Was atheism invented?

[mikkel_the_dane]

I didn't say gods where real. I just said that's how culture works. I'm not sure where you are from, but regardless one's theological stance, its just the nature of culture development. Being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be.

You can study it in archeology, theology, geology, psychology and neurology even. Atheism is irrelevant.

I looked back and couldn't find any questions.

I asked for evidence for this: "Being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not too familiar with that subject, but I would take "god" out (since that's a complex word in itself), and think more of it in context of god of the gaps: finding practices and ideas to explain the natural environment, their place, and the relationship with people they are around and associate with. Another thing is that way back when we were polytheist not theist. I think I learned in art history that the one-god (one-king, one president, one truth, etc) are all political to emphasis authority over people. Though this is entirely cultural, it still makes sense regardless.

The problem is trying to fit our idea of god to the idea of deities way back when. Even people on RF who believe in abrahamic traditions try to fit the concept of their god on eastern traditions and their gods. Even the word god itself is not even universal.

But I'm still confused how you guys don't understand if you're not in an environment to know of god, how would you inherently just believe in one?

I read awhile back in ASL class there was a hearing woman who was raised by Deaf parents in a Deaf/HH town (in Illinois or somewhere close). She thought everyone knew ASL and she never heard a spoken word. When she went to college out of state she was shocked and literally had to learn English to communicate with her hearing peers.

Now, we can say "but she knew English (or other spoken language) because she was born with that ability, but the fact is she didn't know because that's not how she was raised. Take right and left handedness. Most of us have the ability to write, but at one time teachers punished left-handers because to be right handers since the majority=normal. Even the white environment and one black person really tips people off.

So, my point is, it's literally environment, indoctrination, and god of the gaps. Another thing I noticed is as years go on, the more interpretative and abstract christianity seems to be. At first we were dependent on rituals, traditions, and oral stories and so forth now many christians are saying god can't be explained by rituals, mystical experiences, and the like. As if the mundane cancels out the spiritual when in the past (making an intelligent guess on my former practice) it just wasn't so.

I mean, people put their concepts of god today on the bible and their culture, language, and understanding of life and science are completely different than 2 or 3,000 years ago.

I'm not too familiar with that subject, but I would take "god" out (since that's a complex word in itself), and think more of it in context of god of the gaps: finding practices and ideas to explain the natural environment, their place, and the relationship with people they are around and associate with. Another thing is that way back when we were polytheist not theist. I think I learned in art history that the one-god (one-king, one president, one truth, etc) are all political to emphasis authority over people. Though this is entirely cultural, it still makes sense regardless.

The problem is trying to fit our idea of god to the idea of deities way back when. Even people on RF who believe in abrahamic traditions try to fit the concept of their god on eastern traditions and their gods. Even the word god itself is not even universal.

But I'm still confused how you guys don't understand if you're not in an environment to know of god, how would you inherently just believe in one?

I read awhile back in ASL class there was a hearing woman who was raised by Deaf parents in a Deaf/HH town (in Illinois or somewhere close). She thought everyone knew ASL and she never heard a spoken word. When she went to college out of state she was shocked and literally had to learn English to communicate with her hearing peers.

Now, we can say "but she knew English (or other spoken language) because she was born with that ability, but the fact is she didn't know because that's not how she was raised. Take right and left handedness. Most of us have the ability to write, but at one time teachers punished left-handers because to be right handers since the majority=normal. Even the white environment and one black person really tips people off.

So, my point is, it's literally environment, indoctrination, and god of the gaps. Another thing I noticed is as years go on, the more interpretative and abstract christianity seems to be. At first we were dependent on rituals, traditions, and oral stories and so forth now many christians are saying god can't be explained by rituals, mystical experiences, and the like. As if the mundane cancels out the spiritual when in the past (making an intelligent guess on my former practice) it just wasn't so.

I mean, people put their concepts of god today on the bible and their culture, language, and understanding of life and science are completely different than 2 or 3,000 years ago.

Your question is buried somewhere. Its easier to address the clarification in the beginning so I don't respond to your comments (above) assuming the context of your last post is the point I should be addressing. (I think it's called backpaddling)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I asked for evidence for this: "Being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be."

