As a statement of non-belief, ‘atheism’ is not inherently arrogant.
Often when a disbelief in deities is attested, the faithful believer will assert that it is arrogant for anyone to claim an absence of god. Where atheism becomes misconstrued lies in what believers feel it asserts. Many individuals, who do not understand the terminology, (while working within the parameters of absolutism from their own worldview) inappropriately interpret the word to make an absolute claim on the existence of god. This understanding is a misnomer; merely the term states, “I do not believe”.
Now, an atheist may make a more assertive statement regarding specific ‘gods’ such as the Christian Yahweh or the Muslim Allah, because these characters have defined characteristics that can be proven to be highly contradictory, unlikely or wholly incoherent. Just as Christians, Muslims, Jews or another form theistic faith will label incarnations of god other than their own as false, the atheist simply acknowledges the same faults exist in all anthropomorphized deities, and disbelieves them all.
So, those who are ‘atheist’ do not assert absolute, universal knowledge. Many times it is the faithful who are arrogant in this manner, insisting their holy book is ‘Truth’, sometimes to the extent of attempting to silence opposing views. Is it not infinitely more arrogant to declare heresy, blasphemy and apostasy on those who use evidence to shape their understanding of reality? A reaction such as this displays an uncomfortableness with having one’s beliefs challenged and thereby inferring a feeling of infallibility on part of the believer.
The one who says “I disbelieve” is not arrogant, it is those who postulate ownership of absolute “Truth”.
Edit: Image is original work from here – http://www.the-atheist.com/summarising-religion-and-atheism/
“Your kindness for weakness I never mistook
I worried you often,yet you understood
That life is so fleeting,these troubles won’t last
Forever”
there’s a big difference between saying you don’t believe there’s a god and you are sure there isn’t. one is rational uncertainty, the other is, yes, arrogant.
The photo you have that describes “religion” uses a type of logical fallacy known as the reducto ad absurdum argument.
I would suggest that you carefully evaluate that statement if you ever intend on convincing people that the atheism of which you support is not arrogant.
I don’t think it’s arrogant to assume there is no God, nor do I believe it arrogant to assume there is one.
Arrogance is taking your beliefs too far and shoving it on other people.
Both Christians and Atheists are guilty of this.
thank you
Reducto ad absurdum isn’t a fallacy… it’s an argument type. You don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s a valid argument. It reduces a given proposition by applying it to other circumstances and proving it creates an absurd situation; one that has to be both true and false.
That example isn’t reductio ad absurdum in the strict logical sense. That example is just trying to show that something is incredible, and that we should therefore be incredulous, which relies on it being ridiculous to everyone. Clearly it isn’t since some people believe in a God and would say the author of that picture is being absurd in his phrasing by over-simplifying, so it isn’t an example of reductio ad absurdum, not even the weak kind.
Point: Reductio ad absurdum is NOT a fallacy.
“Arrogance is taking your beliefs too far and shoving it on other people.”
Very true, from personal experience, I know there is no god. If I find something that makes me doubt, then I will consider the topic again. I do not try to force my belief, or lack thereof, on you, I would appreciate you doing the same to me.
Those people (atheist, christian, muslim, hindu, jewish, or any other belief structure) that try to force their opinions on others are the most arrogant lot. Sure, many atheists are arrogant, but from my experience, as soon as a christian learns that I am atheist, they will automatically want to “save” me. I don’t want your saving, I don’t want your opinions, and I don’t want to hear you talking about it.
It’s quite easy to prove Christianity is the only correct worldview combining evidentialism and presuppositionalism. That picture shows your lack of knowledge my friend. I would remove it if you want anyone to take you seriously. It’s extremely easy to prove God exists using the cosmological argument alone. Have you just begun studying this stuff?
I am God!
Oh really? Then perhaps youd like to point to just 1 supernatural item as proof. If the supernatural exists, it should be quite easy to show an example.
While it is true that there is a gap between uncertainty and disbelief, I am an athiest, and I absolutely deny the existence of any god. I summarily refuse your assertion that this makes me arrogant. I also deny the existence of the tooth fairy, the easter bunny, and the great pumpkin, none of which make me arrogant.
I do not openly berate or belittle others for their beliefs if they do not interfere with my life, because doing so would be arrogant.
So saying that billions of people derived from two people is more absurd than saying billions of people derived from a few cells magically put together by lighting and soup?
So saying that billions of people derived from two people is more absurd than saying billions of people derived from a few cells magically put together by lighting and soup?
If that is what you think science entails…. “Lighting and Soup” Then I suggest you go and read up more on the scientific theories that explain how we came to be.
Yes, and it’s also easy to prove that the Spaghetti Monster exists using the cosmological argument alone. I have just begun studying this “stuff”
“It’s extremely easy to prove God exists using the cosmological argument alone.”
You can prove anything if you choose the right assumptions. If reasonable people can disagree, then it has yet to be proven. You’ve no idea what you’re talking about.
Nice trolling there mr cosmological argument! Not to feed trolls, but for anyone stupid enough to fall for it, anyone buying that drivel needs to ask themselves “what caused the cause”? If we’re talking about arrogance, that argument is a great example. SOMETHING had to create the universe! OK, but what created the “something”? NOTHING IT WAS ALWAYS HERE LALALALA! Logic fail.
And if you think religion entails “a magic man who wants us to shower him in glory” then I would suggest you to read up also.
Prove it if it’s that easy, my friend.
we are ALL god
religion is a fairy tale, lets just beleive in the tooth fairy cos our parents told us too.
http://batcave911.blogspot.com/
That’s pretty accurate. he made us and everything. He knows how it all goes down. He does it anyway. He knows exactly how many unique mind with free will he is condemning to an eternity of torture. He does it anyway. Why? So he has someone to love him because they choose to.
Humans are arrogant period. We’re arrogant to think we can fathom absolute truth.
Arrogance, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Calling someone arrogant is completely subjective.
I find it the height of arrogance that anyone can insist that their invisible friend not only exists, but is judging their every thought against a subjective list of rights and wrongs. I am sure a few priests would disagree with me.
But really, who is more arrogant? The person who insists on proof before following some unseen force into the night, or the people who follow it blindly and count on its advice and protection?
“I do not believe” Maybe that is what you mean when you say atheist, but it is not the definition, its:
“one who believes that there is no deity.” (Webster) So while what you are claiming is not arrogant, atheism in the strict interpretation is quite understandably considered arrogant by others.
The image attached to this article is incorrectly titled ‘Religion’ as it appears to be a comical summary of the Christian, and other abrahamic religions. Perhaps the picture should be titled ‘Attack on Christianity’, or the description should be extended to include other religions, so as to more accurately reflect the title.
God did not create man, man created God. Of all the fears mankind is capable of experiencing, the unknown is the greatest. Religion existed to fill that gap, be one less (and major) thing humans didn’t fully understand and could not provide an answer for.
And then centuries later we’re still killing in the name of Him, committing atrocities and believing that by apologizing any moral decay will be forgiven and ultimate paradise can still be achieved, while a good, honest man who has spent his life purposefully doing good to other men gets to burn in a lake of fire for eternity after death because he doesn’t have faith in something he can’t see with any of his senses.
If I die and there is an omnipotent God, I’m sure he’ll forgive me in disbelieving in him if he can forgive child molesters, rapists and murderers.
I feel like atheism is the direct and 100% positive belief that there is no God. But can there be some sense of spirituality, without a belief in a god? Maybe if we just saw everything as gears working together. Its just everyone and everything going through a process that just happens and just is. There’s little gears and there’s big gears and they’re all equally important in their own way.
And before someone else makes it a point, yes, an assortment of gears working together normally signifies the presence of a greater machine, which, simply put, would be the whole of us. Whatever “us” compiled together, would happen to be. Life, the universe and everything.
Religion as it’s described above only pertains to Christianity, Judaism and Islam (and related religions). One can believe in God without being part of anyone of those, or in a so-called cult. He could simply be a deist/theist-one who believes in a deity and that is as far as he or she goes with it.
The agnostic, takes the intellectual high ground by simply saying, “I don’t know.”
To not believe is one thing. To say there is no God (as if you really know) is another thing altogether.
To say there is a God (even if you somehow know) but are unable to prove it and want others to blindly believe you is, well, not my cup of tea either.
Atheism is a valueless materialistic viewpoint. It’s a narcissism and it isn’t even interesting. Acting like their philosophy is true, as if they “know” yet they deny 99% of everything else because their is no evidence for a god, is contradicting in of itself. Most arguments for an atheist viewpoint compare themselves against the most ridged dogmatic definitions of a religion. When they know atheism has nothing to do with religion. I don’t believe there are any true atheists and that most are being intellectually dishonest with themselves. What does an atheist have to say really? It seems his words become meaningless if for as his belief states the world has no meaning. It’s an arrogant absolution to the utmost degree.
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
Alright, people.
Arrongance (n): offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.
Atheism (n): disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Some atheists are arrogant. Some aren’t. Some believers are arrogant. Some aren’t. It is all up to the person to choose to be arrogant or not, regardless of their beliefs about the existence of a supreme being.
Well, of course evidentialism and presuppositionalism will “prove” your sky-daddy, the same as any other argument with a false premise can “prove” just about anything.
Let me give a hint, since you are such an old hat in these “studies”: if your “solution” involves “presupposing” exactly what it is incumbent upon you to prove (the existence of your sky-daddy) as the reason logic and reason work, you have not “proven” anything except that you don’t understand logic. Assumed premises are acceptable in conditional proofs…but only if they are then discharged.
As for evidentialism…I claim incoherent infinite regress: all beliefs are composed of other beliefs, which must then be evidenced, and then so on, in a never-ending chain with allows for no first belief. This does not allow, therefore, the belief that evidentialism is true, that evidence is a means for supporting a claim, that evidence is gained through certain acts and evaluated according to certain method, and finally that the world and minds exist, because all such beliefs must be based on evidentialist arguments. This is the same flaw as pragmatism, as one cannot be a thoroughgoing evidentialist or pragmatist…you must have some beliefs that are not formed using those methods to “get you going” so to speak.
So presuppositionalism is a logical fallacy of begging the question and evidentialism leads to an infinite regress that gives no basic “first beliefs” to get going with. So no, they don’t prove anything except that theists like to throw out words in the hope that ignorant people will be impressed and not think through the issues. Which were you…the scammer or the scammed? Do you really believe in theism because of these two positions, or were you looking for justifications for your theism and found these and tried to trot them out? Too bad, as most philosophers of religion will tell you…those particular dogs won’t hunt.
when you choose to create a label for yourself based on your belief, yes that is arrogant
the fact that atheists are now a mark of negativity is beyond belief. Sounds just like ‘if you’re not with us, you’re against us’. Relativity, you gotta love it…
“the atheist” is already putting people in boxes and narrows down the person too much into a ridiculous polarity.
Project this whole idea onto the mind of an atheist, and it shows eventually neither will ever win, because it couldn’t. Cut the crap and move on to important questions, please.
What’s wrong with being arrogant?
Arrongance: Overbearing pride evidenced by a superior manner toward inferiors.
It rightly fills the Atheist with pride to know that he has retained his faculties of reason while intellectual inferiors around him have not. The Atheist stands fast while the credulous believers shake in their boots like little children afraid of the boogie man. For modern adults to believe in the gods is beyond pitiable! Put away your childish things, and grow up!
nice example of arrogance
God says theres a fence you need to get over but to get over it you need to find the right bench that allows you to get over it, obviously you cant get over a fence without the bench because the fence is too big.
btw… hi.
sheez obviously…
The story of Jesus is nothing more than a respin of many other sun gods, including Horus which started 3000 years before Jesus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs9br09jGoc
Zeitgeist Part One (Religion)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs9br09jGoc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs9br09jGoc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rs9br09jGoc
“Many individuals, who do not understand the terminology, … inappropriately interpret the word to make an absolute claim on the existence of god.”
