Atheism Defined Historically
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-01-2015, 05:54 PM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  I think there is indeed some value added here. You see, from my understanding of discussions with many atheists- and theists for that matter- I have come to understand that many of them have different understandings in regards to atheism.

For example, many atheists assume that atheism is something they have adopted after exposure to theism. Many do not know or understand that atheism is in fact the state of being they had before they got introduced to religious ideology. The same is true for theists.

Unless it isn't. Value is added by assuming there's a tiger causing those bushes to move, where no value is lost in being wrong. The converse, however, is, well... selected against. Tongue

And what value is another's understanding of atheism in the absence of theism; wouldn't we just develop a natural philosophy? Isn't that exactly what we did?

(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  I feel this distinction and clarification has significant relevance because it demonstrates to those who are unaware- particularly theists- that atheism itself predates theology and drives home the point of "Hey, we were here first, before any god was ever thought of."

Has that ever been demonstrated? Is there an indigenous tribe anywhere without some form of religion?

(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes, exactly. It is my opinion that being in a state of atheism is the more natural and honest state of existence in contrast to a position of belief. The reasons for this opinion are many and varied, but one such reason is to simply look at the deadly attacks in France today by Islamic militants.

Did you ever see the one where this guy volunteers to go up on stage and become hypnotized into chickenhood? Also heard that such was urban legend, that one cannot be suggestively led into actions completely out of character...

Other than Bourne. But that was the CIA and it took a boatload of time and cash.

(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  Have we ever seen an atheist organization go out and kill in the name of atheism?

Have we ever seen an atheist organization?

(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  But then again this is not my field of expertise.

Never stops me. Hardly a speed bump. Thumbsup

(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  By the same token, however, by assuming first what is (atheism), we can then objectively determine what isn't (beliefs). By promoting atheism through such means as what I am doing here, it could mean that if even one theist comes to reason, then one less child (or more) may not be indoctrinated into theology.

Reaching out to the young and enlightening them with reason verses theology cannot be harmful, but rather beneficial to humanity in the long run.

This must assume that all the world is a stage for theism. Again, bit by bit, what if all the world became a stage for atheism? There can be no harm in educating the theists that their most natural state is more true and honest than their position on beliefs.

Enlightening them with reason =/= lack of belief in god. Once we move into indoctrination, whatever we teach becomes the "theology."

(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  Perhaps, but being an atheist, I could not be inclined nor persuaded to believe it.




[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
07-01-2015, 06:17 PM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(07-01-2015 05:54 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  And what value is another's understanding of atheism in the absence of theism; wouldn't we just develop a natural philosophy? Isn't that exactly what we did?

Or did we? ... Consider

[Image: o-GWYNETH-PALTROW-LINGERIE-570.jpg]

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
07-01-2015, 06:19 PM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(07-01-2015 05:54 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  I think there is indeed some value added here. You see, from my understanding of discussions with many atheists- and theists for that matter- I have come to understand that many of them have different understandings in regards to atheism.

For example, many atheists assume that atheism is something they have adopted after exposure to theism. Many do not know or understand that atheism is in fact the state of being they had before they got introduced to religious ideology. The same is true for theists.

Unless it isn't. Value is added by assuming there's a tiger causing those bushes to move, where no value is lost in being wrong. The converse, however, is, well... selected against. Tongue

And back we go to the point of this thread and hence, "Atheism Defined Historically."

The historical evidence indicates that the state of atheism does indeed come before a position on beliefs. Since atheism is quite simply historically defined as "the state of being godless," it is therefore necessarily implicit that it is also the state of a lack of belief in gods.

One is first an atheist regardless if one has ever experienced any kind of theology.

Quote:And what value is another's understanding of atheism in the absence of theism; wouldn't we just develop a natural philosophy? Isn't that exactly what we did?

This is merely a history lesson, designed only to educate both theists and atheists.

The ongoing development of natural philosophy is most certainly best approached from an atheistic state rather than a supernatural position of beliefs.

