How can you be Atheist in a Christian home?
I found that the easiest way was to keep my mouth shut until I had my own home. Yes, but what if they drag you to church all the time? Live with it. It's their house, their food, their concern for you. When you're an adult, you can rebel. For now, live with it. You might learn something, if only patience. In case you think I don't "get" it, my mom was the local priest's housekeeper.
Answer:
Every underground has had to be quiet when the masters are around. There is a tendency for parents to want their children to grow up properly (AKA the way they did) and any open rebellion will generally be met with resistance. And as pointed out, they hold all the sticks and carrots.
Since an atheist is essentially indistinguishable from a Christian - we are honest, quiet, clean, tidy, good scholars, and don't eat live kittens - the front is not hard to maintain. Even at church it is possible to "listen" while counting bricks in the wall or mentally calculating the power consumption of the lights in the celling. Eventually a day will come when you can butter your bread while grace is being said. Be prepared for a truck load of guilt being dumped on you. Also be prepared for some of the relatives to come out of the closet and admit similar feelings.
Answer
It is hard. just remember they don't want to think for themselves. People who have knowledge don't shove it in faces. Try to not pity them, just go with the flow. if you're sure about what you think you shouldn't get annoyed about it.
Are there any forbidden acts in atheism?
No, atheism has no dogma. All it is is a lack of belief in a god or gods.
Only what we decide to forbid ourselves to do. Religion does not have a monopoly on morality, and just as there are moral and immoral theists, there are moral and immoral atheists.
How is a believer in fortune who doesn't believe in God called?
"Spiritual, but not religious" is the most common term. However, the person might be just non-Christian. Many cultures are not strictly religious, but do have strong beliefs about fortune and luck.
Is billie joe Armstrong atheist?
No one really knows for sure, but certainly a lot of Green Day lyrics could be read as blasphemous or even anti-religion, e.g. Jesus of Suburbia and East Jesus Nowhere. However, just because his songs attack organised religion it doesn't mean he doesn't believe in some form of higher power.
I think you need to clarify what you mean by "yet another version of the Divine Command Theory".
As I understand the DCT, it is the idea that morality comes from a divine commandment - implying that if god commands something, then it must be good. This leads to some difficulties for philosphers - for example, mass murderer, Peter Sutcliffe, claimed that god had told him to kill prostitutes; yet few people would claim he was doing good.
What are the main atheist views?
The point of being an atheist is that you have no religious views, you don't believe in any god, gods, or religion.
There is no "communist blend" of atheism. It is commonly held that communism gets its atheism from a statement by Karl Marx: "Religion is the opium of the people" - a translation of the German statement "Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes".
This statement appears in Karl Marx' - "A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right" in the Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher, published in 1844.
However, this is a gross over-simplification and one should read the entire relevant part of the publication:
... Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.
Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. . .
What religions believe when you're dead you're dead and that's the end of you?
A "religion" is a belief in God (called different names depending on the religion, such as 'Allah' for Muslims), and those are the ones who believe there is an eternal afterlife with God after death. Those who believe "when you're dead you're dead" are atheists and do not believe in God. And since atheism is not a religion, there are no religions that fit the definition of your question.
As they don't believe in the existence of God who would they pray to?
No I doubt if atheists pray.
Is it an essential claim of all atheist that it can be proven that God does not exist?
No. An atheist only says they will not believe because there is no varifiable evidence to support the god claim. This is very different than saying, "there is no god". An usual example of this is: I say I have faith there is a tiny teacup orbiting the rings of saturn...can you prove me wrong? No, but without real evidence, it can be dismissed as impossible.
Who changed cs Lewis from atheist to christian?
It was probably Lewis's friendship with JRR Tolkien that caused his conversion.
Why do Atheist Jews still call themselves Jews even though they are Atheist?
Judaism is typically considered to be an ethno-religious group. It has certain elements that are common to all ethnicities, such as a common language, a common ancestry, particular customs of association, and a view of common historic nation-hood. It also has certain elements that other religions share such as a belief in divine beings and a God, specific divine mandates, houses of worship, and holy scriptures. (Other ethno-religious groups include the Druze and Yazidi.) Ethno-religious groups, unlike other common religions, prevent a person from converting out. This is because the ethnic component of Judaism ties a person to Judaism regardless of what they believe.
