De Maria wrote:scourge99 wrote:
"Atheist/atheism" is an almost entirely useless word. Its as useless as non-astrologer or a-fairyist. It tells nothing about the beliefs of another.
Its only addressing one belief. The belief that God does not exist. In that respect, it is perfect.
Are you unaware there are many philosophical theories and definitions for "belief"?
Are you unaware there are many philosophical theories and definitions for "existence"?
If you are aware then how can you say its “perfect�?
here is a link from someone else listing some different theories about “belief�:
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 253#351253
Its clear from this that a discussion on belief or disbelief in a gods existence is ANYTHING but clear except to those who share similar assumptions. Nonetheless, I partially agree that in general, the definition of "atheist" is someone who does not believe in the existence of God. But you need to be very careful of ASSUMING to know more of others beliefs than you are told simply because they self-define as atheist. It just makes you look petty and dishonest when you try to tell others what they believe.
De Maria wrote:
Furthermore, things become even more hectic and confusing because there are so many different lines of thought regarding what it means to "believe" or "know" (in a god or anything else). Philosophy on this matter runs the gamut from intuition, to justification, to affirmation, to absolute certainty... to name a few.
I propose that instead of trying to pigeonhole others with such a dysfunctional word, you simply ask them about their beliefs, knowledge, intuition, etc. You'll find yourself in a far more productive conversation/debate if you do.
You're joking right?
The only atheists I've met on this forum like to sit back and snipe at the beliefs of Christians and other believers. They hide behind the "I don't have any beliefs" line and shoot down any attempt at intelligent conversation.
De Maria wrote:That is why I set up this thread. To put us on equal footing. I can be just as skeptical about atheism as atheists are about Christianity.
It is 100% EXPECTED and REASONABLE that if a Christian makes a claim about Christian beliefs then an atheist or Muslim or another Christian can question those beliefs and the questioner is NOT required to present their own. This is known as the burden of proof. Do you understand the burden of proof? It is CRITICAL you comprehend such a thing on this forum (or in any debate for that matter). Moderators will be more than willing to explain it.
If someone makes a positive claim and another challenges that claim then the claimant should defend that claim or retract it. But if a person is challenged, the challenger isn't required to present an alternative. Do you understand that? That means an atheist/buddhist/muslim/etc is under no obligation to present their own personal views when challenging the claims of Christians or others. Many people new to debate are unaware of this or do not understand why.
De Maria wrote:Thanks be to God that I was once an atheist.
So many Christians feel inclined to tell others they were once an atheist. No one cares. It’s as though you think it earns you brownie points or special insight into other atheist beliefs. IT DOESN'T because there is NOTHING in common among atheists besides a disbelief in gods. And I've already explained how there is even disagreement regarding that.
De Maria wrote:I recognized the strategy which I once used immediately.
And that doesn't mean anyone here employs that "strategy". Once again you attempt to lump all atheists together as though all or most atheists think similar or alike.
Even worse, you assume atheists here think like you because you used to be an atheist.
De Maria wrote:And also, because I was once an atheist, I recognize that all that atheists have is SUBJECTIVE. They can prove nothing with objective evidence. Because they have no objective evidence.
This sounds like a sloppy rehash of long since debunked Sunday morning pastor preaching. You should stick to commenting on your own views rather then discrediting yourself by making baldfaced assertions you can't even bother yourself to substantiate.
De Maria wrote:
Atheists are not a cohesive group.
Don't I know it.
They share nothing in common but a lack of belief in god(s) (assuming they even agree on what a lack of belief is). And that lack of belief entails NOTHING else in common. Thus, your attempt to chastise atheists as having some type of collective purpose or agenda is in error.
They may not be a cohesive group. But they are a group. And they congregate and form clubs and other memberships which have agendas and missions to spread their "religion". Here's an example of organized atheism:
http://www.atheists.org/
Sincerely,
De Maria
So what? SOME atheists do group up, congregate and form clubs. Some atheists do have similar or identical beliefs. MOST don't. You need to let go of this obsession of trying to pigeon-hole "atheism". Instead focus on the individual beliefs and claims of others.
Do we need to get some Christians in here to tell you the same thing for you to consider it seriously?
