Bob the atheist?

[happyo]

Its that theism is the belief, acceptance of the idea that god exists. You can't accept something that you never thought of. So if a person does not believe in a god they are atheist, whether they heard of zero god concepts or a thousands should be irrelevant.

Maybe this is true from an atheist's perspective but the opposite is true from the side that accepts any God in anyway

 

[idav]

Maybe this is true from an atheist's perspective but the opposite is true from the side that accepts any God in anyway

Are you saying atheists truly believe in god even if they don't know it? I always figured faith in god is a bit more than that, like an active belief in a higher power. God existing is irrelevant to belief in gods existence.

 

[happyo]

Are you saying atheists truly believe in god even if they don't know it? I always figured faith in god is a bit more than that, like an active belief in a higher power. God existing is irrelevant to belief in gods existence.

I think belief is belief. If you think he created us, then you believe, different religions teach different things as to what he will or can or has done, but he loves us either way.

 

[Willamena]

You mean that most atheists such as American Atheists should be forced to define themselves as

"To the choirmaster. Of David. The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none who does good." Psalm 14:1

because they live in a country where most are theists and this is how theists define them?

That's not a definition, it's just poetry.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Depends on how you use the language.

You might not like it, but agnosticism has traditionally been distinct from theism and atheism.

The language even exists to have more than 3 positions

The language exists regardless of whether or not you give it your seal of approval.

Agnosticism is a positive stance ("the existence of gods is unknowable") and therefore doesn't work as a default position.

 

[Willamena]

Its that theism is the belief, acceptance of the idea that god exists. You can't accept something that you never thought of. So if a person does not believe in a god they are atheist, whether they heard of zero god concepts or a thousands should be irrelevant.

When I say that I don't believe in god or fairies or Sasquatch, I mean that I believe they don't exist, i.e. in actuality. I can't say that if I've never heard of them.

 

[idav]

I can't say that if I've never heard of them.

There is neither believing nor not believing in an unknown subject. Its the theist part that requires believing. If you've rejected something that is fine, that isn't the case for Bob.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

It's heartbreaking that you're proud of rejecting a position you admit ignorance on. I guess if we find someone who doesn't know what bananas are, and so reject their existence, we just have to accept it as true. #atheistlogic

Using the banana analogy, if you do know what a banana is, and the individual you're speaking to does not know what a banana is, and ask you to explain the concept to him. . . then why not just explain what a banana is?

He may be assuming that you can't successfully describe what a banana is. . . so prove him wrong.

What's the harm?

 

[Willamena]

There is neither believing nor not believing in an unknown subject. Its the theist part that requires believing. If you've rejected something that is fine, that isn't the case for Bob.

Right. But hence a god concept is not irrelevant.

 

[idav]

Right. But hence a god concept is not irrelevant.

Not to theists. Especially theists who think babies go to hell for not being baptized since they are unbelievers, the tiny heathens that they are, lol.

 

[Augustus]

And how is American Atheists free to define themselves if you insist that they should use the theist definition because since most in the US are theists the theist definition is the "conventional usage"?

Convention = repetition over time, not 'the most popular'. It accepts that words have multiple legitimate uses that are fluid, dynamic and constantly changing. "That we cannot enter twice the same river, applies also to language."

Awesome used to mean inspiring terror, now it also means inspiring wonder or amazement. No one agreed to change the meaning, it just got misused enough until it because right. It is probably better to say 'outside of traditional usage' than 'misused' though. "Language is no object of use,and no tool,it is no object at all, it is nothing but its use. Language is use of language"

 

[Augustus]

Agnosticism is a positive stance ("the existence of gods is unknowable") and therefore doesn't work as a default position.

I agree. I'm not a big fan of the 'default position' line of argumentation as it generally pretty stupid.

That's why I noted that 'The language exists for more than 3 positions'

To disbelieve in gods, you need to have a concept that you've labelled "gods" and that is fleshed out enough for you to consider it and decide that gods don't exist.

Care to flesh out this "god" concept your approach requires? If you can't do it, then the only way to reject gods is one by one.

You need to think you have a concept, that you think is fleshed out enough. You don't have to successfully meet hoop jumping challenges issued on the internet in order to believe or disbelieve something.

It is about belief, not academic knowledge. At a basic level all you need is to disbelieve in the supernatural and believe that all gods must be supernatural to meet the criteria.

At the most basic level you just have to believe it. We all hold countless irrational or unjustified beliefs anyway.

 

[ArtieE]

When I say that I don't believe in god or fairies or Sasquatch, I mean that I believe they don't exist, i.e. in actuality. I can't say that if I've never heard of them.

There are many things I don't believe exists. I don't believe they don't exist either since I've never heard of them. And even if I had heard of them I'm not required to believe they don't exist just because I don't believe they do exist I can just say I have found no good reason to believe either.

 

[ArtieE]

There is neither believing nor not believing in an unknown subject.

If the subject is unknown the only possibility is not believing.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

When I say that I don't believe in god or fairies or Sasquatch, I mean that I believe they don't exist, i.e. in actuality. I can't say that if I've never heard of them.

On the other hand, you can't believe in something you've never heard of.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It's heartbreaking that you're proud of rejecting a position you admit ignorance on.

Pay attention. I don't reject all gods; I just haven't accepted any gods.

I hold opinions about many gods, and I hold even more opinions about arguments for gods, but I hold no opinion at all on the gods I've never heard of; for those gods, I lack belief.

I guess if we find someone who doesn't know what bananas are, and so reject their existence, we just have to accept it as true. #atheistlogic

We don't reject the existence of things we don't know about. We certainly don't accept it, though.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Maybe this is true from an atheist's perspective but the opposite is true from the side that accepts any God in anyway

What do you mean by "the opposite"? To me, this would mean you're saying that theists believe in things before they even have the idea of the thing they're believing in, which makes no sense.

 

[happyo]

What do you mean by "the opposite"? To me, this would mean you're saying that theists believe in things before they even have the idea of the thing they're believing in, which makes no sense.

U can't be guilty of a certain sin if you don't understand the logic. Is a child guilty of theft if he doesn't understand the concept of ownership? From a true Cristian perspective, you are forgiven for your sins and not held accountable for your ignorance of Him. Islam, you will be judged on your deeds and life, not on the fact that you dressed wrong or didn't pray. Although most people would deny this of their own religion. God loves us.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

U can't be guilty of a certain sin if you don't understand the logic. Is a child guilty of theft if he doesn't understand the concept of ownership? From a true Cristian perspective, you are forgiven for your sins and not held accountable for your ignorance of Him. Islam, you will be judged on your deeds and life, not on the fact that you dressed wrong or didn't pray. Although most people would deny this of their own religion. God loves us.

I'm not sure how this relates to the discussion. Are you saying that atheism is a sin, so a person can't be an atheist unknowingly?

 

[happyo]

I'm not sure how this relates to the discussion. Are you saying that atheism is a sin, so a person can't be an atheist unknowingly?

Atheism is a sin. If u reject God it's a sin. In Christianity u also have to accept Jesus as your Savior, and ask his forgiveness, or u sin. So from a thiest's perspective atheism is something you would b held accountable for. But, may be forgiven for based on you life choices, and level of understanding.