Atheism: What does it mean?

[Caroljeen]

Merriam- Webster:definition:
a: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods

What does it mean to lack a belief in God?


This correction /addition to my post by @Judges13:18 in another thread is why I ask:

...an atheist looking for ways to discredit the Bible.

...in order to serve a personal agenda, not because they really think God does not exist.

Atheisim is not real.

YOU said "formative," Edit Boy. All Jews until Acts 10. GET A BIBLE! Yes... I did. Meant it too. The religion you know was formed after that. You haven’t got a clue what the apostles taught. They wasted a whole book not telling you what the lessons were. Real helpful uselessness. Even...

forums.carm.org

 

[Torin]

@Caroljeen, the way your post is formatted is confusing. Since your quote does not appear in a quote box, it makes it look as if you, rather than Judges, are accusing atheists of discrediting the Bible to serve a personal agenda. I recommend clarifying that for your own sake, because it's a really stupid accusation.

Atheism is a lack of belief in God. The dictionary and some other sources still have definitions like belief that God does not exist as a holdover from Christianity. If you go back far enough to when Christians had more sway, you can find dictionary entries about atheism that are basically just theological rants. Dictionaries have power over how we use language, which is sometimes used to influence thought patterns.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Atheism is a lack of belief in God.

It must be much more than that for the atheists who frequent this board. I lack belief in Bigfoot, but wouldn't dream of posting anti-Bigfoot posts daily for years on a Bigfoot discussion board. There might be a "doth protest too much" element in these atheist obsessions.

 

[The Pixie]

What does it mean to lack a belief in God?

Think about your lack of belief for unicorns or goblins. It is like that.

Some atheists choose to argue about, some do not. But either way it is atheism; a lack of belief in God.

This correction /addition to my post by @Judges13:18 in another thread is why I ask:

...in order to serve a personal agenda, not because they really think God does not exist.

This is Christian propaganda. Christians have to rationalise why people reject their beliefs, and one way they do that is to pretend evil atheists actually know God exists, but they love sin so much that they reject him. It is sometimes justified by something Paul wrote, that everyone knows God exists, but that does not make it actually true. Atheists do not love sin, they tend to be no more immoral than Christians.

Atheists just do not believe God exists.

 

[Gus Bovona]

deleted

 

[Temujin]

It must be much more than that for the atheists who frequent this board. I lack belief in Bigfoot, but wouldn't dream of posting anti-Bigfoot posts daily for years on a Bigfoot discussion board. There might be a "doth protest too much" element in these atheist obsessions.

That could be because Bigfoot believers don't promote corrosive and immoral changes to public policy based on what they declare are Bigfoot's wishes. Nor do they justify discrimination against some sections of the community based on what they declare are Bigfoot's demands regarding sexual morality. Nor do the say that everyone believes in Bigfoot and those that refuse to acknowledge this do so because they just want to defy Bigfoot's authority and do things that they know Bigfoot would disapprove of. Nor do they declare that this is a Bigfoot believing nation, that denying Bigfoot should be grounds discrimination, that Bigfoot should be taught in schools despite the science that shows that Bigfoot doesn't exist.

Incidentally, I would consider Bigfoot to be far more plausible than God, though I appreciate you putting the two together in the same category of cryptids.

 

[Temujin]

Merriam- Webster:definition:
a: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods

What does it mean to lack a belief in God?


This correction /addition to my post by @Judges13:18 in another thread is why I ask:


...in order to serve a personal agenda, not because they really think God does not exist.

Atheisim is not real.

YOU said "formative," Edit Boy. All Jews until Acts 10. GET A BIBLE! Yes... I did. Meant it too. The religion you know was formed after that. You haven’t got a clue what the apostles taught. They wasted a whole book not telling you what the lessons were. Real helpful uselessness. Even...

forums.carm.org

I quite agree. An atheist has no real business discrediting the bible except where they are using implausibility of the bible to justify their own atheism, or in defence of for example, evolution, against someone who is using Bible quotes to contradict science. The Bible is no more discreditable than the Koran, and should be respected in a similar way by believers and non-believers alike as something which many humans find to be sacred.

 

[TrvmpleVnSnvkes]

No such thing as an atheist. ‘Atheists’ make an idol of politics, news/entertainment/social media, self, celebrities, money..many things. And most ‘Christians’ as well for that matter. Most people nowadays bow down to their smartphone all day. No such thing as an atheist, just those who serve false idols/other gods.

 

[Gus Bovona]

No such thing as an atheist. ‘Atheists’ make an idol of politics, news/entertainment/social media, self, celebrities, money..many things. And most ‘Christians’ as well for that matter. Most people nowadays bow down to their smartphone all day. No such thing as an atheist, just those who serve false idols/other gods.

You're equivocating on two different meanings of the word "god": (1) a supernatural deity who created the universe, and (2) things people are devoted to in their lives. We sometimes say that people worship both 1 & 2, but there are significant differences between 1 & 2. ETA: The significant difference is that the word "atheism" only refers to 1, and not 2.

