WHY THE FUCK HASN'T ATHEISTS DEFINED ATHEISM YET???????

WHY THE FUCK HASN'T ATHEISTS DEFINED ATHEISM YET???????

lol

There's no such thing as atheism.

God is real, therefore atheism cannot exist. Case closed.

Atheism. Noun. The lack of belief in a god/gods or deity/deities.
Example: Tom is an atheist, so he politely declined his neighbors invitation to their church.

Cause atheism doesnt need to be defined.
when you dont believe in fairy tales there is no need to explain why you dont.
just use the common sense you were born with.
I dont believe on flat earth but that doesnt make me or puts me on a bracket of none believers.
i just dont believe on certain things....period.

Master baiter

Atheism is for losers.
Who cares about science, it has been responsible for many weapons and deaths.
All the atheist regimes, like Mao, the communist and the Nazi's killed hundreds of million people.
Atheists even kill their own babies, because they have no morals so they have too much sex, get pregnant and then kill their babies via abortions.
Atheism is the religion for cannibals, pederasts and vampires

I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but you have brain damage that's preventing you from forming long-term memories. We define it for you EVERY DAY but you keep forgetting and asking again, EVERY DAY.
I know it's pointless to tell you this, because you won't remember it tomorrow, but I want you to know that I feel really, really bad for you.

>Who cares about science, it has been responsible for many weapons and deaths.
I'm going to say two things, and one of them isn't going to sound right.
Ready?
>Holy War
>Scientific War

Notice that?

cause I dun wana

The holy war or the crusades were fought to fend off the Arab invaders, so you should be glad that the church was there to protect you under its divine wings.
Muslims fight Jihad, but Christians and Jews have a Jihad too.
It's when gods sends his prophets or angels to instruct us to fight for him.
The cold war, the Afgan war, the war in Irak all these wars were fought by atheist regimes to subdue the countries who simply want to live by gods rule.

you sound delusional.

Science hasn't disproved god. The furthest humans have gone in analyzing matter is what makes up atoms, which are quarks. We don't know what made quarks or why. We do know you cannot create or destroy matter.. so what is it and how did it get here?

Science can only prove what we know. True scientist.. people who think like one are more open to fantastical ideas.. A lot of real scientists do believe in creationism.. not necessarily religions.

Something had to create matter and space. But it doesn't necessarily mean Humans were even the point of everything. We just are just a collection of matter and energy. We could be unique and special but we aren't the point of everything.

THERE IS A CREATOR.

For you op

>Allah is real, therefore Christianity or any other religion doesn't exist
>Buddha exists, therefore Islam or any other religion doesn't exist

Do you see how retarded your level of reasoning is now, son?

>Largemouth bass bites the bait

You are fucking stupid, I genuinely hope you're retarded / proven sub50 iq

Oh god, that was better than all the ylyls combined I've seen last week. Thanks OP

Welp. This thread gave me cancer.

bla bla bla lack of believe blablabla

Who ever said that the truth has to make sense? Or that you should be able to comprehend it?
Quantum mechanics is illogical, the theory sounds delusional, but it's the truth.
So i'm in good company.
Prove me wrong, don't just assert your opinion.

Never claimed that science disproved that, but there is a pocess called matter creation.
It's the process in which matter is created and it has been repeated by scientists.
So we do know how matter is created.

You have no proof that "a lot of scientists bleive in creationism".
You're clearly making this statement based on faith.
Creationism, as in humans were a sepaate creation, has no ally in science, because all the data we have collected suggested that life arose with water, became plants, created oxygen and gave the chance for one celled organisms to arise.
There is no room for intelligent design here, but even creatiosm is just "ok, scientists talk about a big bang" Well then god caused the big bang" and it will soon be "the multiverse gave rise to the big bang? Well then god created the multiverse". Creationism and intellignet design have no allies

>WHY THE FUCK HASN'T ATHEISTS DEFINED ATHEISM YET???????

Sigh. What a douche.

