Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.

^^^^ A qoute from uncle Harris.



Overtime through the journey, I perceive this quote to be truth. Atheism as a term should not exist, it does not make any sense.

When defined, atheism is simply disbelieve in the existence of God or deity. That known, the bigger problem roll in when atheists are charged to define what they mean by God which they disbelieve in. Many atheists would define God/deity as the creator of earth and end there. Many seem to view the word God from christianity and islamic angle. They forget that God as a term does not end with christianity and Islam. Out there today, God has different definition and conception. It is also not a personal name but more like a tag or label.

In some conceptions, God is a natural entity.

In the dictionary, God is an influencial person.

Therefore;

- If atheism as defined is the disbelieve in the existence of God, atheists should be able to tell us if they disbelieve in all definition and conception of God. Then we can arrive to God been define as influencial, admired and respected person; we arrive to the pantheistic definition of God as Nature and Natural entities. How can someone disbelieve in the existence of God (defined as influencial person or natural entities)? Will an atheist look into my face and tell me respected person and Natural entities does not exist? Well I will have to ask such atheist to check his/her brain.


- If atheism is the believe in some conception of God and disbelieve in some other conception God, then we can conclude such stance is rooted in confusion. Atheists don't believe in God, but you see them just talking about the Christian and Islamic God; what about spinoza's god? In the dictionary, God is defined as Theartre gallery, do we atheists disbelieve in the existence of theatre gallery? If there can be any strain of believe in any concept of God, then atheism seize to exist.

"Several people in this world have grossly
mis-characterized Atheism as a belief. Let
me see if I can help explain Atheism by
means of a metaphor:
There is an auditorium full of people
gathered in groups and wearing colored
shirts; some groups are wearing red
shirts, others green, etc.... In the middle of
the auditorium is a table with an opaque
un-opened box on it and hanging from the
ceiling above the box is a sign that reads:
"What color is the fruit inside the box?".
The people wear the color of shirt they
believe the color of the fruit in the box to
be.

Some people believe the color of the fruit
to be red, because their family and friends,
teachers and acquaintances all believe it to
be red, and how could so many people be
wrong? Other people wear orange shirts
they have incredibly articulated logical
formulations to explain how the fruit can
be no other color than orange. Other
believe the color to be green; they
intuitively felt "green-ness" emitting from
the box the moment they entered the
auditorium. Etc....


The Atheist is the one who doesn't align
with a color, but rather questions: "Since
nobody has ever opened the box and
nobody can see into it, how do we know
there is even a fruit in it let alone know
what color it might be?". The people who
believe the fruit is in the box and believe
they know what color it is are the ones
holding a belief. The Atheist holds no belief
because there is no good reason to do so.

The reason that I, as an Atheist, engage in
dialog with believers is to, hopefully, help convince
them to focus their efforts on
finding out what's in the box rather than wasting
their time focusing on their beliefs. I hope this helps
clear up some of the misunderstanding people have
about Atheists and what we "believe" ."

^^^
This is the best answer so far.

It puzzles me why almost every one, even well informed people, continue to mischaracterize what atheism is.
I think it has to do with word " atheism" itself.
The " ism" attached to it, seem to subconsciously invoke the idea of a philosophical movement.

I think atheism should, henceforth, be called " Unbelief" .
If we use the word "Unbelief" instead of atheism, the people like the op would not be asking us what we unbelieve. Lol

If you make a proposition, any proposition that you cannot prove with a shred of evidence, then I have the right to maintain a position of unbelief until you show convincing proof of your proposition.

The funny thing is all of us take this position everyday in our daily lives in work , business, academics, and personal relationships.

It is only with regards to religious beliefs that we tend to completely block out the critical thinking area of our minds.

For example, For a long time now, I have been trying to sell The 3rd mainland bridge in Lagos, with the condition that the buyer should pay me now, then would receive the title and deeds after death.
So far, there have been no buyers. They think I am trying to take them for maga.

I wonder why it's different for religion.

Unbelief, disbelief, nonbelief.. I don taya abeg..

FOLYKAZE:
Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.

^^^^ A qoute from uncle Harris.



Overtime through the journey, I perceive this quote to be truth. Atheism as a term should not exist, it does not make any sense.

