The absence of belief in the existence of gods regardless of whether one has a concept of gods is atheism. You are wrong, so save your eye rolling for someone else.
no no no. negetive atheism is a given. we are arguing on semantics. the default position is ATHEISM. only thing is, the prefix "A" gives it the impression that it is an extension of{or relating to} the "original" idea of "THEISM". however, that is an illusion. the term "theism" was invented before "atheism" simply because no1 cared to define the default position of "ATHEISM" before "theism". doesnt mean "A"theism has to have "THEISM" to exist in the first place. semantics are complicated that way.
putting it more simply. the default position is not beleiveing in anything{which INCLUDES not beleiving in god among many other things. so by definition you ARE a negetive ATHEIST by default, but are not confined to that definition alone}, AFTER which comes the TEACHING of a beleif in sumthing{which includes, but is not confined to teaching theism}. so THEISM is learned, but u dont have to have theism to have atheism. its just like dividing people into hindus and NONhindus alone. technically before the advent of hinduism, ALL people were non hindus. however, does that mean that you had to have hinduism before its advent simply so that you could contrast against it and seperate out every1 who wasnt a hindu???? basically saying, that it is infact the IMPOSING of the definition of theism, which gives rise to calling people atheists. and if we go by that definition, WE call all people who didnt beleive in theism by default{who never had or cared for such a specific special name for themselves} Atheists. so yes a baby is an atheist.
You have a queer idea of what Copernican is. Copernicans are simply those who subscribe to the idea that the earth and us humans are not accorded a special place in the universe. Where the crap did you get the idea of attaching the Bible to its meaning. Modern day muslim astronomers are Copernicans. Jewish astronomers are Copernicans. Shintoist japanese astronomers are Copernicans.
Modern astronomy has shown that Earth is but just an ordinary planet, orbiting an ordinary star, orbiting an ordinary galaxy ad nauseum., which is why ALL modern astronomers are Copernicans. Let me put this through you, modern astronomers have advanced their way of thinking since Copernicus' time and are heliocentrists only within the context of a simplified concept of the solar system. There a whole lotta of new celestial motions going on. Also, modern astronomers dont let their personal beliefs get in the way of their work. Youre describing Christian apologetic astronomers with your quack definition of copernican.
Gramps, youre so called "divine revelations" and "higher truths" does nothing for us none-believers because it relies on blind faith and blind faith is a dangerous and misleading concept to base your truths on. The fact that atheists uses only objective rational thinking, unhindered by blind faith on some "divinely inspired" myth, is a PLUS.
I find it IRONIC that some bum Irish catholic have the authority to DISMISS the Pope's words, Mr Infallible himself and leader of the Catholic church, as simply OPINIONS and claims his own opinions as the truth. Ha, ha youre beginning to sound like a sock pretending to be a catholic.
Modern geocentrists use both Biblical and scientific arguments for their case. We examine these arguments, and find them poorly founded. The Scriptural passages quoted do not address cosmology. Some geocentrists draw distinctions that do not exist in the original autographs or even in translations. In short, the Bible is neither geocentric nor heliocentric. While geocentrists present some interesting scientific results, their scientific arguments are often based upon improper understanding of theories and data. Much of their case is based upon a misunderstanding of general relativity and the rejection of that theory. While geocentrists are well intended, their presence among recent creationists produces an easy object of ridicule by our critics.
Basically the point that your fellow Christians are saying is that geocentrists such as yourself are damaging the Church’s reputation amongst the faithful and unbelievers because of your stupid insistence on this scientifically wrong and theologically unimportant concept. A lot of mistakes was done by the medieval Church (eg. Inquisition), among them is adopting Thomas of Aquinas work wherein he harmonized flawed Aristotelian physics, Ptolemy's retarded geocentric system, and Christian dogma, as standard Church teachings. The Church and its members should just admit its mistake for supporting erroneous "ancient Greek science", and move on.
Since time immemorial, humans have been using myths and superstitions to explain the UNKNOWN. Thats why religious myths and superstitions exist everywhere you go. Its only around the Age of Enlightenment when the laws of the land allowed people who lack faith in any higher beings to live without fear of punishment (in western civilization anyway) and at the around the time of Galileo that these stupid myths and superstitions were replaced by solid empirical explanations. Science baby.
Let me break atheism down to you:
Atheism is the lack of belief in a higher being or gods. There are two types: implicit and explicit.
Implicit atheists are those who havent thought about belief in gods like babies. A baby's ignorance is not an excuse to the fact that technically it LACKS the belief in the concept of higher beings hence it is correctly labeled as an atheist.
Explicit atheists are those like your female friend. They made a consious choice to become atheists. There are also two types: strong and weak and im too lazy to start differentaiating them now.
Ill just cut and paste my previous answer:
Gramps, youre so called "divine revelations" and "higher truths" does nothing for us none-believers because it relies on blind (Catholic) faith and blind faith is a dangerous and misleading concept to base your truths on. The fact that atheists uses only objective rational thinking, unhindered by blind faith on some "divinely inspired" myth, is a PLUS.
Since time immemorial people have been pulling gods out of their asses and worshipping them. What makes your god special?
Just read my previous answer above.
I'd rather believe in quantum mechanics instead of some old f@rt with delusions of "divine revelations" who have an OVERSIMPLIFIED view of reality.
And i couldnt care less about your brother's opinion.
This is what i've been telling you all along. Your Catholic faith is hindering you from thinking rationally which is why you and your ilk are dredging up old and invalidated theories that could be reinterpreted and used to prop up your twisted religious beliefs. Regardless of what the Church may have taught in the past, we are not at the center of the universe. The only reason you wackos are clinging to an obsolete and useless lumineferous aether theory and other similar theories is because it provides support to your obsolete and useless geocentric theory.
Wrong. There are indigenous cultures in Africa and Australia that have no concept of gods. With no concept of gods, these cultures have no belief in gods. With no belief in gods, these cultures are implicitly atheist, i.e. negative atheists.
Could a person be anti-semitic if Judaism didn't exist?
Could a person be anti-American if the US didn't exist?
Could a person be anti-Walmart if Walmart didn't exist?
The answer to all that is no. On the exact same token, Atheism is an antagonistic response to Theism. You can't be anti anything, if that something does not exist.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
If the whole concept does not exist anywhere then yes. But since it exists here, it exists everywhere. Even if your whole universe has no concept of God, even if there is no sort of God anywhere, since the idea exists here, everyone that doesn't believe in God (which would be everyone in a universe where the concept of God does not exist) is an atheist.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 6th, 2008 06:05 AM
