Atheism Destroyed At Last! - The Deba...

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#41 Feb 21, 2014
None of what you have written so far has addressed your asserted destruction of atheism. Nor have you agreed to any concept of exactly what atheism is, a task that must needs precede any cogent discussion of it.

I assert that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural claims of religion. In order to address that, you must either successfully support some supernatural claim or suggest a different definition. Bear in mind, though, that there is a long history of discussion in this forum about what atheism is and is not, and the atheists here are almost universally agreed that theists have nothing useful to say on the matter.

But perhaps you will surprise us.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#42 Feb 21, 2014
NightSerf wrote:
None of what you have written so far has addressed your asserted destruction of atheism. Nor have you agreed to any concept of exactly what atheism is, a task that must needs precede any cogent discussion of it.
I assert that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural claims of religion. In order to address that, you must either successfully support some supernatural claim or suggest a different definition. Bear in mind, though, that there is a long history of discussion in this forum about what atheism is and is not, and the atheists here are almost universally agreed that theists have nothing useful to say on the matter.
But perhaps you will surprise us.
"I assert that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural claims of religion."

Atheism has nothing to do with religion, or rejection of religion.

As I have often suggested, atheists should learn what the term means before they join its ranks.

Atheism is the belief that no god exists. That's the starting point for honest discussion.
Thinking

Yeovil, UK

#43 Feb 21, 2014
I see Puck Frick is still incapable of posting the whole definition of the word "Atheist". This is why I use "non believer". He struggles to lie about that.
NightSerf wrote:
None of what you have written so far has addressed your asserted destruction of atheism. Nor have you agreed to any concept of exactly what atheism is, a task that must needs precede any cogent discussion of it.
I assert that atheism is a rejection of the supernatural claims of religion. In order to address that, you must either successfully support some supernatural claim or suggest a different definition. Bear in mind, though, that there is a long history of discussion in this forum about what atheism is and is not, and the atheists here are almost universally agreed that theists have nothing useful to say on the matter.
But perhaps you will surprise us.

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#44 Feb 21, 2014
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That's the starting point for honest discussion.
Actually... the start of an honest discussion would involve all parties being honest. You make that unlikely since being honest isn't one of your strong points.(Supplying your own definition of 'atheist' being a prime example)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#45 Feb 21, 2014
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Actually... the start of an honest discussion would involve all parties being honest. You make that unlikely since being honest isn't one of your strong points.(Supplying your own definition of 'atheist' being a prime example)
It's not my definition.

Atheism, from the Greek a-theos ("no-god"), is the philosophical position that God doesn't exist. It is distinguished from agnosticism, the argument that it is impossible to know whether God exists or not (Academic American Encyclopedia).
Atheism, system of thought developed around the denial of God's existence. Atheism, so defined, first appeared during the Enlightenment, the age of reason (Random House Encyclopedia).
Atheism is the doctrine that there is no God.(Oxford Companion to Philosophy).
Atheism (Greek, a-[private prefix]+ theos, god) is the view that there is no divine being, no God (Dictionary of Philosophy, Thomas Mautner, Editor.
Atheism is the belief that God doesn't exist (The World Book Encyclopedia).
Atheism, commonly speaking, is the denial of God. Theism (from the Greek theos, God) is belief in or conceptualization of God, atheism is the rejection of such belief or conceptualization.In the ancient world atheism was rarely a clearly formulated position (Encyclopedia Americana).
Atheism, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. Atheism is to be distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open whether there is a god or not, professing to find the question unanswerable, for the atheist, the non-existence of god is a certainty (The New Encyclopedia Britannia.)
Atheism is the doctrine that God does not exist, that belief in the existence of God is a false belief. The word God here refers to a divine being regarded as the independent creator of the world, a being superlatively powerful, wise and good (Encyclopedia of Religion).
Atheism (Greek and Roman): Atheism is a dogmatic creed, consisting in the denial of every kind of supernatural power. Atheism has not often been seriously maintained at any period of civilized thought (Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics-Vol II).
Atheism denies the existence of deity (Funk and Wagnall's New Encyclopedia-Vol I).
Thinking

Yeovil, UK

#46 Feb 21, 2014
Puck Frick only ever spams a small subset of the true definition of "Atheist".
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>Actually... the start of an honest discussion would involve all parties being honest. You make that unlikely since being honest isn't one of your strong points.(Supplying your own definition of 'atheist' being a prime example)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#47 Feb 21, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Puck Frick only ever spams a small subset of the true definition of "Atheist".
<quoted text>
Small subset?

