Definition of "Atheist"

Religions > Atheism > Definition of "Atheist"

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 2 of 5

Topic:	Religions > Atheism
User:	"Pmb"
Date:	09 Dec 2007 08:45:24 PM
Object:	Definition of "Atheist"

I would like to ask members of this group to post how they believe the term
"Atheist" is defined. Or, if you consider yourself to be an atheist, then
what do you mean when you refer to yourelf as an atheist. If you're
uncomfortable with that then perhaps you could choose amoung one of the two
definitions given below
(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -
Thank you
Pete
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 12:22:03 PM

On 10 dec, 03:45, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

Corrected:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in God.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

This NG prefers 2 which - of course - includes 1.
so do I
Peter van Velzen
(actually a type (1) atheist)
December 2007
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
.

User: "Savageduck"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	09 Dec 2007 09:49:01 PM

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net> said:

I would like to ask members of this group to post how they believe the
term "Atheist" is defined. Or, if you consider yourself to be an
atheist, then what do you mean when you refer to yourelf as an atheist.
If you're uncomfortable with that then perhaps you could choose amoung
one of the two definitions given below

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.
However I will attempt a response, others might disagree and will
probably expand on what I write.
....and if you had been paying attention at all, or done some research
you should be aware the terms are Strong and Weak Atheism.
Yes Strong atheists do not believe in the existence of any gods (not
just the Abrahamic or Mosaic god.)
and
Weak atheists do not believe in any god.
For the most part gods or religions do not play a part in the lives of
any professed atheist regardless of type. That is save for the
uninvited intrusion of obnoctious, arrogant, self righteous,
evangelising theists.
For me I do not believe in the existence of any gods and thusly do not
have to bother with the claim to not believe in any god. Just like the
tooth fairy, Harry Potter and Santa, they don't exist, so why would I
not have to believe in them? there is nothing to believe. So I call
myself an atheist plain and simple (as I understand it, the weak stance
can imply an existence of gods without following the religion that
worships any given god. Almost agnosticism.)
Agnostics can claim an atheistic leaning of either type, but fail to
fully gain the label by hedging their bets and saying prove it.
The atheist knows any submitted proof will be based in myth and
unsubstanciable and only tolerates the attempts for the amusement
provided.
.

User: "Richo"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 05:26:07 PM

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.
Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.
Babies will grow up to be teenagers and they will get involved in
discussion groups and they will ask questions out of genuine
curiosity.
If you start screaming at every one of them that they are a troll
after seeing one post by them you are going to be wrong a lot of the
time. Also overuse of the term "Troll" will render it meaningless.
This is a pity as the word Troll is still useful.
Cheers, Mark.

However I will attempt a response, others might disagree and will
probably expand on what I write.

...and if you had been paying attention at all, or done some research
you should be aware the terms are Strong and Weak Atheism.

Yes Strong atheists do not believe in the existence of any gods (not
just the Abrahamic or Mosaic god.)
and
Weak atheists do not believe in any god.
For the most part gods or religions do not play a part in the lives of
any professed atheist regardless of type. That is save for the
uninvited intrusion of obnoctious, arrogant, self righteous,
evangelising theists.

For me I do not believe in the existence of any gods and thusly do not
have to bother with the claim to not believe in any god. Just like the
tooth fairy, Harry Potter and Santa, they don't exist, so why would I
not have to believe in them? there is nothing to believe. So I call
myself an atheist plain and simple (as I understand it, the weak stance
can imply an existence of gods without following the religion that
worships any given god. Almost agnosticism.)

Agnostics can claim an atheistic leaning of either type, but fail to
fully gain the label by hedging their bets and saying prove it.

The atheist knows any submitted proof will be based in myth and
unsubstanciable and only tolerates the attempts for the amusement
provided.

User: "Pmb"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 06:43:19 PM

"Richo" <m.richardson61@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in sci.physics.relativity
since my expertise in physics lies in the theory of relativity, both special
and general.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate work in
physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans for my life.