Wouldn't you agree?

Quote:
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  I feel this distinction and clarification has significant relevance because it demonstrates to those who are unaware- particularly theists- that atheism itself predates theology and drives home the point of "Hey, we were here first, before any god was ever thought of."

Has that ever been demonstrated? Is there an indigenous tribe anywhere without some form of religion?

It is demonstrated daily by the atheistic parents of atheistic children, of which I am also a parent.

Tongue

Quote:
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes, exactly. It is my opinion that being in a state of atheism is the more natural and honest state of existence in contrast to a position of belief. The reasons for this opinion are many and varied, but one such reason is to simply look at the deadly attacks in France today by Islamic militants.

Did you ever see the one where this guy volunteers to go up on stage and become hypnotized into chickenhood? Also heard that such was urban legend, that one cannot be suggestively led into actions completely out of character...

Other than Bourne. But that was the CIA and it took a boatload of time and cash.

Can theological indoctrination really be compared to hypnosis?

Quote:
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  Have we ever seen an atheist organization go out and kill in the name of atheism?

Have we ever seen an atheist organization?

Sure, they are everywhere.

Quote:
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  But then again this is not my field of expertise.

Never stops me. Hardly a speed bump.

I prefer to thread softly, but carry a very big stick. Smile

Quote:
(07-01-2015 05:06 PM)Free Wrote:  By the same token, however, by assuming first what is (atheism), we can then objectively determine what isn't (beliefs). By promoting atheism through such means as what I am doing here, it could mean that if even one theist comes to reason, then one less child (or more) may not be indoctrinated into theology.

Reaching out to the young and enlightening them with reason verses theology cannot be harmful, but rather beneficial to humanity in the long run.

This must assume that all the world is a stage for theism. Again, bit by bit, what if all the world became a stage for atheism? There can be no harm in educating the theists that their most natural state is more true and honest than their position on beliefs.

Enlightening them with reason =/= lack of belief in god. Once we move into indoctrination, whatever we teach becomes the "theology."

But early intervention may induce a total lack of interest in theology as it may happenstance. In fact, the young may not even think about being an atheist, but only in rejecting ridiculous extraordinary religious claims.

One can be an atheist without even recognizing it.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2015, 08:25 PM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
Quote: I think that Paul is defending the Hebrew God as the true God

Except 'paul' was a creation of Marcion....or at least no one seems to have heard of him until Marcion came along....and Marcion throught Yahweh was shit.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2015, 05:00 AM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
Would it even matter if Paul was a macaroni invention?

And Free, while the thread may be entitled with history, the point of the OP is to promote that nonsense in you're siggy; so stop lying. TongueTongue

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2015, 07:59 AM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(08-01-2015 05:00 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Would it even matter if Paul was a macaroni invention?

And Free, while the thread may be entitled with history, the point of the OP is to promote that nonsense in you're siggy; so stop lying. TongueTongue

Tongue

Actually, the reason I have this siggy is because of what I already knew about atheism, which is what I decided to write in the OP.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2015, 10:25 AM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(07-01-2015 02:53 PM)Free Wrote:  
(07-01-2015 02:31 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  I think your post is pretty interesting. I never saw the word study on atheos before. Thank you. If I may point out something? I think that Paul is defending the Hebrew God as the true God and denying the reality of the pagan gods. Here is the context from Ephesians 2:11:

"Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumsized” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands)— 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world."

The Jewish author, Paul, is saying the Gentiles without Christ have no covenant to match that of Israel with God but had a pagan culture with false gods in it.

Thanks.

Yes, hence why the original definition of atheos was "godless."

Atheism is defined as the "state of being godless."

"Gentile" means "non Jew" and "non-Israelite" Pagan gods were not regarded as real gods to Jews, which included Paul.

But the word "atheos" is not a Hebrew word, but rather it is of Greek origin. It refers directly to atheists, and means inclusively that anyone without a god are godless.