Your lie about the definition is the smallest subset.

And it's a transparent lie - it is a rhetorical sleight of hand to assume the role of a value-neutral default position.

That's called a transparent, calculated lie.

Are all atheists such liars, or just the ones on Topix?

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#48 Feb 21, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Puck Frick only ever spams a small subset of the true definition of "Atheist".
<quoted text>
He's a troll. He'll argue whatever side of the argument ruffles the most feathers. I don't usually bother reading his crap and just scroll on by.
Thinking

Yeovil, UK

#49 Feb 21, 2014
Absolutely. Then he pretends he's a big criminal, yet he's also meant to be credible.
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>He's a troll. He'll argue whatever side of the argument ruffles the most feathers. I don't usually bother reading his crap and just scroll on by.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#50 Feb 21, 2014
TerryL wrote:
<quoted text>He's a troll. He'll argue whatever side of the argument ruffles the most feathers. I don't usually bother reading his crap and just scroll on by.
Sure, you don't read my stuff.

That's how you know what I argue. Makes perfect sense.

Are all atheists such liars, or just the ones on Topix?

“Leave That Thing Alone!”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#51 Feb 21, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Absolutely. Then he pretends he's a big criminal, yet he's also meant to be credible.
<quoted text>
I stopped 'arguing' with the trolls a long time ago. Doing so is as pointless as their lives must be.

Since: Jan 14

United States

#52 Feb 22, 2014
Folks,
Any point making fuss over what is as plain as the back of your hand?
An average person knows who an Atheist is; and it is the generally accepted definition that should serve as our basis for discussions.
A Theist either believes in God, or claims to know that God exists; while Atheists uphold the direct opposite view, i.e. an outright denial of the existence of God.
Up till now, the discussions have been between reasonable doubting Thomases and the unreasonable credulous ones; i.e. between reason and faith.
Whereas, the present thread marks a total departure from the erstwhile reasonable doubt vs unreasonable credulity polemic, towards an eventual knowledge of God in His absoluteness.
With regard to supernatural claims of religion, let me quickly say that any claim to an actual existence of supernatural entities is simply a vestige of primitive, superstitious world views of the cave-man of yores.
The God I know is a natural God, The supernatural are figments of imagination.(to be contd)

Since: Jan 14

United States

#53 Feb 22, 2014
Our world is a natural world; any religion that subscribes to the 'fact' of a supernatural deity, is not a true religion, but merely a corpus of myths and fairy tales.
A true religion should be a reflection of God/Nature here on earth.
If God is conceived as the perfect manifestation of intelligence, observable through the operation of the natural laws, then all arguments put up by Atheists should be weighed against the laws.
Where an Atheist's submission runs foul of the natural laws, the Atheist's point of view nakedly stands to be thrown out; Whereas, in the case of an Atheist's valid point, naturally will such a point be accommodated within the body of the laws, as naturally pointing to the existence of a natural universal Force.
The protracted rift between Atheists and Theists is due to the fact that there can never be any resolution, where one side is anchoring on faith.
But where reason meets with reason, happy resolution is certain, since truth and reason are bed-fellows, but not so with faith.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#54 Feb 22, 2014
Word salad

Since: Jan 14

United States

#55 Feb 22, 2014
Mikko wrote:
Word salad
Disillusioned?
Honeythorn_Gump

Torrance, CA

#56 Feb 22, 2014
jide oni wrote:
Our world is a natural world; any religion that subscribes to the 'fact' of a supernatural deity, is not a true religion, but merely a corpus of myths and fairy tales.
A true religion should be a reflection of God/Nature here on earth.
If God is conceived as the perfect manifestation of intelligence, observable through the operation of the natural laws, then all arguments put up by Atheists should be weighed against the laws.
Where an Atheist's submission runs foul of the natural laws, the Atheist's point of view nakedly stands to be thrown out; Whereas, in the case of an Atheist's valid point, naturally will such a point be accommodated within the body of the laws, as naturally pointing to the existence of a natural universal Force.
The protracted rift between Atheists and Theists is due to the fact that there can never be any resolution, where one side is anchoring on faith.
But where reason meets with reason, happy resolution is certain, since truth and reason are bed-fellows, but not so with faith.


