"no religion, it usually means no atheism as well"

[LuisDantas]

My reality is same way different from one's.
I have also searched, and I do not find any appeal in Atheism, they have never come up with any evidences that supports Atheism and the like.

Why would atheism need any evidence?

Atheism is just disbelief. It does not need any support, just sincerity (and perhaps a touch of affinity for the stance).

Challenging theism might conceivably involve evidence. But atheism is just atheism.

Sorry, I don't find any good reason that they be given exception and or relaxation that they did not allow to the believers to start with.
I could be wrong, but that is what I believe sincerely.
Regards

Yes, you are wrong, among other reasons because you are implying a simmetry of rights and needs that just can't exist in such asymmetrical stances.

I find myself wondering if you (and by extension other Muslims) realize how bold your monotheism is, and how reasonable it truly is to doubt its accuracy.

 

[paarsurrey]

So then what happens to your 'Love for All, Hatred for None'? Are atheists part of that All, or not?

I love Atheists but Atheism is wrong unless it provides evidences of its correctness.
Regards

 

[ecco]

I have also searched, and I do not find any appeal in Atheism, they have never come up with any evidences that supports Atheism and the like.

Do you really want evidence?

Do you believe Atlas and Athena are real God and Goddess or do you believe they are the creations of man's imaginings?

Do you believe Shiva is real God or do you believe he is a creation of man's imaginings?

How about Shango or Bumba or Chac or Ixtab or Viracocha or...or...

All gods, Gods, Supreme Beings,et al, are the creations of man's imaginings.

 

[paarsurrey]

Do you really want evidence?

Do you believe Atlas and Athena are real God and Goddess or do you believe they are the creations of man's imaginings?

Do you believe Shiva is real God or do you believe he is a creation of man's imaginings?

How about Shango or Bumba or Chac or Ixtab or Viracocha or...or...

All gods, Gods, Supreme Beings,et al, are the creations of man's imaginings.

"creations of man's imaginings."

Can man's imaginings create the Universe, please?

The research in revealed religions is done on the basis of attributes of G-d and the claims and reasons mentioned in Word of G-d the believers have. Neither reason, nor science nor evidence/s supports it nor there are any attributes of the "vacuum " of Atheism. Are there any, please?
Regards

_________
"Atlas or Athena Shango or Bumba or Chac or Ixtab or Viracocha or...or..". are not believed by the Atheism people, they don't form any evidence of Atheism. Do these, please?

 

[Vinayaka]

I love Atheists but Atheism is wrong unless it provides evidences of its correctness.
Regards

There is no evidence of anything religious, or belief. There is no evidence of your love for atheists either. In belief, there is no right or wrong, just belief.

 

[`mud]

Back to the `creation` of the universe are we ?
Where was `god` before the `creation`, who knew `him` then....no-one !
What else was there with `him`....nothing !
Where was the `water` that seperated the heavens and the earth ....nowhere !
Where was the singularity in the rhelm of `his` existance....nowhere !
Who or what created `god`....no-one !
Who created the `void` in which `he` dwelled....no-one !
Where in the Cosmos was that `void`....nowhere !
Where was the `universe` in the Cosmos....everywhere !
~
Put the pieces together and you'll have your answers !
NuffStuff

 

[corynski]

and or no Atheism also? Or it is an exception, relaxation enjoyed by the Atheism people requiring no evidence, may be just ignorance is sufficient for Atheism, and nothing more is required?!
I could be wrong, so please fell free to correct me. Right, please?
Regards

Yes, paarsurrey, I think you are wrong, or at best misleading. To say that atheism requires no evidence is wrong, as the evidence for atheism is that there is no evidence of anything supernatural. Atheism is the default position it seems, for if there were any convincing evidence of the supernatural certainly atheism would be wrong. So what evidence have you found that convinces you there exists a 'supernatural' world, above and beyond this natural world we all experience?
To dismiss atheists as ignorant is a little premature...... after all, humans have created thousands of gods and goddesses that do not seem to have 'existed', and some religions exist without any deity. Maybe it's more complex than you have anticipated.
And this statement of yours baffles me......."Sorry, I don't find any good reason that they be given exception and or relaxation that they did not allow to the believers to start with."
I wasn't aware that atheists were given any exception and or relaxation....... what are you saying?

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes, paarsurrey, I think you are wrong, or at best misleading. To say that atheism requires no evidence is wrong, as the evidence for atheism is that there is no evidence of anything supernatural. Atheism is the default position it seems, for if there were any convincing evidence of the supernatural certainly atheism would be wrong. So what evidence have you found that convinces you there exists a 'supernatural' world, above and beyond this natural world we all experience?
To dismiss atheists as ignorant is a little premature...... after all, humans have created thousands of gods and goddesses that do not seem to have 'existed', and some religions exist without any deity. Maybe it's more complex than you have anticipated.
And this statement of yours baffles me......."Sorry, I don't find any good reason that they be given exception and or relaxation that they did not allow to the believers to start with."
I wasn't aware that atheists were given any exception and or relaxation....... what are you saying?

"Atheism is the default position"

reason does not support it. The word "Atheism" presupposes existence of "Theism" or the believers of the religions, they are entitled to be "default position". Right, please?
Please correct me if I am wrong, with reasons and arguments, if any.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

I love Atheists but Atheism is wrong unless it provides evidences of its correctness.
Regards

Atheism can't be "wrong" in any conceivable way until and unless:

1) it is shown that for some very weird reason atheists are ultimately lying about their own lack of belief; or

2) it is shown that there is a deity in actual reality - something that has been evidenced to a degree appropriate to the extraordinary claim of its existence.


