What is the different between atheism,cult/religion? Some religion are not different from cult, in a real sense an atheists is not to embarrassed to joined a cult. Atheists reject the existence of God in a real sense that the motto of a cult,—being free to do as they please, and the lack of ultimate accountability—there are no eternal consequences for doing as they please.

Within the atheist religion, there have
been a number of atheist cults and
atheistic groups which have had a cultish
following. Some of these atheist cults/
groups still exist today. In 2015, FtBCon
which is an online conference organized
by the Freethought Blogs network,
recognized that nonreligious/secular
cults exist (for example, the atheist cult
of objectivism). http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheist_cults

malvisguy212:
What is the different between atheism,cult/religion? Some religion are not different from cult, in a real sense an atheists is not to embarrassed to joined a cult. Atheists reject the existence of God in a real sense that the motto of a cult,—being free to do as they please, and the lack of ultimate accountability—there are no eternal consequences for doing as they please.

Within the atheist religion, there have
been a number of atheist cults and
atheistic groups which have had a cultish
following. Some of these atheist cults/
groups still exist today. In 2015, FtBCon
which is an online conference organized
by the Freethought Blogs network,
recognized that nonreligious/secular
cults exist (for example, the atheist cult
of objectivism). http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheist_cults

The motto of a cult is being free to do whatever one likes?

That's the direct opposite of what a cult is. Any freedom
in a cult is only illusory.

johnydon22:


Are you dodging their being God? common you can do better.

The gallery of a theater is called God so its God. . take it or leave it

I am not denying this.

I guess people acknowledge it worth. . . .that is it is been worship.

Do you disbelieve in God? Devaraja and apotheosis deity?

jayriginal:


Everything can be classified under divine. The guitar is a divine instrument, producing such a divine sound. Chess is a divine game. My girlfriend is a goddess.

You FOLYKAZE have a penchant for distorting words and meanings to the point that they become irrelevant.

My friend,

Do you disbelief in the existence of God (defined as inlfuencial person)?

FOLYKAZE:


I am not denying this.

I guess people acknowledge it worth. . . .that is it is been worship.

Do you disbelieve in God? Devaraja and apotheosis deity?

Now i see you are sick in the head. . . The definition of God as gallery of a theater has nothing to do with worship. .

jayriginal:


I'd say he "advanced" beyond deism rather than renounced it. Of course I can't speak on his behalf. Its left for him to clarify issues.

And yes, he vowed never to return. He even started his own forum. However things don't always work as planned and he's still here.

I see. NL could be addictive, I don't blame him one bit.

Purist:


I see. NL could be addictive, I don't blame him one bit.

Neither do I.

So those god worshipers now all claim that that their religion is not a religion but a way of life (both Muslims and Christians make this statement all around, all over the world), but now, they call atheism a religion.
Well that is OK with me, so long as I don't share the same tag with god worshipers.
I will accept atheism is a religion when all forms of religions and god worshipers are called something else, like dumb-sters or shiit-sters - whatever.

jayriginal:


Everything can be classified under divine. The guitar is a divine instrument, producing such a divine sound. Chess is a divine game. My girlfriend is a goddess.

You FOLYKAZE have a penchant for distorting words and meanings to the point that they become irrelevant.

You are right - Chess is a DIVINE game! P.S. Can I meet your girlfriend

ooman:
So those god worshipers now all claim that that their religion is not a religion but a way of life (both Muslims and Christians make this statement all around, all over the world), but now, they call atheism a religion.
Well that is OK with me, so long as I don't share the same tag with god worshipers.
I will accept atheism is a religion when all forms of religions and god worshipers are called something else, like dumb-sters or shiit-sters - whatever.

Don't confuse belief in a God with formal religion.

We are only debating an academic point.

The only one who has a concrete argument is the Agnostic who says that we have no proof and indeed CAN HAVE NO proof EITH way that God does or does not exist!

The Theist and Atheist BOTH say I cannot prove my point of view. Thus They both resort to FAITH although of a different sort.

It is because of this (often blind) FAITH requirement for the Atheist that I suggested this thread as a fun discussion.