If you start screaming at every one of them that they are a troll
after seeing one post by them you are going to be wrong a lot of the
time. Also overuse of the term "Troll" will render it meaningless.
This is a pity as the word Troll is still useful.

Cheers, Mark.

Thanks Rihco. I can't imagine why people are claiming I'm a troll.
If this attitude remains, and people are unwilling to discuss atheism then I
will gladly leave and you can thus easily retain your beliefs of why I
posted this question.
Pete
.

User: "Pmb"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 06:47:32 PM

"Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:uZWdnZWmKK3BQMDanZ2dnUVZ_ruqnZ2d@comcast.com...

"Richo" <m.richardson61@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in sci.physics.relativity
since my expertise in physics lies in the theory of relativity, both
special and general.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate work
in physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans for my
life.

Thanks Rihco. I can't imagine why people are claiming I'm a troll.

Question: I have no patience for this kind of thing. Do you believe this
"troll" assumption will live on or should I leave this group and seek out
another on atheism or a moderated forum on atheism? I don't wish to spend my
time, nor read anymore nonsense, reading claims that I'm a troll. I came
here for one purpose - To learn about atheism - Period.
Thanks
Pete
.

User: "Savageduck"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 08:05:14 PM

On 2007-12-10 16:47:32 -0800, "Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net> said:

"Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:uZWdnZWmKK3BQMDanZ2dnUVZ_ruqnZ2d@comcast.com...

"Richo" <m.richardson61@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in
sci.physics.relativity since my expertise in physics lies in the theory
of relativity, both special and general.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate
work in physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans
for my life.

Thanks Rihco. I can't imagine why people are claiming I'm a troll.

Question: I have no patience for this kind of thing. Do you believe
this "troll" assumption will live on or should I leave this group and
seek out another on atheism or a moderated forum on atheism? I don't
wish to spend my time, nor read anymore nonsense, reading claims that
I'm a troll. I came here for one purpose - To learn about atheism -
Period.

If your education is in physics, with an emphasis on relativity, as you
state; I am sure the dichotomy of what you have learned in theory and
proofs(which if you recall some of your basic physics do actually
exist) and a belief in the unbelievable is difficult to maintain. Many
of us have come from backgrounds of an education in the sciences and
the dichotomy of what we have learned v. a belief in gods has for us
been resolved.
We do not have a belief in the existence of gods.
For me I no longer bother with the thought of evidence or proof of the
existence of any god. It is a waste of time. I leave that to those who
continue to argue the myth.
I know I implied your OP might be the action of a troll.
If not I apologize, however you need to know this is an oft used
technique of those who troll this group to elicit reaction. This is a
NG where we hold our position, and those who intrude to evangelize
where it is not welcome will be questioned or ridiculed, whichever is
appropriate. For the most part in this group you will find some of the
most intelligent, thoughtful, humorous and tolerant people on the
planet. Just don't try to tell us what we are or what we should
believe.
Might I suggest mining for information where you can glean what you
need to come to whatever conclusion you choose.
http://www.atheists.org/
http://www.atheistalliance.org/
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/nontheism/atheism/
http://www.atheist-community.org/
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php
.

User: "Christopher A.Lee"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 08:02:59 PM

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:47:32 -0500, "Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net>
wrote:

The only nonsense has been yours. Stop being so arrogantly stupid.
And if you had been here to learn you would have taken notice of what
we are fed up with repeating to you.
Your second questions demonstrated you had taken no notice of the
first round of answers.
You were trolling, in spite of your protestations.

Thanks

Pete

User: "Timothy 1:4a"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	11 Dec 2007 04:04:11 PM

On Dec 10, 7:43 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

"Richo" <m.richardso...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in sci.physics.relativity
since my expertise in physics lies in the theory of relativity, both special
and general.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate work in
physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans for my life.

Can you really get a BA in physics, as opposed to a B.Sc.?

Cheers, Mark.

Thanks Rihco. I can't imagine why people are claiming I'm a troll.

If this attitude remains, and people are unwilling to discuss atheism then I
will gladly leave and you can thus easily retain your beliefs of why I
posted this question.