Your statemente, @paarsurrey , betrays some combination of serious lack of understanding of theism (let alone atheism) and ill will.

 

[LuisDantas]

"creations of man's imaginings."

If anything, the Allah of the Qur'an (as a matter of fact, pretty much all competing delimitations of Ibrahim's God) is more demonstrably a creation of humans than most other proposed deities. It is certainly clear to be that it is "less real" than, say, the Tao.

Worse still, Ibrahim-styled God have the need to be real. Unlike most, those gods are built in a fragile way that bets on their literal existence.

Can man's imaginings create the Universe, please?

Not the Universe, far as we can tell. But certainly Gods.

"Atlas or Athena Shango or Bumba or Chac or Ixtab or Viracocha or...or..". are not believed by the Atheism people, they don't form any evidence of Atheism. Do these, please?

This is such a confused question...

 

[LuisDantas]

"Atheism is the default position"

reason does not support it. The word "Atheism" presupposes existence of "Theism" or the believers of the religions, they are entitled to be "default position". Right, please?
Please correct me if I am wrong, with reasons and arguments, if any.

Regards

Perfect example of how confused your stance is.

Atheism, by definition, needs no support. It just needs to be true (and in its case, that only means sincerity).

The concept of atheism was necessary because theism was proposed before it. Atheism proper would still exist without theism. It just would not need to be delimited or named.

Theism can not be a "default" position. Nor could religiosity, which is a very different thing. Nor can theist religion.

Frankly, the difficulty of some in realizing it makes theism look very bad.

 

[paarsurrey]

Atheism can't be "wrong" in any conceivable way until and unless:

1) it is shown that for some very weird reason atheists are ultimately lying about their own lack of belief; or

2) it is shown that there is a deity in actual reality - something that has been evidenced to a degree appropriate to the extraordinary claim of its existence.


Your statemente, @paarsurrey , betrays some combination of serious lack of understanding of theism (let alone atheism) and ill will.

"theism"

I believe "theism" is a term coined by the philosophers not by some founder of a revealed religion. I am primarily a believer of G-d, irrespective of others describing me theist or not.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

"theism"

I believe "theism" is a term coined by the philosophers not by some founder of a revealed religion. I am primarily a believer of G-d, irrespective of others describing me theist or not.

Regards

That still makes you a theist. It would make you one even if the word were never proposed.

But above all, being a theist makes you responsible for your own belief in the existence of a deity. That responsibility can't be neglected without a moral failure. And it turns out that belief in a deity along the lines of Ibrahim's belief is a very high, very dangerous responsibility.

 

[paarsurrey]

That still makes you a theist. It would make you one even if the word were never proposed.

But above all, being a theist makes you responsible for your own belief in the existence of a deity. That responsibility can't be neglected without a moral failure.

I believe the same is the responsibility of those who belong to no-religion, or even more or the most, please.

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

I believe the same is the responsibility of those who belong to no-religion, or even more or the most, please.

Regards

Indeed! And that is why there is no reason to worry. We know that. Theism is suitable - sometimes all too easily - to adherents hiding behind it and neglecting their own basic duties for moral discernment.
Atheism is not.

 

[paarsurrey]

Indeed! And that is why there is no reason to worry. We know that. Theism is suitable - sometimes all too easily - to adherents hiding behind it and neglecting their own basic duties for moral discernment.
Atheism is not.

How one could say that, please?

Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

How one could say that, please?

Regards

I don't know what you are asking me about. One can and should say that because it is true.

 

[corynski]

"Atheism is the default position"

reason does not support it. The word "Atheism" presupposes existence of "Theism" or the believers of the religions, they are entitled to be "default position". Right, please?
Please correct me if I am wrong, with reasons and arguments, if any.

Regards

My dictionary states "default ...a failure to fulfill an obligation or to appear", so yes, I would agree that if the gods don't show up, no belief in gods would be required. And there must have been thousands of years of evolution before the awareness of, or creation of, in my opinion, of deities in the minds of humans took place.

 

[paarsurrey]

My dictionary states "default ...a failure to fulfill an obligation or to appear", so yes, I would agree that if the gods don't show up, no belief in gods would be required. And there must have been thousands of years of evolution before the awareness of, or creation of, in my opinion, of deities in the minds of humans took place.

We are not discussing the word "default" but the term "default position" , please give ones own understanding of the term instead of from a lexicon.
Right, please?

Regards

____________
"A default position is the standard setting or usual pattern / behavior."

 

[gnostic]

We see here so often an assertion from Atheism people that it is not a religion. Isn't one wrong here, please?

Religion is more than just about belief.

Atheists don’t believe in any god...which is the opposite of theists’ position.

Religion is not just about belief, but also about people’s devotion to their respective deities (supernatural beings). And these devotion can come in the forms of worship and prayer, and in the form of holy places or holy religious literature (scriptures).

Atheism isn’t a religion, because atheists also don’t worship any god, nor pray to any. They don’t have holy places, nor do they follow any “holy” book.

I have a number of cousins who are atheists. And they don’t do any thing that consider religion, thus no belief, no worship, no prayers, and they have no sacred books nor holy temples or churches.

You don’t even understand what religion actually mean, which also make you ignorant to what atheists do or don’t do.