Atheism is stupid cock flavored mouth wash

That's Webster's definition and he wasn't an atheist. I need an atheist to define it.

Very well, let me, an Atheist, define the word Atheism for you.
Atheism is the lack of believe in any kind of deity, god or any higher being like that.
Are you happy now?

Only kids and faggots believe in god kys OP

No. Only God is real. The things you've listed are childish fantasies.

>Jew detected
Nice try, Moshe

>calls me a jew
buddy why do you have to speak so badly about me?
did i call you a whore? i did not! did i call you an asshole? no i did not! did i call you a retard? (i thought you are) but i did not say that to you!
and still you go on and call me a (((jew)))
you are hurting my feelings here, what would (((Jesus))) have done if he were to see this?

But here's the problem, "lack of belief" does not mean very much in itself. You either
1. believe God exists
2. believe God does not exist
3. have not made up your mind
So called atheists don't make a distinction between the last two because they don't care -
what they care about is not being preoccupied with the task of being religious. So while being religious generally has a list of X, Y, Z things that you do and act out in life, being not religious does not have anything in the list of things you do. They have not decided what definitions go there, thus it is not defined what "being atheist" means.

he'd lol@your ass for being here

That's retarded, because the third example you give clearly refers to agnosticism, which is not atheism per definition.
So, it's not that atheists don't care, it's that you didn't care enough to research agnosticism and atheism.
Now, what atheists claim (and this is the best way to put it) is that the "evidence" theists provide is not sufficient enough to warrant a belief in a deity.
This is the best way to put it, but it might not fit with the (erroneous) definition of atheism you had/have

>But here's the problem, "lack of belief" does not mean very much in itself.
This is literally irrelevant.
>So called atheists don't make a distinction between the last two because they don't care
are you actually retarded?
lacking the believe and believing that god exists is literally impossible.
and there is no need to make a distinction between the two other because they both fulfill the lack of believe

>refers to agnosticism, which is not atheism per definition.
this is factually incorrect.
you can lack a believe in god and at the same time not know wether there is one or not.
for all it matters this distinction is completely without meaning because it's literally impossible to know wether god exists or not

d-did you post a pic of a copypasta instead of just pasting it?

Vampire here. Can confirm true

>Atheists even kill their own babies

I sure hope this is bait.

D: i did not know that (((Jesus))) is gay, i mean i am all for the rights of (((those))) people but i prefer that my ass be not sullied by such degenerate actions.

Can't tell if bait cause religionfags actually argue like that

it's a dumb phoneposter who is too retarded to copy paste text, what did you expect?

Bait.

Buddhist MasterRace

No, you're moving around with definitions.
Agnosticism is the stance that you do not know if god exist.
Atheism is the stance that you think that god does not exist.
No matter how you decide you decide to play with words, agnosticism is not atheism.
So "not having made up your mind" and "having made up your mind that god does not exist" are not equal at all.

It is impossible to know if god exist, but the evidence in favor for it (in theism) is so poor that it can't be taken serious.
There is something called the Bayesian exeption or Scopie's law.
The Bayesian exeption states that "When something is nonsense 99% of the time it might not be worth investigating.
Well, the Bible has proven to be filled with errors.
Even better.
There is no religious text of any rleigion that is not riddled with errors due to the fact that they were written with the knowledge people had of the world in those times.
The knowledge they had was very little and i shows, its why we have no mentions of virusses, antibiotics, poor physics (like the sun not being a star in genesis) etc.
Taken into account that the texts are nonsense one could easily deduce that this means that what those texts represent are nonsense as well.
Do you agree?

>Agnosticism is the stance that you do not know if god exist.
yes
>Atheism is the stance that you think that god does not exist
no it isn't it is the stance that you do not >believe< that god exists.
>Do you agree?
yes but the lack of evidence or anything you wrote for that matter is irrelevant for >believe

>So "not having made up your mind" and "having made up your mind that god does not exist" are not equal at all.
that's not what you actually wrote yourself
you wrote
>you do not know if god exist.
and
>you think that god does not exist.
these do not exclude each other
even if you were 100% certain that you know that god does not exists, that would still not change the fact that you do not actually know it.