As a result, Jews who renounce the religious claims of Judaism still retain ethnic Jewish culture. They still eat the same foods, have many of the same political outlooks, the same family moorings, etc. He remains a Jew, both in his own perception and in the perception of most Anti-Semites. The Jews are the people of Judea and that heritage stays with them regardless of whether individual Jews choose to believe the religious claims of Judaism.
It is worth making clear, though, that being an Atheist is against the Jewish teachings on religion and violates the first three commandments of the eponymous ten.
If it is impossible to prove a negative why do some atheists make the claim God does not exist?
That's a very good question. I'd like to say those that are educated/learned in debate, logic etc. would not claim so, and would be agnostic atheists, who do not claim to know of God's lack of existence but are convinced as such, as opposed to gnostic atheists, whom you describe. From conversations with them they appear to be so utterly convinced that they decide it isn't possible. And I see what they mean, but they should learn to leave that tiny percent of doubt, in the interest of rationale. Those atheists such as myself who are agnostic atheists but very 'hardcore' often use the analogy of 'a-teapotists', as Richard Dawkins coined I believe. This is about not being able to disprove that a teapot is orbiting Saturn, but the chance is still there so we must be inclusive. Gnostic atheists don't care about this and go over the line, saying he doesn't exist, period. It is basically an irrational position, but better that than being religious, in my humble opinion.
How are theistic religions identified?
Not all religions are "theistic".
A religion is not a theism.
Theism, though, just about always causes the formation of a religion.
It might help to look up "theism", which is a belief...
and compare it to "religion," which is an organized system...
They're not mutually exclusive terms.
There are polytheistic religions too. And nontheistic religions.
If she is the person I think she is she is the founder of the American Atheists.
Has any atheist ever threatened to kill someone because that person believed in God?
The answer to the question though is almost certainly 'yes'. At some point in time some Atheist probably took this stance but it is a very unusual position for an Atheist to take. The opposite situation, where a religious person has threatened to kill, or indeed killed an Atheist for not believing in God are numerous and well documented.
Are the Theist less likely to divorce than Atheists or is it the other way around?
Atheists have a lower divorce rate than theists. Atheists are less likely to divorce.
Why does the scientific community believe so strongly that God does not exist?
The scientific community wants proof. They will not believe in anything without proof. That is what science is all about. But everything in this world doesn't have proof. There is no proof of what life is, what death is, so science has no option but to believe. Science cannot disbelieve death but has science been able to explain the meaning of death? Can science tell us where we go after life? Can science tell us who decides when we were born, where we were born, how we were born? Can science tell us the Truth about the Law of Action and Reaction? Unfortunately science has no proof and it does not believe in God. But science believes, for example, in the Law of Gravity, through inference: when you throw something up, it comes down. There is no proof but it infers that the Law of Gravity exists. So also today, science has proved that every atom of a human being is not mass but energy. Scientists have coined a theory called the Wave-Particle Duality. They agree that this whole world is nothing but energy. This is what spirituality had said thousands of years ago - that we are all made up of God's energy. Slowly science will come on the path of God.
Why do people believe in God without proof?
I think that they believe in him because they think the bible is true.
Answer:
Many are raised into the belief before they are taught to use logic and reasoning to come to conclusions. I am agnostic, though when I was young I was sucked into Christianity by friends of religious families and did somewhat believe it at first. Then I learned of science and history and decided it didn't make enough sense, and to this day have not found enough reasoning to think otherwise.
_____________
At its core, belief in a deity is, or should be, antithetical to any concept of 'proof'. From the perspective of many Christian sects, for example, the idea of FAITH as opposed to SIGHT (proof, or evidence) is crucial. Ironically, if there could ever be satisfying proof that a deity exists, then it would be the downfall of virtually every religion that holds faith in high regard.
