Regarding our differing of 'definition'. This is the most accurate definitions. I am not debating your reasoning, I do not appreciate an 'anti-theist' as they are CERTAIN and will insult somebody else for their views. Just like a religious person is CERTAIN and in the past, collectives have killed others for their views.

-------
antitheist
Web definitions
Antitheism is active opposition to theism. The term has had a range of applications; in secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to organized religion or to the belief in any deity, while in a theistic context, it sometimes refers to opposition to a specific god or gods.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheist
-------
atheism
ˈeɪθɪɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
noun: atheism
1.
disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.
synonyms:   non-belief, non-theism, disbelief, unbelief, scepticism, doubt, agnosticism, irreligion, godlessness, ungodliness, profaneness, impiety, heresy, apostasy, paganism, heathenism, freethinking, nihilism More
antonyms:   belief, faith
Origin

late 16th cent.: from French athéisme, from Greek atheos, from a- ‘without’ + theos ‘god’.
-------
agnostic
agˈnɒstɪk/
noun
1.
a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.
synonyms:   sceptic, doubter, questioner, doubting Thomas, challenger, scoffer, cynic; More
antonyms:   believer, theist
adjective
adjective: agnostic
1.
relating to agnostics or agnosticism.
synonyms:   sceptical, doubting, questioning, unsure, cynical, unbelieving, disbelieving, non-believing, faithless, irreligious; More
-------
theism
ˈθiːɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
1.
belief in the existence of a god or gods, specifically of a creator who intervenes in the universe.
"there are many different forms of theism"
-------


Just type into google, Atheist definition.

Then you will realise, an atheist is merely not convinced. It is an antitheist that wants to tell another they are wrong. You can only tell someone they are wrong if you know what is right. Atheists don't know what the answer is, we humble in not knowing, we are (well some don't care) in the pursuit of that answer and we don't have a desire to fill in the gaps with dogma and superstition that we see no evidence backing it.

Arguable, some may interpret the universe as more a container.

Such as, "everything in the universe" as opposed to "the universe is everything".

For the purpose of this exercise, I'll agree with you

I agree with organ regarding meanings, but for the sake of the forum I think I'm going to bite the bullet and answer danks questions the way he wants, after all he has said himself 14 pages have gone by without him being able to set off his scripted nonsense bomb.

Ahem.

Yes dank I am part of everything.

Take the word therefore out of it.

Nothing is nothing
Everything is everything
Speaking shit is speaking shit

Red is red therefore
A fridge is a fridge

The word therefore creates some sort of reliance on the previous nonsense  statement like a fridge couldn't be a fridge if the color red did not exist. While both statements on there own are obviously true, connected, they just make the person speaking them sound like a brain cripple.

No, the difference between Atheism and Agnostic is not your concern. It is a difference in interpretation of the question, not the outcome of answer.

Atheists think they are not convinced, Agnostics think the question is unanswerable (therefore are not convinced) and Anti-theists adamantly think there is no God as narcasistically and arrogantly as you think there is a god.

So any argument pertaining to the fact that Atheists are telling you that you are 'wrong' or that there 'is no god' is not exactly what Atheism is about. Sure I get frustrated when you knuckle draggers try to ruin the education system with your lack of evidence based drivel designed to dumb the gene pool. I might say you are a total fuck tard from time to time, and I might outright say that you are just wrong. The truth is, I am just not convinced, because nothing you say it in any way shape or form at the slightest compelling.

You are in fact, the most uninteresting, and uncompelling human being that I have had the dishonor of contacting.

Congratulations on supporting religion.

This thread was not started as a religion support thread, it was a put down for atheism thread.

Your atheist definition is wrong many levels, firstly nobody has proven any religion beyond a responsible doubt. The very definition of faith is belief without evidence. If you wish to use the legal term of beyond reasonable doubt, you will require a great deal of irrefutable evidence, which religion provides none. Religion doesn't even come close to the balance of probabilities threshold.

Atheism merely means not convinced. The extreme version would be, extremely not convinced.

Your definition may be more suited to an anti-theist. Somebody that "KNOWS" there is no God

To further add to the Santa analogy.

I woke up with presents under the tree, and I have been told by the people I trust and through ritual yearly discussions that it was in fact a fat man in a suit that came through the chimney.

Therefore, I refuse to apply logic and sense, and will take the minuscule evidence (that presents exist) and use it to validate ludicrous claims that have been drilled into me throughout my early childhood, instead of using a more reasoned application of logic and sense (that comes with brain development) and find the most compelling and realistic theory.

The only real difference between the God/Jesus and Santa stories is all children eventually let go of the Santa story.

But if it didn't exist, would it really not exist?! Don't think ego, think soul!

 

Dank, get off the internet and go start your cult please.

Really? I thought we had already concluded it was the ramblings of a schizophrenic drug addict?

So does this mean you'll start meaningful contributions?

Just lay off the drugs dank, go to a group and sober up please.

Get well soon

Oh shit, then it must be true!!

