Why do NeoAtheists deny the practice of atheism is a religion?<<MOD WARNING>>

Do you acknowledge the basic fact of reality that people can live as if something is true/not true without committing to an absolutely belief in the truth of falsehood of that thing? This seems to be at the heart of the problem.

 

Every time you bring up lack of belief I will direct people to your statement so they can see the truth and your deflection.

 

I am an atheist, I live my life as if gods do not exist, I am not saying that I believe anything to be true about the existence of gods, I lack belief. Is that correct logically?

 

Sounds like agnostic atheism. Nope, perfectly logical. Very few atheists fall into the true strong/affirmative category.

 

Thank you for your help.

 

Sure thing, and I just realized another contradiction here. Koko claims that morality itself involves a tacit adoption of theism. He's wrong, but it reveals a huge hole in gfm's theories. To reconcile the two, gfm would have to commit to 1) Arguing that Koko is completely immoral in every regard 2) Arguing that Koko seeeeecretly believes in God, despite what both he and Koko have claimed or 3) Agreeing that you can live as if something is true without any commitment to any actual truth claim.

 

Ah so then you have no problem with atheism as a religion, your concern is that it would be too broad. Any 'ism' can be a religion, in fact its the first clue that its highly likely it is a religion. Are you sure that whatever it is that you have concluded as 'too broad' qualifies for or as a world view? Its good to see someone making some real sense out here instead of the by definition fantasy approach etc

 

Nice try but your fooling no one.

 

wellllllll you have to be a bit more careful on that one now because I do not have an issue with the existence of a supernatural universe, compared to atheists whose philosophies lock them into strictly material existence.

your premise in this case is defective since I fall into the categories highlighted in brown.

Definition of supernatural
1 : of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil
2a : departing from what is usual or normal especially so as to appear to transcend the laws of nature
b : attributed to an invisible agent (such as a ghost or spirit)

You have an even greater problem in that love hate anything that cannot be touched does not exist outside the neoatheist world, since you demand that the only way to accept anything is that it be touched.

Since belief cant be touched I question if atheists are capable of belief?

Please its not my problem if you cant defend the position.

 

Atheists simply live their lives as if no gods exist, that does not preclude some of them from the supernatural and even life after death, you can either live your life as if no gods exist or not. Which do you do Koko?

 

Wow what a mess you made out of that lol
theists simply live their lives as a G/god does exist
agnostics simply live their lives without knowing if G/god exists or not
atheists simply live their lives like no G/god exists
atheists cannot believe in the supernatural since they are locked into the material world, ie if ya cant kick it, it dont exist. your world.

 

Like your friend you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the terms which gives you these issues. So do you think morals come from god(theist) or from man (atheist) we can then see how you live your life.

 

I think they come from the supernatural realm, (agnostic).

 

Great so you are actually an agnostic theist, see how it all works when you understand the correct definitions.

 

I have no idea where you get that screwed up version from but you cannot blend agnostic with either atheist or theist, or are you going to try to tell me what I believe?

Its as ridiculous as trying to claim someone can go left straight and right all at the same time.

each are exclusive,

but dont get me wrong people with zero knowledge of philosophy and logic do it all the time.

 

Since you have been trying to tell everyone what they believe for this entire thread I do find your reluctance to understand the classic definitions of Atheist, Theist and Agnostic funny. No one is trying to tell you what you believe just finding out what you believe so that people can better understand where you come in the Atheist/Theist classical definitions. You believe that morals come from god(s) hence are a theist and are agnostic because you think the nature of that god is unknowable.

Yes that is why that left/right analogy is useless for looking at what defines peoples world view, much better to use the "do you live your life as if a god exists" it s so much better. It really is a simple dichotomy, you either live life as if gods exist or you do not. Look how quickly it was possible to sort out that you are a agnostic theist.

 

FALSE

neoatheists lack both the literacy and comprehension to understand what I believe.