When defined, atheism is simply disbelieve in the existence of God or deity. That known, the bigger problem roll in when atheists are charged to define what they mean by God which they disbelieve in. Many atheists would define God/deity as the creator of earth and end there. Many seem to view the word God from christianity and islamic angle. They forget that God as a term does not end with christianity and Islam. Out there today, God has different definition and conception. It is also not a personal name but more like a tag or label.

In some conceptions, God is a natural entity.

In the dictionary, God is an influencial person.

Therefore;

- If atheism as defined is the disbelieve in the existence of God, atheists should be able to tell us if they disbelieve in all definition and conception of God. Then we can arrive to God been define as influencial, admired and respected person; we arrive to the pantheistic definition of God as Nature and Natural entities. How can someone disbelieve in the existence of God (defined as influencial person or natural entities)? Will an atheist look into my face and tell me respected person and Natural entities does not exist? Well I will have to ask such atheist to check his/her brain.


- If atheism is the believe in some conception of God and disbelieve in some other conception God, then we can conclude such stance is rooted in confusion. Atheists don't believe in God, but you see them just talking about the Christian and Islamic God; what about spinoza's god? In the dictionary, God is defined as Theartre gallery, do we atheists disbelieve in the existence of theatre gallery? If there can be any strain of believe in any concept of God, then atheism seize to exist.

It's like asking someone which they disbelieve, Santa Clause or Father Christmas?

It's like asking whether they disbelieve the Santa with the very long beard, or the one with a much shorter beard?

FOLYKAZE:
Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.

^^^^ A qoute from uncle Harris.



Overtime through the journey, I perceive this quote to be truth. Atheism as a term should not exist, it does not make any sense.

When defined, atheism is simply disbelieve in the existence of God or deity. That known, the bigger problem roll in when atheists are charged to define what they mean by God which they disbelieve in. Many atheists would define God/deity as the creator of earth and end there. Many seem to view the word God from christianity and islamic angle. They forget that God as a term does not end with christianity and Islam. Out there today, God has different definition and conception. It is also not a personal name but more like a tag or label.

In some conceptions, God is a natural entity.

In the dictionary, God is an influencial person.

Therefore;

- If atheism as defined is the disbelieve in the existence of God, atheists should be able to tell us if they disbelieve in all definition and conception of God. Then we can arrive to God been define as influencial, admired and respected person; we arrive to the pantheistic definition of God as Nature and Natural entities. How can someone disbelieve in the existence of God (defined as influencial person or natural entities)? Will an atheist look into my face and tell me respected person and Natural entities does not exist? Well I will have to ask such atheist to check his/her brain.


- If atheism is the believe in some conception of God and disbelieve in some other conception God, then we can conclude such stance is rooted in confusion. Atheists don't believe in God, but you see them just talking about the Christian and Islamic God; what about spinoza's god? In the dictionary, God is defined as Theartre gallery, do we atheists disbelieve in the existence of theatre gallery? If there can be any strain of believe in any concept of God, then atheism seize to exist.

Atheists define God as a personal God, and I agree. I have no problem with Spinoza's God. In fact, it's difficult to argue against the idea.

plaetton:

It's like asking someone which they disbelieve, Santa Clause or Father Christmas?

It's like asking whether they disbelieve the Santa with the very long beard, or the one with a much shorter beard?

Santa Claus is definitive unlike the word 'God'.

You know what I am pointing at, only that you want to drive this into another direction. Been a pantheistic atheist who believe energy is God, do you disbelieve in the existence of God (energy)?

In Yoruba spirituality, I am a God (being conscious). In pantheism, natural entities and everything that made up nature are God which you have agreed to in the past.

Even in the dictionary, influencial person are refer to as God.

So be an atheist, do you disbelieve I, natural entities and influencial persons are not existing when I refer to them as God?

Weah96:


Atheists define God as a personal God, and I agree. I have no problem with Spinoza's God. In fact, it's difficult to argue against the idea.

You have a point there.

But I will like to ask further more for clarity, do you believe or disbelieve in spinoza's God?

addempsea:
"Several people in this world have grossly
mis-characterized Atheism as a belief. Let
me see if I can help explain Atheism by
means of a metaphor:
There is an auditorium full of people
gathered in groups and wearing colored
shirts; some groups are wearing red
shirts, others green, etc.... In the middle of
the auditorium is a table with an opaque
un-opened box on it and hanging from the
ceiling above the box is a sign that reads:
"What color is the fruit inside the box?".
The people wear the color of shirt they
believe the color of the fruit in the box to
be.