As for the derogatory (and rather ill mannered) comments on Theists is that the only mechanism you have to support your erroneous arguments?

KoloOyinbo:


Don't confuse belief in a God with formal religion.

We are only debating an academic point.

The only one who has a concrete argument is the Agnostic who says that we have no proof and indeed CAN HAVE NO proof EITH way that God does or does not exist!

The Theist and Atheist BOTH say I cannot prove my point of view. Thus They both resort to FAITH although of a different sort.

It is because of this (often blind) FAITH requirement for the Atheist that I suggested this thread as a fun discussion.

As for the derogatory (and rather ill mannered) comments on Theists is that the only mechanism you have to support your erroneous arguments?

The argument that there is no proof for the nonexistence of god is as dumb as it is old.
What am I to prove wrong here? Something that hasn't been slightly proved?

That god exists is only a thought, only a statement. Lack of proof for it is automatically proof against it.

KoloOyinbo:


You are right - Chess is a DIVINE game! P.S. Can I meet your girlfriend

After reading the lines you used on the lady who graced this thread, I wouldn't trust you with my girl. You might want to worship her like I do

ooman:


The argument that there is no proof for the nonexistence of god is as dumb as it is old.
What am I to prove wrong here? Something that hasn't been slightly proved?

That god exists is only a thought, only a statement. Lack of proof for it is automatically proof against it.

Ooman, lack of proof of something is not proof against it.

jayriginal:


Ooman, lack of proof of something is not proof against it.

Might be. Give me instances where it is wrong.

jayriginal:


After reading the lines you used on the lady who graced this thread, I wouldn't trust you with my girl. You might want to worship her like I do

Ah, you sabi me!

ooman:


Might be. Give me instances where it is wrong.

GOD for starters.

Steady state theory for seconds

KoloOyinbo:


GOD for starters.

Steady state theory for seconds

Yea I understand those things. But if we have a god who wants to know me, expects me to spend the rest of my life worshiping him, then it is pointless hiding. So it is either he is anywhere, then show up, or he is no where, so there is no proof for him.

ooman:


Yea I understand those things. But if we have a god who wants to know me, expects me to spend the rest of my life worshiping him, then it is pointless hiding. So it is either he is anywhere, then show up, or he is no where, so there is no proof for him.

Well If he revealed himself plainly then there would be no merit in FAITH. The inherent instinct that all men have to believe (at least at the start) in a creator is NOT proof of a God but to most is a strong indication.

As for no proof for him we have agreed this MANY times in this thread and many others.

No proof for - No proof against. Either is a valid stance. In fact there CAN be no proof for or against!

This is the basis of the discussion that only agnosticism is supportable and that Atheism requires every bit as much FAITH as Theism. Both operate without proof.

KoloOyinbo:


Well If he revealed himself plainly then there would be no merit in FAITH. The inherent instinct that all men have to believe (at least at the start) in a creator is NOT proof of a God but to most is a strong indication.

As for no proof for him we have agreed this MANY times in this thread and many others.

No proof for - No proof against. Either is a valid stance. In fact there CAN be no proof for or against!

This is the basis of the discussion that only agnosticism is supportable and that Atheism requires every bit as much FAITH as Theism. Both operate without proof.

You really think faith is anything useful? Faith is the most useless and self-delusive virtue any human can possess. This is why it is not one of the virtues of rational people.

Merit in faith? This is a joke, really.

I have no inherent instinct to believe anything. I don't have an inherent instinct to believe in the Jewish god as I have no inherent instinct to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Me and you agreed on what?

There is no need for proof against when there is no single proof for.

Atheism is never based on faith, but lack of it.

Am out. Don't have time for this aberration of reason.

ooman:


You really think faith is anything useful? Faith is the most useless and self-delusive virtue any human can possess. This is why it is not one of the virtues of rational people.

Merit in faith? This is a joke, really.

I have no inherent instinct to believe anything. I don't have an inherent instinct to believe in the Jewish god as I have no inherent instinct to believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Me and you agreed on what?

There is no need for proof against when there is no single proof for.