So are you a Deist or a Pantheist?

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#57 Feb 22, 2014
Honeythorn Gump,
I am neither a Deist nor a Pantheist.
What's your contribution or reaction to my killer thread?
Honeythorn Gump

Manassas, VA

#58 Feb 22, 2014
jide oni wrote:
Honeythorn Gump,
I am neither a Deist nor a Pantheist.
What's your contribution or reaction to my killer thread?
Killer thread? Not really. From my perspective atheism is being sceptical regarding the existence of the supernatural. How is this different from your view ? As for your calling natural forces "God", some Pantheists do the same.

Since: Jan 14

United States

#59 Feb 23, 2014
While the supernatural have no actual existence in nature, they nevertheless find a fertile soil in the imagination of the unenlightened and superstitious believers.
I conceive God in His unrestrictive, all-inclusive nature, such that pantheism, deism, atheistic premise, naturalism, transcendentalism, and all other sensible concepts, are well tolerated and accommodated within the confines of God's all-inclusive attributes.
Honeythorn Gump

UK

#60 Feb 23, 2014
jide oni wrote:
While the supernatural have no actual existence in nature, they nevertheless find a fertile soil in the imagination of the unenlightened and superstitious believers.
I conceive God in His unrestrictive, all-inclusive nature, such that pantheism, deism, atheistic premise, naturalism, transcendentalism, and all other sensible concepts, are well tolerated and accommodated within the confines of God's all-inclusive attributes.
You are a Pantheist.

"Definitions of pantheism.

1. Oxford English Dictionary

Pantheism.
1. The religious belief or philosophical theory that God and the Universe are identical (implying a denial of the personality and transcendence of God); the doctrine that God is everything and everything is God.
[First use 1730, modelled on the word pantheist, first used by John Toland in 1705]
2. The heathen worship of all the gods.
[First use 1837 by Sir F. Palgrave, describing the Tartar tribes who respected all creeds but were attached to none]
2. Merriam-Webster Collegiate in Encyclopaedia Britannica

Pantheism
1: a doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of the universe
2: the worship of all gods of different creeds, cults, or peoples
indifferently; also: toleration of worship of all gods (as at certain
periods of the Roman empire).

3. Encyclopaedia Britannica

Pantheism
[Only one def given]
The doctrine that the universe conceived of as a whole is God and,
conversely, that there is no God but the combined substance, forces, and
laws that are manifested in the existing universe¬Ö
The adjective pantheist was coined by the rationalist freethinker John
Toland in his book Socinianism Truly Stated (1705). The noun pantheism was
first used a few years later by one of Toland's opponents.

4. Grolier's Encyclopaedia

Pantheism
[Only one definition given]
Pantheism is the belief that everything is divine, that God is not separate
from but totally identified with the world, and that God does not possess
personality or transcendence.

5. WorldBook Encyclopaedia

Pantheism
[Only one definition given]
Pantheism is the belief that everything is divine, that God is not separate
from but totally identified with the world, and that God does not possess
personality or transcendence.

6. Encarta Encyclopaedia

Pantheism
[Only one definition given]
Pantheism, doctrine that identifies the universe (Greek pan, "all") with
God (Greek theos).
7. Longman Dictionary

Pantheism
1. A doctrine that equates God with the forces and laws of nature.
2. The worship of all gods of different religions, cults or peoples
indifferently, also tolerance of such worship (eg at certain periods of the
Roman Empire)."

http://www.pantheism.net/about/definitions.ht...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 5 min Regolith Based Li... 32,173
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 14 min Rose_NoHo 775
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 20 min Science 76,966
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... (Dec '16) 1 hr Eagle 12 - 290
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 8 hr John 258,478
hell is a real place. so.. ahtiesm is a faux li... 16 hr Eagle 12 - 12
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... (Jan '17) 22 hr Dogen 4,309
More from around the web