Pete- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	11 Dec 2007 04:33:30 PM

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:04:11 -0800 (PST), "Timothy 1:4a"
<canfanorama@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 10, 7:43 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

"Richo" <m.richardso...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in sci.physics.relativity
since my expertise in physics lies in the theory of relativity, both special
and general.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate work in
physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans for my life.

Can you really get a BA in physics, as opposed to a B.Sc.?

It is possible, yes.
But I don't believe a word of it in any case.
He is not a physicist's rectum.
.

User: "Christopher A.Lee"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	11 Dec 2007 04:36:52 PM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:03:30 +1030, Michael Gray
<mikegray@newsguy.com> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 14:04:11 -0800 (PST), "Timothy 1:4a"
<canfanorama@gmail.com> wrote:

On Dec 10, 7:43 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

"Richo" <m.richardso...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in sci.physics.relativity
since my expertise in physics lies in the theory of relativity, both special
and general.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate work in
physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans for my life.

Can you really get a BA in physics, as opposed to a B.Sc.?

It is possible, yes.
But I don't believe a word of it in any case.
He is not a physicist's rectum.

In Britain Oxford and Cambridge give BA instead of BSc because once
upon a time all degrees were in the arts.
But you're right - he's no physicist.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	11 Dec 2007 02:06:42 AM

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:43:19 -0500, "Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net>
wrote:

"Richo" <m.richardson61@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fac7f8ae-1870-4d3d-959f-7e289c70d1b8@e10g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

On Dec 10, 2:49 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> said:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

He could be a newbie.

In this newsgroup I'm a newbie. I usually post in sci.physics.relativity
since my expertise in physics lies in the theory of relativity, both special
and general.

I don't believe you.
Pure and simple.

Babies are not born with an innate knowledge of everything that has
been discussed on th internet for the past 12 years.

Myself, I'm 47 years old and have a BA in physics with some graduate work in
physics. I was attempting to get a PhD but fate had other plans for my life.

I don't believe you.
Pure and simple.
.

User: "Christopher A.Lee"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 08:00:15 PM

On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 19:43:19 -0500, "Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net>
wrote:

If this attitude remains, and people are unwilling to discuss atheism then I
will gladly leave and you can thus easily retain your beliefs of why I
posted this question.

Why do you keep lying?
There is very little to discuss and you have refused to listen to
explanations.
What "beliefs", moron?
Hint: you have been told too many times already, for this to be an
honest mistake.
You're not here to learn. If you were you would have listened to the
answers you got first time around.

Pete

User: "les_on_usenet"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	10 Dec 2007 03:15:59 AM

On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 19:49:01 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck@savage.net>
wrote:

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

This is done I suspect so we are constantly thinking and talking
about what they term' god'. They hope that eventually our minds
will get so obsessed with this word that we will start dreaming
(or seeing) this god. A term they describe as "opening your heart
to god". This, I suspect is what they think they are forcing us
to do.
The only thing that I keep in my mind when I make my brief
visits to this newsgroup is that a bunch of what appear like
self-deluded fools keep making claims about something they
call 'god' that they cannot substantiate.
One particular group, who call themselves 'Christians' seem
to very keen to show us how obnoxious they are whilst another
much smaller group called 'muslims' make laughable attempts
to show us how really, really nice they are. They need to
teach themselves that first.
There is yet a third group called 'creationist' who are
really 'Evolution deniars' who manage to give us a good
laugh with their feeble attempts to deny reality.
Les Hellawell
Greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	09 Dec 2007 11:18:18 PM

On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 19:49:01 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck@savage.net>
wrote:

On 2007-12-09 18:45:24 -0800, "Pmb" <someone@somewhere.net> said:

I would like to ask members of this group to post how they believe the
term "Atheist" is defined. Or, if you consider yourself to be an
atheist, then what do you mean when you refer to yourelf as an atheist.
If you're uncomfortable with that then perhaps you could choose amoung
one of the two definitions given below

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Thank you

Pete

If you have been around this group any length of time you will be aware
this has been debated into the ground. Your further attempts to
resurrect this discussion can only be termed a pathetic TROLL.

