Atheist = Closet theist

[(Q)]

This makes no sense.

A theist believes. So there is no insecurity.

An atheist, however, claims no belief without discrete evidence of a spiritual consciousness. Where is the security here? An atheist as much says "show me the money" before he will believe. That is he has no leanings either way, except those which can be proven/disproven to his satisfaction. Right?

I am secure in the belief an invisible pink dragon lives in my attic - however, you are insecure in the fact I can't show you the dragon? And it makes sense?

 

[KennyJC]

Which is what I think defines the basic insecurity in atheism. i.e. that atheists refuse a belief in God but cannot claim to believe in no God either, lacking any evidence either way.

Since there is no proof either way, there is no insecurity. It's just irrelevance. Just as I can invent a word to describe something that doesn't exist. Irrelevant.

Theists usually do not have a definition of God per se and usually do not seek one.

I doubt that. You would have to prove it. Most people think of God a sentient creator of everything, I am sure.

Irrelevancy refers to the subject at hand (which at this point has been left so far behind as to no longer matter). Since we aren’t discussing the attributes, purposes or nature of God(s) I fail to see how you can say such things.

God effectively does not exist due to no evidence and since, as you claim theists don't know what God is. Which I think is BS as I think it is widely considered amongst atheists, theists and the dictionary that God is the sentient creator of the universe. If theists don't know what 'God' is, then it is nothing but a word, and irrelevant.

It’s first historical merit would be to allow us to cope with a hostile and senseless environment. I think it safe to assume that if mankind had not had religious beliefs in its infancy, it would very well have simply rolled itself into fetal position and cried till it passed away.

It's not safe to assume that at all. But since it's impossible to know I will let it slide. Certainly in modern society, the stronger a societies belief in God, the greater the detriment to that society.

 

[S.A.M.]

I am secure in the belief an invisible pink dragon lives in my attic - however, you are insecure in the fact I can't show you the dragon? And it makes sense?

Yup. A concept only makes sense if you believe in it.
Without belief, any concept is meaningless.
It may not be wholly accurate, but it may be perceived as such.
e.g. I believe I will be alive next week, hence I have an appointment for next Thursday.

One who neither accepts nor rejects the concept has no secure view of the concept.

e.g. I believe in evolution is a secure concept.

But, I neither believe nor disbelieve in evolution pending availability of concrete irrefutable evidence is an insecurity in concept.

edit: to be fair, belief is not evidence of rightness (the above example could well be I believe in creationism).

 

[(Q)]

Would you care to formulate how this control is achieved?

Religious dogma.

How would a belief in god(s) limit understanding? Now find ways to effectively address those and move on. Wholesale denial of the unobtrusive is a waste of time.

Look to Creationism and Intelligent Design as a wholesale denial of reality and the end to understanding.

Are you one of those people constantly harassing lovers on beaches and in parking lots at dusk and dawn pointing out at the sun isn’t setting or rising, but that the earths rotation has simply brought them to a point where the sun is beginning to no longer or once again be visible to them?

Only on my beach and in my parking lot.

 

[(Q)]

Yup. A concept only makes sense if you believe in it.
Without belief, any concept is meaningless.

So, belief is the only property a concept requires to be valid? The concepts' existance or non-existence has nothing to do with it?

Have you ever noticed how potholes are the perfect shape for the puddles of water they hold?

It may not be wholly accurate, but it may be perceived as such.
e.g. I believe I will be alive next week, hence I have an appointment for next Thursday.

No one has ever demonstrated the existence of gods, hence I assume no one ever will. Let's both wait and see what happens by next Thursday whether or not our assumptions come to fruition.

One who neither accepts nor rejects the concept has no secure view of the concept.

e.g. I believe in evolution is a secure concept.

But, I neither believe nor disbelieve in evolution pending availability of concrete irrefutable evidence is an insecurity in concept.

I'm pretty sure we established a while back you didn't understand evolution, so your opinion is baseless.

And, the concept and the process of evolution will continue, despite your beliefs.

 

[S.A.M.]

So, belief is the only property a concept requires to be valid? The concepts' existance or non-existence has nothing to do with it?

I think you missed my edit. A concept lives only as long as someone believes in it.
A concept may exist, but if no one believes in it, it is meaningless.
e.g. A person who is blind from birth has no concept of color. Does color exist? Not for him.

Have you ever noticed how potholes are the perfect shape for the puddles of water they hold?

Yes, so does the shape of the puddle give a clue to the pothole or not? Would you say that the puddle is an indication of the size and shape of the pothole? Or would you say that the puddle and pothole are unrelated?

