(July 30, 2010 at 7:32 pm)Tiberius Wrote: No, atheism (the thing) is not the result of theism. "belief in God" doesn't need to exist in order to "not have belief in God", just as cars don't have to exist in order to not have them either.
My point if you were to speak to a primitive man before the introduction and ideals of god(s) and asked him if he was an atheist, he would give you a blank stare not knowing what you were talking about.
Quote:Atheism (the word) is a result of theism, but what atheism describes (i.e. the non-belief in God) is as old as the universe itself.
Yes. I understand. But the actual non belief of God is only as old as the belief of God. If there is a planet out there that hasn't been discovered yet, its not that we don't believe its there, its that we don't know about it yet. Once we see the argument for said planet, we then chose to believe it or not.
Quote:The baby example is simple. Do newborn babies believe in God? No, for the same reason they don't believe in Santa Clause; they don't have the capacity of understanding to believe yet. So if they don't have a belief in God, what are they? Oh yes...atheists! Passive ones, I'll grant you that, but atheists all the same.
I don't need an explanation for what this scenario meant, i just don't see how it fits into the discussion. However Scented Nectar explained that very well.