Atheism is never based on faith, but lack of it.

Am out. Don't have time for this aberration of reason.

Bye. Philosophy a bit difficult for you obviously.

johnydon22:


Now i see you are sick in the head. . . The definition of God as gallery of a theater has nothing to do with worship. .

Worship is not all about bowing down. Worship is acknowledging worth of something or someone.

jayriginal:


I'd say he "advanced" beyond deism rather than renounced it. Of course I can't speak on his behalf. Its left for him to clarify issues.

And yes, he vowed never to return. He even started his own forum. However things don't always work as planned and he's still here.

That was simple annoyance at the behaviour of Seun. Also the board i created was for the specific purpose of concluding a discussion with Anony
Nothing more.

Yes I am deist

But a spiritual one. Life is deep and spiritual.
There is God, the ultimate mind that spawns and encapsulates all reality.

Don't waste your life with Atheism brothers.

DeepSight:


That was simple annoyance at the behaviour of Seun. Also the board i created was for the specific purpose of concluding a discussion with Anony
Nothing more.

Yes I am deist

But a spiritual one. Life is deep and spiritual.
There is God, the ultimate mind that spawns and encapsulates all reality.

Don't waste your life with Atheism brothers.

That being you describe is not the God of religion.

ooman:


That being you describe is not the God of religion.

Well to some extent you are right. However the intrinsic idea is not too different.
Of course the religions embellish that idea with all sorts of nonsensical and superstitious ideas and legends.

DeepSight:


That was simple annoyance at the behaviour of Seun. Also the board i created was for the specific purpose of concluding a discussion with Anony
Nothing more.

Yes I am deist

But a spiritual one. Life is deep and spiritual.
There is God, the ultimate mind that spawns and encapsulates all reality.

Don't waste your life with Atheism brothers.

I really don't know what can be rational about "spiritual".

Hhhmm.
I find it funny that when it pleases the mind, god is a personality.
At other times, god is a force.
Sometimes, god is not only the begetter of natural laws, but is also the laws itself.
When suitable, god is the all-pervading pulsating
Energy that stretches from infinity to infinity.

Funny that god is all this and all that, but you would readily agree that we(including you) , lack the capacity to see, hear, detect, measure or calculate god in any space. Yet he is all that.

But today, according your wordy highness, god is a mind, a super mind.

I put it to you, sir, that God is a product of mind.

The qualities you and others attribute to god tells us, in very clear terms, where god is created, nurtured, and lives from everlasting to everlasting: In your mind.

DeepSight:


Well to some extent you are right. However the intrinsic idea is not too different.
Of course the religions embellish that idea with all sorts of nonsensical and superstitious ideas and legends.

Thanks for the reply. That's what I wanted to point out.

If God is strictly defined as you did, I will have no problem with [such] God.

DeepSight:


Well to some extent you are right. However the intrinsic idea is not too different.
Of course the religions embellish that idea with all sorts of nonsensical and superstitious ideas and legends.

Now..

How did you get to know about this God?

what are the characteristics of this God?

Is this your God a living entity or not?

just for a start...

plaetton:

I really don't know what can be rational about "spiritual".

Hhhmm.
I find it funny that when it pleases the mind, god is a personality.
At other times, god is a force.
Sometimes, god is not only the begetter of natural laws, but is also the laws itself.
When suitable, god is the all-pervading pulsating
Energy that stretches from infinity to infinity.

Funny that god is all this and all that, but you would readily agree that we(including you) , lack the capacity to see, hear, detect, measure or calculate god in any space. Yet he is all that.

But today, according your wordy highness, god is a mind, a super mind.

I put it to you, sir, that God is a product of mind.

The qualities you and others attribute to god tells us, in very clear terms, where god is created, nurtured, and lives from everlasting to everlasting: In your mind.

We know God exists in our minds and can prove that. He may well exist elsewhere in reality! We can never prove for or against on that one.

So you position is neither logical nor rational. By rejecting the possibility of God you show as much Faith as the Deist.