There is no such thing as agnostic theist or agnostic atheist, it is made up nonsense.

agnostic neither believes nor disbelieves, stop inventing garbage definitions and conflating senses/inflections.

Prove the existence of love in your material atheist world.

 

What you do not think that morals come from a god(s), you just stated that they did, which is it?

Since no one except you knows what you mean by a neo atheist and you will not explain it, you will just have to carry on throwing rocks at windmills.

No it is quite simple, I have found a site that might help with your confusion.

https://www.learnreligions.com/atheist-vs-agnostic-whats-the-difference-248040

Once you get the correct ideas in your head it might help with your understanding of why neither Theism nor Atheism is a religion. You then just need to grasp that both atheists and theists can be in a religion, but that does not mean that ALL of them are, such as yourself.

 

I gave you the definition I use, there is no G/god in it, that is your invention, or the invention of some illiterate.

 

Again you really are getting hung up on labels, if you think that morals are not man made and you ground them in the supernatural then you believe in a god of some sort. It may be that you claim no knowledge of that god because you are agnostic but it must be a creator god since it created these morals you believe in.

 

I found a site that will fix your confusion.

Agnosticism is of the essence of science, it simply means a person shall not say he KNOWS or BELIEVES that which he has no scientific grounds for professing to know or believe - T H Huxley. (see below post for Huxley's work on Agnosticism)

from this definition, if you are intelligent, you will understand that Huxley's agnosticism is not just about Knowledge but beliefs as well, so where do y'all get your information from? Dawkins? Sam Harris? random memes? well u just saw the definition from the guy who coined the word agnosticism himself, if you are honest then you should think about this.

now let's say we agree to the claim that Agnostics refers to knowledge claim, it's still an entirely illogical and contradictory construction. if agnostic should mean "Does not know" then to make a judgment when asked if God exists is illogical, as we can see, the statement " I do not know if it's raining but I believe its not raining is absurd but dont forget many pseudo intellectuals claim agnostic atheist means " one does not know if there is a God but believe there is no God" so my question is if you don't know, why do u believe there isn't? why don't u just say " I don't know" ? remember, saying u don't believe still means u get Burden of proof like the Theists that says he believes in God/gods. just thought I should share this so one free thinker can become less ignorant. https://www.nairaland.com/3559976/proof-there-no-such-thing

but then no matter how many times or ways someone tries to teach you, you fail to make any much less proper distinctions.

Uh...duh! you try to paint everything known to man with one color

stop making **** up



I only need to know that your material world is lacking, as Jake said, lacking the language, lacking the literacy, and lacking the logic to produce what you claim, I dont know and dont care how morals come into play, I do know they cannot come from materially limited atheists.

In agnosticism you cannot believe what you do not know, so please stop harrassing me with that foolishness

 

On the contrary I found Gmf last night to of come up with an excellent idea to explain it and learnt from him. Do you live your life as if a god(s) exist. If we ask that question of you it shows that you are a theist, because you think morals come from a god(s) in this circumstance you chose to call it the supernatural.

I am not, if you think that the supernatural is responsible for morals then they were created and by an intelligence unless you think morals can be created without intelligence. That entity would be known as a god(s) to the rest of us.
Try to respond to the argument rather than the labels.
Ultimately this is important if you are to understand why atheism is not a religion.

 

I would be forced to recognize that as a lie if you made that claim about me because I proved that is not the case, in my case.

 

Again you are not actually debating the point you have just taken my quote and used it entirely out of context. What is important is that you live your life as if morals come from another source than mankind. You call it supernatural, but you will not address the point of what that is, in the absence of any other explanation people would call that god(s) for the reasons I have stated and for which you have not provided a counter argument.

 

Interesting have you now dropped the idea of lack of belief, after all if you think atheist are not capable of belief they cannot believe gods do not exist. Rather screws up your previous arguments. Especially that atheism is a religion or do you think that atheists have religions they do not believe in?