That's not a question. I just responded the contents of your last post not backtrack to figure if you're asking a question or making a statement. It throws the conversation off (like now) when you go back to refer to a comment that's already been addressed (whether agreed to or not) and passed on.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

That's not a question. I just responded the contents of your last post not backtrack to figure if you're asking a question or making a statement. It throws the conversation off (like now) when you go back to refer to a comment that's already been addressed (whether agreed to or not) and passed on.

I am asking for evidence for your claim/statement.

 

[firedragon]

Atheism is a limited negative in the modern sense. I don't believe in deities. That says nothing about if I believe in something else.

Lol. I didnt say "deities". I said "Divinity".

See, changing a definition of what someone says a 100 times does not save anyone's face. Its called a strawman. Let me edit this post to cut and paste this so you could read once more.

You mean to say "a higher power" is not a "divinity"?

Mate. Maybe you should understand the meaning theism. Theism comes from the word Theos in Greek. I am sure you know all of this, and if you do dont think this is some kind of schooling. yet, what must be said must be said.

Theos is "higher power". Ho Theos is "The Higher Power". If you want you could call it "divinity". Atheism by definition is either Anti or A (as in asexual) "theism" coming from the word Theos. By definition an Atheist does not believe in any kind of higher power. But see, trying to change the definition of Atheism just because you found an article offensive to you and your kind is I think beneath your intelligence level.

You said I was against the article cited in that post right? Well, the article says Americans' beliefs about the nature of God. Read it clearly and you will understand what is meant by it with relevance.

Again, Atheists by definition are not supposed to believe in a "higher power" of any kind. Zilch. But, some them who claim to be atheists do.

There is nothing wrong with that and there is no need to get so defensive. Its just a fact that Atheism is also an identity statement, and a few of them may not adhere to the same principles as the rest.

There is no need to get into the apologetics mode Mikkel the dane. Its honestly not a big deal.

Anyway, have a great day. Thanks for engaging.

peace.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Lol. I didnt say "deities". I said "Divinity".

See, changing a definition of what someone says a 100 times does not save anyone's face. Its called a strawman. Let me edit this post to cut and paste this so you could read once more.

You mean to say "a higher power" is not a "divinity"?

Mate. Maybe you should understand the meaning theism. Theism comes from the word Theos in Greek. I am sure you know all of this, and if you do dont think this is some kind of schooling. yet, what must be said must be said.

Theos is "higher power". Ho Theos is "The Higher Power". If you want you could call it "divinity". Atheism by definition is either Anti or A (as in asexual) "theism" coming from the word Theos. By definition an Atheist does not believe in any kind of higher power. But see, trying to change the definition of Atheism just because you found an article offensive to you and your kind is I think beneath your intelligence level.

You said I was against the article cited in that post right? Well, the article says Americans' beliefs about the nature of God. Read it clearly and you will understand what is meant by it with relevance.

Again, Atheists by definition are not supposed to believe in a "higher power" of any kind. Zilch. But, some them who claim to be atheists do.

There is nothing wrong with that and there is no need to get so defensive. Its just a fact that Atheism is also an identity statement, and a few of them may not adhere to the same principles as the rest.

There is no need to get into the apologetics mode Mikkel the dane. Its honestly not a big deal.

Anyway, have a great day. Thanks for engaging.

peace.

Divinity: Definition of DIVINITY
Definition of THEOLOGY
Definition of DIVINE
Definition of DEITY

As far as I can tell you assume that any supreme good must be a god. That is not the case. I can believe in a highest power as a supreme good without it being a god.
As long as I believe it leads to love and caring, which is one version of supreme good, which is tied to highest power. Namely e.g. the highest power, which can do the best love and caring, is human consciousness.

I as an atheist believe in human consciousness as the highest power to do love and caring. I believe in that, because it is without reason, logic and evidence.

 

[Kfox]

No, I'm not you so I don't assume that I'm like you. Those above are not outside sources of agnosticism. You dishonestly posted a link for the definition of "agnostic," not "agnosticism." So like I said, don't assume that I'm like you.

As you can see below, agnosticism deals with knowledge. See, just because you said so, doesn't make it so.

agnosticism
noun
1. the doctrine or belief of an agnostic.

2. an intellectual doctrine or attitude affirming the uncertainty of all claims to ultimate knowledge.

