Does Atheists think of God too?

[sinnerdexter]

The poll is meant for all Atheists only. However, all religious individuals are welcome to (name removed by moderator)ut/share their thoughts.

If God is not in their mind, where is He?

 

[JohnDamian]

Generally speaking, in it’s popular sense Atheism is the lack of belief in a God. (rather than a lack of knowlege of God)

Nessecarily; to hold a lack of belief in something, there must be a mental conceptualisation of what entity or thing it is that is being disbelieved. Therein; nessecarily an Atheist has some understanding of God or what that entails; and this understanding preceeds their belief or disbelief.

It would be meaningless, or at least an indulgence in absurd semantics; to say that someone did not believe in something they did not know about. Particularily this is the case because most people nowadays have heard of, and have some idea of what God is - (yes, remote tribes *may *be an exception but for ease of discourse I shall ignore them).

So an Atheist; or at least a person who chooses not to believe in God (as opposed to someone who does not know what God is; if you want to use a different word) is someone who has to have at least thought about what God is; and have some concept that they reject in belief.

 

[AntiTheist]

Generally speaking, in it’s popular sense Atheism is the lack of belief in a God. (rather than a lack of knowlege of God)

Nessecarily; to hold a lack of belief in something, there must be a mental conceptualisation of what entity or thing it is that is being disbelieved. Therein; nessecarily an Atheist has some understanding of God or what that entails; and this understanding preceeds their belief or disbelief.

Yes, this is absolutely correct. Atheism is a response to god claims. When I say that I’m an atheist (and, since it is a lack, it’s not an “-ism,” not a formal school of thought, not something that you capitalize), I simply mean that I have not heard a god claim that meets its burden of proof.

There’s another thread going on here (“Well…Why?”) that deals with that burden of proof, if anyone wants to present their evidence.

In answer to the question of this thread, as an atheist, I think about all kinds of gods – yours, the Hindu gods, the Greek gods, the Norse gods, etc. – not just because I’m an atheist but because I have an interest in world mythology. But before I vote in any poll, I want to know exactly what the OP means by his question.

I have a sneaking suspicion that he means something silly like, “You really know that god is real and you choose not to believe in him anyway!” If I’m wrong about this, I’d be happy to be corrected.

 

[vera_dicere]

Several of my friends are atheists. They think of God the same way I think of arming New Zealand with nuclear weapons.

You can think about something, ponder the arguments, but still refuse to beleive or accept said arguments. I mean, the atheists who vote in this poll or come on this forum are “thinking” of God too, but just thinking about God doesn’t mean one beleives in Him or accepts the possibility of His existance.

 

[R_Daneel]

Only when I am on this board, or when I prepare a post to this board. However, when I kick a chair, by accident, I do take the Lord’s name in vain, but that does not count. It is just an involuntary reflex, but I am sure it would be looked upon with horror, if I would repeat those words here… so I will not.

 

[_Locke]

Nessecarily; to hold a lack of belief in something, there must be a mental conceptualisation of what entity or thing it is that is being disbelieved.

I wouldn’t say it’s so much “holding a lack of belief” as “lacking belief”; let’s not forget that every newborn baby is an atheist. Atheism is literally from two Greek words meaning “without God.”

But I see what you mean, almost everyone has a conceptualization of some type of God or gods by adulthood.

 

[LoverofMary]

There is a strong and weak form of atheism. Strong atheism explicitly rejects the existence of deities. Weak atheists do not deny the existence of deities, but merely lack a belief: they can be called agnostic atheists.

A person can also be an agnostic theist – a person who believes in a deity (or deities) while admitting lacking knowledge that such deities exist.

That being said, I’m sure some atheists (like Christopher Hitchens) think about gods (or God) often, while others probably hardly give it a passing thought, much like theists.

James

 

[4Horsemen]

The new breed of atheists, like Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, not only think of God, they are obsessive in their repugnance of Him and all Christians alike. In fact, they are militant in their quasi-religious fevor. Some of the New Atheists are found in “scientism,” a religion or philosophy that professes there is no knowledge except for what is derived through science.

This particular brand of atheists is not content to abide by their own beliefs or disuss God (see, they think of God and want to repudiate Him and convert others to their way of thinking), they want to wipe out every vistige of faith in God and Christ and His Chruch wherever they can find it. So they do things like attempt to have Pope Benedict arrested when he comes to England for being responsible for “crimes against humanity” because of the clergy abuse cases. They put up billboards supporting euthanasia, and posters on buses about the futility of worshiping a God (or gods).

