"Atheism is Irrational," Are you sure???

"Atheism was once defined as a belief that there is no God.
Any such assertion, apart from faith, would require one to be
omniscient, knowing all things.
Atheists have recognized
this definition as an intellectually untenable position and
some have therefore recanted from this view.
An explicit assertion that “There is no God” is now reserved
for ‘strong atheism’.

Atheism has since been redefined as a lack of belief in any
deity. Anyone who purports to lack belief in God while
believing there is no God is being intellectually dishonest
by avoiding the articulation of that belief.
Anyone professing a lack of belief in God while being
undecided as to the existence of God is more properly
deemed an agnostic.

Atheism is either intellectually dishonest or intellectually
untenable at best, and a profound analysis would reveal that
atheism is irrational."

I hear Ray Comfort somewhere in the background. So we need to
be omniscient in order to say 'there is no God, no God, no not
one, nor two, nor three..." okay fine. I'm going to make a
statement WITHOUT omniscience: There are no leprechauns. Oops,
I don't know everything, I must be wrong. And it is just that easy.

As far as Atheist vs Agnostic, I'm only going to say: This is
word play.

Fresh from myspace. Mine of course.

Views: 7


You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by kimba on January 29, 2009 at 10:01am
While I would never say that I *know* there is no god, I have to agree with Reality Activist above. I would say in the case of god existence, absence of evidence is indeed evidence (if not proof) of absence.
Comment by Reality Activist on January 29, 2009 at 7:53am
I differ. Surprise! The facts are that there is no evidence that supports the existence of a god and all the evidence that does exists, tends to not support that there is a god. Add that to the fact that religion has had centuries to cultivate an irrefutable story and that it is a perfect tool to control the minds of others and there you have it. There comes a point where one has to accept the evidence or the lack of evidence in it's totality. So one can be like the Creationists and nik pick at some of the irrelevant details but, that doesn't change the whole picture. It is time for us to not dwell on the things that we don't understand and start considering the things that we do understand. That is how we will eventually learn the things that we don't understand.
Comment by Phillip Law on January 29, 2009 at 1:56am
Yeah, I believe the same thing. Atheism and Agnosticism are both basically the same thing in practice. It's just the agnosticism is more lenient & accepting towards the neg. impact of religion imo.



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service