I agree.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	11 Dec 2007 04:13:16 PM

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

I would like to ask members of this group to post how they believe the term
"Atheist" is defined. Or, if you consider yourself to be an atheist, then
what do you mean when you refer to yourelf as an atheist. If you're
uncomfortable with that then perhaps you could choose amoung one of the two
definitions given below

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

An atheist is someone who believes there is no god, in the same way
most people believe there is no Santa Claus. "Negative atheism" is
indistinguishable (without qualification) from agnosticism, which is,
effectively, the belief that god is as likely to exist as not.
J
.

User: "Savageduck"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 12:08:28 AM

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

I would like to ask members of this group to post how they believe the term
"Atheist" is defined. Or, if you consider yourself to be an atheist, then
what do you mean when you refer to yourelf as an atheist. If you're
uncomfortable with that then perhaps you could choose amoung one of the two
definitions given below

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Ok, it seems you are lost in this maze of words.
You fail to comprehend what has been written here, and you continue to
attempt to define atheists to fit your mold.
Quite simply for an atheist there is no issue of belief.
Atheists have NO BELIEF IN THE EXISTENCE OF GODS. Or any need for any
gods in their lives.
They come from a multitude of backgrounds, some from religious families
and some with no history of religious influence at all. What they have
in common is an understanding, or knowledge if you will, that gods and
religions are man made tools of social control. They have no basis in
reality, save for the damage and destruction the believers have wrought
over the ages.
As for your example of Santa Claus, that is not a belief issue. I know
there is no Santa Claus. The old fart is a myth, just as gods are
mythological figures which do not exist. There is no need to waste any
time, effort or emotion on belief in nothing.
Agnostics on the other hand are in something of a philosophical limbo.
They are intellectually atheist, but provoke all the hair-brained
proofs and myth based, uphostered pseudo-evidence the theists dream up,
by saying they need proof or evidence of god(s) then they might believe.
An atheist need not bother with the thought of evidence or proof of the
existence of any god. It is a waste of time. We leave that to those who
continue to argue the myth to gain our belief in their deity. We know
that all the evidence and proofs submitted are myth based and are
subject to various levels of critique and ultimately ridicule.
To that end we as atheists have trancended belief.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 11:49:22 AM

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

They come from a multitude of backgrounds, some from religious families
and some with no history of religious influence at all.

True.

What they have
in common is an understanding, or knowledge if you will, that gods and
religions are man made tools of social control.

No, there is one thing and one thing only atheists have in common and
that is the belief there is no god. They may have different
understandings of why religions exist.

They have no basis in
reality, save for the damage and destruction the believers have wrought
over the ages.

Atheists need have no particular opinion about the actions of
believers over the ages.

As for your example of Santa Claus, that is not a belief issue. I know
there is no Santa Claus.

This is irrational. Positive knowledge of universal negatives is
impossible.

The old fart is a myth, just as gods are
mythological figures which do not exist. There is no need to waste any
time, effort or emotion on belief in nothing.

Agnostics on the other hand are in something of a philosophical limbo.
They are intellectually atheist, but provoke all the hair-brained
proofs and myth based, uphostered pseudo-evidence the theists dream up,
by saying they need proof or evidence of god(s) then they might believe.

Agnostics claim they have no basis to believe one way or the other
about god. Many agnostics simultaneously believe there is no Santa.
I believe agnostics are recovering theists.

An atheist need not bother with the thought of evidence or proof of the
existence of any god. It is a waste of time. We leave that to those who
continue to argue the myth to gain our belief in their deity. We know
that all the evidence and proofs submitted are myth based and are
subject to various levels of critique and ultimately ridicule.

To that end we as atheists have trancended belief.

One would think the first step in transcending something would be
correctly spelling it.
J
.

