The thing about the term "atheist"

[SavageSotoParticipant]

“Atheist” is defined in the dictionary as “someone who does not believe in the existence of God or gods“. However, I don’t think this is often how the word is used. For example, I’m constantly a bit confused why I get called an atheist, either by family or friends when I have never expressed a disbelief in God. I have questioned inside and out the beliefs that I have grown up with and popular religion in general, but does that mean I’m an atheist? Is being openly skeptical about various religious teachings and encouraging critical thinking exclusive to atheism? I would argue that it doesn’t.

Deeper than that, I think the problem is that God can be described in so many different ways. God can be described as a supreme being off somewhere who created and rules the universe and chooses to sometimes intervene in human affairs…but God can also be described simply as the manifestation of existence or the animating force/energy behind it. God can be the feelings of love, joy or interconnectedness. Often times, people that either brand others as atheists or brand themselves as atheists don’t seem to be privy on these varying definitions of the God they say they or others don’t believe in.

[WadeParticipant]

I see a lot of Christians being taught that “athiest” means a lack of a belief in the Christian God, Yahweh.

 

 

[AgnosticBelieverParticipant]

I think that the terminology gets mixed up so often and as long as you don’t believe in the Judeo-Christian God, then I can see how many would simply assume you are atheist. They don’t believe any other gods exist.

[SavageSotoParticipant]

Sure, but by that same definition they are atheists as well because they don’t believe in various other god-concepts. So it’s silly.

[Anonymous]

@savagesolo I would make a distinction between an atheist  (someone who doesn’t belive in the monotheistic God of Christianit Judaism and Isalm) and a non-theist (someone who does not affiliate themselves to a belif in that same God).

So for me, Dawkins for example s a non-theist in that evidendially he would argue that there probably isn’t God, but not an athiest because he keeps the word “probably” in there. He cannot prove by evidence that God does not exist and ackowledges but he would say that it is haightl unlikely rather than saying God doesn’ not exist, if I undresteand where he is coming form correctly.

[Anonymous]

correwction @savagesoto above

[Anonymous]

and yet there are some who call themselves atheist christians. If Christ = a divine manifestation of God, go figure.

[Huddo71Participant]

Hi Savagesoto,

I like where you are going with this post.  It points to a couple of problems I believe atheism fails to address properly.  One is that the definition appears to presume that God or any Devine or supreme being needs to operate within the realm of ‘existence’.  That’s a box I would have trouble putting any notion of a supreme entity into.  The second problem Ifind is that in order to find a relative frame to work with, atheism needs to form a concept of the Devine ‘being’ or ‘idea’.  I would argue that when an atheist does this the concept immediately falls short of what it describes.  I would claim then, that the atheism they argue for is the non existence of the notion or concept of ‘God’ or the Devine that they initially describe.  This initial concept of the Devine that they claim does not exist needs to be defined prior to claiming its non existence.  atheism (defined this way) therefore necessarily becomes the refutation of the existence of a concept.

I don’t know if I’ve explained that too well but it seems to fit when I read your definition.

[Peter StanleyParticipant]

This is a term that really causes endless confusion. I have had numerous discussions over the last few years on the web with people who have walked away from traditional Christianity and now describe themselves as atheists. I actually have far more respect for some atheists than I do for those ‘Christians’ who think they have most of the answers. This is a topic that I would like to be able to develop on a new blog.

Here is a brief introduction to my thoughts:
Although I walked away from traditional Christianity over 40 years ago I have no recollection of ever doubting the existence of God. Despite a very unusual journey I had always considered myself to be a believer. It was in June 2012 that I came across the expression agnostic theist for the first time, and that really set me thinking. I have had many deep discussions over the years with believers (theists), agnostics and atheists. Atheists are commonly thought of as those who have no belief in God, but there is a lot of confusion caused by misunderstanding what people see as the differences. Let me suggest for the sake of discussion that a theist is someone who is convinced that God exists, while an atheist is convinced that a god does not exist, and an agnostic has some doubts (on a sliding scale from close to being a theist to close to being an atheist) which would suggest that almost all of us are agnostic to some extent. I would describe myself as an agnostic theist – I have no doubt that God exists but I do have many questions about the details. At the same time I know from the experiences of my own family how others can be agnostic atheists.

I wrote an article entitled ‘From Christian to Atheist‘ about 5 years ago – any thoughts?

[starfielderParticipant]

You all are brilliant! Just wanted to add this… great discussion.

[WadeParticipant]

I feel like I’m about to throw a monkey-wrench into this discussion, but most “atheist” discussions I’ve seen start with an assumption that the choice is between the Christian God, variously called Yahwah or El, or no god at all. There are, however, theists who believe in whole pantheons of gods, only one of which may or may not be Yahweh.

This is not as strange as you might think. Whilst I happen to immediately think of Wiccans, there are other modern religions in the world that have whole pantheons. Hinduism is probably the best example.

Gives a whole new depth to the term “theist”!

Wade.

 

[Peter StanleyParticipant]

I think Wade has highlighted one of the difficulties when he says that most ‘atheist’ discussions revolve around the choice between the Christian God or no god at all. I realise I have muddied the waters by suggesting that many of my deep discussions have involved “believers (theists)” when I am really referring to committed ‘Christian’ believers. But this in turn raises the question of what do I understand by ‘committed Christian’.

There are many committed believers of the Christian FAITH who feel very uncomfortable using the word ‘Christian’ because like me, they see an enormous difference between the Christian RELIGION (or Christendom) and the Christian FAITH.

Another quote from my blog:
I am not convinced that God can only be approached through the Christian faith, but for me I sense that it is only through the Holy Spirit that I can really begin to understand something of the things of God. I have seen it suggested that faith is a catalyst that brings about a fusion between man and God – an intimate encounter – a treasure that needs to be experienced. Bob Greaves – The Unconventional Pastor suggests that the presence of Christ is self evident and requires no one else to confirm it. I think this highlights what I have described as the difference between head knowledge and heart awareness; the difference between knowing something about God and a relationship with God. But which comes first?

I find it very difficult to express my thoughts.  There are extroverts who think on their feet; there are introverts who need time alone to collect their thoughts; and then there are some of us (maybe living with Aspergers Syndrome) who tend to be more like hermits who are comfortable (and even enjoy) endlessly questioning what life is all about – without needing to come to any definitive conclusions.  Maybe I should write a post on that.

[RichardParticipant]

It’s interesting that the Romans and Greeks considered Christians atheists since they didn’t believe in their gods.

[AmyParticipant]

@Old-Pete, you should definitely write a post on that.  I think a lot of people would be interested in that.  Also, I like the term “agnostic theist.” I think that’s the first time I heard a term that seemed to fit my own beliefs, especially because I fall pretty close to the “believer” end of the scale.  I always got the impression from my family (who are mostly people who don’t believe in any God/gods/divine beings at all) that there are believers (mostly of the monotheistic sort), there are non-believers (“real” atheists who believe there is nothing), and agnostics (who are stuck in some kind of faith limbo and don’t know what they think).

[RichardParticipant]

@amy agnostics (who are stuck in some kind of faith limbo and don’t know what they think).

I’m agnostic and I know exactly what I think.  I have no faith limbo.  I am atheist to any specific claim of gods since there is no evidence for any of them.  Agnostic means that I have no way of determining if there was some sort of intelligence behind the existence of the universe.  It doesn’t mean that I am concerned that there might be a god.  It just means that I would be open to considering it if there were evidence.  In the mean time I live within what I do know.

[Author]

Posts