Who denies god then?

[Light Travelling]

I understand from other threads on this forum that an atheist does not necessarily deny the existence of God. An atheist simply lacks belief in god. So what is the term for a person who says god does not exist?

Does a materialist have to deny existence of god? Or is there another term that can be used?

 

[pavlosmarcos]

I understand from other threads on this forum that an atheist does not necessarily deny the existence of God. An atheist simply lacks belief in god.

to deny inplies the thing exists, you cannot deny that which does not exist.
an atheist does not lack belief(this also assumes the thing exists) an atheist has no belief, you seem to have misunderstood, what an atheist is.

So what is the term for a person who says god does not exist?

An Atheist.

 

[Light Travelling]

pavlosmarcos -
Well this is what I used to think and I was berated by a number of atheists on the thread below for saying such a thing and told that an atheist simply does not believe, and does not actively say god does not exist.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=46829

It would seem to me there is confusion amongst atheists? I am simply trying to understand which terminolgoy is correct.

And what about materialists then?

 

[pavlosmarcos]

there is no confusion all the atheist on that thread say the same thing.(sarkus, fahrenheit, dreamwalker, phlogistician, Sushupti, Cris, and wesmorris.)
the others are either religious or agnostic. not the same thing.
so you can take it that the terminology is correct. an atheist has no belief in gods/god, devil/demons, fairies, dragons, santa, witches, wizards, etc.........

 

[Light Travelling]

there is no confusion all the atheist on that thread say the same thing.(sarkus, fahrenheit, dreamwalker, phlogistician, Sushupti, Cris, and wesmorris.)
the others are either religious or agnostic. not the same thing.
so you can take it that the terminology is correct. an atheist has no belief in gods/god, devil/demons, fairies, dragons, santa, witches, wizards, etc.........

Exactly you said it, the same as all those above.

an atheist has no belief ..

, which is different from saying an atheist denies existence.

So my question remains (and it is only one of interest). Is there a term for somone who specifically and actively denies the existence of god.

By the way - an atheist can still believe in faries or in santa. Atheism is specific to god.

 

[Sarkus]

The terminology is confusing at best, and to add the word "deny" into the equation makes it doubly so.

An atheist has no belief in god. That I agree with.
However, this seems to be termed as a "WEAK" atheist.

Someone who believes that God does not exist is generally termed a "STRONG" atheist.

Some people on this forum are often using the word "anti-theist" to differentiate the strong from weak forms, saying that Strong Atheism is better termed "anti-theist" - but this is inaccurate.
An Antitheist is actually someone who believes theism is harmful to society. You can be weak or strong atheist and also an antitheist (I think).

Hope this helps.

In summary - the answer you're looking for is "STRONG ATHEIST" - but you must include the word "STRONG" to differentiate it from the rest of us who are of the "WEAK" variety.

 

[john smith]

you cannot deny that which does not exist.

i have to disagree, the reason for denial, is the fact that the (object) in question does not exist,A (subject) which has been proposed by an individual can be denied, even if that subject is not in reality therfore you can

deny that which does not exist.

:m:

 

[Godless]

Let me see if I can clarify:

As an atheist, if I were to claim "God does not exist" I would be in the same position as a theist claiming that "God" exists. For one: The assumption made, stipulates knowledge of what god is, both atheist who claim "god does not exist" and theist "god does exist" are claiming knowledge of what god is.

I don't tend to speculate what "god is" In other words to me god/God is a word with no identity, an assumption of supernaturalists that some entity is the supreme entity. If I were to say. God does not exist, then I would be stipulating that I have knowledge of what god is, and that It does not exist.

Thus an atheist then becomes an individual who denies the assertions of theists, Theists claim that an entity exists which is supreme, they have created thousands of variations of beliefs all stipulating there's is the way to salvation? and all follow different sects of dogmas and traditions, and what not. An atheist does not believe all the assertions made by theists, and therefore the word (A-Theist) is a person who denies theology all together.

However since theologists "believes" that a god exists, then the atheists assumes the opposite. Many atheist take there skepticism a bit further and simply lack belief in all forms of mysticism, thus the claim is correct that atheist deny the existence of Santa, Tooth Ferry, Leprechans, unicorns, and all forms of mythical creatures, including demons, satan, devil or what not!.

Godless

 

[kazakhan]

Someone who believes that God does not exist is generally termed a "STRONG" atheist.

Again, I'm going to call this strong and weak atheism stuff bullshit. You either believe there is a god or you don't, those who are unsure have another label so how strongly or weakly someone may feel about it is irrelevant. These labels were probably developed by a theist with a view to converting the weak atheists who could really be termed agnostics in denial
As for the original question, I agree with john smith.

 

[john smith]

Again, I'm going to call this strong and weak atheism stuff bullshit..

Hit the nail on the head.

As for the original question, I agree with john smith.

Bout time someone did!

 

[Sarkus]

Again, I'm going to call this strong and weak atheism stuff bullshit. You either believe there is a god or you don't, those who are unsure have another label so how strongly or weakly someone may feel about it is irrelevant. These labels were probably developed by a theist with a view to converting the weak atheists who could really be termed agnostics in denial
As for the original question, I agree with john smith.

No!
There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between having a belief that God exists, and merely not believing he exists.

I am what some define as a weak atheist. I am certainly not in the group of people "unsure" about my belief. How can I be "unsure" when there is no belief (for God or against God) to be unsure about?

Imagine the people who have a belief that God exists holds a piece of card that is painted white (let's call these people theists).
The people who have a belief that God does NOT exist have a piece of card that is painted black (let's call these people STRONG atheists).

