CreateDebate


Debate Info

50
73
Sure looks like it What
Debate Score:123
Arguments:71
Total Votes:143
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Sure looks like it (35)
 
 What (36)

Debate Creator

Thewayitis(4071) pic



Atheist lack understanding of atheism.

"Technically atheists just lack a belief in god, they don't necessarily believe in the non-existence of god."  Qoute from a debate here.

 

The trouble is that atheist don't just use this meaning, they act upon it. They attack God and religion, making atheism a religion. They don't lack a belief, they just have a different one.

Sure looks like it

Side Score: 50
VS.

What

Side Score: 73
5 points

You have to consider the nature of what beliefs are. Beliefs are more or less dynamically changing structures that form as we encounter patterns in reality. The difference between belief and knowledge can be measured in degrees of certainty.

I'm an atheist who doesn't hate religious people or think they are of inferior intellectual ability. I can by no means speak for the "atheist" religious sect that you suppose exists. I do though, see how it can seem ironic how we atheists have so many beliefs about a being that we don't believe exists. I CAN explain some of how I Think about it, even more if provoked. I'll have you thinking I'm a kook in no time :)

I am willing to admit that god exists as a term. This term god seems inexorably involved with the practice of worship. Worship is a term involved with the placing of extreme trust in a being that is esteemed absolutely "superior". The extreme level of trust that I associate with the practice of worship, is appropriate only for very young children. Their parents should teach them to doubt and question everything as soon as is safely possible. Teachers should be more forthright about where their understanding ends because we need more minds on these problems, not more people looking to higher thans for answers and solutions.

Side: Sure looks like it

Well I agree with most of what your post says. Beliefs make up our worldview and our worldview is how we see the truth. The truth for me is Christ Jesus, so whatever He commands I believe. Those that reject God live by another set of rules or laws. They make themselves the god of the universe they believe in.

I appreciate that you don't hate or treat people of faith as inferior people. We have our kooks just like any other faith, but for the most part those whose lives reject Christ, treat and honor people as they want to be treated. I work with many atheists, especially at Right to Life events...they are wonderful people.

What you said about its ironic that so many atheists talk about God so much, when they say no god exists. It is funny in a way...so true.

You are willing to admit to god on paper, an object an idea not reality....you deny that he exists as a living entity. I believe in that supreme God of the universe who is the first cause, the creator of everything. I believe by faith in the things I have experiences and seen in my life. Can I prove it? No. But can the atheist deny the possibility that just might exist? NO He too has faith in his experiences and what he has seen. So the term atheist is false to describe someone who has no belief in a god. They would have to have all the knowledge in the world and beyond. This is impossible. I think you are agnostic.

I belief children need all the facts, as much as we can provide. But they should know more than that...they need to know theories as well. I believe in questioning. I have a lot of things I don't understand things I question...things I would love to ask God. I am constantly learning new things in the Word. And as I get older, more mature...I am more content to live with the things that will never be answered on earth. I simply have faith that what I believe is true...and I am not alone. Kids should not be kept from the truth however...and this truth would be the POSSIBILITY of things unseen. This should be taught at school along with all the rest of the theories. And until the first cause can be proven.....why we are here, how did we get here......everything should be examined, especially the idea of an intelligent designer. I totally agree with you that teachers should be honest, they should not campaign for their beleifs but put all on the table. It is not right that our public schools eliminate God as an intelligent creator as one possiblity.

I think yours is a fair and good post.

Side: Sure looks like it
3 points

Well I agree with most of what your post says.

This implies that there are portions you don't agree with. Be bold enough to point them out and debate might ensue. :)

The truth for me is Christ Jesus

That comes across to me as plainly illogical. If you had said: "I think Christ Jesus always told the truth, so any statements attributed to him, I believe" it would at least make enough sense for me to ask "How can you be sure Jesus said X?"

, so whatever He commands I believe.

