what is atheism?

by Zep 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Zep

  I use to think that atheism was a denial of the existence of God, or any divine deity...whatever, take your pick. However, i now believe this is not the full picture.

  Atheism is the denial that any proof exists to confirm the existence of God. It doesn't deny that God may exist, only that there is no proof of his existence, and therefore no reason to believe.

  Some guy called Clash_city_rocker, or whatever, seems to think that atheism is dogmatic. huh???? What is so dogmatic about my definition of atheism, which I believe is actually the correct definition.

  Having said that, there really seems to be no difference between atheism and agnosticism.

  agnostics are really just closet atheists to me. Thats how i'm seeing it. there really is no difference between the two. Or am I wrong here??????????
• 

  Sirona

  Atheism is the denial that any proof exists to confirm the existence of God.

  Wierd. I do not believe that there is any 100% proof of God's existence, but I am certainly not atheist.

  Just because there is no scientifically verifyable proof - I still pray and believe.

  Sirona (of the Pagan Atheist class)
• 

  Gopher

  I want to be sure we have our definition straight.

  ATHEISM is defined:

  NOUN:

  1a. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. b. The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 2. Godlessness; immorality.

  It comes from a Greek term broken into "a-", which means "without", and "theos" which of course means God.

  So atheism is literally "without God". There seems to be no room for doubt in the atheist's mind that there is no God, no supreme being.

  Agnosticism, on the other hand, comes from the Greek roots "a-" and "gnosis" which means knowledge. This indicates that the agnostic believes we cannot have knowledge as to whether God exists or not.

  So by definition there is a sharp distinction between the atheist and the agnostic. The atheist is more sure (some are even dogmatically sure) that no God exists.
• 

  Gopher

  Sirona you sound agnostic to me. And your post is proof that some agnostics do pray.
• 

  Sirona

  No, I didn't say we could not have knowledge of God's existence - I said that we don't have 100% proof. I personally feel I have experienced divine presence - but I admit that it isn't scientifically proveable. Therefore I am not agnostic.

  Sirona
• 

  Gopher

  Oh SIRONA!! You got my head spinning so early in the morning! Let me come back and re-read it later. "Not 100% proof -- not agnostic" d'oh! Stop messing with my mind... it's too early. (No offense intended, I'm just a sleepyhead.)

  If this mystery can be unravelled, maybe it'll help me know who/what I am.
• 

  rebel

  This is an interesting subject. We can't really know 100% if God exists as we would like him to exist. For instance, I am pretty sure that, when you look at creation, it proves there is a creator. Our planet is teeming with life. Look at the creatures on land, sea and air - we don't know a tiny fraction of them. Then there is plant life which seems to go on and on. Yet, we don't seem to have found another planet like ours. The earth is so special. In my mind, that points to a creator.

  I would really like to believe in God as he comes across in the Bible (the NT anyway - not too sure about the God of the OT - a bit too violent for my liking) and I like the teachings of Jesus. I used to believe in God (I think - not too sure really as I was pretty mixed up) but now I am not so sure. I find it hard to think that a god of love could allow the world to get into such a state. I am sick of the same people being trampled on by the same people with the big boots - life really stinks at times and it is always the innocent, weak, old, young etc who suffer the most - mainly at the hands of the bully with the biggest gob. Would a loving God really condone this? I believe our creator is powerful and would like to believe he is going to act to cleanse the earth some day but there is no definite proof really - just my thoughts.

  xxR
• 

  Zep

  Gopher,

  your above definitions seem to be fair. And I dont to nit pick here, but I probably am gunna.

  I moreorless consider myself to be an atheist. Atleast thats what I told the mormons that came to my door the other day. I dont think there are any Gods of the traditional kind around, thats what I feel in my gut based on the evidence at hand. Though I do allow for the fact that they may exist (however unlikey), or that there may be a being/creature around in the great cosmos that could fit the definition of 'God'. Just show me the evidence and I'll believe, thats all I say. Until then, I cant.

  And just to add to this. If you want to define 'God' as the 'unity of the cosmos', or as 'nature', or as something 'within' man/woman, then maybe I'm a theist?

  so...

  After having done a little more research here:

  http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/intro.html#atheisms

  It seems i am what is called a 'weak atheist', though not all the time.

  Atheism is defined as:

  '...an absence of belief in the existence of gods.'

  to hold the above position would be enough to qualify you as a 'weak atheist'

  Some atheists go to the point where they 'actively believe that particular gods, or all gods, do not exist'. This postion is called the 'strong atheist' postion. This would sum me in respect to Christianity.

  So to put it all in a nutshell:

  "Weak atheism" is simple scepticism; disbelief in the existence of God. "Strong atheism" is an explicitly held belief that God does not exist.

  So says infidels.org

  An agnostic can be defined as:

  "someone who believes that we do not and cannot know for sure whether God exists."

  I'll go so far as to agree that we "do not" know, atleast in certain cases, as to whether a certain God exists or not. But I dont agree that we "cannot know" whether a certain God exists, unless some evidence is provided that proves we cannot know.

  An agnostic can also be defined as someone who:

  believes that the evidence for or against God is inconclusive, and therefore is undecided about the issue.

  I guess this could define me in a certain sense too.

  So to sum up. I believe that some Gods do absolutely not exist, and I think the evidence bears this out. I think for others Gods, there is no evidence they exist, and therefore no reason to believe, though I allow for the fact they may exist while at the same time doubting it in the extreme. Other times I think that the evidence is inconclusive either way on the matter of Gods existence and I therefore remain undecided as to whether God exists or not. And still other times, depending on how you want to define the term 'GOD', I am a theist.

  So maybe it could be said I am:

  25% strong atheist
  25% weak atheist
  25% empirical agnostic
  25% theist

  It all depends on what day you catch me, and what religion we are talking about, I suppose. But I usually call myself an atheist.

  I've never really made sense to begin with. I dont see why I should start now!
• 

  Gopher

  Zep,

  That was interesting! There is a blurring of lines between "weak atheist" and "agnostic". I had never considered that there were different flavors of atheists. But I guess that makes certain sense.

  I guess it's good to keep an open mind. That's so different from when we were JW's and had to have all the answers or else we'd be considered "weak". Open-mindedness to me is not a sign of weakness, but rather of inquisitiveness which can lead to stronger foundations for your belief system.
• 

  rem

  Great summary, Zep!

  I don't really have anything to add. We seem to have similar thoughts on the issue.

  rem