One prominent atheist even desecrated a host at the U. of Minnesota. He announced: “Nothing must be held sacred. Question everything. God is not great. Jesus is not your lord, you are not disciples of any charismatic prophets.”

Atheists are merely pseudo-intellectual elitists “converting” only a small number of similarly lost souls. Faith is not man-made; it is a universal phenomenon intrinsic to humanity. It is part of God’s design for creation. Denying God is a sign of denial of the self, the true self, with a purpose and end. It is a self-destructive paradigm that, if pursued, leads to the death of the soul (apartness from God). So for the militant atheist, it is a thought-out process and denial of eternal truth, as evidenced in nature and reasoned with our intellects.

Perhaps, in between the professed believers in God and the professed disbelievers in God are the majority of people who are floundering and need equilibrium, and they will find it within the bark of Peter, in the Church God founded through His Only-Begotten Son, Our Lord, Jesus Christ.

 

[4Horsemen]

I wouldn’t say it’s so much “holding a lack of belief” as “lacking belief”; let’s not forget that every newborn baby is an atheist. Atheism is literally from two Greek words meaning “without God.”

But I see what you mean, almost everyone has a conceptualization of some type of God or gods by adulthood.

Every newborn baby is NOT an theist. An atheist DENIES the existence of God.
A baby can’t reason yet.

 

[AntiTheist]

Every newborn baby is NOT an theist. An atheist DENIES the existence of God.
A baby can’t reason yet.

The distinction being made here is the definition of an explicit versus implicit atheist.

A baby is implicitly an atheist because, as you say, it can’t reason so it can’t hold a belief in a god. As such, it lacks a belief in god and is (implicitly) an atheist.

When we talk about atheists, we’re almost always talking about explicit atheists – those of us who have rationally considered the evidence and found that evidence insufficient to support the claim that a god exists.

 

[4Horsemen]

The distinction being made here is the definition of an explicit versus implicit atheist.

A baby is implicitly an atheist because, as you say, it can’t reason so it can’t hold a belief in a god. As such, it lacks a belief in god and is (implicitly) an atheist.

When we talk about atheists, we’re almost always talking about explicit atheists – those of us who have rationally considered the evidence and found that evidence insufficient to support the claim that a god exists.

No, no, no! A baby is neither implicitly an atheist or theist because, as I said, the child would have to reason, so one can only be one or the other explicitly. A baby can’t hold a belief in God, but he or she also can’t NOT hold a belief in God. That is due to the nature of being under the age of reason (which has been considered approximately 7 years). However, children tend to believe in God even at an early age. You might call it cultural/sociological conditioning, but I think there’s more going on. God speaks to all of us in different ways, if we’d only listen.

 

[John_Paul_Jones]

Every newborn baby is NOT an theist. An atheist DENIES the existence of God.
A baby can’t reason yet.

Yes babies do reason, they cry when they’re hungry, gassy, wet, and lonely. They have their parents trained like Pavlov’s dog.

 

[Atramdace19]

i will deny the arguments that babies do reason by using a psychological approach.

Now, in each of our brain, the frontal lobes are the parts of the brain that is responsible for higher psychological tasks such as reason. I will look at this in two ways. When a baby is born, the temporal lobes are not highly developed yet to unable the child to maintain reason.

Imagine the brain as an apartment block, the first block is the brain stem which is the most basic parts of the brain. This part is responsible for basic essential functions such as eating, breathing, sleeping and digestion and as time develops, the apartment blocks increase until you reach to the last level where reasoning is involved which takes place in the frontal lobes. These lobes are also responsible for movement and aspect of speech. Now, aspect of speech such as distinguishing various meaning significantly occurs childhood. A child would distinguished what is a ball. Now if one gives a child a spoon, the child will not say it is a ball because the brain now distinguished the word meaning of “ball” and this is part of reasoning. The child understands what is a ball and he will logically decide if a certain object is a ball.

For the case of babies, they do not reason. The acts of crying, feeling lonely comes from two ways. The first way is due to the activity of the brain stem which is responsible for survival instinct. The second is due to contact comfort where the child relies on the mother for warthm gained from face to face interaction where the child distinguished the mother’s face. This ensures that when the child feels danger, they rely to the mother. They do not reason out why they want to be with mother or purposely decide that they do not want to be the mother because even if the infant is noisy and rude, it will still go to the mother.

 

[LogisticsBranch]

An atheist DENIES the existence of God.

Even atheism lies within the sphere of a certain reference to the concept of God. If it denies the existence of God, it must also know whose existence it is denying.

A pleasure to meet you.