Some people believe the color of the fruit
to be red, because their family and friends,
teachers and acquaintances all believe it to
be red, and how could so many people be
wrong? Other people wear orange shirts
they have incredibly articulated logical
formulations to explain how the fruit can
be no other color than orange. Other
believe the color to be green; they
intuitively felt "green-ness" emitting from
the box the moment they entered the
auditorium. Etc....


The Atheist is the one who doesn't align
with a color, but rather questions: "Since
nobody has ever opened the box and
nobody can see into it, how do we know
there is even a fruit in it let alone know
what color it might be?". The people who
believe the fruit is in the box and believe
they know what color it is are the ones
holding a belief. The Atheist holds no belief
because there is no good reason to do so.

The reason that I, as an Atheist, engage in
dialog with believers is to, hopefully, help convince
them to focus their efforts on
finding out what's in the box rather than wasting
their time focusing on their beliefs. I hope this helps
clear up some of the misunderstanding people have
about Atheists and what we "believe" ."

Platteon could see this as the best explanation but I am sorry to say, this does not answer or have anything to do with the OP.

There is nowhere in the OP I mentioned that atheists believe. Atheism is defined as disbelieve in the existence of God. . . . .but the question remains at what is God?

An albino in a cuture is God. . . . .do you as an atheist disbelieve in the existence of God (albino)?

Fela is my God. I have stated this is many occassions. He is my God because I am influenced by him. Does this mean you disbelieve in existence of Fela because he is refered to as God?

That is the simple question begging for answer

FOLYKAZE:


Santa Claus is definitive unlike the word 'God'.

In Yoruba spirituality, I am a God (being conscious). In pantheism, natural entities and everything that made up nature are God.

Even in the dictionary, influencial person are refer to as God.

So be an atheist, we you disbelieve I, natural entities and influencial persons are not existing when I refer to them as God?

The universally accepted notion of god is a supernatural entity who consciously and purposefully created the universe, and who controls the destinies of his creation like a grand puppet master.
Naturally, unbelievers like myself refuse to accept this notion, because it lacks evidence.

Now, some also believe that god is an impersonal conscious mind that controls the ebb and flow of the universe.
This sounds better, but still lacks evidence.

Now, on the other hand, if you say that Energy, electromagnetic energy is god, I would not have any need to argue with you, nor ask for evidence , because in this case, you have taken something that we both know to exist, energy, and have decided to label it god to satisfy your own mind.
No atheist will dispute this particular labeling with you.

FOLYKAZE:


You have a point there.

But I will like to ask further more for clarity, do you believe or disbelieve in spinoza's God?

I wouldn't say that I believe in it, because it isn't an anthropomorphic God. More like I'm aware of the idea and acknowledge it.

Some worship cows as God. I know cows exist. I believe in God.

Weah96:


I wouldn't say that I believe in it, because it isn't an anthropomorphic God. More like I'm aware of the idea and acknowledge it.

We are getting there bro. . . .

I want you to understand that attributing human character or personification of entity which brought it been describe as God brings much flaws into atheism.

From your argument, atheism is rooted on the disbelieve in personality attached to an entity rather than the entity itself.

Atheism tend to pull against thought and not reality on ground.

I think you understand me here?

musKeeto:
Some worship cows as God. I know cows exist. I believe in God.

To those people that worship cows, cow is God. And you to tell them you dont believe in God existence mean you dont believe cow exist.

God is more like a label. Disbelieving in label is simply irrational

plaetton:


The universally accepted notion of god is a supernatural entity who consciously and purposefully created the universe, and who controls the destinies of his creation like a grand puppet master.
Naturally, unbelievers like myself refuse to accept this notion, because it lacks evidence.

Now, some also believe that god is an impersonal conscious mind that controls the ebb and flow of the universe.
This sounds better, but still lacks evidence.

Now, on the other hand, if you say that Energy, electromagnetic energy is god, I would not have any need to argue with you, nor ask for evidence , because in this case, you have taken something that we both know to exist, energy, and have decided to label it god to satisfy your own mind.
No atheist will dispute this particular labeling with you.

As par the bold, you can actually speak of yourself. Some atheists have argued it and some will still argue it.

My point exactly is God is a label or tag and not a substantial entity. Atheists can disbeliev in Yahweh (a personal character) but when we use the general term God/god (label), then the atheist have to specify what he/she meant by god/God.