No one has ever demonstrated the existence of gods, hence I assume no one ever will. Let's both wait and see what happens by next Thursday whether or not our assumptions come to fruition.

Ha ha you are so (not) funny.

I'm pretty sure we established a while back you didn't understand evolution, so your opinion is baseless.

I was attempting an explanation you would understand.
My delusions are public knowledge.

And, the concept and the process of evolution will continue, despite your beliefs.

Exactly.

edit: the last was a little equivocal sounding, so I want to clarify.
A concept can exist without recognition, like the fact that water is in fact H2O.
Until it is recognised as such the concept of water being H2O is meaningless. But not the water itself.

 

[(Q)]

I think you missed my edit. A concept lives only as long as someone believes in it.
A concept may exist, but if no one believes in it, it is meaningless.
e.g. A person who is blind from birth has no concept of color. Does color exist? Not for him.

Creationists don't believe in evolution, yet they themselves evolved and continue to evolve. Yet, evolution is meaningless simply because they don't believe in it?

Yes, so does the shape of the puddle give a clue to the pothole or not? Would you say that the puddle is an indication of the size and shape of the pothole? Or would you say that the puddle and pothole are unrelated?

Theists would have us believe the pothole was shaped for the water as the universe was created for man.

Ha ha you are so (not) funny.

Perhaps, but evidently accurate, valid and unopposed.

Exactly.

So, you now contradict your assumption beliefs drive concepts?

 

[S.A.M.]

Creationists don't believe in evolution, yet they themselves evolved and continue to evolve. Yet, evolution is meaningless simply because they don't believe in it?

For them, yes. This is actually true even in science. A concept is valid until it is refuted by advances in knowledge. The acceptance of a new piece of information validates its existence, just a it invalidates those concepts which came before it.

Theists would have us believe the pothole was shaped for the water as the universe was created for man.

And you could choose not to accept it, in which case, it would have no meaning for you.

Perhaps, but evidently accurate, valid and unopposed.

So are idiots and madmen, in their own minds.

So, you now contradict your assumption beliefs drive concepts?

Their meaningfulness. A concept defines a phenomenon, it does not determine its (non)existence.


Concept
Noun
1. An abstract or general idea inferred or derived from specific instances.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

That is pretty childish.

It pretty much then means that atheists are actually theists and theists are actually atheists.

I am not disagreeing, the world is full of wardrobes and they are full.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Where does that leave the agnostics?

trying on coats

(no room cos all the closet space is taken up with atheists!)

 

[Prince_James]

And now a bit of RANDOM SILLINESS!

Smithsonian:

"Careful, you’ll make David Hume turn in his grave."

CAUTION: HISTORICAL FAT JOKE AHEAD.

Turn in his grave? He could barely fit in the coffin!

HIYOOOOOOOO!

 

[Satyr]

Me thinks you atheists 'doth protest too much' and thus have concluded you are closet theists.

I will present a case some time soon

I’m all a jitter.
I can’t wait.

First that gay dude in denial tells us all men naturally crave other men sexually, even if they don’t know it or can’t bring themselves to admit it.
Some kind of heterosexual conspiracy, I think.

Now, princess, will uncover the deep dark secret about atheists.
They have the gene, you see, even if their mind battles to overcome their genetic predispositions. It’s called discipline and thinking.

I, myself, am an agnostic…a fence sitter, an eternal skeptic, although I’m leaning towards a no God depending on how one defines this idea.
Could I be repressing my spirituality along with my latent homosexuality?

Here’s what I think:

Little girls should stick to makeup and pretty dresses and spiritual holism and healing the world of its evils and making babies and leave the rest to men.

 

[TW Scott]

So Satyr, that would leave you doing nothing right?

The atheist s problem is they are trying give God a limited meaning. They want conrete and in stone. They need to know everything about God or they are afraid. Since they are to a person unable to admit they can't understand something. So they take the stance that nothing they do not understand could possibly exist. It's typical ostrich crap.

The Theist understands that we don't have to understand god. We like to believe a creator is kind and loving like a parent. We like to believe God is watching us every day. He doesn't seem to interfere that often, but that is fine. Now we don't attribute god with human like motives excepting Hove, Disappointment and Anger. That is enough for us.

 

[James R]

Theoryofrelativity:

James I already know there are closet theists here at sci forums as they have admitted being such to me in pm, they are afraid to speak about their spiritual beliefs on this very forum for fear of ridicule and all that comes along with being honest about such things HERE, let alone else where. They are not the few on the entire planet, thus it is reasonable to assume there are more, not all of course.

