Out of the normal relaxed atheism, as it used to be, we seams to have a growing branch of a special "atheists" that act as much as the next religious fanatic!
This "special atheists", pretty much common at US, so we can call them "American Atheists" (or AA) act like if they can't live without strict good and evil, they uphold their beliefs as it were the supreme truth, like to call it facts and often scientific facts to things science doesn't even come close to, such as human philosophic affairs.
Let's then start to examine this "new religion":
- It's mostly based on "studies" from "experts".
As result there are now thousands of concurrent "studies", most without any scientific value at all (sample too small, bias interpretation of data, non-repeatability, and so on) and paradoxical to its peers, and here, as religious do, they cherry pick the "studies" they found convenient to their belief.
- Anyone denying "MY" facts is an idiot.
The "supreme morality" of the group makes them so wise... It looks like they don't believe there's no God, but instead there's a job vacancy for being God and they want to apply for it.
- If you're not with us, then you're against us!
This is common ground to religious fanatics, they deal quite harshly to any criticism on their views. Moderation is out of the scope.
- The Dogma
The so called harmful part of religions isn't their crosses, crescents, yin-yangs or whatever symbols they use, isn't also praying - praying is somewhat the psychologist of the poor -, but the dogma: The incontestable truths they are meant to react violently if challenged! And in here, the AA's have a LOT of them!
Some are taking just as "to look opposite of what they recognize as their opponents", for AA's this means Christians, such as being "pro-choice", others are plain bull as feminism, lgbt rights, free-for-all economics and so on...
It won't surprise me that in a short these groups start to resource terrorism.
This is one of the more peculiar arguments I’ve ever come across. It is an argument usually levied once a theist posits that God is required for the existence of the universe (an absolute being upon which all other things exist by way of contingency). Some atheists then shift the weight over to the theist saying, “Well then who created God?” This very familiar argument demonstrates a failure to understand what almost any form of classical theism understands by the name “God”. Speaking for Christianity, God is the One who is – i.e., the only One who is the source of His own being. He is worshiped as the uncreated One who always was and always will be. God is not seen by the Christian as one more being in the total aggregate of all beings in the universe. Rather He is the source and ground of all being, of all existence .One way to say it, though it might sound odd at first, is that Christians do not believe that God ever came into existence (Kierkegaard). Think of it in the old ‘Cosmological Argument’ sense. Whatever begins to exist must have a cause. The universe began to exist, therefore it had a cause. But God never began to exist; He always was, i.e., eternal.This "special atheists", pretty much common at US, so we can call them "American Atheists" (or AA) act like if they can't live without strict good and evil, they uphold their beliefs as it were the supreme truth, like to call it facts and often scientific facts to things science doesn't even come close to, such as human philosophic affairs.
Let's then start to examine this "new religion":
- It's mostly based on "studies" from "experts".
As result there are now thousands of concurrent "studies", most without any scientific value at all (sample too small, bias interpretation of data, non-repeatability, and so on) and paradoxical to its peers, and here, as religious do, they cherry pick the "studies" they found convenient to their belief.
- Anyone denying "MY" facts is an idiot.
The "supreme morality" of the group makes them so wise... It looks like they don't believe there's no God, but instead there's a job vacancy for being God and they want to apply for it.
- If you're not with us, then you're against us!
This is common ground to religious fanatics, they deal quite harshly to any criticism on their views. Moderation is out of the scope.
- The Dogma
The so called harmful part of religions isn't their crosses, crescents, yin-yangs or whatever symbols they use, isn't also praying - praying is somewhat the psychologist of the poor -, but the dogma: The incontestable truths they are meant to react violently if challenged! And in here, the AA's have a LOT of them!
Some are taking just as "to look opposite of what they recognize as their opponents", for AA's this means Christians, such as being "pro-choice", others are plain bull as feminism, lgbt rights, free-for-all economics and so on...
It won't surprise me that in a short these groups start to resource terrorism.
The atheist will typically respond with, “who cares what you assert about God, it still does not answer the question.” And this is a great example of the moment when atheists and Christians begin to talk past one another. For the Christian the question is purely nonsensical, for the atheist it’s pure logical fallacy.
However, you don't have to be a Christian. And you don't really have to be a theist in the religion sense of the word. You can be anybody, and still see that nobody has enough knowledge to say truthfully and factually that God doesn't exist someplace, somehow, somewhere in the universe... and even on earth, possibly.
By this alone, the idea of atheism is, at best, a foolish religion.
Now, if atheism meant simply that you didn't think that God existed, but that you understood that He (She/It) might exist, then atheism would be completely logical. As it is,
Believing in something that is physically provable is a logical position.
Believing in imaginary, unreal, out of this world nonsense is irrational.
Believing that your imaginary friend is real is just being delusional.
Hearing him/her is a symptom of schizophrenia.
There are other mental disorders besides schizophrenia. Which mental disorder keeps you believing in atheism in the face of the fact that you don't know for sure if God exists or not? You keep on talking like you know, but you know that you don't have enough knowledge of the universe to be certain you are right.
If you said, "I don't know," you might be on the track of healthy mentality. But to deny that you don't know, and to take a stance stating that God doesn't exist while you don't know, shows that your mental health is waning.
Atheism is certainty that God doesn't exist. Yet, nobody knows enough about the universe to be certain that He doesn't exist. And in the light of the proof that God DOES exist, atheism is utterly nonsensical. The proof:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
I am pretty sure God does not exist. Can I say with 100% probability that God does not exist? No.
I give God, winged horses, unicorns and fairies the same probability of existence.
What I know with 100% probability is that the God of the Bible, Quran and Talmud does not exist. Those Gods were made up by people.
One hundred percent probability means that you don't know for sure. So, since this is a thread about atheism, does this mean that in your heart, that you aren't quite on target with being an atheist, even though you might adamantly say that you are?
Please explain, with definitions of "atheism" when necessary, where the point is that somebody who thinks that there is a chance that God exists, might stop being an atheist.
Thanks.
