Everyone lives like an Atheist

[McBell]

But, you have to admit, that even if you only believe in one all powerful being that cares about how you live your life, that's going to have more impact on your actions that if you believed that there was simply "one less" all powerful being that cared about your life.

Wouldn't that make them unitheists?

I know, they prefer the term monotheists.

 

[Falvlun]

Wouldn't that make them unitheists?

I know, they prefer the term monotheists.

Great. Now I'm going to imagine them all with unibrows.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why is that?
Seems to me that you are merely being arbitrary.

I'm just pointing out that to label a Christian as atheist because they do not believe in some other god is a very weak point. Atheist do not believe in any god, while a theist would believe in at least one. This believe would most likely have an impact on how they live their live (unless that is they are one of those that claim a believe only because it is socially expected of them). However a Christian following Jesus is probably going to be eating more beef than a Hindu. That difference doesn't make them an atheist in any since of the word implies, or living as one, it just means that they adhere to one set of religious ideology rather than another.

 

[McBell]

I'm just pointing out that to label a Christian as atheist because they do not believe in some other god is a very weak point. Atheist do not believe in any god, while a theist would believe in at least one. This believe would most likely have an impact on how they live their live (unless that is they are one of those that claim a believe only because it is socially expected of them). However a Christian following Jesus is probably going to be eating more beef than a Hindu. That difference doesn't make them an atheist in any since of the word implies, or living as one, it just means that they adhere to one set of religious ideology rather than another.

Interestingly enough:

a·the·ist   
[ey-thee-ist]
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.​

Atheist | Define Atheist at Dictionary.com​

Based upon this definition, you are merely being arbitrary.
Please note the word "a".

 

[dmgdnooc]

I don’t know of anyone that doesn’t live like an atheist. From what I can tell everyone lives like there is a foundation for moral laws, like there is such thing as personhood, like their perceptions have something to do objective reality and like they have purpose and meaning in their lives. If there were a creator, then there could be no science, morals, personhood or meaning and purpose.

Thus the arguments for a religious society are mute. There is no such a thing. The act of being human validates that there is no God. You want to unite church and state? Then you have to separate humans from themselves. Show me a society that says it is okay to lie on the witness stand.

[obviously this is a response to Man of Faith's OP http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...ebates/109348-everyone-lives-like-theist.html]

Ok, I'll bite.
Do I have to read that other thread? I glanced and I'm not inclined to do more.
　
Science is limited by the physical senses, it disallows any other perception.
It describes the physical world and denies the existence of any other. Though recently it has been forced to admit that the matter and energy that it describes is only a minor fraction of the substance of the universe.
It strives after certainty while admitting that uncertainty governs its most basic observations
Science would convince me that acupuncture and other non-western medicines are ineffective, merely exercises in charlatanism and placebos. And I don't accept that either.
　
Morality, in humans, is mutable it is not a structure built on a rock.
Its precepts and boundaries change from place to place and time to time.
A mongol of the Golden Horde acted honourably and within the accepted morality when heaping up the heads of decapitated prisoners. A Viking, likewise, had no moralising qualms when disembowelling an unarmed monk and despoiling a monastery.
Slave owning, child marriage, torture and much else were once perfectly moral activities, sanctioned by every arm of the State, they may be so again.
Fashions in morality come and go among humans and we imagine that if something is immoral now then it always has been and under every governing circumstance.
　
Personhood, individuality.
Every vessel is uniquely turned out by the hand of a creator. So, why can't a creator create individuals?
Traditionally human societies are continuously seeking to subsume the individuality of their constituents, ideally to homogonise the mass of citizens through ideas like religion, patriotism, duty, the 'good' of the many. When the dust settles the overriding precepts of the society are us and them; believer and infidel, the favoured few and the dogs at the door; and that society is strong, a cohesive mass of 'do right' ready, willing, to obey.
　
Meaning is not supplied to life by evolutionary imperatives.
　
Evolutionary purpose, to breed, allows nothing for the barren or the unlucky, and mocks homosexuals.
　
When (some will say 'if') Christ returns church and state will be united.
Until then the two should not be mixed.
　
Now show me a society that accepts the lies it is fed as being 'Gospel' truth.