User: "Savageduck"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 09:57:35 PM

On 2007-12-12 09:49:22 -0800,

said:

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

Once more, as a fully functioning atheist with at least a few grams of
grey matter, I HAVE NO, I REPEAT NO BELIEF IN THE EXISTENCE OF ANY
GODS. That means not just a singular god, but NO GODS. You might say,
"There is God the creator, omnipotent, omniscient being, aware of every
fart I have sneaked into the atmosphere." ...and I will say, "I DON'T
BELIEVE YOU! I HAVE NO BELIEF AT ALLTHAT ANY GODS EXIST!" Unfortunately
your existence is all too evident.
Well this atheist has developed the belief that you are not worth
wasting more time on, other than clicking on the send button.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	13 Dec 2007 03:41:42 AM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 19:57:35 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck@savage.net>
wrote:

On 2007-12-12 09:49:22 -0800,

said:

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

Once more, as a fully functioning atheist with at least a few grams of
grey matter, I HAVE NO, I REPEAT NO BELIEF IN THE EXISTENCE OF ANY
GODS. That means not just a singular god, but NO GODS. You might say,
"There is God the creator, omnipotent, omniscient being, aware of every
fart I have sneaked into the atmosphere." ...and I will say, "I DON'T
BELIEVE YOU! I HAVE NO BELIEF AT ALLTHAT ANY GODS EXIST!" Unfortunately
your existence is all too evident.

Well this atheist has developed the belief that you are not worth
wasting more time on, other than clicking on the send button.

He repeatedly confirms my suspicion that he is a theist in atheist
clothing.
They just can't pretend to be reasonable or sane to save their lives.
If it walks like a theist,
if it talks like a theist,
it is most likely a .......
(Answer next week.)
.

User: "Richo"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 11:43:35 PM

On Dec 13, 4:49 am,

wrote:

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

Atheists have NO BELIEF IN THE EXISTENCE OF GODS. Or any need for any
gods in their lives.

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

So a person who had no beliefs in any gods at all might not be an
atheist?
They would be god - less - but if they didnt actively believe that
"God doesnt exist' then they would not be an a-theistist?
Isnt that kinda odd?
Also...
There are a potentially infinite number of gods you *could* believe in
- if you had to conciously have believed in the non existence of all
of them - it would take up an infinite amount of time to identify them
name them and then form the belief "I dont believe in X" for an
infinite number of X's.
So from a practical point of view IF this definition is applied
strickly then no one is an atheist - its an actual impossibility for
any such being to exist.
So the world is full of many godless unbelievers infidels and heretics
but none of them are atheists.
That is why insisting that atheism means the active holding of a
belief in the non existence of every god is impractical.
Cheers, Mark.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 03:18:36 PM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:49:22 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

It is by repeating this lie that you have earned your reputation with
many of the posters here.
It is by refusing to address it in a coherent and adult fashion that
you have earned their ire.
Hint: simply repeating it ad nauseum does not represent coherent
argument.
Now do you understand why many of us do not believe that you are an
atheist?
You act like a dishonest theist, you have the brick-wall logic of a
theist, you ask questions but don't seem to comprehend the answers
that you do not like, and so on.
:
.

User: "Christopher A.Lee"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 11:57:19 AM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:49:22 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

No, liar. What part of YOU ARE TELLING ATHEISTS WHAT WE BELIEVE AND
GETTING IT WRONG are you pretending you are too stupid to understand?
Do you honestly not realise just how arrogantly nasty this is on your
part?
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 03:18:59 PM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 12:57:19 -0500, Christopher A.Lee
<calee@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 09:49:22 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 11, 10:08 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

No. An atheist believes there is no god.

No, liar. What part of YOU ARE TELLING ATHEISTS WHAT WE BELIEVE AND
GETTING IT WRONG are you pretending you are too stupid to understand?

Do you honestly not realise just how arrogantly nasty this is on your
part?

He acts like a theist, that is for sure.
.

User: "Michael Gray"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 01:30:02 AM

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck@savage.net>
wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

I would like to ask members of this group to post how they believe the term
"Atheist" is defined. Or, if you consider yourself to be an atheist, then
what do you mean when you refer to yourelf as an atheist. If you're
uncomfortable with that then perhaps you could choose amoung one of the two
definitions given below

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

:
I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.
.