But there can be no such proof, at least not from the perspective of science. It is not the job of science to prove anything, but to continuously refine the process of 'ruling out'. There is no systematic law based in any research algorithm that allows one to arrive at absolute proof of anything. There are only principles that have withstood 10's or 100's of years of challenge. But even such principles can fall. Newton was considered in his time and for generations afterward to have gotten the principles of gravity exactly and profoundly right. We know how that turned out.
I am agnostic, so the question is literally moot. But frankly I wouldn't have anything to do with a deity who allowed her/himself the indignity of proof.
----------------
Bla, bla, bla. It is a fact that Science cannot exist without Deity, laws followed without one divine law giver, laws that join with one another. The science that is being quoted above is false science, seeking to pass itself of as real science. Conscience informs us that a Deity exists, so much so that people will seek to stifle conscience by claiming that they are Agnostics, Huxley's new term for Atheism. Conscience cries so loud for a Deity, namely God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, that man will fight, and fight to get away from thoughts of God, pen long thesis, stand on platforms and rant. I do not believe in Evolution because it is a lie and a deceit of man that makes chaos not to be chaos by adding order. My conscience does not witness to Evolution as being right, as existing, but it does that God exists because God made conscience, that tells of its Creator. Those who say they believe that God does not exist are liars and deceivers, decrying their own consciences. They cannot leave off talking about God because He is present in their thoughts, their consciences bearing witness against them. Whilst such contend against God they are actually witnessing for God, whilst at the same time making excuses as to why they speak of God, so as to hide the fact that God continues to witness to their consciences.
In which country did Atheism originate?
Many would probably come up with theories about massive external forces, such as gods. This is human nature, because there is lots we do not understand about the world we live in. And if you didn't know about how the sun works, then the rising and settiong of something which gives energy and life to everything on earth would seem so far out of your understanding that saying "it must be a god" seems reasonable.
Others would look at the world, and see that there were patterns which could be analysed, and that explanations could be found. In the modern world, if you read a lot (even popular science books), then there's not which isn't understood (at least, compared to the ancient world). And all the theories which invoke a god or gods are shown to be flawed. They simply do not work as they say they do when you examine them closely. Stephen hawking saying in his new book :the grand design " GOD DID NOT CREATE THE UNIVERSE!!!!!!" UNIVERSE CAN CREATE ITSELF FROM NOTHING DUE TO GREAT PHYSICS LAW....GRAVITY... .. RELIGIOUS PEOPLE BOUND TO ONLY ONLY ONE BOOK!!! BIOLOGY ALREADY KICKED OUT GOD THROUGH EVOLOUTION......
Having said that, there have been atheists as far back as we can reliably go. Even some Romans and Greeks looked at the religions of the day and said: "but that doesn't make sense, and it doesn't work - even by the rules it has laid down itself!"
So atheists have always been everywhere. All it takes to be an atheist is to look at what religion claims to be true, and the ability to observe and to think. Anyone who does that objectively becomes an atheist, if they were not already one to begin with.
AnswerHow about Sumer or Ur (some 6000 years ago). AnswerAll humans are inherently religious. This can be explained by the simple fact that the earliest human beings found religion on their own. Relgious individuals (Christians in particular) explain this as God "leaving His mark" in His creation. If one wishes to claim that all humans are inherently atheistic, they are overlooking the fact that one who is incapable of making a choice about religion has obviously not made one (be it Christian, Jewish, atheist, etc.). An individual cannot choose disbelief in God if they can not yet comprehend the idea to begin with.Every child is born an atheist until inculcated with religion by adults.
Are existentialism and atheism separable?
Kierkegaard (one of the earliest existentialists) was also a Christian, and so he believed that existentialism could work in a world ruled over by God. This opinion has not been popular among later existentialists.
Nietzsche's declaration that God is dead was meant to signify that people no longer looked to God for answers, but now we look to science as our new religion, and the scientists are our new God. In a way, Nietzsche was advocating not just atheism, but disbelief in any system that attempts to bring answers, as the proper method of being an individual.
