Twilight and the Bible?

[A897]

yes extremists are everywhere but a single extremist can be controlled while group of extremists end up doing 911 stuff. Atheists don't force people to dump their religion and try to convert them to atheists. While every religious person thinks he's on the right path and if that person is extremist he'll do anything for his faith.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Atheism without critical thought is no better than fundamentalist theists, IMHO.

Oh, do you mean it's not real atheism?


A quick look around will show that few atheists on this and other atheist forums consistently live up to your standards of what makes a real or useful atheist--and yep,that includes you and me.

[Elles]

Well nobody here has hired a psychic recently for purposes other than humor... has anyone?

[Autumnlicious]

Atheism without critical thought is no better than fundamentalist theists, IMHO.

Oh, do you mean it's not real atheism?


A quick look around will show that few atheists on this and other atheist forums consistently live up to your standards of what makes a real or useful atheist--and yep,that includes you and me.

No. Don't put words in my mouth. I stated that atheism without critical thought is no better than theism - a lack of belief doesn't stop you from making absolutist (the other word for fundamentalist) statements.

For example, look at this ding bat and his insane crusade against vaccines:

---

Bill "ARRRRGHH YOU LIAR" Maher

---

[Edwardo Piet]

You can have extremist atheists... but not about and because of their atheism

I think atheism without critical thought is less likely to lead to something like, say, 911 than theism (Islam in this case). Because it would need more than just lack of critical thought to go that bad... atheism would also need a gospel (or something to that effect) that was completely unquestioned by atheists... and the content of it would have to cause nasty consequences (to say the least) if so zealously believed in.

EvF

[Azazylix]

You can have extremist atheists... but not about and because of their atheism

I think atheism without critical thought is less likely to lead to something like, say, 911 than theism (Islam in this case). Because it would need more than just lack of critical thought to go that bad... atheism would also need a gospel (or something to that effect) that was completely unquestioned by atheists... and the content of it would have to cause nasty consequences (to say the least) if so zealously believed in.

EvF

Well one can argue that atheism is devoid of strict moral values such as displayed in the Bible, -> 'extremists', be it for the atheist purpose or not, may be prone to more radical actions.

Oh, oh, then of course there'd be the reason why atheists would believe in said 'gospel'! If Jesus didn't (supposedly) perform his magic tricks and preached till his mouth ran dry, I doubt anyone would care. I wonder what would (or COULD) convince an ATHEIST. xD

No. Don't put words in my mouth. I stated that atheism without critical thought is no better than theism - a lack of belief doesn't stop you from making absolutist (the other word for fundamentalist) statements.

Agreed, case in point too! But doesn't it irk you when people transform atheism into something of a religion with phrases like 'real atheism'? Almost like there's a religious (pun intended) blueprint!

[Edwardo Piet]

Interesting lol...

Atheism is just not believing in God(s) or positively believing that there isn't God(s)... so yes, to use terms that might imply any more than that means to talk about more than simply atheism.

EvF

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Atheism is just not believing in God(s) or positively believing that there isn't God(s)

Ah the definition issue.


The the word 'atheism' comes from the Greek atheos' 'a-theos'.Meaning without gods,period.


The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines atheism:

Disbelief in the existence of God or gods; godlessness.Gk 'atheos'; not god

You may of course make it mean whatever you like. I'll stick with the correct definition.

[Edwardo Piet]

Can you show me the difference other than the words you used?

If you're not going to count positively believing there is no God too, then you're discounting all gnostic atheists. Unless you think disbelief covers that.... that's a semantic thing.

And I included disbelief of course (as you can see above) - obviously.

EvF

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Can you show me the difference other than the words you used?

No. I've made my position as clear as I can. I use what I see as a simple and accurate definition which is to me a simple concept. I have no need to complicate it with semantic equivocations. If I'm unsure of a concise word meaning, I refer to a good dictionary.


I'm quite happy to agree to differ.