Can explicit atheists ever really understand atheism?

[Subduction Zone]

I call this thread, "the blind leading the deaf".

Then again, I tend to see things in black and white, so you'll have to excuse me.

No, you may be blind or deaf. Don't make the error of assuming those that can reason are afflicted in that manner.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

This is a better OP; easier understand.

Let me get your logic. Talk with me here. ---Please converse.

Atheist don't understand atheism relating to God's existence but agnostics do?

1. First, problem one, no one has defined god in one specific description. No Hindu, no Abrahamic (kinda wish Muslims can say something), and in part, no Pagan. I think the only people I understand god is pantheism.

But then that word is not completely defined by person. Believers can't even (some cant and others prefer not to) anything so far. All we have of gods existence is a claim and evidence making a confirmed bias over scripture of any god-religion, without connecting how the culture and practices then some how applies today. Yet, we don't use the same medical treatments as back then. I find that weird since they are both important.

Even among christians the word god is mixed up. The problem starts with theists. You must have a distinct explanation of god-each of you-to judge whether god Does exist in the active world apart from the desires and minds of believers. The difference is Hindus get this. Some Pagans do. Christians don't.

That's problem one.

2. Problem two is not providing any connection outside your experience to life that we all understand as a common denominator of what fact and whats belief.

Facts arent beliefs; beliefs arent facts. Christians (Since many other god-believers understand this; dont know about muslims and jews). Since beliefs arent facts, expression of those beliefs cannot be presented as facts to a diverse crowd of people.

Unless its your opinion as a fact and kept at your opinion, god as a fact (abrahamic) is not a fact-is not connected to reality for the reason of problem one.

3. Problem three is sacred scripture. Christians and Bahai do this. I don't see any other god-believer do outside their own group.

Its counterproductive. Think about it. You say god exists; fine. You say this is why; fine-your belief. You say look at this book; we look at it. You say god exists by this book. We look puzzled.

If we cannot understand your claim how in the world are we supposed to understand Bahaullah's claim nor the Jews and Muslims claim nor christians (jesus as god or not)l. It's out of the ballpark because of the other two problems. Scripture doesnt help because it was written so long ago and we cannot ask the people who wrote it, we have to talk to you as believers.

Thats why the confirmation bias such as scripture does not work. But believers through it out anyway, as if your scriptures provide some automatic revelation of your truth. That does not make sense.

Now to the atheist part

In order for an atheist to say god exists (or an agnostic to say he doesnt know he does) is theist have to solve the problems above and give a proper and tangible (doesnt mean material) or logical explanation of what and who god is apart from your beliefs of how you define him as well las what people over three thousand years ago defines him. I side with jews since they don't define god. Everyone else tries to.

So a atheist who does 100 percent believe god does not exist is logical because he can't say god does nor says he doesn't know if he doesn't have a proper definition to go off of in the first place

Atheist just means lack of belief in god. People have their variations; but, that's the core of it. So, we can't change the word nor any other word thereby misinterpreting it. Unless there is a god beyond a concept and belief, by what means is this type of atheist wrong or misguided.

Follow the logic not from your personal belief. That's another problem. Arguing from the wrong perspective or tool. You need to change it up a bit. Also, provide new insight rather than regurgitated ones.

Agnosticism says they don't prove whether god exists or not. This, I don't understand, because there is no concrete definition, so which god do they exactly doesnt know exist. Its illogical. Atheist have more sense because you cant claim something exists when there is no tangible definition to which any evidence can be presented.

So....

That leaves me, as an atheist, with this conclusion

God (abrahamic and Hindu) exists in the hearts of people not as external beings. Holy Spirit is said to be love and a comfortable. God is said to be a provider. Jesus had a mission to be a savior. No where in history do these things show up in a spiritual way.

If it were fact, then the spirituality would be part of the history of christianity; it is not. Yes, there are stuff about christianity, but not stuff specific to supernatural events in a historical light. Can't prove god with history.

1. So you must have concrete idea of god in order to defend your view against those who say otherwise

2. Two, you guys need to decide whether you have a belief or a fact. We understand the subjectivity of beliefs. Once you say its a fact, then....

3. Sacred scripture is counter productive. We can't just read Bahaullah's and the Apostles scripture and there ya go, we know everything spiritually. It doesnt work that way.

I am an atheist; strong one, as they call it. Once you find what an atheist is, my definitions would change. I can't be a agnostic because I need to understand who or what I would be saying I don't know exists.

Thank you for reading all this.