You need to be careful here – plenty of people do not define ‘atheist’ as you do. The absence of a belief about God or gods is often called agnosticism, and ‘atheist’ is often used to refer to one who disbelieves the existence of God or gods. I personally call myself an agnostic based on this usage of terms, but it’s a bit arrogant to criticise others for not using the terms correctly – actual usage varies wildly and you need to define your terms when debating theism rather than telling everyone else that they’re wrong.
Sounds kinda arrogant, don’t you think?
)
My personal belief is that agnosticism is the rational response to having no good reason to believe in God, whereas atheism (expressed as a disbelief in God) *is* arrogant – certainty about what is possible in the universe is quite arrogant indeed. Although, I’d claim that theists are exactly as arrogant and for exactly the same reason.
but Horus was real
Don’t post Zeitgest, half the shit in there is flat-out wrong.
Don’t post Zeitgest, half the shit in there is flat-out wrong.
Whenever I encounter Atheists who are not deferential to my beliefs it makes me feel a little ashamed that I hold these beliefs, and that’s not right. My brothers and sisters in Christ do not make fun of me like that, and I do not make fun of them.
If you Atheists would just start thinking with your hearts instead of just your brains maybe you wouldn’t be so arrogant, and we could all get along better.
This is what a douch sounds like: Atheism is a valueless materialistic viewpoint. It’s a narcissism and it isn’t even interesting. Acting like their philosophy is true, as if they “know” yet they deny 99% of everything else because their is no evidence for a god, is contradicting in of itself. Most arguments for an atheist viewpoint compare themselves against the most ridged dogmatic definitions of a religion. When they know atheism has nothing to do with religion. I don’t believe there are any true atheists and that most are being intellectually dishonest with themselves. What does an atheist have to say really? It seems his words become meaningless if for as his belief states the world has no meaning. It’s an arrogant absolution to the utmost degree.
See, a lot of atheists feel the same way, that theists are being intellectually dishonest but this gets us nowhere. Our coexistence shouldn’t be marked by mutual hatred and misunderstanding so we need to get over our Oh-so-necessary sense of superiority and recognize that the person on the other side legitimately and honestly believes in his views. Time to grow up.
Of course, there are intellectually dishonest people but no one group is entirely characterized by such qualities. Except maybe the Fred Phelps crowd.
thiests and athiests are both equally easy to make fun of
Most life on the planet is Atheist! Trees get by just fine, and so do the birds, and the fishes without having to lower, and debase themselves on bended knee before imaginary invisible masters like those apple polishing believers so pathetically do.
Atheism is the natural unpolluted state of human beings, and a baby only becomes otherwise if indoctrinated by their family, or in response to societal pressures. Religion is a filthy pollution to the natural human mind!
I would like to see a bird or fish say “I am atheist”
no cheating training your parrot
Just because a search for meaning is part of the human condition – it doesn’t mean that it exists.
It’s arrogant to think that, just because we don’t understand the universe, it must have been created by an imagined deity.
How can you be certain there is or is not a God when we aren’t even certain what “God” is? Disbelieving the various religion’s beliefs about what God is is one thing, but saying categorically that there is no God is another.
If I assert that “God” is that which set a sequence of matter and energy changes into motion with the big bang with nothing more than what may amount to an “interest” in experiencing the changes in the patterns, changes and movements of matter and energy as a means of expanding itself, could you then assert that there is no “God”?
The notion that “God” must be a paternalistic entity that concerns itself with our well-being or lives is the one atheists concern themselves with because such a definition is so easy to reject, but there could be a God that has a different agenda than the one offered up by those who seek to create God in the image of man.
The truth is that we don’t know if there is or is not a God, and we can’t prove if there is or is not a God until we know what it is we’re attempting to prove. You can reject the concept until the cows come home as long as you keep your definitions narrowed down to the various holy books and their descriptions, but it gets a bit harder if you take a more expansive view of the nature of existence and the possibility that there are links and interactions between all matter and energy in the universe.
It isn’t “Non-belief”, it is “assured belief that what I think is factual – and science can catch up”. It is the same thinking that excludes new scientific discoveries because the believer has already decided on one and only one method, bedamned the search for truth.
Scientifically, atheism IS a religion.
“…and we can’t prove if there is or is not a God…”
Neither can we prove that fairies, or boogymen, or ghosts, or magical unicorns, or the Gods of Olympus, or the Three Headed Elephant Ganesha do not exist, however it would be silly to be agnostic about their existence just because they cannot be absolutely disproved beyond a shadow of a doubt.
If you say that because the prime mover god cannot be disproved then you must allow for it’s existence, then surely you must also believe in all of those other entities which cannot be disproved.
If you believe in one magical critter, then you must also believe in all other Gods, and Goddesses, demons, and mythical monsters who have ever sprung into the minds of men for they too are as immortal as the rest, and cannot be disproved. If you allow for one imaginary being you leave the door wide open to the rest.
Gods are just constructs of the human mind. As someone quite rightly stated, saying you don’t believe in any gods is no more arrogant than saying you do.
All this talk just goes to show there’s a whole lot of insecurity among people on both sides of this argument.
otherwise you are lying
the picture says ‘religion’; it should more accurately say ‘christianity’ or perhaps ‘judaism’ (not sure) or any other specific articulation of religion that fits. ‘religion’ is too generic for what the picture is talking about
What interests me more than the question of whether or not the God of the Bible actually exists or not is the question of why anyone would think that creature if it did exist would be in the least bit worthy of being admired or worshiped by us instead of being reviled for its biblical atrocities against us.
I think you faith heads should choose your imaginary friends more carefully because that one is rotten to the core!
Thanks for stealing the image (an original work by the way) in this post from my blog and not giving credit.
http://www.the-atheist.com/summarising-religion-and-atheism/
*MUCH* appreciated.
Anyone who defies God is indeed arrogant!
RT
http://www.anon-tools.us.tc
anyone who calls me arrogant is arrogant
It pains me to read these responses, no coherency or intellectualism behind most of what has been said here. Most people here have their heads too far up their asses to even realize they are neither making arguments or portrayal of some form of pseudo-rational. I do not know why most here even open their metaphorical mouths because they add absolutely nothing of interest. “Can’t prove or disprove, imaginary or imagined this and that”.
I mean really, I do not believe that people in here even has a clue of what their beliefs imply, or what they say implies. Unless you guys can come to some agreement on the most fundamental questions, the most basic of all questions, there is no way in hell you will agree on the less basic. Kids playing in a sandbox eating sand have a higher chance of making any progress than the people in here. I mean, I doubt you all can even come to an agreement of what atheism is, let alone defining religion. Here is a hint, ‘a’ is negation, there can be atheistic Buddhist, connect the dots people. I think people in here need to get knocked over their heads to knock some sense into you all.
P.S. The morons (and yes, you have to be a moron to believe such bs) who believe in that garbage zeigeist, just.. stop.. you are in the same category of those who believe in niburu (planet X), the end of the world in 2012, and well, scientology (yes, you are that low of the low).
arrogance rules supreme
arrogance rules supreme
god is in the eye of the beholder…
The image used is entirely incorrect in it’s attempt to parody.
Especially the last bit; have you never heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls?
checks eyes… nope!
how is this a topic of conversation? who is more arrogant? what sounds worse? if either side has anything substantive to throw into the ring then that’s one thing – all this posturing and and talking about what sounds worse or what some other group says… it sounds more like playground chatter than intelligent discourse.
Who of the believers in this Forum actually praise the Biblical God for his intimidation, coercion and Rape of the 12 year old Mary? For his turning to salt the wife of Lot because he wanted her out of the way so Lots two daughters could copulate with, and become impregnated by their father in the cave after god committed the mass slaughter in their city.
Who praises that demon of a God for drowning all the animals on the earth save a handful when they had committed no crime? Who praises the immoral slaughterer of humanity for turning to rotting corpses all the humans on the earth (except a handful)including grannies, infants, babies in their mothers wombs in the flood?
Who among you praises God for tricking Adam & Eve into committing the original sin so that he could impose ancestral sin, and everlasting pain in childbirth on everyone else throughout time even though we were not personally tricked by this evil God.
Who among you would do as the beast has done? Who would be as immoral as your god? I suggest that none of you would be so immoral because you are better than your god and you should be as proud to pronounce that fact as I am.
Hitler was a sweetheart compared to the God you admire so much. If the devil had done as god boasts of doing in the bible you would all be very quick to see the Biblical atrocities against humans for what they really are, but you are childlike and cannot see what is right before your eyes in black & white.
Grow up faithers, and flush that book, along with the imaginary master who only exists within the covers of it. After appropriately using it's pages of course…..there's no need to not put that paper to a better use.
Quoting Anonymous, “I don’t think it’s arrogant to assume there is no God, nor do I believe it arrogant to assume there is one.
Arrogance is taking your beliefs too far and shoving it on other people.
Both Christians and Atheists are guilty of this.”
’nuff said!!!
Assuming there is a god. Why would god create me, an atheist. Why would god create a person who do not belive in him…?
This isn’t the first time in human history where scientific developments led personkind to believe they knew almost “everything” I realize that we can know an awful lot about a particular subject, scientific, philosophical, medical, etc. What we as humans inherently lack is the ability to comprehend is the “total sum of the parts”. As I know that NO religion can tell me who God is, what God wants, knows, or needs me to do, I also know the atheist has nothing to offer me as well. Religion offers me a code to live by, it teaches me to tolerate others, as in “Love Thy Neighbor”. Spiritualism is not enough, the mind can rationalize any behavior. The question isn’t whether there is a God or not, the question is do you value life to the point that you will adhere to the rules that will benefit, the earth, and all the creatures on it? Thomas Jefferson would not have received the support of the religious right if he were to run for office today. He may have supported freedom of religion, but his own personal belief was that by looking around you, “God was apparent” When you look around the most prominent focuses of this planet is, for better or for worse, life itself. It is simply amazing what humans have endured because of faith. To be “right” and to say, “there is no god” is to deny millions (billions?) the ability to overcome obstacles in life. So, good for you, you were right!!! Now tell me that’s NOT arrogant
“…to say, “there is no god” is to deny millions (billions?) the ability to overcome obstacles in life.”
So do you suggest that we all merely pretend for the sake of those millions and billions that there really is a Tooth Fairy, and Santa just so they can maintain their magical fantasies?
Is reality so very, very scary for them that they cannot overcome their childish beliefs in magic, and conduct their affairs in the rational world along with other adults who have outgrown their beliefs in tooth Fairies, and Magical flying Elves?
You seem to suggest that even if gods are imaginary we should still maintain the illusion in the minds of the intellectually infirm so as to help them cope with reality better, by avoiding it.
You can keep your silly security blanket of imaginary Gods for the masses, and I will rely upon truth, honesty, and rationality. I rely upon myself and other good humans to get by in life, and not on reciting magical incantations to invisible sky magicians in hopes that they can alter the laws of the universe in my favor.
Be brave children, the gods cannot hurt you, or help you because they belong in the realm of fantasy beings along with Casper the friendly ghost.
Montheistic religions appear to (with some exceptions) claim that their deic figure has created a concentration camp for everyone who doesn’t follow the rules that deic figure has set. It is uncertain how strict these rules are, but they are immutable. So montheists (specifically muslims, catholics and christians) believe their deic figure has power, motive and intent to sent a good portion of humanity to the quivalent of a concentration camp, or at the very least condones that.
Such an ideology is not acceptable to me. Hence, I cannot trust people that distance themselves of the Concentration Camp clause in the laws of the Celestial Dictator. Hence I will seek psychiatric institutionalization and treatment for those who do.
where is the logic in logic?
