Is there such a thing as an atheist?

[Percepi]

I think you will find that you said atheists want what is best for other people. The word generally was not in the comment and as I have shown they don't want what is the best for other people. What they want is the best for other people as long as it does not include anything to do with christianity.

I notice that they are never suing Islamic organisations. I guess they don't want a brick though their windows or a gun up their noses.

1. you're generalizing again.

2. If I did say "atheists want what is best" without the word generally, then I apologize for not being specific.

3. You have proven one atheist group tried to remove religion from a public school. If they tried to prohibit these students from donating to this organization outside of school, most atheists would defend the Christians rights to do so.

4. The reason atheists generally discuss Christianity rather than Islam is because Christianity is the most common religion in first world, English speaking, nations. Christianity also has a huge impact on America - Islam does not. But that's not to say atheists ignore Muslims. Remember the pastor who burned the Koran? Many of the people who defended his right to do so were atheists.

Anyway, I'm done for the night.

 

[Angela53510]

I think as Christians, we should always be modeling Christ. Christ did not condemn atheists, but the legalist who were the Pharisees in his day. Although Psalm 14 talks about the fool saying in his heart that there is no god, so there must have been a few around, maybe hiding, in his day.

So let us show God's love to those who do not profess Christ. We cannot judge whether God will change their hearts. But I guarantee if we show hatred, and curse them, they will have absolutely no reason to even investigate the claims of Christ in their lives.

I was an atheist for about 10 years. I got very depressed, I had no encouragement or fellowship as a Christian, and I was being abused at home. At 16, I made the decision to try being bad, and rejected God. Now, I am not saying because of my experience that there are not moral atheists, I have met several. But for me, becoming an atheist went hand in hand with practicing sin, because I was depressed trying to be "moral" so I figured I would try having "fun" and I knew I had to reject God to do that.

So I lived a life of sin and evil. Which had its own consequences. Then a revival happened, and I saw people converted from atheism, Hinduism, Buddhism and all manner of cults. But although I knew they believed in God, I did not believe in God. They also shared the love, holiness and the gospel in a manner that planted seeds.

Then God reached down and the seeds bloomed and he revealed himself to me, and the harvest was complete in my heart. So my heart goes out to anyone who is suffering, dying of cancer like St_Sebastian. I pray for many of our atheist members to know God, but I know that will take a miracle, and only God can do those miracles. Salvation comes from God, but we can certainly reach out in love to those who have taken the chance to come into a Christian forum, to find ???

(As far someone mentioning Richard Dawkins not believing science has anything to say about God, as was said in an earlier post, I think that person (Cycel?) has forgotten the God Delusion. Dawkins so carefully tries to dismantle faith in God, (particularly the Christian God) by using science as his only weapon. The book was so full of holes, I am told it was actually an embarrassment to true scientists who were atheists. And Darwin's theories might have been novel in the 18th century, but they have been thoroughly debunked by modern atheist scientists. No mechanism for speciation has been found, which he said would cause his entire theory to crash to the ground, and it remains broken in pieces. Darwin has been relegated to "folk science" along with people like Dawkins, who is a pseudo scientist at best! And sorry if this does not seem "loving" or "Christ-like." If you need some links for the above, I will try and find them. I learned about this while studying science, from atheists in University. There are reputable atheist scientists, although I do not agree with them. Dawkins and Darwin are not among those ranks!)

 

[mustaphadrink]

You're referring to liberals (many of whom, are atheists - but not all).

No I am not. I am referring to atheists as I never mentioned liberals especially as I am a liberal.

 

[mustaphadrink]

1. you're generalizing again..

No I am not. I have only spoken about atheists and atheism.

 

[mustaphadrink]

3. You have proven one atheist group tried to remove religion from a public school. If they tried to prohibit these students from donating to this organization outside of school, most atheists would defend the Christians rights to do so.

And I have many more examples of atheists sticking their noses in where they are not wanted so it seems to be a trend with atheists if christianity is involved.

 

[mustaphadrink]

4. The reason atheists generally discuss Christianity rather than Islam is because Christianity is the most common religion in first world, English speaking, nations. Christianity also has a huge impact on America - Islam does not. But that's not to say atheists ignore Muslims. Remember the pastor who burned the Koran? Many of the people who defended his right to do so were atheists.

The reason atheists do not take on muslims is because they are not so accommodating as christians. When Islam takes over the USA, then you will have a real problem because they will be the ones telling you what to do whether you like it or not.

 

[Cycel]

I think as Christians, we should always be modeling Christ. Christ did not condemn atheists, but the legalist who were the Pharisees in his day. Although Psalm 14 talks about the fool saying in his heart that there is no god, so there must have been a few around, maybe hiding, in his day.