Don't you mean "obey" instead of believe? I mean statements are to be believed or disbelieved, and commands are to be obeyed or disobeyed right?

Those that reject God live by another set of rules or laws.

Who doesn't live by the set of rules or laws that they themselves have determined to be wisest? And who isn't susceptible to profound error? I think that those who believe that they receive instructions from on high are even more susceptible.

They make themselves the god of the universe they believe in.

When it comes to placing trust, there is no higher authority than the person who places it.

You are willing to admit to god on paper, an object an idea not reality

Language and ideas are part of reality.

you deny that he exists as a living entity.

Not necessarily. It would depend on how "living" and "entity" are interpreted. I do think of language and ideas as somewhat "living" things.

So the term atheist is false to describe someone who has no belief in a god.

That doesn't logically follow from what you typed immediately preceding. I am comfortable admitting that I have beliefs about god. Depending on how you define god, I might even admit that god exists. But the statement "I believe in god" doesn't even make sense to me.

They would have to have all the knowledge in the world and beyond.

You are atheist in regards to Zeus are you not? When you understand why you dismiss Zeus, you will understand why I dismiss the other deities.

I think you are agnostic.

You are right, I am. But I understand it as a philosophical position and not necessarily a theological one. Chew on that :)

I belief children need all the facts

I believe that there are no facts, only interpretations.

I have a lot of things I don't understand things I question...things I would love to ask God.

Why don't you ask through prayer?

And as I get older, more mature...I am more content to live with the things that will never be answered on earth.

So your faith in god helps suppress your curiosity does it? That god suppresses curiosity and encourages people to be satisfied with their understanding is something I have noticed, and you are confirming.

Kids should not be kept from the truth however...and this truth would be the POSSIBILITY of things unseen.

If kids are taught by their teachers that everything they are being taught might be in many important respects wrong, including teachings about god, I'd say we were on to something.

It is not right that our public schools eliminate God as an intelligent creator as one possiblity.

Who determines what gets included in the curriculum of public schools?

I think yours is a fair and good post.

Thanks. Let's debate about our differences :)

Side: Sure looks like it
3 points

... True. I don't think anybody ever really thinks of it that way. We DO sorta just group it all up together becasue the terms are all thrown around too much. Isn't the correct term for those who are against it Anti-theist? So yes. I think that a lot of us are ignorant sometimes >___<

Side: Sure looks like it
2 points

You can't define something really well until it is down with stiffness. If you are an Atheist, you understand the non-existence of God. Giving it a different meaning especially the kind where criticizing faith is just out of the line!

Side: Sure looks like it

The true definition of the word atheism,,,,

They are people who deny who state...factually that THERE IS NO GOD. They do not say, I don't think there is a God.....that would make them agnostics.

They however can't make a statement like this because in order to do it, they would have to possess ALL KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE. This is impossible to do. No one can make a statement of fact like they do.

It is a religion, a faith religion. They have a worldview and it shapes everything they believe. Our government even classified atheism as a religion. They can meet as a community whether on a computer or in another gathering place, to address issues. They have organizations where they share their faith.

Side: Sure looks like it
imrigone(761) Disputed
4 points

I can't tell if it is funny or sad that you carry on with this tosh even though you proved yourself wrong with your own links a while ago. You remember that post where you asked What then is the difference between an agnostic and atheist?, and then went on to provide four links to supposedly support your claim. Well, churchmouse, here are some excerpts from those links.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-an-atheist-and-an-agnostic.htm

"The atheist may be a weak atheist or strong atheist. The weak atheist may say, “I’m not sure whether gods exist so I don’t worship any. “ The strong atheist comments: “There is no God or gods.”"

