists don't reject God. That is unless you believe "reject" is equivalent to "doesn't believe to be real".Munsing see this verse in the bible:
Matthew 7
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. <- it is written in the bible many choose to reject it.
Matthew 10
12As you enter the home, give it your greeting. 13If the home is deserving, let your peace rest on it; if it is not, let your peace return to you. 14If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, leave that home or town and shake the dust off your feet.
Both of these verses say there are people around us that reject christ and Christians and in the case of Matthew 7 above it means they reject until death.
That means people are not going to believe no matter what you say to them so respecting their choice to reject christ is ok to do if that is their decision.
I have no problem with atheists if they show my faith respect. That is the key to it all showing respect for personal choices in others that do not match your own.
This is not true. The burden of proof is not on the atheist to show there isn't a god. The burden of proof is on the believer to show a god exists. Atheists aren't the ones making a positive claim.First off, this isn't an "Ask the Atheist" or "Understanding Atheism" forum.
Second, until recently the term "atheist" meant one who believed God did not exist. Atheism traditionally has asserted a very particular viewpoint on the matter of God's existence. When atheists were challenged to prove God did not exist they would respond that they weren't obliged to prove a negative, that they didn't have to prove God didn't exist. Of course, this isn't actually true. Professional philosophers quite regularly offer arguments to prove negatives. So, atheists in the last few years, realizing that they could not well defend the assertion that God does not exist, have retreated to redefining what the term "atheism" means. Again, the intent seems to be to avoid having to offer any defense of atheism.
What results from not believing a god exists is a sense of being honest, rational and reasonable with ones self and with others (if they choose to share their atheism with others).The problem with the new definition of atheism is that it gives the impression that nothing results from a non-belief in God, that such a belief is completely philosophically neutral. This is quite false. In fact, several things tumble out of an atheist's "failing to have a belief in God":
Atheism isn't a position for or against any of those 4 items. It is simply a lack of belief that a god exists.1. There are no transcendent moral values or duties.
2. There is no ultimate accountability.
3. There is no knowing what is really good and really evil.
4. There is no explanation for the real, ontological worth and dignity of human beings, so it's quite possible that human beings don't have any special worth or dignity.
As I said, atheism isn't a position or stance with respect to any of those four items. It is merely the failure to hold a belief that a god exists.All of these beliefs have consequences and need therefore to be defended by the atheists who espouse them (whether unwittingly or not).
Agnostic and gnosticism are different too.
Unfortunately you were taught wrong. Atheism is not a bad word. Nor is being an atheist a bad thing. We are what we are. And if we pretend to believe a God exists when we don't really believe such a thing exists, then we are being deceptive to both ourselves and to others.
I suggest you read up on the difference between agnostic and atheist. Atheist vs. agnostic - Iron Chariots WikiHow can you be sure that there is no God? Do you know the whole universe and are you all-knowing? If not, you cannot be sure that God doesn't exist. And if you can't be sure, well then you're in fact an agnostic.
You haven't addressed whether or not these alleged atheists held a belief that a god exists.In 1963 atheists who lived in the same rooming house as I did engaged me in debate over my Christian belief. We talked for over 8 hours, finally 'calling it quits' at 4:30 A.M.
They weren't atheists because they rejected morality as our society at that time perceived it. Instead, they were atheists because they accepted that science had all the answers. In order to solve the problems of both our society and the world at large either science already had the correct answers, or it would soon find the correct answers. For them the answer to life's problems did not reside in religious belief; it resided in higher education and further scientific discoveries.
Sigmund Freud also accepted this philosophy. He taught that those who were well-educated did not need the moral teachings which were built on the foundation of religion, but instead could live a highly civilized existence while being totally independent of any religious influence. He lived long enough to see the flag of the most highly educated nation in Europe flying in his beloved Vienna, Austria. It was the swastika of nazi Germany.
I'm offering that from an objective point of view, not a subjective point of view. So it wouldn't depend on who is asked.Well, that would depend entirely on who you ask, wouldn't it?Unfortunately you were taught wrong. Atheism is not a bad word. Nor is being an atheist a bad thing. We are what we are. And if we pretend to believe a God exists when we don't really believe such a thing exists, then we are being deceptive to both ourselves and to others.
The tooth fairy is very real and it has cost me heaps over the years. the tooth fairy was short of change and had to use a five buck note the third time she visited and set a standard.Atheists don't reject God or the "narrow gate". They simply don't hold a belief that God and what you call the "narrow gate" exist. Just as you don't reject Bigfoot or the tooth fairy, atheists don't reject God. That is unless you believe "reject" is equivalent to "doesn't believe to be real".
I suggest you read up on the difference between agnostic and atheist. Atheist vs. agnostic - Iron Chariots Wiki
In most cases, Atheists can't know for sure there is no God (agnostic). So they are agnostic atheists. However, if you posit a god which possesses characteristics which would make it logically impossible to exist, then we do know for sure it doesn't exist - in which case one would be a gnostic atheist. Some Christians I know have posited a God which has such characteristics, and for that God, I know for sure it doesn't exist (gnostic).
Agnostic = doesn't know for sure
Gnostic = does know for sure
Theist = believes a god exists
Atheist = doesn't believe a god exists
This is not true. The burden of proof is not on the atheist to show there isn't a god. The burden of proof is on the believer to show a god exists. Atheists aren't the ones making a positive claim.
1. There are no transcendent moral values or duties.
2. There is no ultimate accountability.Atheism isn't a position for or against any of those 4 items. It is simply a lack of belief that a god exists.
3. There is no knowing what is really good and really evil.
4. There is no explanation for the real, ontological worth and dignity of human beings, so it's quite possible that human beings don't have any special worth or dignity.
This is exactly what I was talking about. This is a classic atheist response! And it is false. Essentially, the atheist who asserts that he doesn't have to prove a negative, that he doesn't have to prove God doesn't exist, is saying that he doesn't have to offer any justification for his position. But if the atheist has no justification for his position, or is unwilling to offer any, then why should anyone give it any heed?
If we have three people - a Christian, an atheist, and a seeking agnostic - and the Christian offers proof of God's existence to the agnostic but the atheist responds to the agnostic with "I don't have to offer justification of my view that God doesn't exist. One cannot prove a negative," who do you think has properly justified their viewpoint? Certainly not the atheist!
As well, negative, universally-quantified statements can often be proven (and are). For example, a negative statement such as, "There are no deaf piano tuners," can be made quite reasonably and, for obvious reasons, is clearly true. In many instances where I make "all" or "none" statements about a particular domain, I can prove a negative. "No circle has right angles," is another example. I can look at all the circles I have within the domain of my knowledge and see that none of them has a right angle. It is therefore reasonable to assert that all circles have the same geometry. And so on. Clearly, then, it is not true that one cannot prove a negative statement.
Finally, the atheist's declaration that atheism is simply the absence of any belief about God amounts to a kind of psychological report on the state of the atheist's mind that trivializes the atheist's position. Dr William Lane Craig writes,
"Such a re-definition of the word atheist trivializes the claim of the presumption of atheism, for on this definition, atheism ceases to be a view. It is merely a psychological state which is shared by people who hold various views or no view at all. On this re-definition, even babies, who hold no opinion at all on the matter, count as atheists! In fact, our cat Muff counts as an atheist on this definition, since she has (to my knowledge) no belief in God."
Read more: Definition of atheism | Reasonable Faith
If this is what you really believe, then I have to tell you that you don't understand your own viewpoint. In fact, atheism necessarily entails these four points. They arise unavoidably from (especially naturalistic) atheism. That you don't realize this suggests you have a very superficial grasp of what it means to be an atheist.
Selah.
How can you be sure that logic is the ultimate measure to tell what is true and real and what is not?
This is exactly what I was talking about. This is a classic atheist response! And it is false. Essentially, the atheist who asserts that he doesn't have to prove a negative, that he doesn't have to prove God doesn't exist, is saying that he doesn't have to offer any justification for his position. But if the atheist has no justification for his position, or is unwilling to offer any, then why should anyone give it any heed?
If we have three people - a Christian, an atheist, and a seeking agnostic - and the Christian offers proof of God's existence to the agnostic but the atheist responds to the agnostic with "I don't have to offer justification of my view that God doesn't exist. One cannot prove a negative," who do you think has properly justified their viewpoint? Certainly not the atheist!
As well, negative, universally-quantified statements can often be proven (and are). For example, a negative statement such as, "There are no deaf piano tuners," can be made quite reasonably and, for obvious reasons, is clearly true. In many instances where I make "all" or "none" statements about a particular domain, I can prove a negative. "No circle has right angles," is another example. I can look at all the circles I have within the domain of my knowledge and see that none of them has a right angle. It is therefore reasonable to assert that all circles have the same geometry. And so on. Clearly, then, it is not true that one cannot prove a negative statement.
Finally, the atheist's declaration that atheism is simply the absence of any belief about God amounts to a kind of psychological report on the state of the atheist's mind that trivializes the atheist's position. Dr William Lane Craig writes,
"Such a re-definition of the word atheist trivializes the claim of the presumption of atheism, for on this definition, atheism ceases to be a view. It is merely a psychological state which is shared by people who hold various views or no view at all. On this re-definition, even babies, who hold no opinion at all on the matter, count as atheists! In fact, our cat Muff counts as an atheist on this definition, since she has (to my knowledge) no belief in God."
Read more: Definition of atheism | Reasonable Faith
If this is what you really believe, then I have to tell you that you don't understand your own viewpoint. In fact, atheism necessarily entails these four points. They arise unavoidably from (especially naturalistic) atheism. That you don't realize this suggests you have a very superficial grasp of what it means to be an atheist.
Oh please, wise and powerful Christian: Tell me more about my own views, and how I wrong I am about them. It must feel good to stand above me and tell me that you know me better than I do, without knowing anything at all. Why, almost God-like.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?