I have converted to atheism

Post Reply New Topic

@snapcap- You still haven't addressed my post earlier in this thread that refers to a jury. What do you have to say about that?

How about, we don't believe in any of the religion gods? Does that work for you? How about I believe in a god and/or creator, but he has nothing to do with your holy book or any other part of your religion. Does that also work? Or do they mean I still believe in something that means I need to adopt the religious form of argument and can't just say exactly what I mean without being an outsider? Does those statements mean I am somehow closer to your god?

Oh why oh why was I not born in Europe/Germany? My family comes from there...

I don't have these problems anymore... All I had to do was understand what religion really is and it was over. I can truely say I don't believe in god. I can however say that I believe that religion is total evil and that god should never have been made by man.

Just seen what you said.

Well, I actually think there aren't any weak atheists. They seem to be people that are fine stating that they don't believe in God, but they don't acknowledge that they do believe that God doesn't exist. Everyone that that has been exposed to the concept must have a belief one way of the other. Atheists may have their reason for not believing in God, but believing that God doesn't exist is the same as saying you don't believe in God, so there is no difference in a weak and strong atheist.

I'm not sure I understand your analogy of not/guilty to weak/strong. I think the issue is clouded by people thinking that there is actually a real separate position to have that is somehow different from not having a belief. The only things that couldn't are babies, animals and rocks, etc. They are more atheist than you or me could ever become, without some major head trauma.

I lack belief in the assertion that there's a god.
That makes me atheist.
I also lack belief in the assertion that there is no god.
That means I'm not a strong atheist.

Believing god doesn't exist (strong atheism) necessarily means one lacks belief (atheism), but the reverse is not true.
Strong atheism is a subset of atheism, proper, which involves no affirmative beliefs.

Everyone has a belief regarding the existence of God, even if they can't admit it.

You can call EVERYTHING a belief. I believe my knowledge is correct that 1+1=2

Anything that you've been exposed to.

What makes you say this?

What makes you so doubt that my relationship with all claims of god is one of skepticism,
to the point of accusing me of not being genuine?

Consider this:

You're talking to a friend and the friend asks you to consider something. The notion travels as sound which is then converted into electrical pulses which is translated in the brain into language and is considered based on past experiences, and your opinion of your friend, and after a couple seconds, you can come to a belief regarding what your friend said. You can believe it's true or false, with reason behind it. If your not sure, you may not declare your position, not because it's not there, but because you're not confident in it enough to exclaim it.

Saying that you have no belief is like saying that none of that happens in the instance you say you have a lack of belief, which makes me believe that the position of weak atheism is absurd.

I can lack belief in the veracity of my friend's claim without being convinced yet that it is false.
How is that absurd?
Moreover, it requires no lack of confidence on my part.

Here is a clarification: There is a difference between "Not Guilty" and "Innocent."

Here is a better way to make my point: The accused is "innocent unless proven guilty" and I will be a weak atheist until the existence of a god is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Only then will I become a "Believer."

Snapcap, I think the reason people are not getting through to you is twofold.

First, you seem to be unable to lack a belief yourself. You are making the case that because you personally don't think like other people are claiming to think, that they must be lying. What you have utterly failed to realize is that they in fact are demonstrating a way of thinking you have not yet discovered.

I understand how that might be confusing for you, but I assure you the ability to hold no belief, either way, is a very real possibility. I know this with certainty because I hold no belief either way on a grand multitude of issues. I am comfortable saying "I don't believe", "I don't know", "I'm not sure" and "I'm uncertain"...and I know the subtle differences between what each of those words mean! I know very clearly the difference between "I believe", "I don't believe" and "I believe not".

As I said, you don't seem to be able to do that...and that is fine. No one is saying you have to lack beliefs, you can be a black or white thinker all you like. You can think in yeses and nos to your hearts content. But that doesn't mean other people have to, just because you do!!

Second, and this may be a bit insulting, but I really am not trying to be, so please excuse any roughness that follows... You have some serious audacity. The sheer arrogance of your position is sickening. You are taking the stance that everyone else is lying, being dishonest, because you simply don't understand thier answer? It has been explained to you many times now, that people are capable of not holding a position either way, people are capable of not having a belief, and yet you still continue claiming that it isn't true...and you have the arrogance to think you actually know what someone else is thinking, or what someone else is capable of thinking? You feel you have the authority to dismiss other peoples thoughts as not even frigging possible to have????

I urge you to reevaluate what you are claiming here about this. Explore the possibility that maybe, just maybe, people are being genuine and honest. That the majority of the whole multitude of atheists in the world might actually know what they are saying when they claim what they "don't believe".


1) I believe there is god
2) I do not believe there is a god
3) I believe there is not a god

Each one of those means something different. It's not a problem if you don't understand what #2 actually means. But stop claiming that other people don't....because I assure you they very much do.

Edit/PS;



I can believe a tree makes no sound if no one is there to hear it. In fact, I would urge everyone to believe that, because it is true...lol.

A tree makes vibrations in matter if it falls and no one is there to hear it, sure. But those vibrations are not actually sounds unless they are converted by an observer into a sense perception...

"Sound is a mechanical wave that is an oscillation of pressure transmitted through a solid, liquid, or gas, composed of frequencies within the range of hearing and of a level sufficiently strong to be heard, or the sensation stimulated in organs of hearing by such vibrations."

Sound must therefore bear the capability of being heard regardless of whether an organism is present. The problem comes in the phrase "of a level sufficiently strong to be heard". Does that mean it must be stong enough to be heard across any distance to the nearest organism, or just must be of a strength that is possible to hear if you happen to be there.

What if you put a recording device beside it & listened to it later like scientists do with very tiny "inaudible sounds". I realise you aren't listening to the original sound if it is a playback, but it must prove the original sound occurred.

Otherwise I agree with NarcissusSavage.

I am more curious about why people believe religions and what they believe than I am in the actual existance or not or the objects of their fear or devotion.

I have never really considered adopting their beliefs or denying the possibility.

I told my kids there was a Santa after all, (I felt uncomfortable about that, but its still taboo not to, like the last remanent of compulsory religion).

Just because you are exposed to an idea does not mean you must have a definate opinion on it. I have also been exposed to the idea of "Carlsburg, probably the best lager in the world" I never went on to form a firm opinion about that either.

Just because the religious people think it is a life or death decision that cannot be avoided, doen't mean anyone else has to agree about its importance.

Wrong. What concept of 'god'? The 'theists' are just uttering nonsense and deluding themselves to think 'god' mean something.