The article goes on to identify that the primary difference has to do with the acceptance of spirituality, or the self-ascribed assessment of their likelihood to be convinced. But it clearly states that atheists are capable of not believing without stating that Gods definitely do not exist.

http://www.howtodothings.com/religion-spirituality/how-to-know-the-difference-between-atheist-and-agnostic

"As with anything practiced by human beings, there is division within the ranks. A strong Atheist might state flat out that no god exists and that nothing will sway him from his position. A so-called weak Atheist will deny the existence of god based on a lack of evidence. Following that logic, one could say that presentation of new evidence might sway the weak but not the strong. Among Agnostics, the "weak" position allows for the faith of others, in essence stating that faith is a reasonable form of belief, but not for this fella. A "strong" agnostic believes categorically that no human being can reasonably claim to know that a supreme being exists."

Next you used a wikiAnswer site which is spurious support at best. But the hilarious thing is that all three of the answers there refute the point you were trying to make.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_an_agnostic_an_atheist

from Answer 1: "An atheist on the other hand, while they wouldn't deny the statistical possibility of a existing God, believes that mankind's knowledge of the observable world and universe is adequate enough to determine that the existence of God is an extreme statistical improbability."

There is a difference between identifying something as an "extreme statistical improbability", and saying that thing definitely does not exist.

From answer 2: "In his book "The God Delusion", Richard Dawkins invents a scale from 1 to 7, 1 being people who claim to "know" there is no God and 7 being those skeptics who claim to "know" there is no God. Dawkins himself is a 6, claiming that while it is highly unlikely that there is a God, he does not believe in one."

That's right, even Richard Dawkins, one of the most famous and outspoken atheists at the moment admits to the possibility, albeit small, that God exists.

And, from answer 3: "The term agnostic was coined so that the unbelivers would have an socialy easier accepted name and position. If one looks at the difintions and statements from both agnostics and atheists, they are virtually undistinguable."

As far as the fourth link, I won't quote from it, but the author makes it very clear that the definition of the word "Atheist" is changing, and that there is now considerable overlap between that term and agnostic.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1653490/what_is_an_atheist.html?cat=9

I don't get how you can continue on in your ignorance even after YOUR OWN LINKS, presumably chosen to support your stance, deny your assertion.

Side: what
churchmouse(328) Disputed
2 points

Not at all. There are various shades of gray...on the definition. I gave you the links to prove it. IMO however an atheist is someone who says.....there is no god. The atheist that says...they dont know....is more aligned with an agnostic.

There are differences in that religion as there are in other religions. Christians differ on baptism...calvanism....the sacraments....even who Christ is. Atheists differ as well....it is a religion.

I provided links that showed....as you pointed out....atheists...can say....THERE IS NO GOD. I don't think it makes sense for one to say...I am not sure.....that would make them an agnostic.

Side: Sure looks like it
churchmouse(328) Disputed
1 point

A strong atheist....a not so strong atheist....a semi strong atheist........a semi weak atheist.........an almost weak atheist.......an almost agnostic athiest.......a bold atheist.......

I mean come on....quit making excuses. You go to most websites and the definition they use is a person who says there is no God. Not I don't know, I highly doubt, not I dont think so....

An atheist says.......there is no god. An agnostic says, I do not know. They take totally different stances.

This from American Atheists....who do not talk about weak, strong atheists.

They say...........

What is Atheism?

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity, which implies that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own."

Here is another huge organization and how they define atheism. Atheist Alliance International says,

"Atheism, in a broad sense, is the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism, which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists."

http://www.atheistalliance.org/atheism

These are huge organizations that meet get together like people of faith do. They are examples of why our government said that atheism is a religion.

Side: Sure looks like it

Who would have ever thought evangelistic atheist exist? Go spread the word.

Side: Sure looks like it
1 point

I prefer atheist apologist..........................................................

Side: Sure looks like it

This is probably the more preferred term by atheist, but it lacks that extra kick the balls I was going for.

Side: Sure looks like it
5 points

Someone lacks an understanding of atheism here... but somehow I doubt it's the atheists themselves.

The statement you quoted is correct. Atheism is the LACK OF belief in the existence of a deity. That category includes, but is not limited to, people who state flat out that such deities do not exist (sometimes referred to as "strong atheism".)

