• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Atheism people have a belief "God does not exist "

Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
There is evidence but there is no proof.
God would be unjust to expect people to believe with no evidence.
Atheists just do not LIKE the evidence that God provides.
It's that simple.
Click to expand...
Go on, here's your chance. List your evidence and I'll reconsider....
 
P

Ponder This

Well-Known Member
paarsurrey said:
The truthful revealed religion people have the belief "God exists" and
Atheism people have a belief "God does not exist ", nevertheless both have a belief. Right, please?

Regards
Click to expand...

I think part of the problem here is that belief (and dis belief) are a wibbly-wobbly thing.
One might say, "I believe in unicorns."
Another might say, "Ah, but is your unicorn pink?"
And one might say, "No, it's blue."
"Aha! So you don't believe in pink unicorns!"
And one might say, "Well, no, but maybe pink unicorns exist. I don't know. I'm just saying I believe in blue unicorns."
So... does one believe 'pink unicorns do not exist'?
 
Trailblazer

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Altfish said:
Go on, here's your chance. List your evidence and I'll reconsider....
Click to expand...
Sorry, there is much too much evidence to present in a public forum. :eek:

If you are really serious I am willing to discuss it with you later, but not tonight. It is late and I have to eat and get to bed so I can get up early for work. :(
 
Shushersbedamned

Shushersbedamned

Well-Known Member
Trailblazer said:
Sorry, there is much too much evidence to present in a public forum. :eek:

If you are really serious I am willing to discuss it with you later, but not tonight. It is late and I have to eat and get to bed so I can get up early for work. :(
Click to expand...
I hate it when someone says things like " that's an excellent question - we should talk about it sometime."
 
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
Sorry, there is much too much evidence to present in a public forum. :eek:

If you are really serious I am willing to discuss it with you later, but not tonight. It is late and I have to eat and get to bed so I can get up early for work. :(
Click to expand...
OK, I await your post tomorrow or whenever.
 
lewisnotmiller

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Shushersbedamned said:
Because Bertrand Russell has doubts both ways. He does not and did not at late claim his views were correct.
Click to expand...

Of course...one of his key philosophical tenets was that certainty was problematic.
Hence why I'm asking if you only view strong atheists (rather than agnostic atheists like me) as 'true' atheists.
 
lewisnotmiller

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Subduction Zone said:
You could not even quote him, having doubts does not mean that he is not an atheist and as I predicted you have now contradicted your definition.
Click to expand...

I linked to Russell's own words on the topic. But whatevs. Even if only 'strong' atheists are 'true' - which appears completely incorrect to me - we could just offer Sartre instead, or in a more modern sense, Daniel Bennett. It's a strange kind of No True Scotsman fallacy.

However, I like Russell specifically because he openly talked about his philosophical position and his common description of himself. This directly relates to the points made.
 
Kirran

Kirran

ॐ
Premium Member
paarsurrey said:
If there is positive one or +1, there is negative one or -1. Right, please? Same way in relation to God, there is a positive belief or there is a negative belief or disbelief, in both cases it is a form of belief, and none of them becomes science. Right, please?
Believing is a primary natural behavior of humans since inception.
Regards
Click to expand...

Useful analogy, maybe!

Let's say then, than Theism = +1, Agnostic Atheism = 0 and Gnostic Atheism = -1. Does that help you understand?
 
S

SpartanSquid

New Member
You are correct, Atheist is a BELIEF because a God or Gods have not been proven to NOT exist, however they have NOT been proven to exist and have had no reliable evidence to match it's claim, so yes Atheism is a belief. Just not one that accepts religion and mythology.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
There is NO WAY I could ever post all the evidence for the Baha'i Faith on a public forum.
I already told you that. ;)
Click to expand...
that may be, but once again:

You did not post any reliable evidence. One would think that the first thing one wou!d do would be to post at.least one item that was reliable.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
lewisnotmiller said:
I linked to Russell's own words on the topic. But whatevs. Even if only 'strong' atheists are 'true' - which appears completely incorrect to me - we could just offer Sartre instead, or in a more modern sense, Daniel Bennett. It's a strange kind of No True Scotsman fallacy.

However, I like Russell specifically because he openly talked about his philosophical position and his common description of himself. This directly relates to the points made.
Click to expand...
I asked what was meant by "true atheist" and was told by @Shushersbedamned that it was one that did not believe in a god, which describes a weak atheist. I don't think he understands that not believing in something is not the same as believing that something does not exist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top