A good example is god in the bible as Men, in another case, god is used in place of judge.


So if an atheist simply say he disbelieve in God, does it mean he disbelieve in the existence of men and judges?

Fela is my God. I idolize him. . . .worship him and see him as the source of my inspiration.

Do you disbelieve in the existence of God defined as Fela?

I want you to understand that atheism is all about God and not specific definition of God. Atheism is the disbeliev in anything that could be called God. Any substance of believe in God (probably after defining) fails to atheism anymore.

FOLYKAZE:


As par the bold, you can actually speak of yourself. Some atheists have argued it and some will still argue it.

My point exactly is God is a label or tag and not a substantial entity. Atheists can disbeliev in Yahweh (a personal character) but when we use the general term God/god (label), then the atheist have to specify what he/she meant by god/God.

A good example is god in the bible as Men, in another case, god is used in place of judge.


So if an atheist simply say he disbelieve in God, does it mean he disbelieve in the existence of men and judges?

Fela is my God. I idolize him. . . .worship him and see him as the source of my inspiration.

Do you disbelieve in the existence of God defined as Fela?

I want you to understand that atheism is all about God and not specific definition of God. Atheism is the disbeliev in anything that could be called God. Any substance of believe in God (probably after defining) fails to atheism anymore.

When people say the word " God", there is generally no ambiguities about what they mean.

If you use God in the general term, everyone tends to understand what you meant.
But if you say that fela is your god, we also know what you mean.
There are no ambiguities.

^^^
For example,
I am an outspoken atheist, but I also see the Earth and the Sun as gods deserving reverence.
I do that without any contradictions or cognitive dissonance.
Both are visibly real, awesome, powerful and everlasting (from a human perspective), and also give and sustain our lives.

plaetton:

When people say the word " God", there is generally no ambiguities about what they mean.

If you use God in the general term, everyone tends to understand what you meant.
But if you say that fela is your god, we also know what you mean.
There are no ambiguities.

As an atheist, we have two different contextual use of the word God, which one do among the three do you disbelieve in?

Can your disbelieve covers all the two conception in your post?

To make more clearer. Two things are important in atheism; disbelieve and God.

We have God fitting into different context, do you disbelieve in these God in according to their context?

plaetton:
^^^
For example,
I am an outspoken atheist, but I also see the Earth and the Sun as gods deserving reverence.
I do that without any contradictions or cognitive dissonance.
Both are visibly real, awesome, powerful and everlasting (from a human perspective), and also give and sustain our lives.

We view thing from same angle. I see nature as god deserving reverence too. But to atheists like mazaje, you are not more an atheist.

To muskeeto, revering a sun as god makes you not an atheist anymore. To him, atheism is the disbeliev in ALL god.

There the problem lies

FOLYKAZE:


We view thing from same angle. I see nature as god deserving reverence too. But to atheists like mazaje, you are not more an atheist.

To muskeeto, revering a sun as god makes you not an atheist anymore. To him, atheism is the disbeliev in ALL god.

There the problem lies

There is no problem. Theists believe in a conscious being separate/part of this universe responsible for EXISTENCE. One that "CONSCIOUSLY" created and governs the world. The eternal balance of the world sort of. Atheism is the direct opposite of this.

FOLYKAZE:

xtsnce of the supernatural god of monotheism god like that
We view thing from same angle. I see nature as god deserving reverence too. But to atheists like mazaje, you are not more an atheist.

To muskeeto, revering a sun as god makes you not an atheist anymore. To him, atheism is the disbeliev in ALL god.

There the problem lies

Brother stop making things up pls. . .We have been through this before. . .If you claim that nature or energy is god then atheism can not apply to it. . .Energy exist, after all you once said that god is a label, you know very well that we disbelieve in the existence of the monotheist or polytheist concept of god, supernatural concepts of god of religions like christianity, islam and polytheist god concept of hinduism etc. . .I have no problem with admitting that the pantheist concept of god does exist. . .Since it is just a label given to things that we know. . Energy, nature, surrounding environment etc. . .

musKeeto:

There is no problem. Theists believe in a conscious being separate/part of this universe responsible for EXISTENCE. One that "CONSCIOUSLY" created and governs the world. The eternal balance of the world sort of. Atheism is the direct opposite of this.

