Topic: The problem with atheism. (Read 38498 times)

Moose exist (we have a direct physical evidence). Try unicorn.

Agnosticism: "There might be a unicorn in these woods."
Theism: "There is a unicorn in these woods, but I have no evidence."
Atheism: "There can't possibly, under any circumstance or at any point in time, be a unicorn in these woods, but I have no proof."

I actually like atheists because they have a relatively open minds with logic chippering but what I hate is the religious atheists when they get all religious on me about how theism wasted my life and I would be better off it and if I don't get to be an atheist I will burn in atheists' hell  Roll Eyes.

That's the second-worst analogy I ever heard, and not just because I happen to live right next to a wood that I can confidently state there is no moose in.

Atheism makes no sense. If you want to call yourself an atheist because you don't believe there's a god, that's fine. But to try to claim that there can't be a god is just utterly insane.

In order of logic, from sane to insane:
Agnosticism: "There might be a moose in these woods."
Theism: "There is a moose in these woods, but I have no evidence."
Atheism: "There can't possibly, under any circumstance or at any point in time, be a moose in these woods, but I have no proof."

I respect your opinion and principle sir, you view the world differently in your own perspective, Believing into something we cant see is obviously impossible for you to put your faith into something like that. The point is, you have your own angle of truth, the same with people who believe in "God". They have their own version of truth. Maybe your'e right or maybe your'e wrong at all. Im not sure.
No one can prove anything because both have loopholes.
I believe there's a creator/god. But i respect yours sir.

I beleive firmly, that just as peole have the absolute 'right' to beleifs and religeon and quite rightly to practise and assemble while expreesing their chosen religeon; surely the same rights should be extended equally to atheists?
I can imagine though, the furore one would make, on a soap box in any capital city, espousing very devout atheist views.
For example if an individual (allegedly,) with extreme vitriol had anti Christian, anti Islamic and anti - Hinduism views; and even went so far as bringing a scentific evidential, structured arguement along...They would be carted off by the police for a 'hate crime' or similar. 'Racism' maybe. I personally am Christian, but am playing devils advocate here, because, I do think the status quo is unbalanced.
Sg.

The most problem with atheism is people in our society today who have the atheist point of view on religion, which is the belief that there is no god, are going against the so-called norms of society, and therefore are seen as deviant. Deviance is just an idea. Society determines what is deviant by the ideas they hold of what should be the norm. Atheism is seen as a negative deviance, or below the norm. They have a status that is placed on them in society. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they believe in evil, although that is how it is sometimes viewed from people in society who have a specific religion or faith. Atheism, which is not a new idea, has been evolving in our society, and is the reason for problems leading to debate and court cases, and for discrimination and labeling.

The real problem is not whether there is a God or not. The problem is the English language and the society we have lived in in the last five centuries. The English language is a spellcasting language out of Latin hence the Latin alphabets and why we spell English words.

To understand the meaning of the word God, we have to understand the etymology of the word God and also note that GOD does not = God, god or even Allah. Islamist will understand and this is the reason the Islamist say there's no God but Allah.

There are several definitions of the G, O,  D-word. In some places, it means the highest ranked individual. In some places, it means Guns, Oil and Drugs and so on and so forth depending on who is defining it. So to bring it back to the Christian God which is protested by the Atheist, in the eyes of the church, (the original church being the Catholic), Atheist are protestants and in the eyes of the Protestants, Atheists are simply non-believers. So basically in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. To get a better understanding of the God we speak of now, we need to look at where the word came from. This word 'God' comes out of the word Gothic and Doctrine. So in effect, the word God means Gothic doctoring. a doctoring Germany used to rule Europe for some time until the concept fell apart under the Gothics. It's a known fact that the Germans spread Christianity into eastern Europe but I'll leave that to those of interest to research it.

So to look at it from the meaning of the word, then God does exist. However to put it bluntly when you adopt a culture without from any source you'll have to break it to gain entry or backwards engineer it and eventually lose the security or concept. Religion is one of those concepts. A collection of doctrines and teachings of life, how it began and what we know as people of this plain that fits within our cultural environments perfectly but it's a taboo or forbidden elsewhere. To keep it simple we all know of the Adam and Eve doctrine where the woman is demonised. We also know of Cain and Abel where a brother kills a brother. I won't bother with the Jesus story because that's a whole can of worms although, I am discussing that retrospectively here. All these doctrines are common in many other societies but told from a different perspective except where the woman is demonised. We all came through a woman or were seeded by a man. From my culture, There's no God but several names for the situation or forces of nature but due colonialism Christianity is a so to speak a disease we have to deal with. We have Awurade Nyankopɔn, where the Awurade (Master's) is the female creative force and the Nyankopɔn (Greatest Friend) being the male deity. We also have to adopt the notion that we are the children of both deities (so here we have an example of the holy trinity). Together as one force of nature, the deities are called Ɔnyame (the one who got me, which technicals to Master but as a single entity as in man and wife).

Now let's go to how this became a problem when adapted and named as Christianity or Religion. As the world has grown and we've discovered ancient technology and consequentially hidden it to exchange wealth rather than share the knowledge, we have also discovered cultures with different domestic setups that conflict with ours. Power being corruptive as it is either side would rather be of the other culture based on a number of reasons. Some were to gain authority over their woman or vice-versa. So quarrels are settled in favour of one or the other making one feel rejected by society or distrustful of God because in their doctrine God doesn't look out for them.

