What came first, the atheist or the theist?

[Spencer]

I apologize for not having read all 10 pages of this thread, which is in poor taste I know, god will judge me later. So if what I am about to say has already been said please feel free to pray and ask that I be smitten.

Theism was created by man as a way to explain things they didn't understand. Doesn't make it right.

"before the concept of god was created, humans were not non believers in god, because they had no idea what it was that they weren't believing in. wow, that's one hell of a sentence right there!"

Because it hadn't been posed yet as a ridiculous explanation as to why the sun set everyday.

So I am confused, what is your stance on someone who is ignorant to the many fallacies of the world?

I see your line of thought, they are neither theist's or atheist's because they do not hold enough knowledge to make a decision one way or another. Would that then mean everyone is agnostic by default?

---

I guess on further thought to the question posed IE "What came first, the atheist or the theist?" I would have to say yes Theist came first because it was nonsense created by man. Yes how could you have a non belief in something that hadn't yet been created?

[Tiberius]

Yes how could you have a non belief in something that hadn't yet been created?

...by not having a belief in it.

Seriously...why is this point so hard for people to understand? It's honestly like asking how someone could not own a car that hadn't been created yet.

[Spencer]

It seems to me you're confusing knowledge of something with belief of something. You have to have knowledge of ideas or ideals etc, before you can make the decision to believe them or not.

[Paul the Human]

People are confusing a lack of belief in something with disbelief in something, I think. If you never heard of (whatever), you have no reason to believe that (whatever) exists. If you have heard of it, but do not believe it exists, then... you disbelieve in that (whatever).

Until I typed this, I had never heard of green and purple gorillas, so I did not believe in them. Now, of course... I do.

[Spencer]

Until I typed this, I had never heard of green and purple gorillas, so I did not believe in them. Now, of course... I do.

And they're quite tasty!

[Edwardo Piet]

You don't have to know anything to disbelieve. Disbelieve just means "don't believe". Babies don't believe in God, babies disbelieve in God.

[Spencer]

No. Babies do not disbelieve in god. They lack the knowledge of the proposed existence of God.

[Paul the Human]

Babies lack belief in god, because they have not been introduced to the concept and have not had the opportunity to believe and/or disbelieve. I think you must know of the concept of (whatever) in order to disbelieve it. Otherwise, you simply lack belief.

Heheh. Semantics. The point is... having never heard the claims that god(s) exist, people would obviously not believe in god(s).

[Edwardo Piet]

Disbelief=don't believe=lack belief.

[Spencer]

Well I can see we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I just feel you have to have knowledge of something in order to believe or dis-believe in it. Even if it is an ignorant knowledge.