 

[4Horsemen]

i will deny the arguments that babies do reason by using a psychological approach.

Now, in each of our brain, the frontal lobes are the parts of the brain that is responsible for higher psychological tasks such as reason. I will look at this in two ways. When a baby is born, the temporal lobes are not highly developed yet to unable the child to maintain reason.

Imagine the brain as an apartment block, the first block is the brain stem which is the most basic parts of the brain. This part is responsible for basic essential functions such as eating, breathing, sleeping and digestion and as time develops, the apartment blocks increase until you reach to the last level where reasoning is involved which takes place in the frontal lobes. These lobes are also responsible for movement and aspect of speech. Now, aspect of speech such as distinguishing various meaning significantly occurs childhood. A child would distinguished what is a ball. Now if one gives a child a spoon, the child will not say it is a ball because the brain now distinguished the word meaning of “ball” and this is part of reasoning. The child understands what is a ball and he will logically decide if a certain object is a ball.

For the case of babies, they do not reason. The acts of crying, feeling lonely comes from two ways. The first way is due to the activity of the brain stem which is responsible for survival instinct. The second is due to contact comfort where the child relies on the mother for warthm gained from face to face interaction where the child distinguished the mother’s face. This ensures that when the child feels danger, they rely to the mother. They do not reason out why they want to be with mother or purposely decide that they do not want to be the mother because even if the infant is noisy and rude, it will still go to the mother.

This seems to be accurate in terms of psychological argumentation, but just from empirical observation (being a mom and teacher), it seems apparent that a very young child can reason in a rudimentary way. The question is, at what specific age level. Even a toddler between the ages of 1 and 2 can understand how the world works, for example, that things fall down. (They probably learn that while in high chairs in the latter half of the first year by dropping their food to give to the dog or merely for the sake of seeing it fall). I can’t specify an exact age, but as for the higher reasoning skills, as in use of the frontal lobe, it takes longer. Children are doing math and reading at early ages, some before kindergarten. They need to reason how to put sounds of letters together, and of course, the abstract ideas that are mathematics. They can set up science experiments, also, and come to conclusions using the basic scientific method. As for complex reasoning involved in philosophy and theology and logic, certainly a child needs more existential experience of the world and his/her existence in it. The parents help supply the God-knowledge, although most children start questioning the reason for their existence–how they got here, why they are here, where they will go when they die. Children start with these questions around the ages of 3 and 4. (My own experience with my own children confirms that, but I did study child psychology as well as various social sciences).

 

[4Horsemen]

Even atheism lies within the sphere of a certain reference to the concept of God. If it denies the existence of God, it must also know whose existence it is denying.

A pleasure to meet you.

(LOL!) As they say, the devil has “faith” in the sense that he believes in God.

A pleasure to meet you too!

 

[4Horsemen]

Yes babies do reason, they cry when they’re hungry, gassy, wet, and lonely. They have their parents trained like Pavlov’s dog.

Bark, bark . . . ruff, ruff . . . I’ve been through the process of conditioning and know what’s it’s like.

That’s why I listened to Dr. Ray’s advice on Catholic Family Radio. Families need all the help they can get to instill the virtues in their children. Parents can’t force-feed faith, but they can show by example and teach by being attentive to the words and actions of their children. They can also question their understanding and seek Wisdom for themselves and their progeny. Still, some will turn away from the faith and call themselves agnostics or atheists. Most will come back. I did. I’m still praying for so-called atheists in my family.

 

[Holly3278]

I did not vote as I am not an Atheist but I am sure that they do sometimes think of God. I don’t know how many do but I am sure some of them do. My Grandpa is an Atheist and he likes to make fun of religion so I am sure he thinks of God sometimes.

 

[Mystic_Banana]

During an intense rainfall a couple of days ago, a born and raised atheist I know said “it’s official: God is mad at us”, then, after realizing what she’d said, added a conditional “or at least that’s what I’d say if I believed in imaginary supernatural beings”, of course, you can just put these things down to the ubiquity of a concept influencing even those vociferously opposed to it, but lets face it, it’s a naff argument…

 

[4Horsemen]

Scripture says that “the fool says there is no God.” It seems atheists are too puffed up with pride to humble themselves before the Lord. They fall for idols and even make of themselves little demi-gods.

(I’m talking about hard-core atheists, not the lost souls who are deluded. They probably are the ones who return and are Surprised by Truth (title of a book in which re-verts tell their story). I think another is Prodigal Sons, as well as, Prodigal Daughters. I think the latter is authored by Donna Steichen.