Anti-theism Means

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't trust what you or anyone else claims about god.

It might be personal, if you attempt to sway public policy to be in keeping with your religious beliefs.

Not only don't I need god, I think that - on the balance - theistic religion these days does more harm than good.

Your belief in the perfection of Abrahamic scripture seems as silly to me as if you told me you believed in unicorns.

Your belief that morality comes from religion strikes me as both laughable and dangerous.

Yeah, we agree.
We disagree on evidence, rationality and all of those words in some contexts and some of the beliefs of some the non-religious people are to me as silly as some of the beliefs some religious people hold.

 

[Colt]

I don't trust what you or anyone else claims about god.

It might be personal, if you attempt to sway public policy to be in keeping with your religious beliefs.

Not only don't I need god, I think that - on the balance - theistic religion these days does more harm than good.

Your belief in the perfection of Abrahamic scripture seems as silly to me as if you told me you believed in unicorns.

Your belief that morality comes from religion strikes me as both laughable and dangerous.

I find the assumption that a lack of belief in God translates into a lack of belief about public policy laughable! And when we look at the dominant secular culture in the world, it’s difficult to find much overbearing influence of religion on anything! The godless rebels are winning!

 

[RestlessSoul]

I don't trust what you or anyone else claims about god.

It might be personal, if you attempt to sway public policy to be in keeping with your religious beliefs.

Not only don't I need god, I think that - on the balance - theistic religion these days does more harm than good.

Your belief in the perfection of Abrahamic scripture seems as silly to me as if you told me you believed in unicorns.

Your belief that morality comes from religion strikes me as both laughable and dangerous.

Which begs the obvious question. So obvious, I’m pretty sure I don’t even have to ask it tbh.

 

[icehorse]

Another list about atheism by a theist.

A truly wise theist would post their feelings about anti-theism instead of trying to misrepresent anti-theism.

It's another example of how theism fails the theist.

Wait, are you contending that I'm not an anti-theist? I can assure you, I am

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Another list about atheism by a theist.

A truly wise theist would post their feelings about anti-theism instead of trying to misrepresent anti-theism.

It's another example of how theism fails the theist.

Yeah, we are everywhere. Even when we are atheists.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Wait, are you contending that I'm not an anti-theist? I can assure you, I am

No, I pretty sure you are uncover.
If you deviate from my atheism, you are an uncover theist.

 

[icehorse]

No, I pretty sure you are uncover.
If you deviate from my atheism, you are an uncover theist.

Cool, do you have any atheistic scripture you'd like me to read?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Cool, do you have any atheistic scripture you'd like me to read?

Well, I can't remember if I have linked it to you. But here it goes. Can you spot anything problematic with it:
"...
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.

Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."
Our Vision

 

[Sundance]

I don't trust what you or anyone else claims about god.

As a Roman Pagan (more specifically, a Stoic), I’m a pantheist and polytheist.

You don’t have to trust me, just gaze into the Heavens for yourself.

It might be personal, if you attempt to sway public policy to be in keeping with your religious beliefs.

I’m big on freedom of religion, myself.

I don’t agree with the tenets of various religions or with atheism fundamentally, but I believe that it is the sacred right, or dare I say, responsibility of each and every person to discern their own beliefs for themselves.

As for public policy, I don’t necessarily see a problem with that, insofar as the founding documents that undergird society and the legal statues which govern it (along with the “common sense, common good” mindset that should ultimately be the goal of any policy) are the standard against which such policies are measured. If all of these conditions are met, let it rip. If not, re-evaluate them.

Not only don't I need god, I think that - on the balance - theistic religion these days does more harm than good.

Your belief in the perfection of Abrahamic scripture seems as silly to me as if you told me you believed in unicorns.

A few comments here:

firstly, if by “theistic religion”, you mean “Christianity”, if by “God”, you mean “the God of Christians”, and if by “Abrahamic scripture”, you mean “the Christian Bible”, then I don’t know, it’s a toss-up. Some good, some bad.

secondly, the persistent conflation of “religion”, “God”, other such concepts with Christianity as though these are the exclusive properties thereof by many atheists, agnostics, and anti-theists, is vexing.

Whew! One more.

Your belief that morality comes from religion strikes me as both laughable and dangerous.

This modern idea that one can inherently divorce morality and ethics from religion and the accumulated wisdom of a society molded by it in some way, shape, or form (whichever religion that may be) is contemptible to me.