User: "Savageduck"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 01:57:02 AM

On 2007-12-12 00:00:02 -0800, Michael Gray <mikegray@newsguy.com> said:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck@savage.net>
wrote:

:
I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.

Now there is something I can believe.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 12:05:02 PM

On Dec 11, 11:57 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-12 00:00:02 -0800, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> said:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net>
wrote:

:
I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.

Now there is something I can believe.

I am of the growing opinion that you both simply cannot brook or
respond to differences of opinion intelligently, and, when faced with
them, call people names.
I am an atheist, and I have been since the age of 16. I believe there
are no gods, in much the same way I believe there are no leprechauns,
sprites, elves, fairies, ghosts, extraterrestrial UFOs, cosmic tea
sets, Tom Sawyer, Winston Smith, and other fictional/supernatural/
imaginary things.
I don't believe either of you actually believes I'm a theist, but in
case anyone reading this may be genuinely doubtful, here I am some 2
years ago claiming to be an atheist:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2mhtgn
So, if it's all a charade, it's a damn long-lived one.
J
.

User: "Christopher A.Lee"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 12:09:29 PM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:05:02 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 11, 11:57 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-12 00:00:02 -0800, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> said:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net>
wrote:

:
I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.

Now there is something I can believe.

I am of the growing opinion that you both simply cannot brook or
respond to differences of opinion intelligently, and, when faced with
them, call people names.

WE know you take no notice of what you are told, and no notice of
explanations for it.'
Stop whining when you are treated as the dishinest, nasty,
pig-ignorant idiot you show yourself.

I am an atheist, and I have been since the age of 16. I believe there
are no gods, in much the same way I believe there are no leprechauns,
sprites, elves, fairies, ghosts, extraterrestrial UFOs, cosmic tea
sets, Tom Sawyer, Winston Smith, and other fictional/supernatural/
imaginary things.

You're either lying or stupid. At this pointit no longer matters
which because the result is the same.

I don't believe either of you actually believes I'm a theist, but in
case anyone reading this may be genuinely doubtful, here I am some 2
years ago claiming to be an atheist:

THEN DON'T ACT LIKE ONE, PRETENDING YOU KNOW BETTER THEN WE DO WHAT
OUR OWN POV IS, AND THEN LYING ABOUT US BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO GRANT
THAT WE MIGHT ACTUALLY KNOW MORE ABOUT IT THAN YOU DO.
Was that clear enough even for you?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/2mhtgn

So, if it's all a charade, it's a damn long-lived one.

Start thinking for a change.

User: ""
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 12:18:49 PM

On Dec 12, 10:09 am, Christopher A.Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:05:02 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 11, 11:57 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-12 00:00:02 -0800, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> said:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net>
wrote:

:
I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.

Now there is something I can believe.

I am of the growing opinion that you both simply cannot brook or
respond to differences of opinion intelligently, and, when faced with
them, call people names.

WE know you take no notice of what you are told, and no notice of
explanations for it.'

The explanations are embarrassingly nonsensical.

Stop whining when you are treated as the dishinest, nasty,
pig-ignorant idiot you show yourself.

The pig-ignorant don't know how to spell dishonest.

You're either lying or stupid. At this pointit no longer matters
which because the result is the same.

I don't believe either of you actually believes I'm a theist, but in
case anyone reading this may be genuinely doubtful, here I am some 2
years ago claiming to be an atheist:

THEN DON'T ACT LIKE ONE, PRETENDING YOU KNOW BETTER THEN WE DO WHAT
OUR OWN POV IS,

I never claimed to know your POV.

AND THEN LYING ABOUT US

I have not said a single lie about you. Frustrated that anyone could
possibly disagree with your arrogantly stated opinions, you resort to
accusing me of being an impostor, when you know damn well that is not
true. You have absolutely no basis to call me a liar.

BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO GRANT
THAT WE MIGHT ACTUALLY KNOW MORE ABOUT IT THAN YOU DO.

I do indeed refuse to grant that.
<snip>
J
.