God made me an Atheist. Who are you to question the will of god.
Far be it for God to say that a book is true. And yes atheists are arrogant and usually aggressively demeaning of people who believe in a higher power. Usually that arrogance is followed by quips at how ‘all christians’ or ‘all religions’ are the cause/root of ‘all evil’, if I ever met an atheist that didn’t try to make fun of my beliefs… o wait that will never happen.
Far be it for God to say that a book is true. And yes atheists are arrogant and usually aggressively demeaning of people who believe in a higher power. Usually that arrogance is followed by quips at how ‘all christians’ or ‘all religions’ are the cause/root of ‘all evil’, if I ever met an atheist that didn’t try to make fun of my beliefs… o wait that will never happen.
If just being an atheist is considered arrogant then I’m sorry, there is not much I can do about that, I’ll be an atheist till the day I die.
First off, I think it decidedly idiotic to say that the denouncement of deities in and of itself is arrogant. What is arrogant is science claiming to have all the answers, or at least be able to procure them at some point, as no one can say what science will look like in five hundred years. Think back to the 16th century, and you’ll see what I mean. Our entire scientific world view could be radically changed within this century, and our grandchildren will look back on us and unenlightened savages. All it takes is one brilliant mind and a lot of dedication.
That being said, none are more arrogant than the “hardcore” theists… And myself of course, why deny it?
Silly beliefs deserve to be ridiculed. To treat such silliness as being worthy of respect would be to condone the nonsense, and I as an Atheist care too much for you to allow you to wallow in your own ignorance without trying to help you out of your dark cave of superstitious belief into the light of rational thought.
You will thank us for the service we are providing you once you snap out of your self-imposed credulity. You are welcome, in advance!
I like how you posted this on Friday the 13th.
Many children believe in Santa until they are jarred into dealing with the reality of the matter when all the kids on the playground are laughing at you for still believing in that fairytale. We Atheists are providing the same service to the credulous childlike theists. When are you going to grow up theists, and realize that god is just Santa in disguise?
Using an extremely arrogant statement to convince people that atheists are not arrogant.
Sounds reasonable.
Whats so wrong with being arrogant anyway? So I don’t believe what your religion says, so what. So I don’t believe in a god, any god, your god, so what. So I think your bible, koran, torah are all bs books written by men to get other people to follow them and worship what they say to worship. Im arrogant, Im atheist, I dont care what you think, but try to make me or my family BELIEVE anything and there will be a fight.
Don’t Believe Anything – Know
And I will make fun of people who believe in anything until the day I die and go nowhere. And why is that such a strange thought, to think we just die and nothing special happens to us. I think the afterlife and heaven and hell are entirely silly notions thought up to scare and control simple minds.
is it arrogant to assert that im certain unicorns don’t exist ?
Arrogance is claiming to know what can’t be known, telling people that your version is the only correct version and anyone who disagrees will spend eternity in torment. I don’t know if there is a God or not, if there is, I don’t think he/she/it/them would want me to be that arrogant.
Well if the god of the bible exists it certainly would want you to assert to the exclusion of everything else that it is great.
That god is a petty being, always looking to be praised, and worshiped as being good at this, and great at that. So vain, so egotistical, and needy. Clearly that god has an inferiority complex, and is in need of much comforting from humans. If it did not have an inferiority complex why would it say that it is a jealous god, and that humans must worship no other gods.
Aside from god himself confirming that other gods exist he is also showing himself to be a whiny insecure petty creature more concerned with being flattered than anything else. What a pathetic wimp! If such an god with those mental deficiencies existed surely he is more deserving of our pity than our worship.
It was funny when the cosmological argument got shotgun/butt-stroke combo’d and never got heard from again. Anslem was an overly analytic idiot.
Perhaps, when we say, “I don’t believe in God because of this and that”, we are simply making the case that the definition of God must be expanded to compensate for the limitations that our religions have imposed on Him/Her.
As a “non-believer” many tell me that i am not right, “GOD” is truth. If “GOD” were truth than why have we changed the Bible? I think that the New Testament is a slap in the face of “GOD.” Was the Old Testament not good enough for those believers? I’m not arrogant, i do not laugh in the face of believers, i believe it takes a lot of courage to believe in “GOD,” even though you have never seen him/her or even talked to him/her they still believe. To me, that’s amazing. On that note, most of the religious people i run into and have educated debates with are very arrogant. At times i too become a little arrogant when they metaphorically spit in my face while trying to tell me that I’M WRONG and I’m going to BURN IN HELL!! To all of those people, i lead just as good of life as you do but i don’t need to look to the sky for help, i have free will and a brain to figure my situations out. Thanks, but no thanks for the “prayers” you think i need. I’ve made it on my own for quite a while now so why don’t you use those “prayers” that will never be answered for those of you that need it.
you’re speaking of religion, whilst the question of the existence of god goes beyond religion, it covers the creation of all energy, matter and time in this vast universe. if the beginning of our universe was indeed in the big bang – where does the matter of the big bang came from, the force which started the event and the laws of physics to determine the outcomes of it ?
Atheists, from what i’ve read and learned so far, do not try to deal with that question, they only try to conflict with religion, not science.
the question of god, i believe, is not who designed us, it’s who designed the universe.
nrgcrap@gmail.com
Call me arrogant, but I’m seriously not taking the fairytales of the religious into account. I don’t care what they want to believe, it doesn’t matter if it’s some sort of god, santa or the easter bunny.. I will never let their rules or logic be applied on me. I refuse to live by rules coming from a fairytale book. In that regard I’m very intolerant towards religion and religious people, sorry.
if you can define something then it exists for you.
whether everyone is aware of your definition is another story.
Both atheists and religious people have been arrogant, but i really think it does not matter what you believe or do not believe. As long as religious people dont bother atheists or the other way around. Im really starting to get sick of people telling me that im going to hell if i dont believe in god. Whatever, i dont care, just leave me alone. And trust me, you wont ever see me telling anyone that they are an idiot because they believe in a fictional invisible man who lives in the sky. This whole religious disagreement is just plain stupid. So live, and let live.
It’s a bit more than most people realize.
A theist and an atheist both consider their view as an external, and the other’s beleifs as an internal.
To the theist, an atheist is not denying the theists beliefs, but rather the reality of the theists deity or deities, universal entities outside of themselves. Likewise a theist believes that he is denying the atheists internal logic or science, a logic which the atheist considers external and external.
All of our arguments, theist or atheist, describe the flaws in the others internal/personal beliefs, which are being superposed over our own external/universal beliefs.
This is the essence of arrogance, to consider your own concepts/percepts to be of higher significance than global. If we look only at the personalities involved, then all parties are acting arrogant.
FYI: I am a fan of Joseph Campbell, and am therefore likely considered a spiritual atheist.
“…where does the matter of the big bang came from…” If you want to infinitely regress then where did God come from?
If you can answer by saying that god was always there, then why cannot all the matter in the universe have always just been there as well.
There is no need to make up imaginary magicians to solve this mystery as science is working on it. Science drives out these silly little stop gap gods one by one, and now you push him way out to the beginning where you think the cowardly little bastard is safe. If he had a spine he would show himself, and face up to his crimes against humanity in a court of law, but that cannot happen, and you believers know full well why it cannot happen.
That’s right, because your god only exists in your head!
http://www.religioustolerance.org/at_ag_hu.htm
“you’re speaking of religion, whilst the question of the existence of god goes beyond religion, it covers the creation of all energy, matter and time in this vast universe. if the beginning of our universe was indeed in the big bang – where does the matter of the big bang came from, the force which started the event and the laws of physics to determine the outcomes of it ?”
First answer: Energy. The two are interchangeable. Matter can be made into energy and vice-versa. Take a hydrogen bomb for example… when that thing is detonated, matter is converted into energy. Yes, some matter is lost. It is not destroyed, it is converted. E=mc2. It works.
Your other two questions are unanswerable. They deal with a point in time BEFORE the actual “event”. There are no measurements or tests that can be performed to answer this question REGARDLESS of its answer, be it deity or not. This is why the Big Bang theory begins the absolute nanosecond after this “event”. Not one moment before… just as evolutionary biology does not deal with the origin of life, but the changes it undergoes AFTER it hits the scene.
“First answer: Energy” and the rest of that. You are arguing side issues. You are arguing on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, instead of whether angels exist at all.
You can obfuscate the question of whether or not gods exist by burying it in these side questions if you like, but you are merely grasping at straws with these convoluted proofs of nothing.
You are saying that because we do not know every particular of the past history of everything that this necessarily makes the argument for the existence of gods plausible which it does not.
I'm not an atheist. It's not that I don't believe in god, it is that I know that god doesn't exist.
How do we classify people who do not believe in:
Santa Claus? Santheist
Gremlins & Goblins? Ghouliest
The whole argument is lost when we allow ourselves to be classified on any side of a non existant argument.
I suspect my personal beliefs are an extreme minority. I don’t believe in the God of the Christians or Muslims. That all merciful loving God does not exist. The suffering in the world is the clearest indication of this. However, My wife and I lived in a haunted house for 5 years. I strongly believe that there is more to our existence than the physical body.
In other words, our universe is far more complex than we imagine. I just am not able to understand this universe.
Atheism
The belief that there has never been anything greater than me, and that nothing amazing ever has or ever will happen. Despite the astounding complexity we find in even single celled organisms, we summon incredible faith and remain steadfast in our dogma that all of the beauty and complexity in nature, even our own sense of right and wrong, had no cause. So from one cosmic accident to another, everything is meaningless. I mean it. Please believe me.
Sounds reasonable.
we all atheist will go to hell, but dont worry, seriously, hell ain’t that bad. hell is only a place without God, so we will fit right into place. no fire, no cold. we will have eternity of non-Godness, and all our christian friends who annoy us wont be there either.
Uhm, but why are you separating the term “atheist” from the person who uses it? Of course the word is not inherently arrogant, but that doesn’t stop the person from being so!
An Atheist Anon.
Is English the writer’s second language? I figured out what the writer was saying but only with some difficulty. I used to believe in a god, but no longer do. I decided that I really had not seen any proof of such a supreme being. I know that a lack of proof is no proof that something does not exist, but I don’t think it is up to the atheists to prove that a god does not exist; it is up to believers to prove the god does exist. And this is the problem. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And proof is totally lacking. No god ever manifests himself, herself, or itself. We don’t have 200 foot high all-powerful monsters or gods exerting godly powers. No smiling visages in the clouds, or phenomenon that cannot, eventually, be explained by science. There is just nothing there. I know that fact is disturbing to most, but it is not arrogant to ask for proof of something; and your existence, or consciousness, is not proof that there is an invisible power.
And even if you do believe in this god, what is to say that it is your god who exists? How do you disprove the Hindu gods? The muslim god? The Jewish god? The Christian god? If you can disprove those gods you can disprove your own god just as easily.
I think I agree with Jaxxed. There is no arrogant but the one who thinks his view is superior. But for the ones who believe truly (in whatever ideology) and are authentic, then they are just being themselves, not arrogant. Anyone that has an opinion is arrogant, in a way, if that opinion gets perceived as superior by the audience, even when no harm was meant.
I say, it does not matter, let all of us be arrogant and live according to our beliefs without worrying what others might think. I believe this is the most liberating and empowering attitude.
And yes, I am an arrogant. What are you going to do?
javier
Of course its not atheism that’s arrogant. It’s the atheists that are.
As an atheist, I don’t mean to be arrogant. But, I just hate seeing people I care about wasting their time and energy on a idea that is unprovable. I know some people where their religion is their whole life, and I think it is ridiculous. I want them to realize that there is less out there; there is no meaning. But, I can see how religion can be a comfort for people… and I guess it isn’t doing any real harm to them individually. As for killing in the name of…. well that’s different
I guess… to each their own.