Paul's use of it was directed towards the supposed "one true God," because it was his belief that there was only one true God, and the concept of pagan gods being "true" simply didn't exist, with him being a Jew and all. Therefore, from Paul's perspective, any pagan, regardless if they had pagan gods or not, were atheists.

The pagans also viewed the Jews and Christians as atheists as well. It was polytheism verse monotheism in all it's glory. It was like, "If you don't believe our god(s) exist, then you are an atheist; godless."

Hence, my point remains ...

I am an atheist because I was born this way.

I really was, and so were you, and so was everybody.

I'm glad you mentioned that because I personally recall from a tender age believing in God and I was raised by liberal, secular parents and not in any church.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2015, 10:36 AM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(08-01-2015 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(07-01-2015 02:53 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes, hence why the original definition of atheos was "godless."

Atheism is defined as the "state of being godless."

"Gentile" means "non Jew" and "non-Israelite" Pagan gods were not regarded as real gods to Jews, which included Paul.

But the word "atheos" is not a Hebrew word, but rather it is of Greek origin. It refers directly to atheists, and means inclusively that anyone without a god are godless.

Paul's use of it was directed towards the supposed "one true God," because it was his belief that there was only one true God, and the concept of pagan gods being "true" simply didn't exist, with him being a Jew and all. Therefore, from Paul's perspective, any pagan, regardless if they had pagan gods or not, were atheists.

The pagans also viewed the Jews and Christians as atheists as well. It was polytheism verse monotheism in all it's glory. It was like, "If you don't believe our god(s) exist, then you are an atheist; godless."

Hence, my point remains ...

I am an atheist because I was born this way.

I really was, and so were you, and so was everybody.

I'm glad you mentioned that because I personally recall from a tender age believing in God and I was raised by liberal, secular parents and not in any church.

Yes? Some people of that background believe in Gods, others do not. And unless your parents raised you in a secluded cultural bubble where you dealt with nobody but them and had no outside book/media influence you were also likely influenced by a religious culture, as almost anywhere you were living was likely a religious area.

There's plenty of cases of it and you frequently get questions on boards like this about non-religious parents wanting to know how to deal with religious influence from culture, childs peers, grandparents, aunts, media, etc. It's something where if you still just leave a kid alone in the culture as a parent, the child is still likely to become religious based on the percentages due to these social factors.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-01-2015, 10:57 AM (This post was last modified: 08-01-2015 11:49 AM by Free.)
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
(08-01-2015 10:25 AM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(07-01-2015 02:53 PM)Free Wrote:  Yes, hence why the original definition of atheos was "godless."

Atheism is defined as the "state of being godless."

"Gentile" means "non Jew" and "non-Israelite" Pagan gods were not regarded as real gods to Jews, which included Paul.

But the word "atheos" is not a Hebrew word, but rather it is of Greek origin. It refers directly to atheists, and means inclusively that anyone without a god are godless.

Paul's use of it was directed towards the supposed "one true God," because it was his belief that there was only one true God, and the concept of pagan gods being "true" simply didn't exist, with him being a Jew and all. Therefore, from Paul's perspective, any pagan, regardless if they had pagan gods or not, were atheists.

The pagans also viewed the Jews and Christians as atheists as well. It was polytheism verse monotheism in all it's glory. It was like, "If you don't believe our god(s) exist, then you are an atheist; godless."

Hence, my point remains ...

I am an atheist because I was born this way.

I really was, and so were you, and so was everybody.

I'm glad you mentioned that because I personally recall from a tender age believing in God and I was raised by liberal, secular parents and not in any church.

Then you were taught. No one believes in any ideology unless they are taught.

Perhaps a pre-school program, or other children, brought the concept of a god to mind. If this were not true, then 1.3 billion Muslims would be proclaiming Jesus as lord, rather than Allah.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2015, 10:38 AM
RE: Atheism Defined Historically
I'm not speaking of ideology but a relationship. I experienced the presence of the divine.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: