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.
I don't think it's fair to use a single atheist to answer the question "Is it possible to be a polite atheist?", which is a little bit of an absurd question itself.
I don't think it's fair to use a single atheist to answer the question "Is it possible to be a polite atheist?", which is a little bit of an absurd question itself.
Atheist = one who denies the existence of God.
Agnostic = one who accepts the possibility that God exists.
Now why would Atheist want to disavow the meaning? Because it is an absurd position, but they hold it anyway, but pretend they don't. Thus they are impolite in my book
Hi Nicknack28, I agree, if the "atheists" posting on this thread actually believed what the claimed, they would change their icons to agnostic.
Did you see the claim about "weak atheists" and "strong atheists?" Actually a weak atheist is the same as an implicit atheist, a person such as a child, who has not considered the question of whether God exists, and thus does not believe God exists. This is the actual accepted definition, but it is not the one offered in this thread.
Similarly, an explicit or strong atheist is one who has considered the matter and denies the existence of God. Here is how the game is played, a "non-theist" could be an agnostic, or an atheist. So the atheist equates atheist with "non" theos as opposed to "against" theos for the purpose of blurring definitions, avoiding the logical consequence of being an explicit atheist, i.e denying the existence of God.
If your post is typical of how you discuss the issue - and to some extent even if it is not - I think I see the problem. Rather than focus on the rationale for your belief, you tend to focus on and judge those who hold the opposite opinion.
Much as you may consider John Paul II, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine and Stanley Hauerwas "deluded," you have to acknowledge their intellectual stature. Men and women like this may be wrong; but they are not sloppy thinkers. If you want to discuss, you have to engage the ideas!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-Thomas Aquinas and Augustine were men of "intellectual stature" to the point that they were members of a tiny, literate elite in a world populated almost entirely by primitive, ignorant, illiterate, superstitious goobers.
I've read some works by both men. I'm thoroughly unimpressed with both. Their arguments are no better than any number of philosophical musings I've heard from half-drunken soldiers and stoned college students. Augustine in particular was an "intellectual giant" to the extent he lived in - and wrote for - a society of midgets (the late, degenerate Roman Empire teetering on its last legs. Perhaps lead poisoning may have helped thin out his competitors?) The most I can say for him is that he at least avoids (for the most part) the raving, ranting lunacy of his theological inspiration, Tertullian... a man whose nasty, mean-spirited, fanatical notions have had WAY too much influence on the Western world, IMHO.
I don't think it's fair to use a single atheist to answer the question "Is it possible to be a polite atheist?", which is a little bit of an absurd question itself.
Hi Nicknack28, I agree, if the "atheists" posting on this thread actually believed what the claimed, they would change their icons to agnostic. Did you see the claim about "weak atheists" and "strong atheists?" Actually a weak atheist is the same as an implicit atheist, a person such as a child, who has not considered the question of whether God exists, and thus does not believe God exists. This is the actual accepted definition, but it is not the one offered in this thread. Similarly, an explicit or strong atheist is one who has considered the matter and denies the existence of God. Here is how the game is played, a "non-theist" could be an agnostic, or an atheist. So the atheist equates atheist with "non" theos as opposed to "against" theos for the purpose of blurring definitions, avoiding the logical consequence of being an explicit atheist, i.e denying the existence of God.
I'm sure you coould be a polite atheist, and I consider myself one, in terms of being careful what you say.
But, ultimately, I flat out deny the thing you hold most dear. I honestly feel like an adult talking to a kid who still believes in Santa.
There was some evangelical work going on along my city's main street and we had a bit of a discussion but I felt like I couldn't say anything without being rude, so I gave up on the concept and just said what I honestly felt. The last thing I said to him was (something like):
"My greatest despair is that such good people could believe such nonsense."
I don't want to, but I feel more enlightened than religious people. I feel like I'm in a superior position, and it's a bit embarrassing. It's like when I give beggars money, I hate the appearance of "I'm better than you because I'm being charitable towards you" when the truth is I'm probably just luckier.
I know that people who believe in God are deluded.This is what I've wanted to say for
ages. But it sounds so insulting.
I feel that I have to explain why I said "know" rather than "believe". Technically I have to be agnostic, but in the same sense as being agnostic towards the tooth-fairy, so I can confidently assert knowledge.
I don't feel like me denying God is offensive, but just the other parts about how I feel given that I deny God and other people don't. You know, like the parts about Santa clause, you being deluded, etc...
So, I wonder, is it possible to be a polite atheist while still being wholly honest? Because I feel like I have to hide a part of myself.
P.S: I don't want any posts rebutting my denial of God, please (although I'd be happy to talk about it in another thread? But isn't that against the forum rules anyway? Not sure), because I won't change my mind. Even if anything I posted was offensive, because I wanted to show you how I honestly felt without regarding offensiveness like I so often do.
Sorry about the long-windedness.
I do not know if there are any strong atheists, if there are some, more than likely is from emotional reasons, which I personally don't consider as true atheists. If I do find one, I will say they are probably wrong same way a christian says they are sure there is a god. The vast majority of atheists, including myself, think the existence of god is both improbable, or equally improbable, and are open to new evidence. If provided with strong enough evidence, then we will revise our standpoint. Same way science does with new facts that contradict a current theory.