In this analogy, we WEAK atheists do not hold a piece of card.. The entire concept of holding a piece of card is, to us, meaningless, for one reason or another. Hence we don't.

So you see, if atheists are those that do not hold a white card, how do you differentiate those that hold a black card, and those that hold no card?
This is why the terms "Strong" and "Weak" were introduced - to differentiate.

A table is a weak atheist. It has no belief in the existence of God.
But it is not that the table has a belief that god does not exist.


To call someone an atheist and thus imply that they actively believe that God doesn't exist is wrong.
Strong and Weak atheists are both atheists in that they don't have a belief that God exists, but there is a fundamental difference between the two that needs to be distinguished.

 

[john smith]

but there is a fundamental difference between the two that needs to be distinguished.

Why not give them two utterly different names then, save much confusion? The trouble with simply terming two beliefs differntly in the same category i.e.Strong/weak-athiest,is that it mearly sounds as if the strong/weak conection was unimportant and was added as a second thought, if (you) people find the strong/weak thing so important, go out there and make it recognised...before now i had no idea, i just rated Athiest as an unbeliever.. :m:

 

[kazakhan]

Sarkus, not holding a card would make you agnostic in my opinion as I mentioned above, you're in denial

 

[Sarkus]

Why not give them two utterly different names then, save much confusion? The trouble with simply terming two beliefs differntly in the same category i.e.Strong/weak-athiest,is that it mearly sounds as if the strong/weak conection was unimportant and was added as a second thought, if (you) people find the strong/weak thing so important, go out there and make it recognised... :m:

I wish they did have two different names - but they don't have any that are coined at the moment.
Maybe "non-theism" instead of "weak atheism"?

The strong/weak WAS added as a second thought when people realised it needed differentiating.

As stated in my example (black, white or no card), atheism was originally the lack of a white card. But then people made assumptions that if you weren't carrying a white card you MUST be carrying black.
And back in the days of old, it didn't matter whether you carried a black card or no card - you got burnt at the stake anyway.

The problem is that some of us aren't card holders at all - and the false assumption of "if not white, then black" had to be corrected.

 

[john smith]

Maybe "non-theism" instead of "weak atheism"?

Sounds good to me, and thanks, that was actually qutie helpful, cheers :m:

 

[Sarkus]

Sarkus, not holding a card would make you agnostic in my opinion as I mentioned above, you're in denial

Ah - no - a common misconception of agnosticism.
(A)theism is about "belief" in God.
Agnosticism is about "knowledge" of God.
You can have belief with or without knowledge.
You can have lack of belief with or without knowledge.

I am certainly agnostic - I claim no knowledge of the initial cause or the origin of the universe or of anything but material phenomena - holding that with regard to such matters nothing can be known.
I also have no belief in God.
I am an "agnostic atheist".

A friend of mine is an agnostic theist - he believes that a God exists but doesn't claim knowledge of him.

You can also claim to be an (a)theist without being agnostic - i.e. those that claim knowledge to support their belief.

So there is a difference.
Agnosticism is not, as many believe, a "third way" between atheism and theism.

Consider in my "card-holding" example that you could also hold, additional to the choice of black/white/none, a yellow one to signify whether you had knowledge to support your other choice. It is the holding (or not) of this yellow card that determines if you are agnostic or not.

 

[kazakhan]

Ah - no - a common misconception of agnosticism.

No, it is not a common misconception. My description of an agnostic with your analogy is valid.

(A)theism is about "belief" in God.

No, atheists deny the beliefs of theists which in turn denies the existence of god.

...agnostic theist...

Are you going to cover the strenuously, vehemently strong\weak agnostic theists as well
This is looking upon the topic too deeply and applying more analysis than is required in which case I'll be leaving the consversation. I have better things to do than debate the redundant intricacies of labels applied to peoples beliefs.

 

[Sarkus]

No, it is not a common misconception. My description of an agnostic with your analogy is valid.

No it isn't - for the reasons I stated above. But let's move on...

No, atheists deny the beliefs of theists which in turn denies the existence of god.

My point is that theism and atheism revolve around the aspect of "belief" - i.e. whether you have it or not and in what in - whereas agnosticism revolves around the aspect of "knowledge".

Are you going to cover the strenuously, vehemently strong\weak agnostic theists as well
This is looking upon the topic too deeply and applying more analysis than is required in which case I'll be leaving the consversation.

Then please start using them correctly.
The question asked in this thread was "Who denies god then?". The thread starter raised a question about the apparent misconceptions of what atheism means.
This has led on to the apparent misconception of agnosticism as well, which I am trying to help clairfy. If you feel this is too deep then please feel free not to post on this thread again.

But thanks for your enlightening input thus far.

 

[scorpius]

(A)theism is about "belief" in God.

no, atheism is about "lack of belief" in gods...a-theist=without god belief
belief in god =theist

Agnosticism is about "knowledge" of God.

agnostic is ..not sure if god exist,

then theres also maltheists who think god exists but is evil so they dont believe/worship him

 

[Cottontop3000]

I'll give you these def's from Webster's:

atheist - one who denies the existence of god and rejects all religious faith and doctrine.

agnostic - withholds belief because he is unwilling to accept the evidence of revelation and spiritual experience.

deist - rejects the conception of God as an active ruler and guide known through revelation while believing in a supreme being as the creator of the universe.

freethinker - suggests loss of faith and a belief only in the rational and credible.

unbeliever - implies loss or lack of religious faith without suggesting a substitute for it.

infidel - usu. applies to one belonging to a faith (as Muhammadan) other than Christian or Jewish and commonly connotes an enemy of the true faith.

theist - believer in (such) a god or (such or so many) gods <pantheist>

Pick whichever floats your boat.