Yes if you believe that God exists then you cannot rule out that all gods exist. If you open the door for one then every one of the thousands of deities which have ever been worshiped pile right on in along with your favorite flavor god.
They are all immortal, and none have ever been proven to not exist so by all means believers make room on your altars for all the goddesses, and gods, because if you pick just the one, the others will surely smite you in a jealous rage.
To each his/her own. Whatever works for you. Just don’t go around pretending YOU have been given the correct answer to the questions you ask. The fact of the matter is, is at this time we just don’t know. Belief is just that, belief. Belief, by its very nature does not have to have a proof. That’s why it’s called ‘belief.’ So, go ahead, believe what ever it is you want to believe if it makes you feel better. Just don’t try and coerce me into believing what you believe. I respect you. You respect me. If we both live “good” lives and are “good” people, what’s the difference?
But, some just don’t respect.
I DO exist!!… see!!
I DO exist!!… see!!
The title does not match the article. I agree that “Atheism” is not inherently arrogant as it is simply a definition. The atheist, however, refers to a follower of atheism and by believing that their philosophy is the absolute truth defines arrogance. This is true of any philosophy…except mine…cuz mine is right.
On a purely subjective and side note. Trying to convince someone you are not arrogant and calling them ignorant in the same breathe will generally prove to be difficult.
What if part of what I believe is that I should “coerce” you into believing in God? Christians call it “to convert you” and to Evangelize is all about “coercion”, if you like that word, and all Christians are called to “save” you.
So “coercion” is inevitable because some of own beliefs compel us to act in ways that might involve others. For example this web site is creating a beautiful debate, or conflict, where we all participate. And this web site has a strong opinion about the existence of God and it is “coercing” its agenda and thus being “arrogant” as well.
But are we not all of us “coerced” already? Have we not been “manipulated” to believe what we believe. Whether we believe in God, or not, was this not being taught to us in our upbringing? so why get upset if now someone else wants to coerce you a little bit more, maybe in a different direction?
Ah, but there is free will! we can _choose_ what we want to believe and what not. Then the wold “coerce” has no meaning after all, because the decision is in our hearts/minds. I think we are free to believe whatever we want and we are free to try to “save” others with our message. Nobody can coerce you.
javier
The problem with militant anythings (theists, atheists, agnostics, or vegans) is that the other side will most likely respond with equal vehemence. No one here has actually argued specific points against each other. Rather, everyone has made loud assertions or are arguing points that are simply ridiculous.
God does not create athiests in the Abrahmic faiths. He creates free-willed beings who can choose to be what they wish.
Saying God exists does not mean any other magical being exists because belief in the Abrahmic God categorically denies the existence of such things, unless they serve the devil or some lesser god.
The arguement here as been specifically against the Abrahmic God so if a theist that does not believe in this God appears, what will these atheists do? Methinks that the conversation will end until they look up these new gods because they haven’t educated themselves on every possible opponent. And what happens when they come into contact with rather looser definitions of God?
It amuses me that the “religious” posters often have spelling and grammatical errors, while the “atheists” put forth well thought out, intelligent statements.
First of all, that’s not the definition of atheism or the etymology of atheism. That’s easy enough to verify through any search that doesn’t take you to some fool’s “I’ll be an atheist to rebel against my parents” site. So, I won’t go into it here.
The problem with this post and everyone who has replied to it so far is that they are playing the wrong side of the game. If religion does anything, it plays constant offense. The idea that atheism is arrogant doesn’t begin to make sense until you look at the world of revealed religions (a religion founded on something that some god told some guy).
All revealed religions state the following: All of existence was created for the sole purpose of man to be tested, rise above and eventually escape the poor conditions that the omnipotent, omniscient God created for him.
Let’s take a quick look at what arrogant really means:
ar·ro·gant (r-gnt)
adj.
1. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance.
2. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one’s superiority toward others.
Not only do the followers of revealed religions assume that everything in existence was created for them or perfected in them, it assumes that it was created poorly and it’s our job to fix it. How does it get any more arrogant than that?
I’m building a site to discuss these matters further. If you’re interested you can check it out at http://www.todayi.org. It should be up in the next day or so. Check it out.
Well, this is one way to bring some traffic to your blog!
Atheists assume they know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no god. If this is the case, this is in fact arrogance.
I don’t see why atheists have to come up with such arguments to prove they’re not arrogant. For one thing, since when have theists needed or demanded proof of anything to accept it?
Can anyone answer why it’s more arrogant to not believe in something than it is to believe in something?
I’ll gladly boast of not believing in God or any other supernatural rubbish as much as anybody else will proudly promote their faith.
I don’t see why atheists have to come up with such arguments to prove they’re not arrogant. For one thing, since when have theists needed or demanded proof of anything to accept it?
Can anyone answer why it’s more arrogant to not believe in something than it is to believe in something?
I’ll gladly boast of not believing in God or any other supernatural rubbish as much as anybody else will proudly promote their faith.
The difference is between-
“I don’t believe in god”
and
“I believe there is no god”
Because when you BELIEVE something, even something negatively charged like that, it’s still a belief…
I think it’s extremely arrogant for atheists to not learn about, and at least partially study, various world religions. simply because one aspect of something isn’t whole and nourishing isn’t valid cause to discard the entire philosophy. I’ve certainly made an attempt.
What I think you’ll find is many “hardcore” atheists are this way because their parents were of the foaming-at-the-mouth type christian mold, and they tried to get as far from this life as possible.
I’ve found, lately, that I do believe in bits and pieces of various philosophies that i find either interesting enough to take into consideration more frequently than others (a hall where all the biggest mass murderers sit around and eat and kill each other eternally? thats a once-over kind of consideration).
What it all boils down to is, everyone heard about heaven when they were young… and deep down inside, i think everyone wants to go to heaven, whether or not they believe in it. and who wouldnt? it sounds nice.
Christians are subhuman scum.
Can I just saw nice use of the Dropkick Murphy’s at the end there…..
You’re actually completely wrong. The term atheism IS an assertion that THERE IS NO GOD. This is actually a common mistake made by so-called atheists. Here is the definition of atheism:
“The doctrine or belief that there is no God.”
There is a large class of people that call themselves atheists that truly are not, because they misunderstand the term. True atheists believe that God doesn’t exist just as much as Christians/Jews/Muslims believe that God does exist. In between these extremes lies agnosticism. So, when you say that atheism does not “make an absolute claim on the existence of god” you’re completely in error. Making an absolute claim on the non-existence of god is precisely what atheism is all about.
Zzzzzzz.
“So, those who are ‘atheist’ do not assert absolute, universal knowledge.”
Nice try, but to claim that there is no god when you haven’t killed yourself to find out, then come back with the bar graphs of nihilism from the other world is the very definition of arrogance.
Atheism just doesn’t exist. Agnosticism does. But atheists, in order for them to be true to their Merriam Webster roots, must at some point come to the realization that their ‘belief’ is just as much as a faith-walk as the Christian’s.
The atheist is the exact same creature as your run of the mill Christian fundie.
By definition.
Amen to that!
I bet you people believe in creationism too. Fuck science, right? What does science know?
yahweh is the jewish name for god, not christian.
good article though
Aethism, simply means to be without theology, or to not accept a theology.
Belief in a “god” or “gods”, is to me taking a step back in my development as a human “being”, not a step foward. Just as our ancestors worshipped animals, nature or the sun. A christian, or Muslim would never consider going back to worship these deities, and would not consider themselves arrogant because they would not, and so “I” do not consider myself to be arrogant because “I” will not go back to what I consider some primitive kind of “god” worship. To me it is not arrogant, but ridiculous for “me” to do so. I do not “judge” those with such beliefs, or see them as Anne Coulter called Jews a couple of years ago as unfinished.
I am, what makes me feel balanced and comfortable, and whole in this universe of form and the pairs of opposites. Aethism works for me, and I thank the author for his essay.
How can you make any logical argument that insists there is no proof of a God, and leave out that fact that you have no proof that there isn’t a God. Such a conjecture is asinine.
And Atheists sure are riding a lot on random cosmic chance. Thank goodness every single freaking detail was exactly right for this world to turn out the way it did. Imagine…one tiny, near infinitesimal shift in any other direction and we wouldn’t even exist. Forgive me, but I prefer the order that God provides over chaos.
The only reason I can juice from my brain as to why anyone would be Atheist is that they are afraid of God. Afraid of His judgments, His interaction in our lives, and what He’s asked them to do. You want to live life free of that responsibility because it’s easier to believe that this life means nothing and you can do whatever you want to “for tomorrow we die.”
I think we’ll all get what we want after this life. So, take your chilling empty chaotic chasm and I’ll live eternally with God and my family enjoying an eternal increase in an incomprehensible paradise.
I love how the title of the article is “the atheist is not arrogant” but then you put up an image that is nothing more than a smug quip that only someone who is arrogant would put up. Being an atheist is not what makes you arrogant. Acting like you are some how smarter than everyone else who has faith is what makes you arrogant.
What is arrogant is that any of you think you have anything original to say, or that what you say can have an affect on those of opposing viewpoints.
Quit arguing about religion or atheism. What can you possibly hope to accomplish except to pat yourself on the back for your cutting intellectual word play?
Go do something useful like working in your community and making the world a better place.
“Arrogance is taking your beliefs too far and shoving it on other people.
Both Christians and Atheists are guilty of this.”
Read the article Atheism is NOT a belief. It is the absence of belief. It was silly to even name it. there’s no word for people who don’t believe in werewolves.
Fuck religion
Fuck your GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fuck RELIGION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fuck HUMANITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Decker… “How can you make any logical argument that insists there is no proof of a God, and leave out that fact that you have no proof that there isn’t a God. Such a conjecture is asinine.”
Because the argument that one cannot prove the non-existence of something is a logical fallacy.
For example… there’s an invisible pterodactyl named Charlie perched on your monitor right now. Prove he doesn’t exist.
See, the default for proof of existence is that a thing does not exist, and one then finds evidence to prove that it does exist. Not the other way around.
So… it is your argument which is asinine.
Well, it’s easy to disprove a straw man. First, your definition of Religion doesn’t match any religion out there. If you think it does, then you don’t know that religion at all.
Secondly, as G K Chesterton once pointed out, if you can make a world view (all of us have them) that’s shared by millions of people sound completely ridiculous in only a few sentences, you have not understood that world view.
All world views have some truth in them, even atheism. That doesn’t mean that everyone is right and no-one is wrong. On the contrary, that it’s possible that one world view is “the real one” — at least as far as humans can understand it. So, IMO, the truth is out there if you really are committed to looking.
WRT materialistic atheism, I have a simple objection. It has no room for free will and identity or even human rights. All of us are just machines. And as machines, we cannot even guarantee that we are rational. Any programmer will know that it’s easier to encode logical flaws that logical truths, even when you try your hardest. Without guaranteed rationality, freewill, and human rights, it doesn’t matter what you believe and it doesn’t matter what you do. Break a chair or break someone’s legs, it’s just atoms being rearranged. Dedicate your life to healing people or gunning them down, it’s the same thing. Just atoms in motion.
So even if materialistic atheism is true, it’s irrelevant. I wouldn’t have a choice what I believe and it wouldn’t matter.
Given this fact, I’m free to choose a world view that affirms all these things and there would be no consequences if I’m wrong. But if that world view is correct and materialistic atheism is false, then materialistic atheism would be suicide.
So the question for me is not, if materialistic atheism is true. Rather, what world view other than materialistic atheism is true.