When I was an agnostic, I stood in the middle saying I truely don't know if I should believe or not. But until I reevaluated my position, I can say I do not believe in god same way I do not believe in bigfoot. If provided with the knowledge, then I can reevaluate my belief. So an atheist is one with the lack of knowledge and belief, as in contrast to an agnostic who just lacks knowledge, and is in the middle with faith, talking strictly agnostic. Sure there are agnostic atheists/theists. Most atheists are agnostic-atheists, but for short simply atheists. Because we don't believe
Your atheism is well-founded. You're saying basically 'Why put all this extra crap in my head?' It does'nt matter if you're polite or not. A true Christian should have learned forgiveness to a degree that it is almost instant.
It is a belief system-yours is that you think there is no god.
It would go against human nature. We are cautious of our surroundings and those who fuel our transgressions. Immediate forgiveness would be psychologically destructive and builds a skewed perception of reality.
If a guy murders your family, would it be the christian thing to do to immediately forgive him? How would that help the situation? And what would this to you emotionally?
This is a rhetorical set of questions, and not directly aimed at you.
I'd like to ask one question. What matters the most to you: how "good" a person is or how atheist a person is?I'm sure you coould be a polite atheist, and I consider myself one, in terms of being careful what you say.
But, ultimately, I flat out deny the thing you hold most dear. I honestly feel like an adult talking to a kid who still believes in Santa.
There was some evangelical work going on along my city's main street and we had a bit of a discussion but I felt like I couldn't say anything without being rude, so I gave up on the concept and just said what I honestly felt. The last thing I said to him was (something like):
"My greatest despair is that such good people could believe such nonsense."
I don't want to, but I feel more enlightened than religious people. I feel like I'm in a superior position, and it's a bit embarrassing. It's like when I give beggars money, I hate the appearance of "I'm better than you because I'm being charitable towards you" when the truth is I'm probably just luckier.
I know that people who believe in God are deluded.This is what I've wanted to say for ages. But it sounds so insulting.
I feel that I have to explain why I said "know" rather than "believe". Technically I have to be agnostic, but in the same sense as being agnostic towards the tooth-fairy, so I can confidently assert knowledge.
I don't feel like me denying God is offensive, but just the other parts about how I feel given that I deny God and other people don't. You know, like the parts about Santa clause, you being deluded, etc...
So, I wonder, is it possible to be a polite atheist while still being wholly honest? Because I feel like I have to hide a part of myself.
P.S: I don't want any posts rebutting my denial of God, please (although I'd be happy to talk about it in another thread? But isn't that against the forum rules anyway? Not sure), because I won't change my mind. Even if anything I posted was offensive, because I wanted to show you how I honestly felt without regarding offensiveness like I so often do.
Sorry about the long-windedness.
"My greatest despair is that such good people could believe such nonsense."
I don't want to, but I feel more enlightened than religious people. I feel like I'm in a superior position, and it's a bit embarrassing. It's like when I give beggars money, I hate the appearance of "I'm better than you because I'm being charitable towards you" when the truth is I'm probably just luckier.
I know that people who believe in God are deluded.This is what I've wanted to say for ages. But it sounds so insulting.
So, I wonder, is it possible to be a polite atheist while still being wholly honest? Because I feel like I have to hide a part of myself.
It may or may not be the Christian thing to do forgiving a guy that murdered your family but it would indeed be the Godly thing. Thats a very good example of the level of humility God requires.
Now think of it this way, if somone murdered your family and you did not forgive them, what would this do to you emotionally?
I'm sure you coould be a polite atheist, and I consider myself one, in terms of being careful what you say.
But, ultimately, I flat out deny the thing you hold most dear. I honestly feel like an adult talking to a kid who still believes in Santa.
There was some evangelical work going on along my city's main street and we had a bit of a discussion but I felt like I couldn't say anything without being rude, so I gave up on the concept and just said what I honestly felt. The last thing I said to him was (something like):
"My greatest despair is that such good people could believe such nonsense."
I don't want to, but I feel more enlightened than religious people. I feel like I'm in a superior position, and it's a bit embarrassing. It's like when I give beggars money, I hate the appearance of "I'm better than you because I'm being charitable towards you" when the truth is I'm probably just luckier.
I know that people who believe in God are deluded.This is what I've wanted to say for ages. But it sounds so insulting.
I feel that I have to explain why I said "know" rather than "believe". Technically I have to be agnostic, but in the same sense as being agnostic towards the tooth-fairy, so I can confidently assert knowledge.
I don't feel like me denying God is offensive, but just the other parts about how I feel given that I deny God and other people don't. You know, like the parts about Santa clause, you being deluded, etc...
So, I wonder, is it possible to be a polite atheist while still being wholly honest? Because I feel like I have to hide a part of myself.
P.S: I don't want any posts rebutting my denial of God, please (although I'd be happy to talk about it in another thread? But isn't that against the forum rules anyway? Not sure), because I won't change my mind. Even if anything I posted was offensive, because I wanted to show you how I honestly felt without regarding offensiveness like I so often do.
Sorry about the long-windedness.
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?