Brilliant! I had to mark "winner" after reading only about 1/2 of your post-- but, of course, I read the rest too.

Wish I could mark "winner" two times... (so I un-marked it, and re-marked it a second time... does that even count? )

 

[joe1776]

Wrong again. you have no clue on how to reason rationally. I only need to know that there are no reliable claims.

Are you saying that unless claims of precognition and telepathy have been demonstrated to be true, that precognition and telepathy are therefore impossible? If you are, that's nonsense.

If that's not what you mean, then what are you saying?

You refuted your own claim by explaining why you were delusional.

Quote me, please.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Disciple of Jesus,
It seems to me that the best answer, or description of an atheist is found in the Bible itself, Psalms 14:1, 53:1.
The reason for an atheist not believing in God, is, that they do not search for Him, with sincerity, Psalms 10:3,4, Proverbs 2:3-14. It seems that atheists do not want to know God, because that would would limit their actions, they would be required to obey His laws, which they do not want to do. It seems that they want to do whatever they want to do, whenever they want to, without having to answer for their actions. The problem with this Godless way of life is, their is a God that requires certain obedience, for any person to live in the Paradise Earth, that God has Purposed, Revelation 21:3-8. Agape!!!

Presumptive-projection Straw Man.

This atheist (me) would *love* for there to be a Jesus/God/whatever who is actively watching out for the collective fates of Humanity. For one? I wouldn't worry so much about the ugly direction our government is taking at the moment.... !

Indeed, I spent the majority of my life in "search for Him, with sincerity" -- and I will put my sincerity up against yours, any day of the week, Mr Quick To Judge Without Evidence!

And as for this gem? "they would be required to obey His laws, which they do not want to do."

Hmmm.... looking about the place? I find that it's you christians who absolutely refuse to obey God's Laws! Every frikkin DAY of your LIVES!

Seriously. I see you people eating bacon, shaving your beards, cutting your hair, NOT covering your heads, as God's Laws Command You To Do.

Can you spell.... H. y. p. o. c. r. i. t. e? Good.

 

[Polymath257]

And again:

The Illusion of Matter: Our Physical Material World Isn’t Really Physical At All
.

The number of out and out falsehoods in this link is impressive. For example, no, if you looked in detail at an atom, you would NOT see a bunch of tornado-like vortices.

While quantum mechanics is strange, it definitely does NOT say that.

 

[Polymath257]

Are you saying that unless claims of precognition and telepathy have been demonstrated to be true, that precognition and telepathy are therefore impossible? If you are, that's nonsense.

Nope. But until they are demonstrated to some degree, it is *far* more likely that someone claiming these to have happened to them is delusional. This is doubly so if the experience was the result of great stresses on the body (dehydration, fasting, etc).

 

[Audie]

Please forgive me for not expounding upon the specifics of the communication but the voice (singular) was like the noise of many waters and it came OUT of my right arm with what felt like the strike of a lightning bolt and then it commanded me.

This occurred after three days of fasting and fervent prayer when I finally took a drink of water.

But the now Spirit has moved me to remember Proverbs 17:28.

And Romans 3:4 Absolutely not! Let God be true and every man a liar. As it is written: "So that You may be justified in Your words, and prevail in Your judgments."

Have a nice day!

When you use borrowed language like "the noise of many waters" is really put a dent in your story.

But regardless..

You do know perhaps that lo and many a
religious tradition has called for fasting
and chanting as a way to get communicaitons
from like, some spirit.

So your Red Indian brave goes and sits
on a hilltop, drumming and fasting or
whatever. Finally, he gets a vision, maybe
a white eagle.

You think that is supernatural? If so, much
is revealed.

When I was wondering which grad school to
go to, I stewed and worried about it for
weeks!

Sure enough, after a few days I would get
this Message, out of nowhere, a message
or considerable power and finality.

"Go to XXX!"

But I am not so easy to satisfy. So I kept
it up and in a day or three, here it came
again.

"Go to YYY!"

Supernatural?

 

[Polymath257]

Seems like you extrapolated my point, but we're in agreement??

Yes.

 

[Audie]

The number of out and out falsehoods in this link is impressive. For example, no, if you looked in detail at an atom, you would NOT see a bunch of tornado-like vortices.

While quantum mechanics is strange, it definitely does NOT say that.

Funny how Christians so seldom seem to think that
diligence and truthfulness is a value.