That’s one thing people of science will never understand. Christianity isn’t about proving or disproving facts, it’s about having faith,and all the blogging in the world isn’t going to change shit about it
Atheist: taken from the greek word ‘theo’ meaning god and the prefix ‘a’ turning it to the negative. Atheist in the literal sense means ‘no God’ and therefore is a statement of absolutism that is just as arrogant as labelling yourself a ‘theist’ by your logic. I imagine that your argument to claim that atheists aren’t arrogant has only gone to show that they can be arrogant and more severely that many atheists are ignorant. I personally follow no religion and worship nothing. I do recognise however that there must be a God. Many people such as yourself seem to perpetuate the idea that a God can only be defined in the constraints of that of the Abrahamic belief systems which follow Freud’s primal horde system of belief. You all must release your own narrow mindedness on the idea of God being a sentient entity and realise that God is not just one thing, but everything. Whatever created our universe is God, and the only thing that could create God is the universe itself.
@first comment: Following that thought, being sure there is a god is just as arrogant as being sure there isn’t.
I think you’re wrong, because I think that the atheist claim is stronger than simply a lack of belief. The claim is, as Richard Dawkins puts it, “there is almost certainly no god.” Most atheists would, if presented with evidence of the existence of a god, reconsider their position. However, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, the existence of a god is as probable as the existence of Russell’s teapot. Which is to say, infinitely improbable.
The atheist position is, “God? What the hell are you talking about?”
Thought I’d throw this in as an absolute disproval of the stereotypical Christian God (very well known, but why not?):
An all knowing God removes free will. Therefore unless free will doesn’t exist, God contradicts himself and is therefore wrong.
If free will doesn’t exist, the vast proof of constant evil/sin in the world proves that God is therefore not benevolent, again a contradiction.
For God to be all knowing but not apply that to the universe, means he isn’t all knowing, so it’s still wrong by the way.
Also, I notice a lot of you are just stating “Your definition is wrong” without actually explaining why – that isn’t much use outside of being an inferred hominem.
As for any cosmological argument for God, why is infinite regress not possible? M-Theory requires time to have existed before space, for example.
basically all the religious people and by definition atheists need to mind their own business and stop pissing each other off and making laws for their side and killing other people over it.
“Arrongance (n): offensive display of superiority or self-importance; overbearing pride.
Atheism (n): disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.”
There is no way an athiest and a believer will ever agree on this topic and here is why. If there really is a god then claiming he doesn’t exist would be considered an “offensive display of superiority or self-importance” and therefore would make the atheist and arrogant person. Since we can’t agree wether god really exists or not or what his characteristics are this arguement will continue endlessly.
You wake up on Christmas morning and see that Santa ate the milk and cookies you left for him. Santa must exist right? It is the only plausible explanation that coincides with your faith, I mean you did put those cookies out there for him… right?
Mom and Dad didn’t eat the cookies, you saw them go to bed. Santa must be real.
Years pass and your parents finally tell you *SPOILER ALERT* Santa does not exist… It was them all along… HAHAHAhahahaHAHaHha…. NOW YOU FEEL LIKE A JACKASS FOR MISPLACING YOUR BELIEFS! (sry caps)
Now I doubt that anyone would change their belief after age 16 (or whenever the adult mindset is enabled) without indisputable proof, or that which they view as indisputable. I don’t blame anyone for that. My Santa example is to show that a world can come crashing down TOO FAST when the legs are pulled out from under it.
Now the world would fall into absolute chaos if the foundation of religion were ripped out from the world. People would see they have devoted lives, family and children to a false cause.
What in the world could be more disheartening than that?
It would be the same holy s**t factor that would strike Atheist should Mohammed, Jesus or anyone come back to earth and dazzle us. (After waiting this long, I better be F***ing DAZZLED!)
People are inherently biased to their own opinion, just make sure that you create your opinion critically.
Don’t just accept that things are the way they are. If you believe that you can create your own destiny (free will at it’s finest, IMO) you will question those who lead you and yourself as you lead others.
Atheism implies no further belief system — it implies no beliefs about politics, no philosophy, no beliefs about society, no beliefs about science, no beliefs about religion, or even that the person is irreligious (because some religions are atheistic). Atheists vary as much in their beliefs and attitudes as theists do. If you know that a person is an atheist, then you know that he or she lacks belief in gods — nothing more, nothing less.
“As for any cosmological argument for God, why is infinite regress not possible? M-Theory requires time to have existed before space, for example.”
The problem is that we cannot tell what happened before the nanosecond after the Big Bang. All the math goes beyond infinite, so no solid answer can be provided. Whether or not time existed before the BB doesn’t get around the simple fact that we cannot tell what went on before that point in time.
This also means that the theist cannot draw any conclusion (such as “Well what caused it?!”) because your evidence and data would wind up being the same as that from science: irrational math. It doesn’t matter if a purple four-headed tiger with plaid eyes “caused” it, there’s no way you can draw any conclusive evidence.
Being what theists call an “atheist”, my reasons for not following a faith are rather simple: there is not one single shred of evidence that points to a supernatural being. No test can be made, no data can be gathered. It is an argument which is not falsifiable. Everything in science has hard evidence and solid data to support it. Each theory is falsifiable and constructed with all known fact. I can read this data, interpret it, and perform a test to show that this data is correct. If science does not have an answer, then the scientists say “No clue, working on it.”… whereas the theists say “Our deity can defy physics and do what he wants!” much like the child on the playground whose superhero persona is invincible and can do anything. It is an argument from a premade conclusion, not one from collected and researched evidence like everything else in science.
Go change the world… w/e
This is shit!
“The problem is that we cannot tell what happened before the nanosecond after the Big Bang. All the math goes beyond infinite, so no solid answer can be provided. Whether or not time existed before the BB doesn’t get around the simple fact that we cannot tell what went on before that point in time.”
I don’t see how that was relevant – the point was to disprove the cosmological argument for the Christian God, not explain the universes creation (I mean metaphysically the universe can’t have been created, according to the laws of propositional logic. Outside of the idealist perception of the universe anyway, which is disproved by particle-wave duality so that doesn’t matter).
“The problem is that we cannot tell what happened before the nanosecond after the Big Bang. All the math goes beyond infinite, so no solid answer can be provided. Whether or not time existed before the BB doesn’t get around the simple fact that we cannot tell what went on before that point in time.”
I don’t see how that was relevant – the point was to disprove the cosmological argument for the Christian God, not explain the universes creation (I mean metaphysically the universe can’t have been created, according to the laws of propositional logic. Outside of the idealist perception of the universe anyway, which is disproved by particle-wave duality so that doesn’t matter).
Both “atheist” and “believers” should clarify to the rest of us WTF is god. Seriously, what do people mean with this word. So much talking and controversy for something you cant even grasp as a concept. “Believers” took the easy way. They said to themselves “I know god is an old papa with a bear who created everything in this universe thus everything explained by him and all i have to do now is say how good god is and keep on with my pathetic life”. “Atheist” when they say “i don’t believe” or “he doesn’t exist” they actually declare that they understand WTF is god as a concept, but they they have no idea as well.
Do I? Of course not, and i don’t fucking care! If exist such a thing then he is a fucking asshole who made the world and then watch us suffer. Lets get on with this shit. Have a life, fuck god
I would classify myself as somewhere between atheist and agnostic. What I find arrogant is when Christians, Mormons, etc. come up to me and try to talk to me about Jesus, or when they act surprised when I say I’m not sure I believe, etc.. That sort of behavior implies that internally, they are unable to accept other peoples’ beliefs that differ from their own, which I think is the height of arrogance. I accept that some people believe in God, but I think only time will tell. Some people use scare tactics to try to make other people believe, saying that if you don’t believe then you’ll go to hell, but I don’t really buy that, as that argument basically only applies to the Abrahamic religions. What about people who believe in reincarnation, for instance? It seems that there is no universal agreement on the existence/properties of God, which is the main reason I choose not to believe in any one religious system.
“THE BIBLE HAS BEEN THE SAME EVER SINCE IT WAS WRITTEN, IT GETS TRANSLATED BUT IT REMAINS THE SAME.”
Incorrect. The Bible has been translated hundreds of times into misleading terms – for example, during the Crusades (the Christian massacre of millions of innocent people and takover of territory in the Holy Land) the Bible was changed in order to make Christians believe mass genocide justified by God. Religion has always been corrupt until very recently, thus the constant translation.
The earliest known version of the Bible a: agrees with evolution, and b: says that God creates all of Earth’s animals in two different places/at two different times.
This is why I am Agnostic. I don’t think there is a God, but I cannot rule it out either… there *might* be. Either way, I’m still going to respect my fellow human beings and their beliefs (as long as they respect mine).
Whether or not a position is arrogant has nothing to do with its legitimacy. I honestly don’t give two shits about which is the more PC theory of the universe. Honey might attract more flies, but I don’t care for those who don’t acknowledge the truth value behind it.
Semi-agreed, however, since the conception of God is dependant on the person, I am ignostic. Whether God exists or not depends on what you define God as, not the generalised agnostic God (i.e: an anthropomorphisised one).
When kids cant sleep at night, its because they feel scared and lonely… they need a friend, someone to stay with them through the night… thats why kids sleep with teddy bears and stuffed toys, so they always know that someone is there to accompany them through the night… its the same with most religious adults, when the time is tough, a person only needs to believe in someone who is always close to him/her and will lead him/her out of trouble… that someone is God… religion was created in the times when every man/woman in a community needed support and morale much needed to make them stand and work again… believing all the way that there maybe someone whose besides them all the while…
i dont believe in ‘bhagwaan’ (God-hindi) but ‘Insaan’ (Man, Human-hindi) which i very much see everyday. These are very similar words, with very different meanings… one meaning ‘human’ while the other means ’superhuman’… but i believe in every human i see around me… because i have proof that they all exist… i provide and recieve help from other humans, i fight with and despise other humans, i play and talk to other humans… i think if i have to believe in a God, i would believe in myself first and then the rest of the people and fauna around me… i think God exists but not as singular superpower but as a collection of all the beings around us… much like a bittorrent network, or an opensource development environment, where various peers give and take, seed and leech, and basically contribute to the entire society in order to leverage it to a higher level, while ofcourse continuously interacting with each other in a seamless manner.
The charge of arrogance cannot be used against atheists without using it against religious people as well. Both groups have enormous common ground, rejecting hundreds of Gods and saviors. i.e. Christians absolutely deny that Horus was the son of God. Somehow religious people have no problem behaving exactly like atheists in denying the Gods of others, but act offended when their own idea of God is rejected.
It is the idea of a personal God that meddles in human affairs that most atheists reject. If you say that God is energy, then you’ll find no objections from most atheists.
i see two types of atheists: those who don’t believe in god, and those you believe in not believing in god. the former just don’t believe in god, they are as harmless as those who just believe in him. the latter are those who make it a point of combating those who believe. that is atheism and them some. i consider myself atheist, but do i find those who spend every second of the day praising jesus offensive to me? no. they are living their lives the same way i am living mine. the way our lives are frames by beliefs, we live to try to be happy, if that includes or excludes jesus, it shouldn’t be anyone else’s business. the assertive atheists are arrogant for imposing secular scientific belief on others. assertive religious people who get in my way of normal life because i refuse to believe in their god are also arrogant.
one more thing: if dismissing the christian god is arrogant, then what is dismissing all other gods? dare i say blasphemy?
I’m an atheist… and yes I’m probably a little arrogant. I simply think that super religious people are silly for believing in something like an invisible man in the sky.
I think religious people are arrogant for thinking that we are special or somehow different from the rest of the animals on earth. Sure we got lucky and we communicate and can build things that we eventually destroy our earth. We are the dominant species. That’s it.
It’s arrogant of the religious people to try to push religion on others. I may be atheist but I don’t push that on others.