You mean to say anti-theism?

mazaje:


Brother stop making things up pls. . .We have been through this before. . .If you claim that nature or energy is god then atheism can not apply to it. . .Energy exist, after all you once said that god is a label, you know very well that we disbelieve in the existence of the monotheist or polytheist concept of god, supernatural concepts of god of religions like christianity, islam and polytheist god concept of hinduism etc. . .I have no problem with admitting that the pantheist concept of god does exist. . .Since it is just a label given to things that we know. . Energy, nature, surrounding environment etc. . .

All I read from your post is anti-theism.

FOLYKAZE:


To those people that worship cows, cow is God. And you to tell them you dont believe in God existence mean you dont believe cow exist.

God is more like a label. Disbelieving in label is simply irrational

To compare God to a cow is wrong, u can see a cow so u can believe in him.

FOLYKAZE:



You mean to say anti-theism?

Is black anti-white?

If you consider labels useless, why do you feel so compelled to be referred to as atheist? or spiritual atheist?

FolyKaze,

[size=15pt]Do you mean how atheists identifies a god?[/size][size=14pt] Or[/size] [size=15pt] how they see god as identified by others?[/size]

Speaking for myself alone I can't define god because the idea of "God" is a fluid concept to me, being an atheist (It may be different for other atheists) My first question if asked to define god would be "which god?" Shiva will be defined in a very different way to Baal or Allah. If pressed I probably could define those gods but it would be textbook regurgitating because I have no personal connection or affiliation to those gods, likely my response would be a cut n paste of their wiki page There are so many gods that, unless you firmly believe in a particular one it's almost impossible to come up with a blanket definition that applies to all, some are cruel & vengeful some are caring & forgiving. Some are even wolves!
You have a concept of "One god" so you can speak & define in terms of one being, I don't share that belief don't so I can't possibly define it.



God, in the most general terms, is an empty concept. The myriad definitions of God have left essentially every aspect of its personality (even whether or not it has a personality) totally open. I don’t have a personal definition of God, because I don’t believe in any gods. All of the concepts of God I’ve been presented with, I have rejected as baseless; and I know that if I just made up my own definition, all I’d be doing was believing in something I made up.


I define a God (never just "God" for there are many that are or have been believed in) as an unseen deity that is responsible for certain things on Earth. In some cases, the God created the Earth and all on it, in others the God may just be responsible for the sun, with other Gods taking other responsibilities.


As an Atheist, I am aware of the beliefs of others, but do not fins any credence whatsoever in the idea of any God or Gods, from Roman through Greek and Muslim to Christian and beyond. Mankind has always worshiped and feared something as a general rule, and Gods will continue to rise and fall as beliefs shift.

[size=15pt]If i may ask FolyKaze I ask how you define god ? [/size]

Actually, folly, why in the known universe do you still claim to be an 'atheist' when you clearly claim to know what's in the box?

musKeeto:

Is black anti-white?

Black is not necessarily opposite of white.

FOLYKAZE:


All I read from your post is anti-theism.

No.
He is right.
No one can dispute the existence and power of the sun, earth, gravity etc.
But we are free to dispute the existence of a non visible and non verifiable entity possessing these same attributes.

Ymodulus:
[size=15pt]If i may ask FolyKaze I ask how you define god ? [/size]

God is energy (Like plaetton will define it).

God is anything that is been worshipped (As defined by PastorAIO).

God is consciousness (As define in Yoruba spirituality).

God is totality of everything that made up the universe and the universe itself (Pantheism).

God is an admired, adored and influencial person (My dictionary).

God is a theater gallery (Also my dictionary).

God is natural entities (naturalistic pantheism).

God is substance or Nature (spinoza definition).



Those are my definition. . . . .

If I may ask you, as an atheist, which of among the God defined above do you disbelieve in?

Which one do you believe in?

plaetton:

No.
He is right.
No one can dispute the existence and power of the sun, earth, gravity etc.
But we are free to dispute the existence of a non visible and non verifiable entity possessing these same attributes.

We are talking of Sun, moon and stars seen as God here.

The non visible, and non verificable entity are mental creation. Which is a substance. (could be wrong).

Substance is God (spinozism).

When this substance is personified, it samething as anthromorpism which the sun, moon and stars falls in.

They are all substance and God.


Muskeeto point is anti-theistic. We know atheism is all about God and not theistic conception of God only