My personal belief is that atheism is a necessary part of existentialism, because by submitting your will to that of a higher a power, you are turning yourself into an object of his control. It all hinges on the very shaky question of whether free will is possible in a world with God.
What does Shemhamphorash mean?
Shemhamphorasch (a corruption of Hebrew Shem ha-Mephorash) is an epithet for a 72-letter name of God derived by medieval kabbalists from the book of Exodus, by reading the letters of three verses in a specific order.[1] The name is composed of 72 groups of three letters, each of these triplets being the name of an angel or intelligence. In speech and writing the term Shemhamphorasch is normally substituted for the actual 72-letter name for brevity, and, as with the epithet Tetragrammaton, to avoid desecrating the actual name. Spelling variants include Shemhamforash, Shemhamphorae, Shemhamphorash, Shemahamphorasch, Shemhamphoresh, Shem ha-Mephoresh, Shem ha-Mephorash, Shemhamphoresch. Verses: וַיִּסַּע מַלְאַךְ הָאֱלֹהִים הַהֹלֵךְ לִפְנֵי מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיֵּלֶךְ מֵאַחֲרֵיהֶם וַיִּסַּע עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן מִפְּנֵיהֶם וַיַּעֲמֹד מֵאַחֲרֵיהֶם׃ And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them: וַיָּבֹא בֵּין ׀ מַחֲנֵה מִצְרַיִם וּבֵין מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיְהִי הֶעָנָן וְהַחֹשֶׁךְ וַיָּאֶר אֶת־הַלָּיְלָה וְלֹא־קָרַב זֶה אֶל־זֶה כָּל־הַלָּיְלָה׃ And it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness [to them], but it gave light by night [to these]: so that the one came not near the other all the night. וַיֵּט מֹשֶׁה אֶת־יָדֹו עַל־הַיָּם וַיֹּולֶךְ יְהוָה ׀ אֶת־הַיָּם בְּרוּחַ קָדִים עַזָּה כָּל־הַלַּיְלָה וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת־הַיָּם לֶחָרָבָה וַיִּבָּקְעוּ הַמָּיִם׃ And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go [back] by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry [land], and the waters were divided. The arrangement of Hebrew letters (with Roman alphabet transliterations) is as follows: Shemhamphorasch: The Divided Name 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 י ך K ל L ה H ה H ם M י I ה H ל L א A ה H ך K א A ל L מ M ע O ס S י I ו V ל L א A ק Q ר R ב B ז Z ה H א A ל L ז Z ה H כ K ל L ה H ל L י I ל L ה H י I ו V ם M י I ה H ל L ע O ו V ד D י I ת Th א A ה H ש Sh מ M ט T י I ו V 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 ה מ M ך K ל L י I ו V ל L א A ר R ש Sh י I ה H נ N ח Ch מ M י I נ N פ P ל L ן N ו V ה H ח Ch ש Sh ך K ו V י I א A ר R א A ת Th ה H ל L י I ל L ה H ו V ד D ק Q ח Ch ו V ר R ב B ם M י I ה H ת Th א A ה H ו V ה H י I ך K ל L ו V 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 45 44 43 42 41 40 39 38 37 ו ן N נ N ע O ה H ד D ו V מ M ע O ע O ס S י I ו V ם M ה H י I ר R ח Ch א A י I נ N מ M ח Ch נ N ה H י I ש Sh ר R א A ל L ו V י I ה H י I ה H ע O נ N ת Th א A ם M ש Sh י I ו V ה H ל L י I ל L ה H ל L כ K ה H ז Z ע O ם M י I 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 61 60 59 58 57 56 55 ה ם M ה H י I ר R ח Ch א A מ M ד D מ M ע O י I ו V ם M ה H י I נ N פ P מ M ו V י I ב B א A ב B י I ן N מ M ח Ch נ N ה H מ M צ Tz ר R י I ם M ו V ב B ם M י I מ M ה H ו V ע O ק Q ב B י I ו V ה H ב B ר R ח Ch ל L ם M י I ה H LOOK AT Anton LaVey and satanism