DBT
Contributor
Converting others to the Club is a way of defending the faith. Or at least justifying a belief in God.
Because in a sense theism is the absence of atheism. As people have noted, many believers tend to just believe without needing reasons. The ubiquity of the god-belief limits their options about how to explain god's absence from the world.The atheist myth thread became about proofs of god. There is a long history of theists showing up determined to prove god exists.
Because in a sense theism is the absence of atheism. As people have noted, many believers tend to just believe without needing reasons. The ubiquity of the god-belief limits their options about how to explain god's absence from the world.The atheist myth thread became about proofs of god. There is a long history of theists showing up determined to prove god exists.
But once their minds become aware-enough to realize that "maybe god doesn't exist" is something to consider also, then unbelief's a threat. Previously the only options were "I'm a sinner", "God's abandoned this wicked world", "God's ways are mysterious", "I'll have to pray harder". Now there's an additional possible reason why so many prayers don't get answered and the world looks material, and just material (aka "godless").
These more outspoken doorbell ringers just have a favorite color and they think everyone needs to have the same mental affliction. I think that's a good analogy. Who knows why exactly, except that certainly they're wired a bit differently upstairs because green is right and purple is wrong. Odd.
These more outspoken doorbell ringers just have a favorite color and they think everyone needs to have the same mental affliction. I think that's a good analogy. Who knows why exactly, except that certainly they're wired a bit differently upstairs because green is right and purple is wrong. Odd.
I like the 'favourite colour' analogy. I think it works very well. No one colour is 'truer' than another, but obviously, if you have been brought up in a home decorated with a certain colour, that will affect your adult preferences (you may rebel against it though). Etc.
Actually, this works just as well for many things, religion is only one of them.
Which begs the question, is atheism a colour (of belief) or an absence of colour?
To me, it's a colour. Others may disagree.
To me, it depends on whether someone actually identifies as an atheist and actively makes that a component of their social identity, in which case it is definitely a color.
If on the other hand we are simply labeling people "atheist" based on their answers to a hypothetical bank of philosophical questions, then they are likely any sort of color they like; they are not obligated to accept a categorization they did not choose.
Ditto "theism", or "polytheism", or "animism", or any other such academic generalization.
I agree. Some say it is merely the absence of a belief (colour) but I'm not sure about that.
I am not sure what you mean here (especially bit in bold).
Ditto "theism", or "polytheism", or "animism", or any other such academic generalization.
Again, I'm not quite with you.
Turning the question around for the theists if god exists and you have faith why must you prove it?
Why would an atheist bring it up?
Why would an atheist bring it up?
I don't bring up 'proofs' of God's existence in random conversations or for the fun of it.
i.e., some people consider anyone who happens to lack a belief in god as an "atheist", whether or not they would agree. That's not a color, to me, because it isn't a preference. Given the choice, someone might choose to identify in any number of ways other than atheist; the very reason sociologists of religion struggle to understand the so-called "nones".
Summarizing: Categorizing yourself is picking a color. Being categorized by someone else is not.
I can't remember a time that an atheist ever knocked on my door to testify to me.Turning the question around for the theists if god exists and you have faith why must you prove it?
Curiously, every time I had been asked to prove God's existence is when an atheist brings it up.
I don't bring up 'proofs' of God's existence in random conversations or for the fun of it.
I can't remember a time that an atheist ever knocked on my door to testify to me.Turning the question around for the theists if god exists and you have faith why must you prove it?
Curiously, every time I had been asked to prove God's existence is when an atheist brings it up.
I don't bring up 'proofs' of God's existence in random conversations or for the fun of it.
Excuse me, have you been introduced to the concept of god(s)... and that they are just made up?
In my real life, I generally don't ever hear anything concerning religion or religious beliefs except when initiated by religious proselytizers.Turning the question around for the theists if god exists and you have faith why must you prove it?
Curiously, every time I had been asked to prove God's existence is when an atheist brings it up.
I don't bring up 'proofs' of God's existence in random conversations or for the fun of it.
The RN that was talking to my Dad when in the hospital was mentioning being able to get the cancer into remission was a "miracle". I interjected and noted the doctors and surgeons and chemo likely deserved some credit.In my real life, I don't generally don't hear anything concerning religion or religious beliefs except when initiated by religious proselytizers.Turning the question around for the theists if god exists and you have faith why must you prove it?
Curiously, every time I had been asked to prove God's existence is when an atheist brings it up.
I don't bring up 'proofs' of God's existence in random conversations or for the fun of it.
Why would an atheist bring it up?
Most American college students have an obligatory class as part of their general education pattern, Philosophy 100 or some similar designation, in which a (usually atheist) professor tries to disprove theism for a semester. It's called introduction to philosophy, but god's existence is nearly always a central topic.
Why would an atheist bring it up?
Most American college students have an obligatory class as part of their general education pattern, Philosophy 100 or some similar designation, in which a (usually atheist) professor tries to disprove theism for a semester. It's called introduction to philosophy, but god's existence is nearly always a central topic.
Which appears that a claim for the existence of a God or gods must be made before an atheist can argue against it?
If there was no belief or claim for the existence of God, everyone would be an atheist by default.