Allah is real, Allah means god. Buddha was real, you can be a Buddhist and be in an Abrahamic religion.

All gods are created by man. Your god is a myth. This is a fact.

No, because "believe" is not something a rational person would base his worldview on.
We generally define our knowledge of the world by what we know and not by what we believe.
Completely opposite from religion so it must sound pretty foreign to you.
Religion really is just accepting premises on bad evidence

"Having made up your mind that god does not exist" and "thining that god does not exist" are both a definition of atheism, yes.

Not having made up your mind" and "not knowing" is the stance of agnosticism.

By saying that you do not know, you imply that there is a 50/50 chance that god either does or does not exist.
Atheists don't give a 50% in favor of god, because atheists caim that the "evidence" for god is not enough to warrant a belief.
Gravity on the other hand has mountains of testable evidence

Technically christians are athiests in regards to zeus, odin, kritchna, osiris. Most of us just take it one god further. I forget the origination of the word, i want to say it was roman, but the definition meant " one less" or somthing.

The Buddha was an atheist.
He said so in one of his lectures.
One of his students asked him if he believed in a creator deity and he said no, but he knew of a deity in the realm of the gods (you can reincarnate as a god with other gods in the god realm in Buddhism) who grew up completely isolated and never met anyone else. This isolation made him believe that he created the realm he lived in. So he calls your god delusional.

I don't think your example of gravity is reasonable here, more fitting would be something like.
On the fourth planet of alpha centauri is a planet that has life on it
you can say what you want, believe what you want. but at the end of the day no matter what, you do not know so you are agnostic in regards of life on that planet.
but i guess this all leads to the point of having
>Not having made up your mind
be part of the definition

See this is what I mean by "atheists don't make a distinction between the two"
Trying to do that spins off this whole pointless discussion of agnosticism which I say is pointless because atheist and agnostic are identical in practice.
And you can take a look at the comments on Neil DeGrasse Tyson's "Big Think" video trying to give the discussion any measurable credibility.
This is why the OP says you guys can't define it. There is nothing to define in the first place, only something to not be defined as, which is being religious.

No, because that's not an hypothesis or a theory.
The example of gravity is reasonable, because the law of gravity is testable.
God, creationism and intelligent design are all hypotheses that have failed any testing and their only "evidence" is a book,"interpretations of real sceintific studies" and "personal experiences from the users".
No, you can make the same decision, you do it all the time.
When you want to know which team you should join, do you?
a: let faith decide
b: research the teams as touroughly as possible
And can you honestly say that you have done the same for you religion?

PPS belief has value to a theist, but its worthless to an atheist.
This is why atheists base their worldview (or you would say "belief on how the world is") on what has been established to be true via the scientific method instead of basing their worldview on dubious ancient books written by middle eastern superstitious tribes.
Did you know that Jews came from Uruk, Irak and the Aryans came from Iran.
So the founders of the two biggest and most ancient religions (Hinduism and Judiams) were literally neighbouring countries.
I think that i know what this means for the truth of judaism and Hinduism.

>you can lack a believe in god and at the same time not know wether there is one or not.

Verbal diarreah
Why would you not believe in something of which you think that it exist?
What you're writing is pure sophistry.
Agnosticism and atheism only share the fact that they're not religious, but an agnost still counts for being half religious.
So your logic would imply that agnosticism and theism are the same, which they aren't.

>agnost still counts for being half religious.
That's where I disagree, I think of religion like a big lottery that you can't see because you have to climb a mountain to see the winning numbers.
The atheist says there's no lottery, I won't climb the mountain. And the agnostic who is also not climbing goes "I don't wanna be lumped in with that guy, I actually think there could be a lottery I just don't care to climb"
The religious person doesn't care to make a distinction because it's like jerking yourself off. What difference does it make to anyone other than yourself what the reason is you aren't climbing?