Definition of agnosticism | Dictionary.com

How is that definition different than the one I provided? It is still a claim applied to all of mankind; not just the person holding the view! So how am I being dishonest here?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not too familiar with that subject, but I would take "god" out (since that's a complex word in itself), and think more of it in context of god of the gaps: finding practices and ideas to explain the natural environment, their place, and the relationship with people they are around and associate with. Another thing is that way back when we were polytheist not theist. I think I learned in art history that the one-god (one-king, one president, one truth, etc) are all political to emphasis authority over people. Though this is entirely cultural, it still makes sense regardless.

The problem is trying to fit our idea of god to the idea of deities way back when. Even people on RF who believe in abrahamic traditions try to fit the concept of their god on eastern traditions and their gods. Even the word god itself is not even universal.

But I'm still confused how you guys don't understand if you're not in an environment to know of god, how would you inherently just believe in one?

I read awhile back in ASL class there was a hearing woman who was raised by Deaf parents in a Deaf/HH town (in Illinois or somewhere close). She thought everyone knew ASL and she never heard a spoken word. When she went to college out of state she was shocked and literally had to learn English to communicate with her hearing peers.

Now, we can say "but she knew English (or other spoken language) because she was born with that ability, but the fact is she didn't know because that's not how she was raised. Take right and left handedness. Most of us have the ability to write, but at one time teachers punished left-handers because to be right handers since the majority=normal. Even the white environment and one black person really tips people off.

So, my point is, it's literally environment, indoctrination, and god of the gaps. Another thing I noticed is as years go on, the more interpretative and abstract christianity seems to be. At first we were dependent on rituals, traditions, and oral stories and so forth now many christians are saying god can't be explained by rituals, mystical experiences, and the like. As if the mundane cancels out the spiritual when in the past (making an intelligent guess on my former practice) it just wasn't so.

I mean, people put their concepts of god today on the bible and their culture, language, and understanding of life and science are completely different than 2 or 3,000 years ago.

@mikkel_the_dane

Everything is read in context rather than bold verses. That, and you'd have to make a direct statement or ask a question.

I back tracked on purpose. What were you referring to when my explanation didn't cut it and how does you being an theist relate to the comment?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Evidence for the bold.

You'd have to ask a question or put context to the statement so I won't guess what you mean.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You'd have to ask a question or put context to the statement so I won't guess what you mean.

Do you have evidence(that is a question) for that being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Do you have evidence(that is a question) for that being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be?

In the context in which I wrote it. You don't have to be an theist to understand how people come to believe in gods.

Why did you mention you were an atheist to my comment? (That's what I was referring to in context of the whole post)

 

[firedragon]

Divinity: Definition of DIVINITY
Definition of THEOLOGY
Definition of DIVINE
Definition of DEITY

As far as I can tell you assume that any supreme good must be a god. That is not the case. I can believe in a highest power as a supreme good without it being a god.
As long as I believe it leads to love and caring, which is one version of supreme good, which is tied to highest power. Namely e.g. the highest power, which can do the best love and caring, is human consciousness.

I as an atheist believe in human consciousness as the highest power to do love and caring. I believe in that, because it is without reason, logic and evidence.

Irrelevant. repeating you are an atheist does not make any point. You are just arguing for no reason now.

Bottomline is, according to Pew Research, almost 20% of atheists in the U.S are actually believing in some kind of higher power. By definition they are theists. But by identity, they are atheists. Since you have missed the post once more and was bringing in another point for your sake, I will cut and paste one post so that you could read, for the third time.

You mean to say "a higher power" is not a "divinity"?

Mate. Maybe you should understand the meaning theism. Theism comes from the word Theos in Greek. I am sure you know all of this, and if you do dont think this is some kind of schooling. yet, what must be said must be said.

Theos is "higher power". Ho Theos is "The Higher Power". If you want you could call it "divinity". Atheism by definition is either Anti or A (as in asexual) "theism" coming from the word Theos. By definition an Atheist does not believe in any kind of higher power. But see, trying to change the definition of Atheism just because you found an article offensive to you and your kind is I think beneath your intelligence level.

You said I was against the article cited in that post right? Well, the article says Americans' beliefs about the nature of God. Read it clearly and you will understand what is meant by it with relevance.

Again, Atheists by definition are not supposed to believe in a "higher power" of any kind. Zilch. But, some them who claim to be atheists do.