“i think God exists but not as singular superpower but as a collection of all the beings around us… much like a bittorrent network, or an opensource development environment, where various peers give and take, seed and leech, and basically contribute to the entire society in order to leverage it to a higher level, while ofcourse continuously interacting with each other in a seamless manner.”
Just a little quixotic a statement there… we don’t really interact in a seamless manner at all, otherwise the world would be utopic, not the failing, slum of a world we have running right now.
VVV There’s nothing arrogant about not believing in made up stuff. I’d say claiming there’s even a chance of something existing, that’s totally made up (by you and the people you follow) is incredibly arrogant.
If you have two religions which both state, that there is only one god, then I have a question. If one religion is right then the other must be wrong.
If I was a religious person I would wonder which one it might be…of course my religion would be the right one, but why then do so many people believe in the wrong one?
Why would god have all these people going of in the wrong direction? Is he making fun of us……
“I don’t see how that was relevant – the point was to disprove the cosmological argument for the Christian God, not explain the universes creation (I mean metaphysically the universe can’t have been created, according to the laws of propositional logic. Outside of the idealist perception of the universe anyway, which is disproved by particle-wave duality so that doesn’t matter).”
And my point was not to “disprove” anything, but more to show that the cosmological God cannot be proven using any scientific method (which is what we use to prove and validate everything else in our world).
By showing that it is impossible to know precisely what happened before the Big Bang, one cannot attribute a deity to it.
Actually, the author’s right. This definition of atheism is not arrogant, it’s cowardly. It’s an agnostic wanting to claim the mantle of atheism. Saying you ‘disbelieve’ is just a way of getting around saying ‘I don’t know.’ There are only three options: I believe, I don’t believe, and I don’t know.
When all is said and done, there are many religious people who’s primary objection to atheism is that it robs life of meaning. I fail to see how obedience, subservience, and unquestioning worship of a creator under threat of eternal damnation and unthinkably agonizing torture provides any life with meaning. If we exist solely to glorify an entity with the power to create everything in known existence, don’t we suffer from a lack of any appreciable value? How does a single race out of thousands on an infinitesimally small speck orbiting one of billions of stars, all allegedly created by a single being, contribute anything meaningful to the grand order of things? By massaging God’s ego? By somehow affirming that what he does is good?
Our lives have the potential to be full of meaning without the need for a higher power. The world is full of rich, diverse opportunities to contribute or detract as we see fit, each of us having the potential to change society in ways that not only affect our immediate surroundings, but all of humanity both now and in the future. We are each one of a series of “random” “coincidences” that affect reality. The choices that individuals make can have lasting, far-reaching consequences for all life on earth.
Is it really so hard to accept that “randomness” and “chaos” play a large role in the development of the natural order? Consider your own life. Marginal differences in the past might have led to a very different present. If your great-grandfather had been running five minutes late on the day he met your great-grandmother, your entire family might not exist. Your contributions at work and in your community would not exist. Everybody that you’ve ever influenced would in turn have made slightly different decisions, all leading to a today which would be unthinkably different than what actually became. What if Hitler had never lived? Charles Darwin? Thomas Edison? Bill Gates? Benjamin Franklin?
What if God had decided to put life on a different planet? What if God had punished Eve singularly rather than damning all of humanity? What if Abraham had been unwilling to sacrifice Isaac? How are the whims of a deity or a handful of scriptural figures any less chaotic or random than the compounded decisions of billions upon billions of individual lives over the course of the planet’s history?
People also argue that God demands faith, not logic. This is consistent with many Judeo-Christian beliefs that call for the suppression of that which is natural to us. Humanity’s gift, that which makes us different from all other species on the planet, is that of intellect and logic. It allows us to communicate and collaborate on an unprecedented level, and both understand and manipulate the world around us. Why then would our salvation and ultimate success involve completely renouncing that which makes our lives on earth possible? Why must we fast, abstain from sex, refrain from speaking, deny ourselves romantic relationships, inflict injury upon ourselves, suffer extreme isolation, persecute our brothers and sisters, manufacture conflict, enslave our own kind, and constantly plan for the end of the world all in the name of becoming closer to god? Wouldn’t the creator of humanity be more likely to promote the human experience rather than command that we all deny it?
Many will say that we renounce these desires and inclinations in the name of morality, a strict set of codes handed down to humanity from God. Why then do we only hold a few of the commandments in high regard, while others have almost no bearing on modern behavior, even among the most devout? Morality is firmly societal. Someone rigidly following the word of the Old Testament would be upholding morality by stoning someone with differing beliefs. Scripture provides moral affirmation of slavery, incest, polygamy, human sacrifice, the taking of property and land through bloodshed, and a host of other vile acts. Why then do societies which militantly maintain that the Old Testament is the infallible word of god not embrace these time-honored, biblically accepted practices?
Why are the messages of Christ in the New Testament so thematically different than those of God in the Old Testament? Aren’t these just two incarnations of the same being? Why would someone who is all-knowing change the rules mid-game? Do civilizations reflect the the morality of their Gods, or do Gods reflect the morality of the civilizations that create them? Is the God of modern day Christianity the same God of the 1st Century? What about the God of the Middle Ages, Renaissance, or Inquisition?
How is it that the land rites of a small band of people warrant God’s intervention, but a millennium of conflict and subsequent change of ownership of this same region goes presumably unnoticed? How is it that the transgressions of two cities warrant complete destruction, while a century marked by repeated genocide sees no divine intervention? Has God changed, or have we? Surely a being who was once provoked to the point of eradicating everyone and everything on the planet save for the contents of a small boat (apparently with a mind-boggling number of stables and astronomical amount storage space) would find some reason to interject during the last two thousand years.
As for those who argue that the God dilemma is one of definition and not dogma: The implications for our lives if the universe and its rules were created by an entity who never interferes in our lives, vs. an essentially random occurrence are nil. People are affected by the doctrines of religion. If you reduce God to an abstract idea, the debate becomes a philosophical one with little pragmatic purpose for most people. The aspects of religion that most devoutly defend, and of which most atheists are offended, all stem from the characterization of God as a palpable, meddling being who continually interjects into our lives. This is the idea that is dangerous, with thousands of years of conflict, persecution, and poor decisions as evidence.
wtf? what connection is there to arrogance. It is the exact opposite – presuming to know who everyone else’s supreme being is is the ultimate expression of arrogance.
Try telling people you’re an athiest for just one day and see what kind of assumptions come your way.
People question your moral values and ethics based entirely on the fact that you, as a person, do not believe in God, in the same way that this article clearly shows, others do not believe in the deities of other religions.
We athiests only come off as arrogant to protect ourselves from the slander that will come their way from so called, “god-fearing” individuals.
My favourite thing about any online discussion of anything to do with religion?
NOBODY changes their mind, and EVERYBODY feels superior in their own belief/disbelief.
I am an atheist, but I do not feel arrogant. But I do pity people who believe in a god.
For a simple reason. There are so many different gods, that there is no telling which one is the right one, should there be one.
To me atheism is very simple – I just don’t believe – end of story…
I really don’t care either way.
God or no God.
I just try to get along with people without exploiting them.
God or the idea of God doesn’t really come into it at all.
If the be believer is wrong, he is not missing out on anything.
If the non-believer is wrong he will regret it FOREVER!
Athiesm- The belief that there was nothing… which exploded…and formed self-replicating bits when eventually led to dinosaurs..
Yeah I suck toes!
I don’t want to sound rude, but that blue pictures, sounds extremely reasonable, to me. You haven’t understood the bliss, and pease, and faith that comes from being religous. No matter you write, you could never offend a person who is truly religous, because religon helps solve many problems.
I will believe in atheism when I die and black space consumes me like it did to Khan’s victims, turning my mind into an Alzheimer’s patient, but then I won’t recognize it for consciousness, the ability to understand nothingness will be gone as well.
I will just sleep forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever…
Until then, I believe in God. Number one because I haven’t died yet to find out that nothingness is a really stupid concept. And, as an attachment to that thought, number two, since we exist right now, why would I posit a notion that nonexistent somehow trumps this very existence. Its extremely non-intuitive, and yes, arrogant and lame.
For any persons looking to find theism that is both logical and heart-confirming, outside of the dominant realm of Christianity. I recommend the book “Jiva Dharma” written by Bhaktivinoda Thakur. I also recommend this book to all atheists that may find any contradictions in the modernized teachings of Christianity.
Saying there is no gods is no more arrogant than saying there is no Santa Claus or no pink unicorns. Anyone that makes an outrageous statement, like the existence of of invisible beings, is subject to the burden of proof, as are all professors of theories. Nobody has the responsibility of disproving a theory stated by another.
The superstitious belief in imaginary beings is the single largest cause of death and repression in the history of the world. Whether through crusades, inquisitions, holy wars, suicide bombers, or a host of other outrages, religious superstition has been the cause and justification for violence against those with different or no superstitions. As long as there are believers in “true” gods, there will always be violence in the world against those that disagree. Educating people to be rational wouldn’t stop all people from committing violence, but it would stop many. As the Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg once said:
“Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things. But for good people to do bad things — that takes religion.”
Religion is the most dangerous of superstitions which makes it difficult to ignore. At least astrologers, tarot card readers, tea leave readers and followers of other superstitions are harmless and don’t kill, torture and enslave people that disagree with them. Hopefully soon the USA will follow in the footsteps of all the other Western in marginalizing religious superstitions.
I’m pleased this post has sparked so many comments. If “atheists” and agnostics really believe what they say, then they shouldn’t care about reasserting their logic on all these craaaaazy theists.
Hell, Pascal’s wager pretty much sums it up. If Christians find what their looking for in their faith, it really makes no difference if they (or you) are right or wrong.
What I can’t figure out is why someone would admit to being an atheist. You can’t prove a negative unless you have infinite knowledge. It’s a logical fallacy.
At least agnostics admit they don’t know if there is something else out there. Until you go there, there is no basis for a discussion, and you won’t get eaten alive in an argument.
I think the arrogant person is the one who believes that an all knowing, all powerful, infinity existing God was apparently lonely and needed to create a vast universe of stars and planets and then place on just one of those planets human beings that would worship him, but only if they wanted to, but if they didn’t he would send them to an eternal hell where they would burn forever and if they did they would worship him forever at his knee. WTF wouldn’t he just create them in heaven to worship him in the first place??? Oh wait, because we are God’s special creation and he loves us and created everything for us and blah blah blah blah, yeah that’s not arrogant at all…
it takes faith to become atheist no?
fuck atheists
fuck atheists
life is relative. truth is personal and interpretable. i am an atheist, yet i have respect for those with faith, hell i wish i did every now and then. i know its several thousand years too late, but can we agree to disagree? at the end of the day, noone can really prove anything, because when you go back far enough, the origin of everything is unknown. all we humans have are our theories, can we not just respect one another’s?
Atheism is stupid. If most Aithiests actually thought about what they believe they would find that they are Agnostic, and I don’t care what Richard Dawkins has to say about it.(even if I agree with him 99% of the time) Questioning knowledge is the only path to truly understanding the world we live in.
Believe the Lie.
‘Jesus’ lived in poverty, he was somewhere between the ages of 12 and 15…his mother Mary bore him around the age of 14-15, he had olive skin and was about 5.2 due to a number of things but primarily due to lifestyle and nutrition.
His ‘image’ for the Bible was recreated by Da Vinci because of cultural issues where it was a ‘crime’ of that age to depict people other than being Anglo-European.
Why on Earth the religious lie continues to portray this dude as a 6 foot blue eyed blond is all a big part of the Christian con to the millions of the faithful.. Try a little honesty for once…
Religion is simply the flat-Earth ideology trying to their arms around the world…
You mean….
Religion is simply the flat-Earth ideology trying to wrap their arms around the world…
Yes!