 

[Caroljeen]

@Caroljeen, the way your post is formatted is confusing. Since your quote does not appear in a quote box, it makes it look as if you, rather than Judges, are accusing atheists of discrediting the Bible to serve a personal agenda. I recommend clarifying that for your own sake, because it's a really stupid accusation.

My response was to 5wize who, imo, frequently attempts to discredit the Bible. That's fine if that's what he wants to do. Judges responded to what I wrote with "...in order to serve a personal agenda, not because they really think God does not exist." The thing that bothered me with Judge's response was the implication that atheists might think that God exists (he used a double negative). I think 5wize tries to discredit the Bible because he does think that God does not exist and therefore the Bible, in his opinion, is completely the work of the minds of men.

I left the link to the discussion as well. I didn't realize it was confusing.

Atheism is a lack of belief in God. The dictionary and some other sources still have definitions like belief that God does not exist as a holdover from Christianity. If you go back far enough to when Christians had more sway, you can find dictionary entries about atheism that are basically just theological rants. Dictionaries have power over how we use language, which is sometimes used to influence thought patterns.

A lack of belief in God is like a lack of belief in any fairy tale or myth. Isn't that the same as saying "I don't believe in God."?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

That could be because Bigfoot believers don't promote corrosive and immoral changes to public policy based on what they declare are Bigfoot's wishes.

Nor do Christians. Quite the opposite. See pro-life vs, pro-abortion movement.

Nor do they justify discrimination against some sections of the community based on what they declare are Bigfoot's demands regarding sexual morality.

Nor do Christians.

Nor do the say that everyone believes in Bigfoot and those that refuse to acknowledge this do so because they just want to defy Bigfoot.

Nor do I or most Christians I know. But even if I did, why the obsession about atheism?

 

[TrvmpleVnSnvkes]

You're equivocating on two different meanings of the word "god": (1) a supernatural deity who created the universe, and (2) things people are devoted to in their lives. We sometimes say that people worship both 1 & 2, but there are significant differences between 1 & 2. ETA: The significant difference is that the word "atheism" only refers to 1, and not 2.

Biblically speaking, a god could be anything one puts first in their life or believes that thing is ultimately in control. I don’t use secular definitions in spiritual matters.

 

[Gus Bovona]

Biblically speaking, a god could be anything one puts first in their life or believes that thing is ultimately in control. I don’t use secular definitions in spiritual matters.

I can work with your definition. It's a little hard, though, because I find it difficult to figure out what I would put first in my life; first of all, what exactly does "put first" mean? I can only imagine it means something if you pit one thing versus another, and then see which is prioritized. But what about different scenarios? I can imagine that different circumstances would make me prioritize different things. So if in one scenario I favor A over B, but in another scenario I favor B over A, how do I decide which I'm putting first?

For believing a thing that is ultimately in control, do you mean in control of one's life? Or something else?

 

[5wize]

My response was to 5wize who, imo, frequently attempts to discredit the Bible. That's fine if that's what he wants to do. Judges responded to what I wrote with "...in order to serve a personal agenda, not because they really think God does not exist." The thing that bothered me with Judge's response was the implication that atheists might think that God exists (he used a double negative). I think 5wize tries to discredit the Bible because he does think that God does not exist and therefore the Bible, in his opinion, is completely the work of the minds of men.

I left the link to the discussion as well. I didn't realize it was confusing.

A lack of belief in God is like a lack of belief in any fairy tale or myth. Isn't that the same as saying "I don't believe in God."?

Yes, Judges needs to reduce all challenges he can’t directly handle into comfortable Christian bromides that are cozy for him. Then he strikes out from there as if the challenge has been met.

I don’t discredit the Bible to discredit the existence of god. Those would be different arguments of a different type. More cosmological, teleological, sociological, and psychological as well as comparing the natural world to whatever the god claim was.

But when it comes to Bible debunking, Judges is correct in that it is an agenda. When I was exposed to the Bible - pretty extensively, and zealously... I seriously couldn’t believe that adults, pounding and proselytizing at me, actually believed this stuff and would dare to think they had some strength of argument based in it. As a defense against that, I enjoyed learning about it, how this whole juggernaut came to be and why it holds sway - in whole cultures and singular adult mature minds. Judges just reminds me of the rote evangelical zealots I’ve met and puzzled at. I enjoy exposing the errors and contradictions and problems of scripture to evangelicals and watching them get wrapped around themselves in bizarre apologetic.

 

[TrvmpleVnSnvkes]

I can work with your definition. It's a little hard, though, because I find it difficult to figure out what I would put first in my life; first of all, what exactly does "put first" mean? I can only imagine it means something if you pit one thing versus another, and then see which is prioritized. But what about different scenarios? I can imagine that different circumstances would make me prioritize different things. So if in one scenario I favor A over B, but in another scenario I favor B over A, how do I decide which I'm putting first?

For believing a thing that is ultimately in control, do you mean in control of one's life? Or something else?

Anything put before The Most High is an idol. Could be a spouse, a pet. A career, TV show, drug addiction, anything. Where does most of your thought, love, devotion, resources, and energy go? That’s who you serve..that’s your god.

