What Is Atheism

@DocSavage [quote]You seem to consider the title “god” as having no bearing.[/quote]

That isn't true

[quote]Atheist means Anti - theist.[/quote]

No. Anti-theist is a much more sensible term. Atheist doesn't mean anti-theist, it means antithesis of theism. I compare it to apolitical. Antipolitical isn't the same thing. Anti is against. Antichrist, for example. Asexual isn't antisexual, there's no such thing. I don't think. Asexual means not involving sex. Atheism and apolitical means not involving theism or politics.

Since I'm a homosexual who abandoned homosexuality and abstain from sex due to my beliefs, I'm asexual and apolitical. Two out of three isn't bad. Here's a video for you to watch. It amuses me.


[media=https://youtu.be/eb6ja96y6Ps]


[quote]God, is not simply something normal, natural, or inanimate.[/quote]

It can be. It doesn't have to be but it can be. An illustration: a man slowly makes his way through the cold night. He needs fuel to light a fire to keep warm and protect him from wolves. There are no trees. He stumbles upon a pile of dried bovine excrement. Underneath creeping things to eat. It serves as fuel. He makes it into his god. The shit is a god. His god.

Fertility symbols, idols are the same thing.

[quote]Generally it refers to something divine, and supernatural.[/quote]

A god can be supernatural, it doesn't have to be. In the Bible, for example, Jehovah God makes Moses God to Aaron and Pharaoh. Jehovah also calls the human judges gods. Jesus was a man. And a god.

@AkioTsukino
You seem to be confusing your views here. One one post, you state we were “created” evidently by some supernatural being. Here you insist that the term god can and does refer to a random number of objects or people, including cow shit.
As an Atheist, what would be the point of debating the existence, or divine nature of cow shit ? You are posting in the creationist section, you discuss the differences of science, and theology. And then you throw in petty little tidbits about how insignificant items become akin to god at least in title if not in essence.
Is it asking too much to stick to a subject, maybe provide a bit of evidence to give us a hint as to what you’re getting at ?
And for the record, I am an Anti-theist, a.k.a. An Atheist.

@DocSavage Gods have names. There are billions of gods. A god can be anything or anyone. Well, okay, maybe I'm going about this wrong. Do you know what henotheism is? The Bible writers were henotheistic.

You don't have to debate the existence or divine nature of bovine excrement. You have to debate what is divine. I keep leaving my links but I don't think anyone gives a shit to read them.

Some scripture. You can compare these in translations at Bible Hub if you wish. Do a search, they give you different translations to compare.

Philippians 3:19: their god is their belly

1 Corinthians 8:5-6: there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.

Psalm 82:1,6: Judges as gods. John 10:34,35 Jesus quotes Psalm 82 in application to him as a god. The concept was also difficult for the religious leaders of his day to understand.

Now, keep in mind, if you compare translations, that the word can be interpreted in different ways, of course. Godhead, deity, godlike, they are all accurate. They all mean the same thing, but people can get confused by that. Godlike isn't a god. Yes it is. So, if you look at the original language (also at Hub) you can see. The word for god, the variations, are used. For example, remember the stupid Christian bumper stickers and their obsession with the Hebrew word elohim. Some of them still treat that word like it means just God. Well, look up Dagon, or any number of gods and goddesses mentioned in the Bible. The same word is used for those.

They mean the same thing. Someone somewhere thinks Dagon, Molech, etc. are gods. Mighty. In some way. 1 Samuel 5:7 (Dagon); 1 Kings 11:5 (“goddess” Ashtoreth); Daniel 1:2 (Marduk).


It isn't that all sticks or all shit are gods. It's that they can be, if someone makes them their god.

Eric Clapton is a guitar god.

@AkioTsukino
Interesting. In another post. When you asked me to define god. You denied my claim that god was whatever we need or desire him to be.
Now you just proved my point.
God conforms to us. We create him to suite our ego. He’s not the prime mover, we are.
I still have no idea of what you are trying to prove. But so far , it’s nothing but a big pile off fire fuel.

@AkioTsukino [quote]A god can be anything or anyone[/quote]

So anything or anyone can be a god

Which means that gods are indistinguishable from everything and everyone else.

@AkioTsukino The Bible is a product of its time. Slavery is still in two commandments and women are simple property. The U.S. constitution counted male slaves as 3/5 of a person when determining representation in the House. Just like in the Bible. Women had even less.

Btw, Danny Gatton is god.

@BlueSkyKing [quote]The U.S. constitution counted male slaves as 3/5 of a person when determining representation in the House. [/quote]

I'm sure that is an inaccurate statement.

The constitution says:

"Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

The official language in Article 1 Section 2 included both genders. It recognized slaves as people but they were not citizens and had no rights under American law. Their numbers benefited the White men in the slave States because only White men could vote. The inclusion of 60% of the slaves gave the White men more political power but it did not benefit the slaves one iota.

BTW, slavery is still legal in America.

@Diotrephes
The U.S. Constitution, Article 1. Section 2. The "Three-Fifths Clause"
Ratified 1788

Although the Constitution did not refer directly to slaves, it did not ignore them entirely. Article one, section two of the Constitution of the United States declared that any person who was not free would be counted as three-fifths of a free individual for the purposes of determining congressional representation. The "Three-Fifths Clause" thus increased the political power of slaveholding states. It did not, however, make any attempt to ensure that the interests of slaves would be represented in the government.

Transcript
The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

[b]Representatives and direct Taxes[/b] shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

@DocSavage [quote]Atheist means Anti - theist[/quote]
No it doesn't. An anti-theist would be someone who opposes theists. Most a-theists simply do not believe in any gods, they don't care about gods or theists. Some atheists are also anti-theists and actively campaign against theists and theism.

@AkioTsukino [quote]He makes it into his god. The shit is a god. His god. [/quote]
That's not a god, it's a fetish.

@ninalanyon So? A fetish can be a god.

@AkioTsukino If every parcel is marked ‘urgent’, then no parcel is urgent... urgent simply becomes the new ‘standard delivery’

If everything can be a god, then nothing is a god, because any one thing is indistinguishable from all other things in that regard.

The proposition is self-defeating and trivial.

@AkioTsukino As you are so keen on dictionary definitions here's one
[quote]a spirit or being believed to control some part of the universe or life and often worshipped for doing so, or something that represents this spirit or being:[/quote]

@ninalanyon [quote]a spirit or being believed to control some part of the universe or life and often worshipped for doing so, or something that represents this spirit or being:[/quote]

Right. That is a god.

@AkioTsukino
Yesterday you stated that Bullshit can be god.
I’ll stay with god is Bullshit, and leave it at that.

@DocSavage [quote]Yesterday you stated that Bullshit can be god.
I’ll stay with god is Bullshit, and leave it at that.[/quote]

What's the difference?

@AkioTsukino
Context. As I explained before.