That you seem to think a proper explanation of the meaning of atheism represents a misunderstanding of atheism would indicate you yourself are ignorant of what atheism is.

Side: Someone does but it's not atheists
2 points

I do not believe anyone can be an atheist because no one can prove that God does not exist. To do so someone would need all the knowledge in the universe. This is impossible. The best they can be.......is an agnostic, who doubts, is skeptical but does not know for sure.

An atheist says.......there is no God.....anything weaker and they are agnostic.

Side: what
catticus90(360) Disputed
2 points

I will say this again.

I do not believe anyone can be an atheist because no one can prove that God does not exist. To do so someone would need all the knowledge in the universe.

Based on your logic, someone cannot be religious either since a large amount believe their deity to be the only truth. You have said God definitely exists multiple times on CD.

Side: Sure looks like it
Thewayitis(4071) Disputed
1 point

If theism is a religion, then anti-theism is a religion as well.

Religion is defined as: 4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith (Merriam-Webster)

Side: Sure looks like it
Conro(767) Disputed
3 points

"Religion is defined as: 4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith (Merriam-Webster)"

And thus, atheism is not a religion. Lacking religion does not imply holding to a belief in no deities with ardor. It just means there has been insufficient evidence for that person to claim a belief in a deity. At least, atheism in its truest sense; of course, there's always douchebag atheists who will actively defend there being no god (just as there are douchebag theists who will actively defend there being a god). Lacking a belief in a god does not imply a belief in no god. Don't confuse the two.

Side: what
gcomeau(536) Disputed
2 points

If X =A then not X also = A

Hmmm, interesting logic. and by "interesting" I mean entertainingly ridiculous.

Also, atheism isn't "anti-theism". Nor is it a cause, a principle, or a system of beliefs. It is a state.

Side: Someone does but it's not atheists
churchmouse(328) Disputed
0 points

So what atheists are perfect?

Atheism is a person who states that there is no god. Therefore they do not belief because none exists. This is a statement said as a fact.

They assert that Gods existence is rationally improvable and is therefore at best a meaningless proposition. But its not...it is a rational proposition.

There is no way to prove this the statement.....THERE IS NO GOD......to be able to say it...they would need to prove it 100%...which would take all the knowledge the world has....since the beginning, since the first cause. Atheists are finite human beings....they have limited knowledge just like the rest of us. They have faith....even if it is in themselves.

Have you ever heard of Isaac Asimov? He signed the Humanist Manifesto ll. He said, "Emotionally I am an atheist. I don't have the evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, but I so strongly suspect he doesn't that I don't want to waste my time."

And he is right, science can not disprove that there might be an intelligant designer. The idea repulses people like Asimov....that is why science does not even want to look into this....they do not want to admit to some moral entity, that would control their actions.

To say..........there is no God.....is unproveable. It is impossible to be an atheist.

Side: Sure looks like it
gcomeau(536) Disputed
3 points

"Atheism is a person who states that there is no god. Therefore they do not belief because none exists. This is a statement said as a fact. "

Well gosh, thank you so much for telling me what I say. I had no idea I said that before but now that you've stated it well... it just must be true!

I wonder why I don't remember saying these things. Perhaps I have amnesia?

Or... and bear with me here because this is a wild idea...

...you have no understanding of what atheism is.

Side: Someone does but it's not atheists
Peekaboo(704) Disputed
3 points

Not all atheists believe that.

Take a look at these two statements:

1. I believe there is no god.

2. I do not believe there is a god.

At first glance, they may look like they say the same thing, but they don't.

Statement 1 is your definition of atheism - believing that God doesn't exist for sure. Some atheists think this way, but not all.

Statement 2 means simply not having the belief that God exists. It doesn't mean that you think he doesn't exist, or that you have proof he doesn't exist. It just means you don't have this particular belief regarding his existence. Someone who says they don't know whether or not God exists would not believe that he exists, and at the same time not believe that he doesn't exist.