I can't imagine that there were many atheists at all in that era. I wonder if it might not make more sense to think Paul was actually making reference to pagans or perhaps even to Jews who denied the deity of Christ, or even to heretical Christians. Remember, the Romans accused the Christians of atheism, simply because they denied the pagan gods. Perhaps Paul was defining non-belief the same way and meant only those who denied the reality of the Godhead as he understood it? Where does Paul talk about confronting atheists? He doesn't. His issues are all with other Christians, who have the message wrong, or with Jews, or pagans.

Your thoughts?

 

[Percepi]

No I am not. I am referring to atheists as I never mentioned liberals especially as I am a liberal.

You mentioned atheists, but not all atheists fit the description you provided. In fact, your description better fits liberals.

No I am not. I have only spoken about atheists and atheism.

You're generalizing atheists and atheism. When you see one atheist group do something you dislike, you assume all atheists hold those views. To be an atheist, all you literally need to do is lack a belief in a higher power. Every single other view you might have is irrelevant when it comes to defining whether or not you're an atheist.

And I have many more examples of atheists sticking their noses in where they are not wanted so it seems to be a trend with atheists if christianity is involved.

So what? What a few atheists or atheist organizations do does NOT define atheism as a whole. Keep in mind "atheist" groups are often more than just that. They often represent people who are anti-religious, or secular, etc.

As I said before, to be an atheist, all you have to do is lack belief in an entity. You do not have to belong in any sub-group. You do not have to belong in an anti-religious group. You don't even have to belong to a particular group of atheism.

The reason atheists do not take on muslims is because they are not so accommodating as christians. When Islam takes over the USA, then you will have a real problem because they will be the ones telling you what to do whether you like it or not.

Obviously, you have never heard of Draw Muhammad Day. It's an event both atheists and Christians alike draw different likenesses of Muhammad as a way of expressing freedom of speech. This stemmed from the deaths of artists who have drawn Muhammad to the dissatisfaction of radical Muslims.

Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Islam has an incredibly weak presence in America, and radical Muslims are close to none (though there are a few in America, don't get me wrong). That's the reason why you don't see too many atheists speaking out against Islam in America, because there are barely any Muslims.

(As far someone mentioning Richard Dawkins not believing science has anything to say about God, as was said in an earlier post, I think that person (Cycel?) has forgotten the God Delusion. Dawkins so carefully tries to dismantle faith in God, (particularly the Christian God) by using science as his only weapon. The book was so full of holes, I am told it was actually an embarrassment to true scientists who were atheists.

I've read The God Delusion. It doesn't use science to attempt to disprove God. It talks about the impact of religion (specifically Christianity) on society.

Whoever gave you that information about The God Delusion has clearly never read the book before. There's no reason for scientists to be offended with the book because Dawkins doesn't attempt to use science in it. He uses history and philosophy.

And Darwin's theories might have been novel in the 18th century, but they have been thoroughly debunked by modern atheist scientists.

Completely untrue.

Also, the theory of evolution is completely irrelevant when it comes to discussing atheism.

No mechanism for speciation has been found, which he said would cause his entire theory to crash to the ground

Pseudogenes
Atavisms
Fossils
Homology
ERV's
Embryology
Vestigial organs, behaviors, etc..
Phylogenetic Trees
Cytochrome C
Human Chromosome 2 - Fusion
Geographical Distribution of Species

Darwin has been relegated to "folk science" along with people like Dawkins, who is a pseudo scientist at best! And sorry if this does not seem "loving" or "Christ-like."

Don't worry, you're only coming off as severely misinformed.

If you need some links for the above, I will try and find them. I learned about this while studying science, from atheists in University.

That's odd, because almost all scientists (including atheists, Christians, Hindus, etc.) accept the theory of evolution. What university did you go to anyway? Who were these atheists who taught you about evolution? Teachers or peers? And did they teach you evolution was wrong, or did they teach you about how evolution is a proven fact while you were skimming answersingenesis?

 

[Cycel]

The reason atheists do not take on muslims is because they are not so accommodating as christians.

As an atheist I think Islam is a lot of nonsense, but my background is Christian. I have no knowledge of Islam and would really have a difficult time debating the matter. Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and other well known atheists have and do attack Islam, but again, their backgrounds are Christian. They were raised as Christians and so they have a minimal understanding of that other religion. I don't know whether you ever listen to atheist debates, but if you did you would learn that Islam is often a target. On the other hand there are those atheists, who were themselves former Muslims, who go after Islam exclusively; and yes, they do it at great risk to themselves.