...

It is not different to closet homosexuality, why do they hide it, why do you think?

The difference is that in society at large, homosexuals are a minority, whereas in society at large theists are a majority. Surely the great majority of theists out there would not feel intimidated by a tiny majority of atheists? (Only 4% of people identify as atheists in the US.)

 

[James R]

TW Scott:

The atheist s problem is they are trying give God a limited meaning. They want conrete and in stone. They need to know everything about God or they are afraid.

Many scientists are atheists. And, in general, scientists recognise that they will never know everything. Sure, they want to find stuff out - as much as they can. But they are realistic about what they do and do not know. Those who pretend to know stuff when they don't have any actual evidence are quickly found out.

The Theist understands that we don't have to understand god. We like to believe a creator is kind and loving like a parent. We like to believe God is watching us every day.

Very comforting, but what is this belief based on? A book written by human beings? Or a warm, fuzzy feeling you get when you think about God, perhaps?

He doesn't seem to interfere that often, but that is fine. Now we don't attribute god with human like motives excepting Hove, Disappointment and Anger.

You limit God? On what basis?

 

[TW Scott]

Many scientists are atheists. And, in general, scientists recognise that they will never know everything. Sure, they want to find stuff out - as much as they can. But they are realistic about what they do and do not know. Those who pretend to know stuff when they don't have any actual evidence are quickly found out.

I think you will find most scientist are deeply entrenched in their faith. True Many scientist are atheists but it is hardly a majority.

Very comforting, but what is this belief based on? A book written by human beings? Or a warm, fuzzy feeling you get when you think about God, perhaps?

My observations of the part of the Bible that seem to more reflect god than a skewed persective, and real life.

You limit God? On what basis?

I'm not limiting God. God probably has man more emotions including ones we could not wrap our minds around. I'm just saying that those are the ones we can see and understand. See the limit is not on God, but on us. Our brain is impressive but we have limits.

 

[James R]

I think you will find most scientist are deeply entrenched in their faith. True Many scientist are atheists but it is hardly a majority.

Perhaps. Anyway, the point was that it is not true to say that atheists need certainty any more than theists. In fact, arguably, theists are much more certain about what they think they know about the world than atheists. For example, theists are usually convinced there is an afterlife, and like you they presume to know the nature of God.

Very comforting, but what is this belief based on? A book written by human beings? Or a warm, fuzzy feeling you get when you think about God, perhaps?

My observations of the part of the Bible that seem to more reflect god than a skewed persective, and real life.

This sounds like you're saying that your knowledge of God comes from some experience separate from the revelation of God contained in the bible. It sounds like you have a preconception of what God should be like, and then you pick and choose parts of the bible which correspond with that preconception.

What, then, is the basis of your preconceived ideas of God? Is it that warm, fuzzy feeling thing after all? Or what?

 

[Godless]

Where does that leave the agnostics?

Were else but in the fence, the agnostic is nothing more than the intellectual coward, who can't make up his/her mind wether to believe or disbelief in an assertion.

Godless

 

[James R]

Smithsonian:

We'll need Theoryofrelativity's confirmation, but you may be right. Maybe she is saying that she feels intimidated by the fact that there seems to be a majority of atheists on sciforums. I imagine that situation would be rare in most places on the internet. In fact, it might provide an interesting perspective for theists to see things from "the other side", as it were.

If theists really feel the need to hide on this forum, to dress themselves as atheists in order to conform to a perceived majority view, as she claims, I wonder what that says...

My impression from debates on the Religion forum, however, does not seem to me to support the theory that theists are too scared to speak about their beliefs here.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Smithsonian:

We'll need Theoryofrelativity's confirmation, but you may be right. Maybe she is saying that she feels intimidated by the fact that there seems to be a majority of atheists on sciforums. I imagine that situation would be rare in most places on the internet. In fact, it might provide an interesting perspective for theists to see things from "the other side", as it were.

If theists really feel the need to hide on this forum, to dress themselves as atheists in order to conform to a perceived majority view, as she claims, I wonder what that says...

My impression from debates on the Religion forum, however, does not seem to me to support the theory that theists are too scared to speak about their beliefs here.

Very funny, I am surrounded by atheists in real life. Boyfriend, mother, aunt , uncle and all my friends. I love them dearly, they are great. They are not 'afraid' of my view and do not seek to demean it, and I respect their views. This is how life should be. Embracing the differences.

The atheists here are NOT true atheists as they spend too much time on religious matters, I don't? I am not religious. Thus atheists here (not else where) closet theists or theists in denial.