Thread: Can Atheists be trusted?

Originally Posted by Spookycolt

No religion came before a central figure on which to base it upon. None of them.

Thank you for understanding my point. Therefore, you can understand why your previous statement was flawed: "There is no diety that exists that doesn't have a religion, specifically outlined, attached to it."

A higher power doesn't need a religion or even believers. It just is. The religion comes afterward.

Originally Posted by Spookycolt

What your describing here is agnosticism not a true belief in a deity.

Then please clarify the description of atheism and your beliefs regarding atheism.

Thank you for understanding my point. Therefore, you can understand why your previous statement was flawed: "There is no diety that exists that doesn't have a religion, specifically outlined, attached to it."

A higher power doesn't need a religion or even believers. It just is. The religion comes afterward.

Well if that's the route your taking then your correct. Alcoholics Anonymous believes in a higher power without a religion but its not really a deity is it? You can believe in "something" out there but a deity is associated with a divine or supreme being. In that regards my statement still holds.

Then please clarify the description of atheism and your beliefs regarding atheism.

This is simply the belief that there is nothing higher then humans. There was no divinity involved in the creation of anything and all can be explained through natural occurrences.

Originally Posted by Spookycolt

This is simply the belief that there is nothing higher then humans. There was no divinity involved in the creation of anything and all can be explained through natural occurrences.

While I agree with you that this is the proper definition of atheism, I know several that would vehemently disagree. They waffle by falling on the idea about atheism not being a believe in deity even though they may believe in "woo", an afterlife or other "magick".

Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity, which implies that nothing exists but natural phenomena (matter), that thought is a property or function of matter, and that death irreversibly and totally terminates individual organic units. This definition means that there are no forces, phenomena, or entities which exist outside of or apart from physical nature, or which transcend nature, or are “super” natural, nor can there be. Humankind is on its own.

While I agree with you that this is the proper definition of atheism, I know several that would vehemently disagree. They waffle by falling on the idea about atheism not being a believe in deity even though they may believe in "woo", an afterlife or other "magick".

This falls within the realm of mysticism which is quite fascinating actually. Its between a belief in a deity and full on atheism. It helps explain the mysteries without commitment to a specific type of God.

Maybe that's the term you were searching for.

Originally Posted by Spookycolt

This falls within the realm of mysticism which is quite fascinating actually. Its between a belief in a deity and full on atheism. It helps explain the mysteries without commitment to a specific type of God.

Maybe that's the term you were searching for.

I think you are missing my point; several self-labeled "atheists" are really, to use your term, "mystics". I completely agree that an atheist is more than someone who doesn't believe in a deity or deities, but also believes in a strictly physical universe as the linked definition states. Anyone who doesn't go with that definition isn't an atheist.

Originally Posted by Divine Wind

There is a difference between belief in the Almighty and belief in (and adherence to) religious dogma. Atheists often mix the two for their own purposes. A deceit which does not engender trust.

Two major problems with your statement.

The first, ironically, is that you state "atheists often mix the two" while you yourself are mixing all Atheists together.

The second is that you claim "deceit," but have no specific example as to how this is deceit.

Originally Posted by Divine Wind

I think you are missing my point; several self-labeled "atheists" are really, to use your term, "mystics". I completely agree that an atheist is more than someone who doesn't believe in a deity or deities, but also believes in a strictly physical universe as the linked definition states. Anyone who doesn't go with that definition isn't an atheist.

Atheism is pretty simple: Do you believe in god/gods/deities? No. An atheist is someone who lacks a belief if a god(s)/deity(ies).

However, there are different kinds of Atheists: Atheists, Anti-theists, Movement Atheists, New Atheists, as well strong/weak (or positive/negative) atheism.

I think it's pretty ironic when theists expect atheists to consider nuances yet they have no problem generalizing.

Atheism by itself is the first step to self awareness. People are limited by cognitive limits to how far they will succeed to become self aware. 99% of the population will die before ever becoming self aware. Which is to say they do not understand even themselves.

Originally Posted by Divine Wind

Oddly, even atheists can't agree on their beliefs. Some go with the strict "When you're dead, you're dead" and there is nothing beyond the physical universe. Others are Pantheists or believe in other forms of "Woo" albeit without a deity involved.

"Atheist" and "Pantheist" are mutually exclusive terms.

Originally Posted by Hairball

"Atheist" and "Pantheist" are mutually exclusive terms.

What ? A pantheist is a step up from atheism, atheism is a starting point for truth and to see reality as it truly is.