Over time people have discovered, questioned and learnt from societies where both deities prevail as one and tried to figure out who is more authoritative or most important. I mean to tell the truth a child has and syncs with their father's Brain but they have their mother's heartbeat and blood (so fathers spirit but mums blood and the two forms the body). The realisation the women in Europe and Asia (These are not two continents, its a single landmass without separation) have been demonised so the need for feminism rises and this is kind of where we are today. Men being forced to be more womanly in terms of motherly nature and women trying to grow a set of balls (no pun intended)

So to conclude, the Atheist problem is the religious-societal domination problem which has led to greed for wealth and ownership. However, the spirituality says that after all the belongings one gathers, on their death bed one takes with them nothing but a single piece of clothing and 6ft squared of space if buried or nothing at all. The church gatherings are just a means to meet new people with same ideas to push forward and general thought. With that said there is no problem but the one created by the church to hide what is in plain sight and allow the influence of alcohol and drugs to destroy one's life. We have to also note the culture you are brought up in determines your end result but you have an input to either listen to advise to become spiritual or non-spiritual and whether you become spiritually good or bad. As in guns don't kill people, people do kind of scenario. The message is basically to honour your mother and father, Easter celebrates the change to having longer days than nights on one side of the plain to another and vice-versa. In effect, the problem is what you been taught and how dossal you have been to it not to look around you and observe nature.

Oh, in Russia there is even article in the constitution - "Insult of feelings of believers", so if I'm atheist and say that - "There is no God", believers can go to the court and submit the application for me (and I can really be put in prison) and it concerns only Christianity (!).
So if you atheist, and believers say to you that it is necessary to believe in God, this is not insult of feelings.
It is dishonest also a game in one gate.

Atheism is the people who believe that life exists without the existence of God and keep giving an equal explanation to all the wonders of this earth. I am wondering when can they give an explanation for all the things happening in this world and how broad their imaginations are to explain life. Religion may be difficult to understand but we should first understand that people cannot live without their own God who can they call on to when life seems harder beyond the capability.

Check out #6 of religion at Dictionary.com - http://www.dictionary.com/browse/religion?s=t. Religion fits everybody.

I really shouldn't ever engage you...

But for the sake of the watchers.

Atheism can be a religion. Religion, at root, means to bind oneself to a creed. Those few atheists who make the claim that there is no god (strong or positive atheists) are indeed claiming a creed, which makes it (sort of)a religion.

However, the vast majority of us in my experience simply do not believe in a god, which is the very opposite of a religion. We do NOT posit that there is no god, but rather that the proofs presented by theists simply lack sufficient evidence.

I am an atheist. I have no gods, and worship no one.

I'm also a religious man in that I MOST ASSUREDLY have a creed that I try to live by. It has no need of gods, nor would it be heightened or lessened by their putative existence.

I know, from previous go 'rounds with you, that you are a christian. At one time, I, too, believed in that fairy tale. But sooner or later, one must grow up. Belief in the unbelievable doesn't make it true. Christianity, like EVERY OTHER THEISTIC RELIGION OUT THERE, is easily disproven. This does not prove or disprove a god or gods, it merely disproves one postulate of a deity.

The simple truth, which most atheists and all theists understand:

If there was a god that wanted to be worshipped, there would be ZERO chance that this debate would ever exist. An all powerful being that desires to be worshipped would not hide it.

Atheists don't realize that atheism is a religion.

Theists instinctively believe that God exists, because they see the universe machine. Machines have makers. Atheists know subconsciously that they see the universe machine, and they instinctively understand that God exists, just like the theists. But they don't like it. So, they try to believe that God doesn't exist, by making many forceful claims that they are atheists. Doing this makes them liars.

Sure, I got another one for you: if we say there are no Unicorns because there is no evidence that they exist, what proof do we have that Unicorns don't exist? None! But is this reason enough to believe that Unicorns exist? For me personally not.

See what I did there? This may be why other people don't share your particular beliefs. The absence of a lack of proof doesn't equal proof.

You are right my friend. The only problem is "the lose of respect" the reason for this, is the different beliefs of all people whether you are a man with religion or an atheist. For me the atheists and the theists are both similar if they don't have respect to anyone and the dead is better than these living creatures. To be in silence and adopting the nature is better than creating noise with no respect.

Damn, it's amazing how you complicated value of an atheism. Atheism is way of rationality and logic with no religions and faith in the supernatural order of things. It's only question of choice to be an atheist or religious believer. Just try to keep your world outlook with yourself.

Yeah, but the kind of liberal thinking people make at the very best 5% of the population.
And i was dipped and grew up in an extremely catholic environment, but that hasnt restricted me from using my tiny brain and imagination.

Atheism has not always been publicly proclaimed. Often, the ungodly have walked to a church, participated in the worship, were hypocritical to others. Their unbelief is mostly recognized in cases that have been in complete contradiction with the ethics of Christianity.

An atheist prefers rebirth. Why do they prefer her? As it is known, they are strongly attached to the earthly goods and joys. By believing in rebirth, they live in the hope that they will return to this material world

The problem isn't with atheism. The problem is with atheists. Why? Because they talk like they believe in atheism. But they don't, because all of them know that God might exists somewhere they haven't looked yet.

Self-proclaimed atheists are liars, although many of them are not maliciously so. And for the same reason, those who proclaim others to atheists are liars, as well.