You should add this to the end to make it seem even more valid

It's logically impossible to prove there is no God. You'd have to be everywhere in the universe at the same time. You'd have to be....God.
- Friend from Facebook.

You sir, are without a doubt, the biggest idiot I have every met.

You think that if atheists support eachother must be members of a church?

I'll admit, the only thing I can appreciate about religion is it does have value communally, but only for those people that share that orientation ... for example, its charitable to one another, it aims to care for one another, it provides a basic human interaction that we all need, it is cultural ... on the other side it provides an outlet for priests to have a steady supply of children, it is responsible for some of the biggest wars (pre WWI/II) on the planet against those who do not share the same values, it spawned the KKK, it's values are set in something that is infallible and should never be questions (fascism), it is a business model that channels funds to one much larger organisation tax free.

You seem to think that if two or more people meet up in a room to discuss their perspective it is a church. The Alcohol Anonymous Church, The Lawn Bowls Church, The LAN Party Church?

I don't attend any Atheist Club (Church) meetings or whatever you would like to call it. I can tell you this, I'd probably prefer it be labelled as a religion because then we get to do it all tax free, we would get to genuinely rip down all festivities on public property and say 'IT OFFENDS MY RELIGION' then cry, and call you a racist ... because it was the religious neanderthals that somehow merged the word religion and race together.

Atheist does not have a dogma, no text, no commandments, no specific way of life, just an investigative mindset, a curious mindset, critical thought is the only commandment.

If a group of critical thinkers in one room is a church, then MIT and Mensa are now churches.

The reason why religious people want to declare Atheism a religion is so they can effectively try to diffuse our only statement of 'I am not convinced of religion' by saying, 'but you are in a religion'.

Atheism is as much a religion as being bald is a haircut. Or about how if you don't follow football and therefore don't have a favorite football team, 'No Football team' is your favorite team. Or playing a game of musical chairs and being the only left standing, declaring your lack if chair is still a chair ...

Judging by the responses that seems to have totally ignored the definitions I put forward.... people are still under the impression it is binary what you believe in. You either believe their is, or their is not.

What about those that are just not convinced but if science could prove some prime mover (god, aliens, a large ball of spag etc) caused the universe then they would out of natural curiosity want to investigate it and may adopt that approach? What about the apathists (yes I coined that word), the group of people that just don't give a fuck?

It is not binary. Atheist is just not convinced, the onus if on anybody else with any idea to convince them of that idea. Brand us what you like, just don't try to debate with us any "logic" at the same time. The OP here has failed at the very title of this thread. Had he have said 'Anti-theist' instead of 'Atheist' it may have had some sort of meaning.... to somebody that also had limited oxygen in the womb.

All it really says is 'A person that is not convinced does not exist' ... errr ... wtf?

Wait wait, just to be clear ... you took credit for curing cancer with your mind?

Do you even know what 'quantum' is?

Bringing a childs indoctrination into the equation means nothing. Any person that is impressionable can be taught anything as fact. Maturity separates things like jesus and santa clause from reality.

Listening to someone tripping balls and claiming when they are finished curing dogs of cancer (which wasn't published in any medical journal, funny that) they will be resurrected at a music festival is just too much. There needs to be a sitcom based on this guy. I'd pay to watch that. It is just hilarious.

By the way guys, I invented the spoon.

I was never properly rewarded for my invention to humanity so spoon related donations are welcome.

Yes, that is just the drugs. Of course it is the drugs, it wasn't the ham sandwich you had for lunch.

Feelings are subjective, the drugs scrambling your brain is objective. They are both 'real'. Objective observations are reality, subjective impressions are perception of reality.

The truth is, you are just a brain in a jar. Your hands, tongue, ears, eyes, nose are all just sensory inputs. Grass is not green, it is every colour but green. We see it as green because we observe the light that was not absorbed. Our senses give us the best information of our surroundings so our brain can compute it as best as possible.

If you want to add mind altering substances into the equation, you can expect all your sensory inputs to become altered. Well, how the brain computes this information.

You have achieved nothing more than altering your perception or reality. You did nothing to change reality.

Unfortunately your brain has clearly taken its toll with the drugs and it is now permanently scrambled.

I don't need to be a grand pianist to understand how a piano works or appreciate music. I don't need to put my tongue in a ban saw to understand machinery or experience pain.

I certainly don't need to take drugs to understand those drugs are making your brain go haywire and cause hallucinations, they certainly did not open a portal to another dimension.

So I'm being educated on 'logic' by someone that is 24/7 tripping off their balls ...

I'm sorry, I don't have the time to humour or debate with somebody that thinks taking a mind altering substance that changes brain chemistry is genuinely a journey to another dimension.

I can tell you what is going to happen, you'll say a series of points that are irrefutable such as nothing is nothing, or a chicken is a chicken, then after I've agreed with you for 10 or so points you've made you'll say a chicken is a horse and with some twisted and false logic link it back to previous agreement I have made.

Not interested.