Funny, but that's a bad misrepresentation of religion and it makes your poin looks crooked.
Let's say that religion is a big power structure and the atheist says i do not think that this power structure will work. The agnost says i don't know if the power structure will work. And the theists says i believe that this power structure will work.

The one who you should not ask for help in this situation is the .... ?

I used the term "power structure" because every religion has been used to gain power.
Judaism was founded after the Semites took control over Israel, to validate their rule they claimed that they were sent there by god.
But then the Romans took control over Israel and then they founded Christianity as a state rleigion, which overthrew Jewish (Semitic) "divine" rule.
Then the Semites (Arbas, are semites too) took back Israel and created another religion in which they largely went back to the basics of Judaism.

I remember these threads

>I used the term "power structure" because every religion has been used to gain power.
Not a good analogy. Plenty of non-religious beliefs have been used to gain power too.
If there are religious people where you live, and you live in a first world country, its not likely power has anything to do with their motivations, on an individual or large scale, fact is modern religions have formed their own peaceful sects by now so your history points no longer matter.

Ooooooohhhhhh i member!

Ironic how you posted the biggest out going atheist, potentially in the world, woth your post

Not at all.
Organized rleigion is a power structure and it has used its power to do many good and bad things in the past.
I'm simply adding historical facts to my points and not opinions.

You can often find the function of something or the reason for something after seeing it work.
Now let's put religion, its practices, dogma and traditions in a box and then lets see who uses the box and for what.
Generally we see big organization and/or governments handing out these boxes in the name of "state religions".
Now, ofc, these rleigions were forced. If our forefathers were heretics, apostates or other dissidents they'd get killed.
Quite often we see that religion is used to enforce a certain set of ideas, to keep the population united and happy.
Now, justl ike every story, leave it long enough and people will forget why they believe in it.
Religion these days is soemthing passed on from parents to children, there's nothing "revealed" about it anymore.
Just a set of ancient stories great grandma and co believed in.

...

>leave it long enough and people will forget why they believe in it.
I'd argue my experience with religious people has never been dogma for superficial purposes. At least with Christianity the prevailing conviction was to shed light on the truth of human nature so those who listen can lead better lives.
>there's nothing "revealed" about it anymore.
I wouldn't count this as an argument but I have to mention - I was an atheist and have had startling events where truth seemed to reveal itself to me. And this is also why I don't think people who haven't been atheist at some point can truly be religious because you're right it would have simply been passed on stories otherwise.

NO YOU NEED FUCKING THERAPY

Sorry mi English no good yet.

poes law is a bitch

Because the religious rightwingers got republicans elected to reduce education funding. Then they replaced all the dictionaries in school libraries with bibles.

I'm not referring the experience a theist has with other theists.
I was referring to how theists experience rleigion.
Ask a theist now why he believes in Jesus and the answer will be slightly different from how it would have been when Christianity was just turned into a state religion.
This is what i meant with that people 9as a collective) have forgotten why they believe in Christianity.

I'm glad that we see eye to eye on that, but you know what i've also seen?
That many of the metaphysical experiences people have are never tied to any particular religion or sect.
Things like ghosts, spirits, revelations, messages in dreams, premonitions we have people experiencing them daily, but the things we don't see people experience are the things in the bible.
Many people in the OT were able to perform magic, the bible things that astrology is real, hich is why it is forbidden to follow your horoscope in the OT and the list goes on with all these metaphysical claims that nobody has, seems to care about or of which we know that they are nonsense like horoscopes.
The religions are never right, the miracles they describe could have happened (being very generous here) to anybody, but they can't be tied down to a particular religion making all those religions who claim that they are special, kind of full of themselves.

I became an atheist, so why did you became a theist?

>WHY THE FUCK HASN'T ATHEISTS DEFINED ATHEISM YET???????

Because you're so amusing when you're triggered.