 

[phil112]

Here is one for you avowed atheists: Read Pascals Wager, if you haven't already, and tell me what you think about it.

 

[Cycel]

(As far someone mentioning Richard Dawkins not believing science has anything to say about God, as was said in an earlier post, I think that person (Cycel?) has forgotten the God Delusion.

Hi Angela, yes that was me.

Did you know that Dawkins has said he cannot reject the existence of God with 100% certainty? He has also said that science does not disprove God's existence. Dawkins would say that science says nothing about God.

I have read The God Delusion. Dawkins attempts to undermine belief in God by quoting the Bible, not by quoting science. Yes, he will say that the creation account of Genesis is myth and is undermined by science, but liberally minded Christians say the same thing. Does Dawkins think that evolution disproves God? No he doesn't. He simply thinks that evolution explains things better and makes God unnecessary.

Dawkins so carefully tries to dismantle faith in God, (particularly the Christian God) by using science as his only weapon.

Do you have an example of what you mean? It's been two or three years since I read the book, but I have a copy here, so if you can supply a quote I can look it up.

The book was so full of holes, I am told it was actually an embarrassment to true scientists who were atheists.

Not an embarrassment, but there was one atheist scientist who is conducting brain research on religious belief and was very disappointed that Dawkins ignored his research.

And Darwin's theories might have been novel in the 18th century, but they have been thoroughly debunked by modern atheist scientists.

You mean the 19th century, but regardless, this is false. Your sources have led you astray. Trust me, no one has debunked Darwin.

No mechanism for speciation has been found, which he said would cause his entire theory to crash to the ground, and it remains broken in pieces.

Again, this is false.

Darwin has been relegated to "folk science" along with people like Dawkins, who is a pseudo scientist at best!

Again, you sources are bad. Dawkins is in fact a mainstream evolutionary biologist.

I am familiar with a number of evolutionary scientists who creationists have tried to claim have undermined Darwinism, but the claim is false. Stephen J. Gould is one that is regularly sited, but I have read a lot of Gould's works and know that he was saying no such thing. He is frequently quote mined to make it look like he is saying something he is not. The problem is people such as yourself, who haven't read Gould thoroughly (except for the quote mined bits) won't know that you are being hoodwinked.

 

[Cycel]

Here is one for you avowed atheists: Read Pascals Wager, if you haven't already, and tell me what you think about it.

I am quite familiar with Pascal's Wager. Why do you think this argument is persuasive?

 

[doseofreality]

That's me. I haven't bothered because an atheist on a christian thread is senseless. Some of those leach over into the other threads, which is why I started this. Why is an "atheist" on here in the first place? Because they know there is something they are missing. Either that or to cause trouble. Take your pick. I emphatically reject atheism and embrace Christ, and I want everyone to see that so that they will know something is missing in their life.

I must point out how ridiculous this statement is, no offence to you @phil112 but clearly the term "atheism" is way overused and not clearly defined at all.

You CANNOT reject atheism because atheism IS the rejection...its like a double negative.

Its very simple, you either believe in a god or you dont.
The one who believes is called a theist
The one who rejects the belief in a god is called an atheist.

So obviously an "atheist" can exist.

Also these terms are very general, if we get specific then the term "atheist" should apply to all non-christians who reject belief in the God of the bible.
A christian is an "atheist" regarding belief in the gods Allah, Krishna, Zues, Thor, Osiris, and so on.

I think from now on I will no longer use the term atheist.... I am simply not a christian nor am i a believer in any other religion

 

[mustaphadrink]

You mentioned atheists, but not all atheists fit the description you provided. In fact, your description better fits liberals.

As atheists do not speak for other atheists (so I have been told) then your comment is nothing more than your own personal opinion.

You're generalizing atheists and atheism. When you see one atheist group do something you dislike, you assume all atheists hold those views. To be an atheist, all you literally need to do is lack a belief in a higher power. Every single other view you might have is irrelevant when it comes to defining whether or not you're an atheist.

That is your opinion as one atheist does not speak for another atheist. (so I am told).

So what? What a few atheists or atheist organizations do does NOT define atheism as a whole. Keep in mind "atheist" groups are often more than just that. They often represent people who are anti-religious, or secular, etc.

But....as you do not speak for other atheists (so I am told) I take it that is your opinion and no more.

As I said before, to be an atheist, all you have to do is lack belief in an entity. You do not have to belong in any sub-group. You do not have to belong in an anti-religious group. You don't even have to belong to a particular group of atheism.

As this is only your opinion not necessarily subscribed to by other atheists, I don't need to take any notice of it.