Morality and ethics are built from the accumulated wisdom of a culture group over time. That wisdom is sourced, undeniably from that group’s religious notions, even if the overt influence of said religion declines. The stories, the ideas, the oral sayings, written texts, songs and dances of religion, all of it will inform a community’s or civilization’s conception of personal right and wrong, as well as lay the groundwork for ethical norms. The use of reason, as advocated for by those who believe this idea, is the mere filter through which a people periodically evaluates their notions for the purpose of deciphering and preserving those permanent standards. It is not itself the foundation of ethics and morality.



This notion that one can separate the two unto itself is not only audaciously ignorant, but the attempt at formulating any set of moral and ethical standards without concern for even the foundational values built from *insert religion here* will result in a system that lacks authentic depth and meaning, one which rests upon nothing more than the considerations of passing whim (i.e. “I just want to do something. Right or wrong be condemned!”), or a mentality of imprudent individualism (i.e. “something is right or wrong merely because I as an individual say that it is.”), or some other transient thing.

 

[icehorse]

What a fantastic response! thanks!

As a Roman Pagan (more specifically, a Stoic), I’m a pantheist and polytheist.

You don’t have to trust me, just gaze into the Heavens for yourself.

I’m big on freedom of religion, myself.

I don’t agree with the tenets of various religions or with atheism fundamentally, but I believe that it is the sacred right, or dare I say, responsibility of each and every person to discern their own beliefs for themselves.

As for public policy, I don’t necessarily see a problem with that, insofar as the founding documents that undergird society and the legal statues which govern it (along with the “common sense, common good” mindset that should ultimately be the goal of any policy) are the standard against which such policies are measured. If all of these conditions are met, let it rip. If not, re-evaluate them.

So far, so good. I'm okay with freedom of religion, but it must also include freedom FROM religion, and I think that's where I often get crosswise with the religious folks who want to inflict their religious beliefs into public policy. Things like how we teach science, and a woman's right to choose, are examples of how some religious people are chipping away at the separation of church and state.

A few comments here:

firstly, if by “theistic religion”, you mean “Christianity”, if by “God”, you mean “the God of Christians”, and if by “Abrahamic scripture”, you mean “the Christian Bible”, then I don’t know, it’s a toss-up. Some good, some bad.

secondly, the persistent conflation of “religion”, “God”, other such concepts with Christianity as though these are the exclusive properties thereof by many atheists, agnostics, and anti-theists, is vexing.

I think I specifically mentioned the Abrahamic religions. I'm mostly concerned with Christianity and Islam, and therefore I'm mostly concerned with the OT, the NT, and the Quran. That said, there are aspects of Hinduism I'm not so keen on. I'm aware of Pagans and Druids, the non-revealed, the left handers and so on, and I tend to be less concerned.

Whew! One more.

This modern idea that one can inherently divorce morality and ethics from religion and the accumulated wisdom of a society molded by it in some way, shape, or form (whichever religion that may be) is contemptible to me.

Morality and ethics are built from the accumulated wisdom of a culture group over time. That wisdom is sourced, undeniably from that group’s religious notions, even if the overt influence of said religion declines. The stories, the ideas, the oral sayings, written texts, songs and dances of religion, all of it will inform a community’s or civilization’s conception of personal right and wrong, as well as lay the groundwork for ethical norms. The use of reason, as advocated for by those who believe this idea, is the mere filter through which a people periodically evaluates their notions for the purpose of deciphering and preserving those permanent standards. It is not itself the foundation of ethics and morality.

This notion that one can separate the two unto itself is not only audaciously ignorant, but the attempt at formulating any set of moral and ethical standards without concern for even the foundational values built from *insert religion here* will result in a system that lacks authentic depth and meaning, one which rests upon nothing more than the considerations of passing whim (i.e. “I just want to do something. Right or wrong be condemned!”), or a mentality of imprudent individualism (i.e. “something is right or wrong merely because I as an individual say that it is.”), or some other transient thing.

I would agree that religions were some of our first attempts to understand the world and to codify morals and ethics. But religions tend NOT to be nimble when it comes to incorporating new ideas and evidence. I contend that the best of modern morals and ethics are far superior to the morals and ethics that were "state of the art" 2000 or 1400 years ago. And it was largely forces outside of religious establishments that led the charge in evolving morals and ethics. It's usually the case that religious establishments are slow to evolve, and when they do, they often try to pretend that they led the charge.