There is nothing wrong with that and there is no need to get so defensive. Its just a fact that Atheism is also an identity statement, and a few of them may not adhere to the same principles as the rest.

There is no need to get into the apologetics mode Mikkel the dane. Its honestly not a big deal.

 

[Orbit]

I suppose you have evidence to back this up? If not, this statement is little more than militant atheist rhetoric.

Are you being serious? Of course children have to be taught about religion and their gods. Children only know what they are taught.

 

[Kfox]

Theism comes from the word Theos in Greek. I am sure you know all of this, and if you do dont think this is some kind of schooling. yet, what must be said must be said.

Theos is "higher power". Ho Theos is "The Higher Power". If you want you could call it "divinity". Atheism by definition is either Anti or A (as in asexual) "theism" coming from the word Theos. By definition an Atheist does not believe in any kind of higher power. But see, trying to change the definition of Atheism just because you found an article offensive to you and your kind is I think beneath your intelligence level.

You said I was against the article cited in that post right? Well, the article says Americans' beliefs about the nature of God. Read it clearly and you will understand what is meant by it with relevance.

Again, Atheists by definition are not supposed to believe in a "higher power" of any kind. Zilch. But, some them who claim to be atheists do.

Can’t speak for Greek, but in English, theism does not mean higher power, it means God belief. What constitutes a higher power is completely subjective according to the individual. I may consider the Sun a higher power than my own due to the influence it has on our solar system; that doesn’t mean I am a theist, I would have to assign deity status to the Sun in order to make that happen.

 

[lukethethird]

Was atheism invented?

Atheism is entirely predicated on there being theism; no theists running around saying that there's an invisible god out there means there are no atheists to say, "I don't believe you."

 

[Nakosis]

If God was invented by priests, then godlessness was invented by atheists? How is it better then?

An atheist Bob might reply: "By analogy, smokers have invented smoking; and who then has invented non-smoking? Non-smokers, maybe?"

Me in reply: "Non-smoking as well as a sober lifestyle was invented by the Ministry of Health."

Bob: "Atheism is based on the achievements of science and its evidence, and religion is based only on legends and blind faith."

Atheism was discovered to exist as far back as 6 century BCE. Though has probably existed for much longer. It existed in places where a belief in God hadn't been invented.

I suspect if you look you'll discover tribes where smoking tobacco hadn't been invented.

Me: "Atheism is unscientific because the Supposed Death of God is not scientifically proven. Faith in Wikipedia is defined (with peer-reviewed references) as loyalty, faithfulness to Omniscience. After all, God knows everything.

Atheism is a fact. However, neither belief nor disbelief in a God is scientific. Science doesn't deal with supernatural premises.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Irrelevant. repeating you are an atheist does not make any point. You are just arguing for no reason now.

Bottomline is, according to Pew Research, almost 20% of atheists in the U.S are actually believing in some kind of higher power. By definition they are theists. ...

All beliefs in a higher power are theistic, because you say so.

 

[paarsurrey]

Now, how do I know as to how many of the Aryans were athiests more than 3,000 years ago. But this one, Prajapati Parameshthi was surely one. There are a few hymns like that in RigVeda. So this leads me to believe that there may have been a few. This is one of the celebrated hymns of RigVeda, it was not removed, proscribed at any time. Therefore, I believe such people were not hated and were accepted as the part of whole variety.

Aupmanyav wrote :"it was not removed, proscribed at any time."

Is one sure that this hymn was not interpolated in the Vedas by the non-believers 3000 years ago, earlier the Aryans believed in G-d, please? Right?

Regards

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I didn't say gods where real. I just said that's how culture works. I'm not sure where you are from, but regardless one's theological stance, its just the nature of culture development. Being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be.

You can study it in archeology, theology, geology, psychology and neurology even. Atheism is irrelevant.

Now I see it. You answered my question. Good. But you gave no evidence for this: "Being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be."

So here is a new question: Do you have evidence for that being an atheist really has nothing to do with the progress of history and how beliefs in gods came to be?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Aupmanyav wrote :"it was not removed, proscribed at any time."

Is one sure that this hymn was not interpolated in the Vedas by the non-believers 3000 years ago, earlier the Aryans believed in G-d, please? Right?

Regards

We are not sure of anything, if we play that game. You could be in a Boltzmann Brain universe and there is no God.