Both of these statements are classified as "atheism". Plenty of atheists, I included, hold to statement 2.

Side: what
catticus90(360) Disputed
1 point

Just wanted to dispute your last little words of wisdom.

To say..........there is no God.....is unproveable. It is impossible to be an atheist.

To say there is a God is unprovable. By your logic it's impossible to be a Christian.

Side: what
2 points

For nearly two thousand years Biblicists have been lecturing people on the importance of adhering to the Bible’s teachings on ethics, manners, and morality. They quote Jesus and Paul profusely, with a liberal sprinkling of Old Testament moralist. The problem with their approach lies not only in an oft- noted failure to practice what they preach, but an equally pronounced tendency to ignore what the Bible itself, preaches. Christians practice what can only be described as “selective morality”. What they like, they cling to and shove down others throats; what they don’t like, they ignore vehemently. I believe 'There is no Religion Higher than Truth.

Side: what
1 point

Certain Atheists only lack the understanding of Humanity and human emotions. They understand quiet well that they disbelieve and criticize the believes that they term blind. They hope to see a betterment in the light of something different. That isn't wrong. It is how they get people against them instead of making a point. It is how some of them mock the believes and underestimate and not care of indifference.

Side: what
churchmouse(328) Disputed
0 points

Well its blind to believe that we came from nothing. That in itself takes faith.

Side: Sure looks like it
imrigone(761) Disputed
2 points

Your tactic is simple: let somebody else give you a quick quip, and then repeat it ad nauseum as some quote from the opposition that the opposition itself doesn't actually say.

Also, I'm still waiting for an answer to the last question I asked you:

Why do you value faith?

Side: what
1 point

EDIT: Oops. Clicked the wrong button when trying to reply.

>.<

Side: what
1 point

Well, psychologically, there isn't a middle ground. If someone suggests something to you, you ordinarily deny it or accept it.

However, the actual claim of Atheism is merely that there is no evidence for any sort of god-thing, and not the direct statement "there is no god."

For it is impossible to prove a negative, like "there is no god." Or, like, "there are no unicorns," or "there are no wormholes."

We might, at some point, find something which indicating, neccesarily, that there was some kind of being, some kind of intelligence, out there, that we might call a god. Or we might find a unicorn, or astrophysics might discover a wormhole (If I've kept up to date with my astrophysics), and then these things would have been proved. But you can't prove the negative of them, and until they are proved, the claims are merely indeterminate, neither true nor false.

Actually, given Quantum Mechanics, this seems to be a property of the universe. Of reality itself, that is.

Things which are unobserved have indeterminate states.

Side: what

Athiest:

A= without

Theist=belief in the existence of a god or gods

Therefor: Atheist=without belief in the existence of a god or gods.

Therefore atheism is the lack of belief in a deity. Hard to see how people could get that mixed up.

Side: what
Thewayitis(4071) Disputed
1 point

One would think so. It is easy to know the term. Too bad atheist fail to comprehend their own beliefs.

Try actually applying the term to your actions. Actions speak louder than words.

Side: Sure looks like it
0 points

Sorry to be 'that guy', but this seems like a pointless debate. Who cares about the terminology? Is that truly what we're fightng for? It sounds to me like we're trying to hold onto a word. Come on. If we're worried people will confuse us, atheists, people who simply lack a belief in God, with the ardent New Atheists and others of that kind, then let's come up with a new term that refers to what we are. We're not going to be able to change people's viewpoint of what an atheist is simply because we deserve it, because ardent God haters use the terminology wrong. They want the term, and sociologically, they have it. Get over it. Come up with something new.

Side: what
Thewayitis(4071) Disputed
0 points

There are no pointless debates, only pointless debaters .

Side: Sure looks like it
WizardDevil(22) Disputed
2 points

Wow, personal attacks? Nice argument. Point proven. I'm done.

Side: what