 

[crocusj]

If there isn't a God and we all got here by a naturalistic big bang, and naturalistic evolution

In what way - whether true or not - do a big bang and evolution negate a god?

then morals are something made up and don't have anything to do with reality. Atheists don't want to believe in fairies in the sky but do want to live with fairytale morals?

Morals are not made up. Many social animals have morals, justice systems and punishments. These are not imaginative animals who make things up, they are merely animal groups who require (presumably) morals the better to succeed as a group.

In my worldview morals came from God, so what I see are atheists that have no foundation for morality living like there is a foundation for morality, like the world was created by my God, and ignoring the fact that their worldview has morals that are made up from imagination and they live like they are real

What you see is what you want to see and what you suggest is that there can be no naturalistic explanation for morals that is satisfactory to you and therefore it must be magic.

 

[micrurus]

I'm just pointing out that to label a Christian as atheist because they do not believe in some other god is a very weak point. Atheist do not believe in any god, while a theist would believe in at least one. This believe would most likely have an impact on how they live their live (unless that is they are one of those that claim a believe only because it is socially expected of them). However a Christian following Jesus is probably going to be eating more beef than a Hindu. That difference doesn't make them an atheist in any since of the word implies, or living as one, it just means that they adhere to one set of religious ideology rather than another.

we are all atheists about most gods, some of us just take it 1 god further. you believe in Zeus in the same way as an atheist believes in yahweh. and from that perspective labeling a christian as an athiest is not a weak point.

And I don't live by religious ideologys

[youtube]d0A4_bwCaX0[/youtube]

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Interestingly enough:
a·the·ist   
[ey-thee-ist]
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Atheist | Define Atheist at Dictionary.com
Based upon this definition, you are merely being arbitrary.
Please note the word "a".

I really don't even think we are discussing the same point.

we are all atheists about most gods, some of us just take it 1 god further. you believe in Zeus in the same way as an atheist believes in yahweh. and from that perspective labeling a christian as an athiest is not a weak point.

But a Christian is not an atheist, but a Christian. If denouncing any god made one an atheist, then we wouldn't even have the label of agnostic. It's actually quite rude to insist that a person is something they are not, especially when there is a more suitable label to describe them. You can say someone with bi-polar disorder is depressed, because technically depression is a symptom, but it's looking at a smaller part of the whole picture.
Myself I do not believe in any Gods that man has come up with, but I acknowledge that there is still the possibility that there might be a god/higher power. However this does not make me an atheist, it just means I don't dismiss or accept the entire "god concept."

 

[yourhopeboundheart]

I really don't even think we are discussing the same point.

i think the problem is you're discussing different definitions of one word, atheist.
i've always considered atheism to be the complete lack of belief in any gods. but the definition provided above does leave some verbal wiggle room. you are right that it would render the word entirely useless, but if you're using a different definition then you're never going to be able to agree.

it's all how you use the definition.

 

[Falvlun]

Interestingly enough:

a·the·ist   
[ey-thee-ist]
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
​

Atheist | Define Atheist at Dictionary.com
​

Based upon this definition, you are merely being arbitrary.
Please note the word "a".

I don't think the "a" in there means what you are claiming it does.

Personally, I think that claiming that atheist can be ascribed to any person who doesn't believe in every single god concept out there makes the word essentially meaningless.

 

[McBell]

I don't think the "a" in there means what you are claiming it does.

Personally, I think that claiming that atheist can be ascribed to any person who doesn't believe in every single god concept out there makes the word essentially meaningless.

The label of atheist means lack of belief in any god.
The word atheist means lack of belief in a god.

The difference is subtle, I grant you that.
But the difference is still there.

 

[Falvlun]

The label of atheist means lack of belief in any god.
The word atheist means lack of belief in a god.

The difference is subtle, I grant you that.
But the difference is still there.

Ah. Ok. That makes sense. Thanks.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

i think the problem is you're discussing different definitions of one word, atheist.
i've always considered atheism to be the complete lack of belief in any gods. but the definition provided above does leave some verbal wiggle room. you are right that it would render the word entirely useless, but if you're using a different definition then you're never going to be able to agree.

The complete lack of belief is where I am coming from. The definition provided does leave this wiggle room, but to use it in such a since is not the most accurate term to use.