I have to re-up this from the Anon poster above because it bears repeating.
“The superstitious belief in imaginary beings is the single largest cause of death and repression in the history of the world. Whether through crusades, inquisitions, holy wars, suicide bombers, or a host of other outrages, religious superstition has been the cause and justification for violence against those with different or no superstitions. As long as there are believers in “true” gods, there will always be violence in the world against those that disagree. Educating people to be rational wouldn’t stop all people from committing violence, but it would stop many. As the Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg once said:
“Good people will do good things, and bad people will do bad things. But for good people to do bad things — that takes religion.”
True Dat!
The belief in Gods is for Cowards who are afraid of the dark. You are afraid to die so you prefer to believe that you will not die but live forever.
It is magical wish thinking of a child. Grow up faithers you are so pathetic.
To even think we know is arrogant.
The practice of Scientific Inquiry in search of knowledge, and truth is the highest and noblest cause, and it is in mans nature through curiosity to do so.
Religion on the other hand is antithetical to the search for knowledge for it asserts that God is the answer to everything, and to search for less whimsical answers is blasphemy.
What is all this bullshit about anyway? Arrogance?! Big fucking deal!! I am an adult. Therefore I am not affected by something so silly, childish, infantile, and stupid as the concept of arrogance…or “gawd allrighty”. It means nothing to me. Nor should it mean ANYTHING to any of you. So…GROW THE FUCK UP…and stop arguing about such stupid shit!
You grow up you turtle butt!!
That’s nothing. I used to be a homeless rodeo clown but now I am a world class magician !
I can’t wait for 2020 or so when the entire Internet is just a big page saying, “has nobody asked for your opinions on belief because they aren’t very interesting or unique? Write them down here and also have some Nine Inch Nails MP3s!”
>>Saying there is no gods is no more arrogant than saying there is no Santa Claus or no pink unicorns. Anyone that makes an outrageous statement, like the existence of of invisible beings, is subject to the burden of proof, as are all professors of theories. Nobody has the responsibility of disproving a theory stated by another.<<
Actually, anyone who asserts any knowledge of truth bears the burden of proof. That's why the author of this article says that he "does not believe god exists" instead of saying that he "believes that god doesn't exist." At first glance it looks the same, but the first is simply saying that he isn't a theist, while the second is making a claim to knowledge about the non-existence of god.
This is why I say that people who talk like this are either cowardly atheists who don't want to shoulder the burden of proof (or know they don't have any more proof than the theists they despise so much), or agnostics who are afraid to admit that they simply don't know.
Anyone completely researched yourself? Instead of thinking about others. Look into yourself first.
Anyone knows the answer for “Who are you”
Dont say this body is me.. If you say.. My body is me, Then may I consider that, If you lost your Hand or Hair.. Then you are 1/2 of you?
Man, Research about yourself instead of others.
I use religion as motivation for working, serving others, and unconditionally showing love to everyone.
And that affects atheists in no negative way. So why argue?
because religion kills people eventually
ultimately religion is about power and control
I suggest all atheists and believers alike to read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. It’s extremely insightful and filled with many interesting facts from both the religious and rational sides.
In the end, we all just have to accept that none of us know if we’re right or not, and anyone claiming they know more than anyone else about this topic is arrogant. Plus, fighting about it over the internet is not proving anything. If you want to prove you’re right, die and see what happens.
The way I see it, it doesn’t really matter whether I believe in god or not, or whether any of you believe in god or not. What we believe won’t change the fact that god either is, or is not… there.
Unless god will disappear if we stop believing?… No wait, that’s fairies isn’t it?!
Why is it that so many religious individuals are anonymous?
Atheism is stupid because you see it as meaning that nonexistence trumps existence? Did you exist before you were born? Surely the total quantity of time before your birth is more significant than the few decades that you’ve been around. How is it crazy to think that after this life we all return to the state we were in before it?
And as for the comment that atheism is stupid because we’re all actually agnostics: We can’t know for sure that gravity works the way we think. For all we know, it’s possible that there’s a big horseshoe shaped magnet in the center of the earth, and everything on the earth has tiny specks of iron in it. Am I stupid to hold the position that there is no giant horseshoe shaped magnet in the center of the earth, even though I can’t know for sure that it isn’t there? Is it stupid to say that there is no such thing as vampires, werewolves, the bogeyman, or fairies even though we can’t absolutely disprove their existence? Agnostics are people who are either unwilling or not interested enough to take a position.
Agnosticism is indeed a form of Atheism.
An Theist is “One who “believes” in the existence of a god or gods.”
Agnostics lack that belief which is to say that they do not have it inside them. Neither do Atheists have that belief inside them. Atheists, and Agnostics both lack the belief that gods exist therefore they are both Atheist.
Rocks, and Trees lack the belief that gods exist therefore they are Atheist as well. Bugs, and birds lack that belief so they too.
Most life on this planet is not possessed of the belief that gods exist therefore most life on the planet is Atheistic.
All children are born into the natural state of Atheism, and only become unnatural when converted into a Theist by family or societal pressures from those who are infected with that mind disease.
Yes if an Agnostic says that they do “not” lack the belief then that would mean that they have the belief, and that would make them a “Theist”, but since they say that they don’t know one way or the other, then they are indeed “Atheist” because they still lack the “Belief” necessary to make them a Theist!
Agnostics are just weak kneed Atheists!
A “Theist” is a person who is possessed of a positive belief. Anyone who lacks that “Belief” is not a Theist. If someone is not a Thesit, then they are Atheist!
Atheist is a term which encompass all who do not have the belief that gods exist.
It is a simple binary system. There are only two states. Either you have the belief or you lack that belief. You are either Theist, or Atheist. There is no other possible position.
Arrogance in the matter is unimportant.
“there’s a big difference between saying you don’t believe there’s a god and you are sure there isn’t. one is rational uncertainty, the other is, yes, arrogant.”
Yet living one’s life on the “safe” side is absurd – the whole Pascal’s Wager scenario. Therefore, in the interest of living life to the fullest without worrying about such b.s., one can and ought to live as if one were sure there is no god, just as life is lived with the surety that gravity will hold one down.
Damned apologist.
A light bulb is either on or off. The natural state of humans is that they are born with the light on, and it only becomes dimmed, and goes off when and if the person is convinced to believe in the backward superstitious belief in the gods.
The believers are so quaint. Like frightened natives tossing Virgins into the Volcano to appease the Fire God. Nowadays we understand that the Volcano only shakes the earth and spews forth fire because of the natural forces of plate tectonics so those believers look mighty damn foolish indeed. Modern day believers are just as silly to believe in their own magic man! Like frightened children scared of the bogeyman. Too funny!
Anyone who does not answer “YES” to the question “Do you believe in God” is an Atheist.
Any answer that is not amount to “YES” is a NO! Any answer that is not affirmative disconfirmative of the Belief. If you lack the Theistic belief in the existence of gods then you are Atheist.
Atheists can call themselves Agnostic, Atheist, Non-Believers, Rationalists, Brights, Naturalists or whatever they like. They all lack the positive Belief in the existence of god(s) Theism, so they are in effect all Atheist! The prefix “A” meaning “Not”, as in “Not Theist”.
Anyone who does not answer “YES” to the question “Do you believe in God” is an Atheist.
Any answer that is not amount to “YES” is a NO! Any answer that is not affirmative disconfirmative of the Belief. If you lack the Theistic belief in the existence of gods then you are Atheist.
Atheists can call themselves Agnostic, Atheist, Non-Believers, Rationalists, Brights, Naturalists or whatever they like. They all lack the positive Belief in the existence of god(s) Theism, so they are in effect all Atheist! The prefix “A” meaning “Not”, as in “Not Theist”.
Any answer that is not affirmative is disconfirmative…
I like turtles!
Anyone who does not answer “YES” to the question “Do you know if God exist or not” is Agnostic. If you answer yes, go get your head examined.
I have met many people of a variety of religions or are atheists that are arrogant. In my opinion some atheists are so fervent in their belief there is no higher being that they are almost practicing some sort of religion. It’s a hypocrisy for them to complain when they are no different than the arrogant religious people they complain about (primarily Christians in the US at least). Arrogance is arrogance regardless of spiritual beliefs.
Positing a god is a claim for god’s existence, right? An EXISTENT entity is part of the cosmos, and thus part of nature. There can be no way around it. Calling something “supernatural” is only an attempt to remove certain “special” ideas from scrutiny to protect them from their own fatal epistemological flaws. It’s a snow job, a sleight-of-mind with which people have grown accustomed to for the purposes of self-deception. The majority of people, it seems, need to deceive themselves in order to convince themselves that they are special in the universe.
Majority of the people are cool, it’s the minority that act as if they know that are insane.
“Jesus lived in poverty, he was somewhere between the ages of 12 and 15…his mother Mary bore him around the age of 14-15, he had olive skin and was about 5.2 due to a number of things but primarily due to lifestyle and nutrition.”
I agree. Artists have taken liberty in depicting Jesus as someone they idealize. But be careful to assume all Christians are ignorant to this fact. Most are, but not all.
It seems a lot of this argument (on both sides) boils down to assumptions on stereotypes and few people willing to openly listen to the other person’s stance before offering a response.
Matt
Christian2.0
I believe the fairytale goes that the God Raped the preteen Mary when she was @12, and that would put the birth of the Alien/Human Hybrid known as Jesus around Mary's 13 or 14th year.
The Pedophile sent an Angel to accost the youngun & the bible says she was confused and frightened. She was told that she was to be used as a breeding bitch for the purpose, and supposedly agreed to the use.
How could a powerless, young, poor 12 year old girl give consent to this when she was being intimidated, and coerced by an Powerful Angel.
It was Rape! If someone in authority these days used their position of power to coerce a preteen or teen into sex to impregnate her, they would be guilty of a crime. They would be a Rapist.
Why do you Faithers worship a Pedophilic Rapist?
“Anonymous”
I would like to be able to answer your question(s). But I’m not sure what you’re asking. Help me out here. Are you wondering why we worship God? Are you questioning the accuracy of Scripture? Or are you asking about the virgin birth? Probably all three, but I thought it would make sense to understand your question(s) first.
Matt
Christian2.0
I think he is asking why you Christians have such low morals.
I’m not sure that’s what he was asking, but I don’t mind answering it.
In my opinion Christians are no more moral (a mass generalization) than the rest of society. But I also believe that we are no less moral. The problem is that we have a habit of projecting morality greater than we have (I think this might be where most rational people start getting annoyed). I love Tolstoi on this topic, “Attack me, I do this myself, but attack me rather than the path I follow and which I point out to anyone who asks me where I think it lies. If I know the way home and am walking along drunkenly, is it any less the right way because I am staggering from side to side!”
You are very right to call into question the morality of Christians. Again, not because of some astounding immorality, but because of a discrepancy between projected morality and actual morality. I just ask that you leave that distaste with the individual(s) (I’m sure that’s a lot) and not with the belief as a whole.
Matt
Christian2.0
I suggest that the worst of us in this Forum, and on this planet are more Moral than the God of the Bible brags of being in his book.
Who amongst us would build a skyscraper apartment complex, and fill it with handpicked tenants to your own liking, and then permit them to have children, and keep pets there, and then if one of them makes too much noise past a certain hour against the landlords rules who of us would barricade the exits to prevent survivors, and burn the place to the ground with everyone inside except perhaps the janitor, and his family.
Nobody here would be so insane as to do this wicked thing, yet god did worse when he braggs of drowning everyone on earth except a handful in the great flood. What a Psycho whack job!
Who among us would be so immoral as to burn down a petshop or a Zoo full of animals. God did similar but worse when he drowned all the innocent animals who had committed no crimes, and did not deserve to die.
