[Serious] Atheist Dogma

[Simon Moon]

I don't know. This guy comes in like he has all the answers but clams up for days after posting. It is beyond annoying.

I sympathize with your grievance, but I am doing it, because I have gone through it several times, already - the arguments are no different.

The arguments indicate that the respondents are not reading and comprehending that the definition of theism is incorrect. It does not make sense for atheists to accept a definition that does not assign doctrine to the definition to theism.

Again, you are just wrong, as I previously pointed out in post #40 on this thread.


The standard definition for "theism" is: belief in the existence of a god or gods (Webster dictionary). Full stop. There is no doctrine to assign to the belief in the existence of gods.

Deists, those the believe in a god as 'first mover' and nothing more, do not have any doctrine. Pantheists (Spinoza's god) and panentheists, believe in the existence of gods, but don't have any doctrine.

Religions have doctrines, theism does not. It happens, the the vast majority of theists do follow some religion, and therefore do have doctrine, but dontrine is not a necessary part of theism.

Atheists prove this when they argue that theists have to be indoctrinated to believe in something that does not exist. The use of "believe," in a definition is flimsy, and gets absurd when referring to "disbelief," and "non-belief," and the like.

Where are you getting the idea that atheists claim that theists necessarily have to be indoctrinated in order to be a theist? Please quote an atheist making this claim.

Anyone who believes in a god or gods, whether indoctrinated or not, are theists. Does not matter how they came by their belief. The only thing that defines one as being a theist, is answering "YES" to the following question: "do you currently believe that at least one god exists?".

Maybe you are confused as to the definition of "belief"?

I would bet that I am of very few that you are suggesting actual are, and probably the only person who is making the claims that the definitions of the words significant to the atheists' sense of atheism are inaccurate and adversely effecting the reasoning abilities of individual atheists and the organizational ambitions of atheist activities.

As far as your definitions, you have been wrong at every turn.

Theism: belief in the existence of a god or gods [no doctrine necessary to be a theist]
Atheism: a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods: a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods [no opposition to specific religion dogma necessary]
Anti-theism: is the belief that theism and religion are harmful to society and people [oposition to religious dogma and dogma as being dangerous]

When you define atheism, you seem to be referring to the definition of anti-theism

Not all atheists are anti-theists. I have a good friend who is an atheist, but not an anti-theist. He does not believe any gods exist, but he believes that for many people, religion is necessary for them.