User: "Christopher A.Lee"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	12 Dec 2007 12:28:59 PM

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:18:49 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 12, 10:09 am, Christopher A.Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 10:05:02 -0800 (PST),

wrote:

On Dec 11, 11:57 pm, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net> wrote:

On 2007-12-12 00:00:02 -0800, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> said:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net>
wrote:

:
I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.

Now there is something I can believe.

I am of the growing opinion that you both simply cannot brook or
respond to differences of opinion intelligently, and, when faced with
them, call people names.

WE know you take no notice of what you are told, and no notice of
explanations for it.'

The explanations are embarrassingly nonsensical.

Only to somebody remarkably comprehension-impaired.
You have never once addressed what you were told, or the explanations.
All you have done is repeated your original incorrect assertion.
You have never said why you imagine they are nonsensical.
And those two sentences explain why you earned you the negative
reaction you pretended was name-calling.

Stop whining when you are treated as the dishinest, nasty,
pig-ignorant idiot you show yourself.

The pig-ignorant don't know how to spell dishonest.

A typos, moron. Or hadn't you noticed that the "i" and "o" keys are
next to each other?
But a spelling flame is all you've got, isn't it?

You're either lying or stupid. At this pointit no longer matters
which because the result is the same.

Confirmed by your response.

I don't believe either of you actually believes I'm a theist, but in
case anyone reading this may be genuinely doubtful, here I am some 2
years ago claiming to be an atheist:

THEN DON'T ACT LIKE ONE, PRETENDING YOU KNOW BETTER THEN WE DO WHAT
OUR OWN POV IS,

I never claimed to know your POV.

Then why insist that as an atheist I have to believe something
irrelevant from somebody else's religion doesn't exist?

AND THEN LYING ABOUT US

You have lied about atheists. I am atheist. Therefore you have lied
about me.
Logic obviously isn't your strong point, is it?

BECAUSE YOU REFUSE TO GRANT
THAT WE MIGHT ACTUALLY KNOW MORE ABOUT IT THAN YOU DO.

I do indeed refuse to grant that.

Because you are a stupid, pig-ignorant, arrogant moron.

<snip>

J

User: "pmb"
Title: Re: Definition of "Atheist"	13 Dec 2007 10:02:27 AM

On Dec 12, 2:30 am, Michael Gray <mikeg...@newsguy.com> wrote:

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 22:08:28 -0800, Savageduck <savaged...@savage.net>
wrote:

On 2007-12-11 14:13:16 -0800,

said:

On Dec 9, 6:45 pm, "Pmb" <some...@somewhere.net> wrote:

(1) Positive atheism: The belief that that God does not exist.
(2) Negative atheism: The absense of a belief in Gd.
(3) Other: Please fill in -

:

I am of the growing opinion that this person is a theist troll.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I am not a troll. The FAQ for this forum does not answer the question
of definition. I've discussed the definition in previous threads when
such threads was crossposted to sci.physics.relativity when someone
felt the need to discuss it in a physics forum. I was critisixed there
by others who claimed that I didn't know what an atheist is. Since I'm
reading a new book called "Why Atheism?" I thought it woud be helpful
to me in some ways to discuss this with atheists. So if you are still
convinced that I'm a troll then you can easily block me. I have no
desire to prove otherwise since that can prove to be an impossible
task. Rarely is the case when someone forms an opinion on someone else
and is then redealy able to or have a desire to rethink their opinions
which were based.
Pete
.

Page 2 of 5

Post reply

What is the atheist definition of "religious fanatic"?
definition of "atheist" and sources
Changed Definition of "Atheist" on Merriam-Webster Online.
Claim vs Assume: Atheist by Default do Which?
Re: agnostics are atheist too
Atheist warden demoted for refusing training in a church
Atheist beheaded--apparently by Bible-toting ex-marine
The atheist sloth ethic

You might be a funda,ental atheist if?
How to know if you are a fundie-mental atheist
You're an atheist if
NFL honors their Atheist in Foxhole
Testimony of an Atheist
Hey fellas, been a while - the Atheist Dictionary has been redesigned
And Now We Bring You the Atheist Hour