Only the Agnostic can claim a fully rational position. (Have you guys ANY knowledge of philosophy or logic) All I hear seems to be the Atheists restating the same old boring position without any more shred of proof than the Deists who at least acknowledge that their position is supported only by FAITH.

[quote author=KoloOyinbo post=33347490]

We know God exists in our minds and can prove that. He may well exist elsewhere in reality! We can never prove for or against on that one.

So you position is neither logical nor rational. By rejecting the possibility of God you show as much Faith as the Deist.

Only the Agnostic can claim a fully rational position. (Have you guys ANY knowledge of philosophy or logic) All I hear seems to be the Atheists restating the same old boring position without any more shred of proof than the Deists who at least acknowledge that their position is supported only by FAITH.
[/quot ]

How exactly does one go about proving a negative ?

God does not exist because I don't see him, and I have known no one that has.
That is a starter.
Now, other than bringing him to dinner or inviting him to kick the opening ball at a world cup soccer opener, the onus is on you to show or prove that he exists , and perhaps lives in the Alpha Nebula Galaxy system.

It is patently absurd to ask an atheist to prove that God doesn't exist, given that the atheist disbelieves in the existence of god because he has neither seen, heard or used any known instrument to detect god.

As an atheist, I have better faith in the existence of Higgs-Bosson, Antimatter, Dark matter, Tachyons, or even Klingons than god.
We can device instruments, like the Super Hedron Collider, to search for, confirm or disprove of all of the above, now or in the future.

Like I pointed out before, the agnostic position is not really a position in the real sense.
It's simply a halfway house intended to ready the inquiring mind towards the lonely and dreaded position of a non-god reality.

Most people, for fear of commitment, and some, for lack of impetus for further explorations, decide to stay put and safe by calling themselves agnostics.
Agnosticism is not a position. It is the lack of a position.
I know, because I was there not too long ago, after saying good bye to religion and faith.

KoloOyinbo:


We know [size=20]God exists in our minds [/size]and can prove that. He may well exist elsewhere in reality! We can never prove for or against on that one.

So you position is neither logical nor rational. By rejecting the possibility of God you show as much Faith as the Deist.

Only the Agnostic can claim a fully rational position. (Have you guys ANY knowledge of philosophy or logic) All I hear seems to be the Atheists restating the same old boring position without any more shred of proof than the Deists who at least acknowledge that their position is supported only by FAITH.

Is anything else needs saying

KoloOyinbo:


We know God exists in our minds and can prove that. He may well exist elsewhere in reality! We can never prove for or against on that one.

So you position is neither logical nor rational. By rejecting the possibility of God you show as much Faith as the Deist.

Only the Agnostic can claim a fully rational position. (Have you guys ANY knowledge of philosophy or logic) All I hear seems to be the Atheists restating the same old boring position without any more shred of proof than the Deists who at least acknowledge that their position is supported only by FAITH.

Let me cut this short to fully demonstrate the atheist position.

I say: I believe their is a flying pink horse ( belief requires faith)

You say: I don't believe you, prove it.. ( Can you detect any faith in this?)

now

You say: Their is a God (You believe by faith)

An atheist says : I don't believe you, prove it. (Meaning atheists lack faith)

So you see, Atheist lack belief in every God concepts. . .Just like you lack
faith in the God Thor, this doesn't mean you need faith to disbelieve Thor.

If you contrast your lack of belief in other God concepts that you are
atheistic towards, then you will fully understand the atheist position.

johnydon22:


Let me cut this short to fully demonstrate the atheist position.

I say: I believe their is a flying pink horse ( belief requires faith)

You say: I don't believe you, prove it.. ( Can you detect any faith in this?)

now

You say: Their is a God (You believe by faith)

An atheist says : I don't believe you, prove it. (Meaning atheists lack faith)

So you see, Atheist lack belief in every God concepts. . .Just like you lack
faith in the God Thor, this doesn't mean you need faith to disbelieve Thor.

If you contrast your lack of belief in other God concepts that you are
atheistic towards, then you will fully understand the atheist position.

Atheists lack Faith in MY position but HAVE Faith in theirs. _ A little more logical though will eliminate these basic errors.