 

[Polymath257]

The Illusion of Matter: Our Physical Material World Isn’t Really Physical At All

I'd also point out that *any* quoting of the movie 'What the Bleep Do We Know?' as serious automatically puts the quoter in the category of a crackpot. This is, perhaps, one of the absolute *worst* movies to learn about quantum theory.

One time, my girlfriend (who is also in physics) and I tried to watch this movie. We lost count of how many out and out falsehoods and misrepresentations there were in the first 15 minutes. It was so bad, it was just funny.

 

[joe1776]

Nope. But until they are demonstrated to some degree, it is *far* more likely that someone claiming these to have happened to them is delusional. This is doubly so if the experience was the result of great stresses on the body (dehydration, fasting, etc).

How did you go about determining probability? Are there studies and statistics available?

I suspect there aren't and your comment only reflects your bias on the topic.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Brilliant! I had to mark "winner" after reading only about 1/2 of your post-- but, of course, I read the rest too.

Wish I could mark "winner" two times... (so I un-marked it, and re-marked it a second time... does that even count? )

Ha. ha. Yep. That counts. Thank you!

Now, I think I'm ready to retire from RF.

 

[Revoltingest]

One thing I've noticed, is that of all non religious we'll say, or rather anti-theists, what not, explicit atheists seem to understand atheism, the least. This has even affected the very way that atheism is defined.

Ie,
'Know there is no god or gods'
No, you're getting what you think you know, mixed up with know

'No evidence for god or gods'
No, you're getting what your perspective is, mixed up with a fact statement

The only non god adherents who understand non god adherence, seem to be agnostics, and then it gets muddled with 'atheism', a claim to know that god or gods, doesn't exist, or isn't real.

Weird idea.
I'm an explicit atheist, & I think I understand atheism pretty darn well.
What do you think I might be getting wrong?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Weird idea.
I'm an explicit atheist, & I think I understand atheism pretty darn well.
What do you think I might be getting wrong?

Everything. You probably do not even know where the colander goes.

 

[Revoltingest]

Everything. You probably do not even know where the colander goes.

I do!
It's because I designed the cabinetry for the kitchen rehab.
(But I still know to never load the dishwasher.)

 

[Skwim]

Some might use them interchangeably but that's not how they were coined or used in academic circles. (Neither is Scientism interchangeable either.) Rather that strong atheism is a type, but not the whole umbrella, of explicit atheism.
Implicit and explicit atheism - Wikipedia

That is, you can be explicit without being strong but you can't be strong without being explicit.

Interesting. I've never considered atheism to be a passive regard of deities. Implicit atheism: "the absence of theistic belief without a conscious rejection of it". Under the definitions given in your linked source I've always thought of atheism as "the absence of theistic belief due to a conscious rejection of it." Thanks for the information.

.

 

[Polymath257]

How did you go about determining probability? Are there studies and statistics available?

I suspect there aren't and your comment only reflects your bias on the topic.

I take exactly the same attitude towards any other phenomenon that has not been demonstrated and is contrary to what we know of the laws of physics.

 

[QuestioningMind]

One thing I've noticed, is that of all non religious we'll say, or rather anti-theists, what not, explicit atheists seem to understand atheism, the least. This has even affected the very way that atheism is defined.

Ie,
'Know there is no god or gods'
No, you're getting what you think you know, mixed up with know

'No evidence for god or gods'
No, you're getting what your perspective is, mixed up with a fact statement

The only non god adherents who understand non god adherence, seem to be agnostics, and then it gets muddled with 'atheism', a claim to know that god or gods, doesn't exist, or isn't real.

All atheists share a lack of belief in any god(s). SOME atheists ALSO make the definitive statement that there is no god(s). I'm not sure who you are claiming doesn't understand atheism.

 

[ChristineM]

One thing I've noticed, is that of all non religious we'll say, or rather anti-theists, what not, explicit atheists seem to understand atheism, the least. This has even affected the very way that atheism is defined.

Ie,
'Know there is no god or gods'
No, you're getting what you think you know, mixed up with know

'No evidence for god or gods'
No, you're getting what your perspective is, mixed up with a fact statement

The only non god adherents who understand non god adherence, seem to be agnostics, and then it gets muddled with 'atheism', a claim to know that god or gods, doesn't exist, or isn't real.

Atheism : disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Anything else is not atheism but religious trying to spread nasties so they can feel better because they know there is nothing to prove gods exist.

 

[Willamena]

What's an "explicit" atheist, and how do they differ from an unexplicit atheist?

.

They would differ from an implicit atheist, and what they are is explicit when it comes to atheism.