What Is Atheism

@SW-User [quote]You wrongly expanded the definition of atheism to include non-gods and then selected a specific god to show that you would also qualify as an atheist.[/quote]

The definition of atheism I gave was cut, in it's entirety, from the dictionary and pasted. So I didn't expand it. To reiterate: disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. A "non-god" wouldn't fall in the category of theism and so would be irrelevant to atheism.

[quote]Atheism is about the rejection of all magical god(s)- and if you believe in any of them you're a theist. I don't like it when someone twists words and meanings in order to ridicule- and in the hope of better promoting something far more ludicrous.[/quote]

Atheism is, once again, disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. Magic and "non-gods" have nothing to do with it, which means you are the one doing that which you don't like.

Try arguing the point instead.

@AkioTsukino I tire of your laughable arguments and insults.

@SW-User I would too if I were you. And I never insulted you, or I certainly didn't mean to do that. I apologize if I did without realizing it.

@AkioTsukino [quote]disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods[/quote]

1. there's no proof that gods exist (otherwise we’d all be theists)
2. there's no proof that gods don't exist (they might be lurking around a mountain top somewhere)
3. in any event, there’s [b][i]no compelling necessity[/i][/b] to postulate gods, and the postulation explains nothing (not even itself)... it merely tries to explain everything away. By eschewing the postulation, we lose nothing.
4. therefore, I have no gods (I’m an agnostic atheist)

None of that requires belief or disbelief.

@newjaninev2 woohoo. The big guns are here.

Atheism is the complete disbelief in gods. Therefore, it would stand to reason that an atheist would consider all gods to be unreal. However, it is non atheists that bring ‘magical’ descriptions into the equation, and atheists happen to dismiss those ‘beings’
as well. @AkioTsukino

@Kowabunga An atheist can't disbelieve in a god if they have no idea what the hell one is. Magical descriptions? Atheism comes from late 16th century: from French athéisme, from Greek atheos, from a- ‘without’ + theos ‘god’.

So belief actually doesn't necessarily have anything to do with it. It means without God/gods. You can believe in the existence of gods without having anything to do with them.

From the magicians of Meriam & Webster

Definition of atheism
1a: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b: a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
2archaic : godlessness especially in conduct : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS


Definition of god (Entry 1 of 2)
1God : the supreme or ultimate reality: such as
a: the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped (as in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism) as creator and ruler of the universe
Throughout the patristic and medieval periods, Christian theologians taught that God created the universe …
— Jame Schaefer
… the Supreme Being or God, the personal form of the Ultimate Reality, is conceived by Hindus as having various aspects.
— Sunita Pant Bansal
bChristian Science : the incorporeal divine Principle ruling over all as eternal Spirit : infinite Mind
2or less commonly God : a being or object that is worshipped as having more than natural attributes and powers
specifically : one controlling a particular aspect or part of reality
Greek gods of love and war
3: a person or thing of supreme value
had photos of baseball's gods pinned to his bedroom wall
4: a powerful ruler
Hollywood gods that control our movies' fates

@AkioTsukino [quote]disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods[/quote]

1. there's no proof that gods exist (otherwise we’d all be theists)
2. there's no proof that gods don't exist (they might be lurking around a mountain top somewhere)
3. in any event, there’s no compelling necessity to postulate gods, and the postulation explains nothing (not even itself)... it merely tries to explain everything away. By eschewing the postulation, we lose nothing.
4. therefore, I have no gods (I’m an agnostic atheist)

None of that requires belief or disbelief.

@newjaninev2 [quote]1. there's no proof that gods exist (otherwise we’d all be theists)[/quote]

Here is a photograph of the N Korean God, Kim Jong-un.


Here is a google search on "Is Kim Jong-un a God?

https://www.google.com/search?q=is+Kim+Jong-un+a+god&rlz=1C1UEAD_enUS988US988&oq=is+Kim+Jong-un+a+god&aqs=chrome..69i57.9504j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Here is the Oxford dictionary definition of a god

3. an adored, admired, or influential person.

Tell me why I'm wrong when I claim Kim Jong-un as proof of a god that exists.

@AkioTsukino What you have shown me is a photograph of thousands of gods, including a hat badge that is a god, more than a few people who might be gods (or their noses might be gods), several fingernails (any one of which might be a god), an ear that might be a god... or perhaps just the lobe of the ear is a god...

@newjaninev2 [quote]What you have shown me is a photograph of thousands of gods, including a hat badge that is a god, more than a few people who might be gods (or their noses might be gods), several fingernails (any one of which might be a god), an ear that might be a god... or perhaps just the lobe of the ear is a god...[/quote]

Now you're getting it! But those other gods better not be more of a god than Kim Jong-un. That reminds me, of Exodus 20:3 https://biblehub.com/exodus/20-3.htm

@AkioTsukino But that’s purely idiosyncratic... it enters the realm of personal fantasy, rapidly becomes delusional and self-serving, and can be disregarded, because there is no compelling necessity behind it. We can dispose of the proposition and lose nothing

@newjaninev2 Idiosyncratic? [Laughs] Yeah, I don't think so.

[quote] it enters the realm of personal fantasy, rapidly becomes delusional and self-serving, and can be disregarded, because there is no compelling necessity behind it. We can dispose of the proposition and lose nothing[/quote]

Hmm. That don't sound like a god to me. Does that sound like a god to you?

Look. I really don't mean to be rude, but I think you people, quite possibly, may have the intellectual capacity of, oh . . . let's say, Winnie the Pooh? Either that or you are in denial due to some, I don't know . . . world view? Almost, what, religious?

@AkioTsukino [quote]Yeah, I don't think so[/quote]

and that automatically makes it incorrect, does it?

Perhaps details and specifics would help show why..?

[quote]That don't sound like a god to me[/quote]

So you agree that there’s no compelling necessity to even postulate gods.

Excellent... as agnostic atheists you and I are therefore in agreement, and all done 👍

@AkioTsukino He's nothing more than a human being.
Worshipping someone as a god doesn't make them an actual god.

@Entwistle [quote]Worshipping someone as a god doesn't make them an actual god.[/quote]

Yes it does! Being a god doesn't mean being Jehovah God. Being a god doesn't necessarily mean you are supernatural or anything else. Just that someone has deemed you mighty in some capacity. That's all a god is.