We are all more moral than that ghastly god, so if anyone needs forgiveness for their sins it surely isn’t us! God is guilty of the worst atrocities ever perpetrated against mankind, yet the believers sully themselves cowering, and praising such a prick as god.
Yes if the Devil had done the genocide and other atrocities God brags of doing in the bible, every one who praises god for doing the acts would damn, and curse the devil for those same acts.
Drowning thousands or millions of innocent babies, mothers, grandmothers, men, and women, and drowning all but a few animals is the type of evil that is only worthy of a devil yet god brags of how powerful he is by being able to do it. He is a braggart, a blowhard, and a mass murdering insane bastard! If god exists he should be brought to justice for his crimes like any other criminal, and certainly not praised for those crimes!
There are still those who praise Hitler for his atrocities as well, but Hitler was a small potatoes sweetheart compared to the arch criminal god. Who could be so immoral as to worship such a demon as that lowlife scumbag of a god!? I suggest that the dictator should open up the position, and hold free elections. Any of us could do a much better job at being a good, and merciful god than the thug who holds the job now. Out with the smelly trash!
How do you define morality? Just wondering, we could be in totally different ballparks. Is morality equal to fairness? Justice? Love? Or an understanding of right and wrong? Or something else I failed to suggest?
Another question: Do you view morality as descriptive or prescriptive?
Matt
Christian2.0
I think the examples of non-morality given was quit clear. If you don’t comprehend I think there is something wrong with your brain.
True, there were examples given of “non-morality.” However none of them met with a definition of morality, that’s where I’m having a problem. I see them as arguments of good/evil not moral/immoral.
If they are points relating to morality/immorality, where does the standard of morality come from?
I’m just trying to better understand the points being made.
Matt
Christian2.0
I think the point is your God is immoral and pretty messed up compared to even a human. Standard of morality that is comprehensible to you and me comes from humans as we experience what is painful or leads to negative outcomes for humanity.
So human being the default standard, if a powerful creature has less morals than human then that creature can be considered evil.
I guess I’m just confused with the discussion of morality.
Here is why (I’m taking a lot of this from CS Lewis, I can give you footnotes if you like): Your argument against God (assuming I’m discussing this with an atheist, or three atheists) is that everything seems so immoral (the God you deny is immoral). But where does your idea of morality come from? Can you call a line crooked without having something straight to compare it to? If the whole show, from A to Z is senseless, how can you, someone who is just part of the show, find yourself in such opposition to it?
If the whole universe has no meaning (a common atheistic stance), we should never find out that it has no meaning: just as if there was no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would have no meaning. In order for moral to have meaning, there must be a standard to measure it by. Hence my earlier questions about how you define morality and where does that standard come from.
I’d like to address, Biblically, a counter point for your stance on the “immorality” of God due to the flood, but I feel that my argument would be tossed aside as invalid for quoting “fiction” in your opinion. So I’m confused as to how why you are using it to prove your point. Would you grant me the ability to quote it’s authority just as you have?
Matt
Christian2.0
Standard of morality that is comprehensible to you and me comes from humans as we experience what is painful or leads to negative outcomes for humanity.
“Standard of morality that is comprehensible to you and me comes from humans as we experience what is painful or leads to negative outcomes for humanity.”
In response to this, my question would be this: If morality is relative (which it must be if it is experience based), how are you able to say Hitler, Gandhi, Bill Gates (whoever) is moral or immoral? Isn’t it dependent, then, on the culture from which they come? And would this experience based understanding be sufficient enough to define all morality?
I view a morality that is based upon shared experiences as incomplete in its understanding and constantly changing in its interpretation.
Incomplete or not, the only morality you can view is based upon shared experiences. Reading your God book is also an experience.
Your God is relatively immoral compared to human standard.
I disagree wtith that.
I’m not disagreeing that your point is difficult to reconcile. Honestly, if I didn’t believe the authority and authenticity of Scripture, I’d be asking the same thing.
Part of the problem is pulling a single narrative out of an entire book and assessing the whole thing by that one narrative. And before I could ever explain my stance on that, we would have to agree to look at the entirety of Scripture as evidence for my belief.
@Christiant2.0: You seem to be arguing in the last several posts that God works in mysterious ways as if that somehow puts any of his actions outside the scope of human critique.
That God, being God can do as he likes without regard for the consequences those actions have for other lifeforms as he does not answer to us who must just marvel at his madness and think it good.
It is not that way for humans. It is sometimes the case that when crimes are committed the reasons for the criminals actions are fully explicated, however is is often the case that a serial killer for instance will be found guilty of her crimes, yet never reveal the reasons why he/she perpetrated them. Society never learns the where, and why for of the matter, nevertheless the scoundrel is convicted by the courts, and condemned by society.
The Courts, and civil society do not say….well the serial killer has worked in mysterious ways, and we know not whatever motivated her to take the actions she did so we cannot fairly judge her/his actions as being immoral, or criminal. We do not say well we don’t know enough about the person, or their background to know if what they are doing is actually immoral, or wrong so just let people murder and eat other people if they like without judging them harshly for it.
We can measure Gods bad behavior, against our own better behavior. We can judge God as we would judge the behavior of our neighbor, or a stranger. We can expect of god to behave himself, and get back on his medication, or be lobotomized, castrated, caged, and fed a bland diet to calm the fucker down.
It is not just the Great Flood for which that nutjob has to answer, but that is a good start.
Christiant2.0, answer this question: Do you praise God for drowning all those Animals, and for turning all those babies, and grandmas, and old shopkeepers, and the kids playing soccer, and the pregnant women into so much drifting rotting corpses just because he was displeased with some of them, or all of them. Do you think their lives were worth nothing, just like the lives of those good animals who were not even capable of sinning were not even worth saving.
Christiant2.0: would you be so wicked as the God of the Bible, and do as he did. Look around at your family, your neighbors kids, the old lady who walks her dog past your house, the kids who play ballhockey at the end of the street…..would you…..could you do as he did?
No, I knew you would not, and could not, so why do you defend that bastard for doing it?!
If the Devil appeared and did the same mass murderous actions, who of the believers would praise him for it. None!
Not a single one of the believers in God, and the Devil would praise the enemy for drowning everyone on the earth, but fall all over themselves to look the other way at the crimes of their own tyrant so they can kiss his hand which is drenched in the blood of innocent babies.
Society looks on in disgust at anyone who displays a Swastika in praise of Hitlers evil doings, yet people feel no shame at adorning their necks with Crosses in praise of the ultimate evildoer in all of fiction.
do you think that because may have done some things right that those few things should be looked at and the bad things overlooked.
Do you apply those same rules to Hitler for instance. Hitler believed smoking was bad for your health, so instituted anti-smoking rules which seems like a good thing to do. He liked to play with his dog, and no doubt loved his family, and did other relatively normal everyday things, yet we do not say well those things outweigh all that nasty Holocaust Gas Chamber Genocide nastiness no do we.
Hitler in his small way, compared to God in his big way had a lot of similarities. Well Hitler did have more redeeming qualities because he at least played with a dog, while that fucker God merely amused himself with torturing Job, and making life for humans generally miserable.
Even Hitler would make a better God, than God!
This is a very difficult topic. Probably the most difficult for Christians to reconcile if we honestly approach it. It is also difficult for me to approach because I have the suspicion that I’m dialoguing with multiple people, so the rules keep changing. While one person will quote the authority of Scripture as evidence for a “cruel” God, others deny the existence of God. One moment I’m arguing with an atheist, the next I’m discussing aspects of theology (which, imply the existence of a God).
There is absolutely no way I would be a Christian if I had to swallow the whole thing at once. For me it flows out of a logical process. If this, then this. If that, then that.
The only way I could begin to answer such a complex question as the one that is being asked is to start at step one. There is no way to jump to an understanding of God as good without having something to jump from. Which is practically impossible given the medium. I really would like to explain how I came to the conclusions that I have come to, but I’d need a suggestion on how to better do that.
Until then, just know that I agree with you on this point: Barring an explanation of the question, I too would doubt the goodness of God. But also know that I have been given a more than reasonable explanation for it and would like to explain it in depth.
I recommend that you merely Advocate on behalf of God. Arguments directed at Atheists, or Believers will be addressed sufficiently to both if you just vigorously defend gods case. Be as Arrogant as you like in the doing of it, as I prefer you not to hold back on any anything.
There mere Belief, or actuality that a Super Natural Being (SNB) known as god exists, does not necessarily constitute sufficient evidence to determine the worthiness of that Supernatural Being to be worshiped by humans.
Believers in SNB gods also believe in SNB devils which they presumably do not worship, so that proves that mere supernatural existence is not enough or believer would worship god, and the devil too.
Why should people worship God, and not the Devil for instance who has done less evil than god, according to the evidence laid out in black & while by god in his Biblical Testimony.
It is God who brags of turning Lot's wife into a pillar of Salt for merely exercising her god given human curiosity. And God himself who knew full well in his capacity as omniscient super-villain that when she was out of the way that Lot's two daughters would commit adultery with their father in the cave a short time later.
God engineered, and manipulated those events so as to facilitate that adultery by snuffing out the Wife of Lot, and the Mother of the girls in order too have the girls have extramarital incestuous sex with their father.
If the devil had done this unholy act for that reason some might call him a fucking murderous, adultery, and incest promoting Prick, but because it was God who perpetrated this atrocity, and he can send us to perdition we must all must just smile like sycophants and praise such inhuman, and inhumane immoral, and criminal behavior!
Believers are like to kids looking on as the schoolyard Bully pushes the littler kids around, and steals their lunch money. You know it's wrong, but if the Bully looks your way you look sheepishly down, and keep your mouth shut.
You would be better people if you all took the bully to task, and shouted to the top of your lungs at the Bully to stop his unjust criminal behavior, like I am doing here, but you are cowards.
Who reading here will shout at god to lay off, and who will side with the crazy bastard and praise, and defend the Bully Boy for his atrocities against your fellow man? Come out and defend your god you god believing weasels!
There mere Belief, or actuality that a Super Natural Being (SNB) known as god exists, does not necessarily constitute sufficient evidence to determine the worthiness of that Supernatural Being to be worshiped by humans.
Believers in SNB gods also believe in SNB devils which they presumably do not worship, so that proves that mere supernatural existence is not enough or believer would worship god, and the devil too.
Why should people worship God, and not the Devil for instance who has done less evil than god, according to the evidence laid out in black & while by god in his Biblical Testimony.
It is God who brags of turning Lot's wife into a pillar of Salt for merely exercising her god given human curiosity. And God himself who knew full well in his capacity as omniscient super-villain that when she was out of the way that Lot's two daughters would commit adultery with their father in the cave a short time later.
God engineered, and manipulated those events so as to facilitate that adultery by snuffing out the Wife of Lot, and the Mother of the girls in order too have the girls have extramarital incestuous sex with their father.
If the devil had done this unholy act for that reason some might call him a fucking murderous, adultery, and incest promoting Prick, but because it was God who perpetrated this atrocity, and he can send us to perdition we must all must just smile like sycophants and praise such inhuman, and inhumane immoral, and criminal behavior!
Believers are like to kids looking on as the schoolyard Bully pushes the littler kids around, and steals their lunch money. You know it's wrong, but if the Bully looks your way you look sheepishly down, and keep your mouth shut.
You would be better people if you all took the bully to task, and shouted to the top of your lungs at the Bully to stop his unjust criminal behavior, like I am doing here, but you are cowards.
Who reading here will shout at god to lay off, and who will side with the crazy bastard and praise, and defend the Bully Boy for his atrocities against your fellow man? Come out and defend your god you god believing weasels!
Anything in extreme is dangerous and arrogant. Atheism is as extreme as is fundamentalism. The are the polar opposites.