Control of anything really. For example, many people believe it is politicians or ‘the elites’ or whatever who are in control. To an extent people are in control of their own life, they can make choices..good or bad. Sometimes God protects us (believers or not) from some of the bad decisions we make. I know He has. Not to say, there won’t be consequences though. But He is merciful to everyone, believer or not. It isn’t always so visible.

 

[Gus Bovona]

Anything put before The Most High is an idol. Could be a spouse, a pet. A career, TV show, drug addiction, anything. Where does most of your thought, love, devotion, resources, and energy go? That’s who you serve..that’s your god.

Why does it have to be a single thing? What if several things all get approximately the same level of attention?

Also, you're using "idol" and "god" as synonyms. Is that what you intend?

Control of anything really. For example, many people believe it is politicians or ‘the elites’ or whatever who are in control. To an extent people are in control of their own life, they can make choices..good or bad.

I consider that different people and different things are in control, depending on what you talk about. I don't see that any one thing is in control generally.

Sometimes God protects us (believers or not) from some of the bad decisions we make. I know He has. Not to say, there won’t be consequences though. But He is merciful to everyone, believer or not. It isn’t always so visible.

 

[TrvmpleVnSnvkes]

Why does it have to be a single thing? What if several things all get approximately the same level of attention?

Also, you're using "idol" and "god" as synonyms. Is that what you intend?


I consider that different people and different things are in control, depending on what you talk about. I don't see that any one thing is in control generally.

I never said it has to be a single thing. Most people have multiple false gods they serve. Mainly self and mammon (in the west anyway).

Yeah that is what I intend, it appears the scriptures use idol/god interchangeably. As in describing false gods of course. Like I say in spiritual matters I only go by spiritual definitions, not worldly.

Well I can understand your last point. But I don’t believe a single thing comes to pass unless God allows it. And if it is His desire for something to come to pass, there’s not anything that anyone can do to prevent it.

 

[SteveB]

This is Christian propaganda. Christians have to rationalise why people reject their beliefs,

no, actually we don't have to rationalize anything about atheism.
King David did it for us 3000 years ago.
twice. Well, at least twice.
there are several other locations throughout the old testament which are pretty clear.

Psa 14:1 WEB The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt. They have done abominable deeds. There is no one who does good.

Psa 53:1 WEB The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and have done abominable iniquity. There is no one who does good.

it's pretty basic.
H5036 search
Original: נבל

Transliteration: nâbâl

Phonetic: naw-bawl'

BDB Definition:

foolish, senseless, fool
Origin: from H5034

TWOT entry: 1285a

Part(s) of speech: Adjective

Strong's Definition: From H5034; stupid ; wicked (especially impious): - fool (-ish, -ish man, -ish woman), vile person.

I'll definitely agree with the idea that someone would be willing to acknowledge that they're stupid, thick-skulled, senseless, lacking mental awareness.... would be a painful realization.
But instead of doing so, and turning away from such, the atheists here dive right in, and go for the proverbial gusto of shear "nabal."

and one way they do that is to pretend evil atheists actually know God exists, but they love sin so much that they reject him.

Actually, we don't pretend any such thing.
that's what king David, and Paul both stated.

It is sometimes justified by something Paul wrote, that everyone knows God exists, but that does not make it actually true.

actually, what makes it true is that God breathed that statement into Paul’s mind to write it.

So, in fact, God is stating it through Paul.

Atheists do not love sin, they tend to be no more immoral than Christians.

what do you think sin is?
do you like screwing around with someone you're not married to?
are you greedy? Covetous? You clearly have no problem whatsoever with blaspheming YHVH because you believe he killed children in the flood of Noah.

Atheists just do not believe God exists.

Yet here you are spending your life arguing with strangers about it.

Something seems cognitively dissonant about that.

 

[Caroljeen]

Think about your lack of belief for unicorns or goblins. It is like that.

I do lack a belief in unicorns and goblins or I could say I don't believe in unicorns and goblins. It means the same thing to me.

Some atheists choose to argue about, some do not. But either way it is atheism; a lack of belief in God.

I'm not looking for an argument in this thread.

This is Christian propaganda. Christians have to rationalise why people reject their beliefs, and one way they do that is to pretend evil atheists actually know God exists, but they love sin so much that they reject him. It is sometimes justified by something Paul wrote, that everyone knows God exists, but that does not make it actually true. Atheists do not love sin, they tend to be no more immoral than Christians.

I've been in your shoes. I understand what you are saying.

Atheists just do not believe God exists.

Is saying "a lack of belief in God" equate to "do not believe God exists"? I think it is.

 

[Tiburon]

It must be much more than that for the atheists who frequent this board. I lack belief in Bigfoot, but wouldn't dream of posting anti-Bigfoot posts daily for years on a Bigfoot discussion board. There might be a "doth protest too much" element in these atheist obsessions.

Do believers in Bigfoot try to tell you that his existence means you have to live a certain way? Do they try to influence political candidates and law makers to benefit themselves and force others to comply with their beliefs?