Is Atheism Agnosticism tainted by Religion?

Question

You don't believe in God. Fair enough.

But what is this God you don't believe in? No religion has, as far as I can tell, ever managed to tie down just what God is supposed to be. It could be some random life force, it could be some existential father figure, it could be the personification of our fathers as a cosmic entity, it could be some peripheral standard of justice, it could be just the origin of the world (whatever that is)...

Doesn't Atheism take the definitions of deity by their cultural religion for granted; in effect believing their proclamations about the God they worship? Or does it have some internal definition of what it is that it doesn't believe exists?

melius, how do you know if it exists or not if it hasn't been properly defined? It seems illogical to denounce a predicate as false without first defining it.

Avondrow, to elaborate, what if I were to say that God was some guy that lived next door? I suspect you might give one of 2 responses; either "I believe that God exists then, since I've met the guy next door and he's actually quite a nice chap" or "No, that's not God, don't be delusional".

The latter, however, requires you to have an existing understanding of what is meant by "God" and, well, isn't that based entirely in Religion?

Nice response, Paul S. My underlying query, really, is whether Atheism as a principle makes sense in a world where Religions are increasingly losing their monopoly on theistic philosophy ("God Bless Secularism", as I've heard one friend put it).

Answer 1

I am not an atheist, but I know some people who are. It seems to me that they reject the definition of God that has been given by the standard, traditional religions. Perhaps a person will decide to proclaim herself to be an atheist because she feels that the modern English term "God" has been so corrupted by the ideas of closed-minded church people that the concept no longer contains any value. And I would just about have to agree with that. If I mention the idea of God as a universal life-force or as the interpersonal spirit of goodness and compassion to one of my atheist friends, they might agree with that, but still the name "God" has a disagreeable connotation to them.
Religious language is full of metaphor. Some of the most simple, basic terms of religion are such large, sweeping, all-encompassing concepts that it takes many pages of erudition to even explain what we mean when we say the name "God".
When you say "God", you are implying a whole big set of ideas. Atheists are often people who simply cannot agree with some of the ideas that they have heard being attached to that name.

Answer 2

I believe in the natural world. There are no gods in that natural world.

If someone chooses to use the word "god" to describe some element of the natural world, fine, and of course I believe in whatever that person is referring to. But if that's what we mean by "believing in god" there's really not much point in discussing any of this.

Most religions do "tie down" what god is supposed to be, within certain maybe broad parameters. For example, god is thought to have created the world, to answer prayers, to smite his enemies, etc. There is no one entity in the natural world that does all of those things, and therefore the god referred to by people who believe that simply does not exist.

I think this was a fairly good question on your part, but it's best addressed to believers. If they're willing to throw out the false parts of their understanding of god, I'm sure you'll find that atheists have no issue with their beliefs. But most believers want to hold onto those false beliefs - for example those that allow them to believe that they have a "personal relationship with god".

Answer 3

I don't really understand the question. An atheist does not believe in any god, that is what the term means! And many religions are very specific about the Deity they believe in!
It is not for me, as an atheist, to define the nature of an entity I disbelieve in! I know the universe to be naturalistic, and do not require any preternatural expanation of it's origin or opperation, whether that explanation is labled 'Jehovah' 'Allah' or 'The force'!

Answer 4

I see your factor yet a faith is a theory shape. Atheism isn't a theory shape so no. A single, disbelief does not characterize a shape of theory. as an occasion an atheist would desire to stay any variety of existence they choose. they may be recommend or surprising, beneficiant or grasping, satisfied or indignant, stable or evil and none of those issues in any way compromises what they (do no longer) have self belief. A christian would desire to a minimum of SAY they stick to the instructions of Jesus Christ as a manner to be considered christian. in the event that they do obvious issues that pass against what Jesus taught then different christians besides as others will say that they are "no longer possibly christian." Or "no longer stable christians." a minimum of they might desire to. So no atheism isn't and could never be something close to to a faith.

Answer 5

Because religion has played such a role in history it has formed or at least had input into the accepted norms of society. Non believers may not believe in God but their lives have been shaped as in the moral code they live by ......by the society around them. So I suppose religion does have input. Also the very fact of opting out.....shows that enough consideration has been given to religion to make that choice. So again there is influence.

Answer 6

Atheism is a word that shouldn't even exist. You don't see any non-alchemists or non-astrologists running around, do you?

Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make when in the presence of religious dogma. The atheist is merely a person who believes that the 260 million Americans (87% of the population) who claim to never doubt the existence of God should be obliged to present evidence for his existence and, indeed, for his benevolence, given the relentless destruction of innocent human beings we witness in the world each day.

Answer 7

Dude, that was a very well-worded question. I see what you mean, when they say it and acknowledge the existence of a god. The fact is, they don't follow the gods in any way, shape or form, they just know they exist. Some atheists know there isn't one, but see to each his own. That would mean that there are two different versions of atheism; those who know that divine beings exist, and those who know that they don't exist.

That's a tough question. If you already know that much, you should be a religious historian. Study up on each religion that conflicts and put out possible come-to-agreement websites or books.

Answer 8

Wrong. Atheists don't believe in the existence of gods, or supernatural beings because there is no evidence for such.

No matter what god you come up with, even if it's one I never heard of before, I won't believe it unless you can prove it.

Culture doesn't have anything to do with. Education has a LOT to do with it.

Answer 9

I'm an Atheist, so I don't believe in any god(s) or godess(es), Christian or other wise.
I don't need to define the god(s), I don't believe in, because "he" is different for each believer, depending on what they believe "him" to be like.

A random life force is nature, not god.
If there were a god, it would have to think.
God implies that it's a deity.

Good Question : )

Answer 10

Many atheists are ex christians. As such they live in continuous resentment and their ideas are based on reaction rather than real independent thinking. I totally respect and appreciate atheists that think for themselves and aren't total nazis about their beliefs but I find that a lot of atheists are just as rigid, judgemental, inflexible, self righteous and narrow minded as fundamentalists.
The problem isn't what you believe its whether or not you are rigid and narrow minded about your beliefs.
Note how many of the answers provided by atheists to the persons question totally ignore his central point, which is logical, and respond with a knee-jerk reaction, which is hysterical. Now who does that remind you of? Hint: It rhymes with "-undamentalist".