Islam has an incredibly weak presence in America, and radical Muslims are close to none (though there are a few in America, don't get me wrong). That's the reason why you don't see too many atheists speaking out against Islam in America, because there are barely any Muslims.

Just your opinion so I will say thanks but no thanks.

I've read The God Delusion. It doesn't use science to attempt to disprove God. It talks about the impact of religion (specifically Christianity) on society.

Whoever gave you that information about The God Delusion has clearly never read the book before. There's no reason for scientists to be offended with the book because Dawkins doesn't attempt to use science in it. He uses history and philosophy.

As I have read atheists who say otherwise, I guess you don't speak for all or any of them.

Also, the theory of evolution is completely irrelevant when it comes to discussing atheism.

As there are many atheists who fight to the death to defend evolution I guess I would have to say that your view is just one opinion that only holds water for you.

Don't worry, you're only coming off as severely misinformed.

That is your opinion, not necessarily held by others.

That's odd, because almost all scientists (including atheists, Christians, Hindus, etc.) accept the theory of evolution. What university did you go to anyway? Who were these atheists who taught you about evolution? Teachers or peers? And did they teach you evolution was wrong, or did they teach you about how evolution is a proven fact while you were skimming answersingenesis?

Yes, that is one point of view but as you don't speak for any other atheist, we will treat it as your opinion and not place too much emphasis on it.

 

[mustaphadrink]

You CANNOT reject atheism because atheism IS the rejection...its like a double negative.

I must point out how ridiculous that statement it. Taken to its logical conclusion you CANNOT reject christianity because christianity is the rejection of...atheism.

 

[mustaphadrink]

I think from now on I will no longer use the term atheist.... I am simply not a christian nor am i a believer in any other religion

That is where most atheists go wrong as everyone believes in something. Whatever you worship is your God. Some young men worship their cars. A lot of people in Australia worship Australian Rules Footy. I know a couple of twins who worship fishing. Every weekend hail or shine they are out fishing. There are a vast number of people who worship Justin Beiber. Vast numbers of atheists worship themselves judging by the fact that they insist they know everything and everyone else knows nothing. In the UK, Football is their religion and some players are worshipped like gods.

The fact is dose of unreality, you do worship something or someone. You are just not honest enough to admit it.

 

[doseofreality]

I must point out how ridiculous that statement it. Taken to its logical conclusion you CANNOT reject christianity because christianity is the rejection of...atheism.

christianity is not a rejection of anything, it proposes a new claim concerning Yahweh and his coming to earth as a man to reveal the truth and save us from our sins.

That is where most atheists go wrong as everyone believes in something. Whatever you worship is your God. Some young men worship their cars. A lot of people in Australia worship Australian Rules Footy. I know a couple of twins who worship fishing. Every weekend hail or shine they are out fishing. There are a vast number of people who worship Justin Beiber. Vast numbers of atheists worship themselves judging by the fact that they insist they know everything and everyone else knows nothing. In the UK, Football is their religion and some players are worshipped like gods.

The fact is dose of unreality, you do worship something or someone. You are just not honest enough to admit it.

I don't see your point.
you use "worship" very generically. I play golf and watch american football a lot, so according to your definition, I worship these things.
Ok, so what, Im not claiming these things are divine nor am i establishing a religion around my worship of sports ??

 

[phil112]

christianity is not a rejection of anything, it proposes a new claim concerning Yahweh and his coming to earth as a man to reveal the truth and save us from our sins.



I don't see your point.
you use "worship" very generically. I play golf and watch american football a lot, so according to your definition, I worship these things.
Ok, so what, Im not claiming these things are divine nor am i establishing a religion around my worship of sports ??

[h=2][SUP]1[/SUP]wor·ship[/h]noun
a. the act of showing respect and love for a god
b. extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem

Play and watch sports a lot? That is worship, whether you want to believe it or not. Anything you do that takes more of your time than God is plain and simply a show of adoration (worship) to something other than Him.

 

[IntoTheVoid]

I can't believe how ridiculous this thread has become.

Maybe I should generalise like some others on here and say that all Christians are like the Westboro Baptist Church. But i wouldn't do that because it's absurd and ignorant.

 

[Jda016]

I'm curious and lack knowledge in this area, so could an atheist please answer this.

An atheist chooses not to believe in God, because there is not sufficient proof that God exists? Is that correct?

Well, if an athiest bases his judgement on proof then wouldn't he have to have definitive proof that God doesn't exist in order to maintain his athiesm?...if that makes any sense....I might have just confused myself. Let me try again.

so Athiests don't believe in God because they lack proof, not because they have proof of God's non-existence.

So if athiests were truly honest with themselves, they would actually be agnostic, right?