A take off from this thread:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=820569
Czarcasm is particularly invited to respond.
As an atheist, due to lack of evidence I do not believe that any gods put forth so far exist. If verafiable evidence for any god is put before me I am willing to take a look at it.
We all carry around pieces of the True Crossed-Off.
Seriously, the problem lies right at the start here, with the framing of your question. “True” in this context carries certain assumptions more appropriate to religion than reality.
Unless you can wrap your head around the idea that atheism is not an alternate religion, or religion at all, you will never get an answer that makes the slightest sense.
It’s really that simple, isn’t it?
I always find putting “True” in front of a noun rather silly, purely a rhetorical trick. If someone is X then they are a true X by definition. True is simply redundant in these cases.
So to answer your question, an atheist is someone lacking a belief in a deity.
There is an equal amount of evidence(as far as I’ve been shown to date) for all gods envisioned by humans, so there are really two logical choices I can make: Either believe in all of them, or believe in none of them.
I choose the latter.
If you pray in a time of stress are you a True Atheist?
If you say “Oh God!” are you a True Atheist?
Is a True Atheist required to mock and revile faith?
Is a True Atheist required to mock and revile Organized Religion?
Czarcasm asked: “What exactly defines one as a “True Christian”, and not one in name only?” so I asked the same.
If my question is silly and rhetorical, why isnt his?
I gave you the whole of my answer-it require neither addition nor subtraction to be any more the answer that you asked for, and received.
You’re still asking religion-v-religion questions.
The all in one answer is “No, I can do that regardless of my own beliefs.”
It’s a form of Faith or Belief and some Atheists proselytize.
In any case, it doesnt have to be a “religion” to have “True”, you can have “True Vegans” “True Fans”, and so forth. Is Veganism a religion? is being a Yankees Fan a “religion”? There is certainly religious fervor, proselytizing, arguments of what a “True” means, and so forth.
I asked of Christians what their opinion was of the matter. Are you a person that considers himself to be a Christian and, if so, did you give your personal definition?
I am a doubting Christian, yes, and I did.
You might call me a "open minded agnostic’ also.
There are atheists that proselytize-that doesn’t make them any more or less an atheist than one who doesn’t. It just means that they have not been convinced that any gods exist, and they wish to be public about it. They are atheists, and they do things that seem to annoy you.
Well, saying OMG is just a colloquial term and has nothing to do with actually invoking a god.
I suppose some atheists might mock and revile religion and I can’t speak for all of us, but personally, I don’t care what others believe. If it makes you happy and fits in with your life then good for you. Just because I don’t believe, doesn’t mean I get to disagree with your beliefs.
The whole lack of evidence really is what it’s all about. If we judge other scientific knowledge on evidence-based results, then why not gods?
I’m not calling you anything. If you say that you are a Christian, I’ll take you at your word, as I will for anyone who self-designates as such in the thread this is an off-shoot of.
But isnt that the difference between being agnostic and atheist?
*a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.
*
Certainly there is a lack of solid evidence. But saying “I have seen no evidence that convinces me there is a God, but my mind is open to such evidence” is being* agnostic.*
- atheism is the belief that there are no deities.* A atheist is* certain* there is no god.
Both questions are silly.
This: “a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God” is not at all the same as the personal definition I gave in my first post.
By the way, why does your definition of “agnostic” us the term “God”, and not “gods”? Are you agnostic against one particular “god”, and dismissive entirely of all the others, or are you agnostic towards all gods?
I think this belies a bias towards seeing things in religious terms. People can exhibit behaviors that religious-minded people would label as “religious fervor, proselytizing, arguments of what a “True” means, and so forth” without these behaviors actually being religious.