I've recently learned on this forum that atheism--a lack of belief in any deity--is somehow a "belief". So I'd like to share my other non-belief beliefs:
I'm also an a-Bugs Bunny-ist. This deeply held belief is comes from the spiritual awakening I had when my soul realized there was no Bugs Bunny.
A-Chris Cringlism: One of the most important nights of my life, was a cold winter evening when I gave a homeless man a cup of warm cup of ramen noodles. In return, he shared the hard-to-swallow, but life-changing truth about Santa Clause's lack of reality.
A-Fonzy-ism: "A", Fonzy...alas, the leather jacket-wearing god is no god at all. I know that some fanatics have threatened death to all who oppose Fonzerellism. But my heart isn't afraid to tell the truth.
A-god damnism: my belief that no god named Damn exists.
A-NotButterism: I simply can't bring myself to believe it's not butter.
I hope my coming forward can empower other believers in non-belief to be strong. I am your brother in the faith of faithlessness.
14 Aug 15
1 edit
Originally posted by vivifyThese are not a parallel with a non-belief in a god as there is concrete evidence that bugs bunny doesn't exist. No non-belief is required.
I've recently learned on this forum that atheism--a lack of belief in any deity--is somehow a "belief". So I'd like to share my other non-belief beliefs:
I'm also an a-Bugs Bunny-ist. This deeply held belief is comes from the spiritual awakening I had when my soul realized there was no Bugs Bunny.
A-Chris Cringlism: One of the most important nights of ...[text shortened]... er other believers in non-belief to be strong. I am your brother in the faith of faithlessness.
A parallel would possibly be a non-belief in ghosts or perhaps aliens visiting earth in flying saucers.
Originally posted by divegeesterPlease present your evidence. And are you talking about the Bugs Bunny of cartoon fame, or any Bugs Bunny? And how could you possibly have evidence that he doesn't exist when I am positive that I have seen him on TV?
These are not a parallel with a non-belief in a god as there is concrete evidence that bugs bunny doesn't exist.
Are you saying that 'belief' or 'non-belief' constitute positions not backed up by concrete evidence? Who decides when evidence is concrete? Are there levels of concreteness or is evidence merely concrete or not concrete?
14 Aug 15
Originally posted by divegeesterLet me see your proof that Santa doesn't exist.
These are not a parallel with a non-belief in a god as there is concrete evidence that bugs bunny doesn't exist. No non-belief is required.
A parallel would possibly be a non-belief in ghosts or perhaps aliens visiting earth in flying saucers.
Originally posted by twhiteheadThere is a human creator of the bugs bunny cartoon, evidences of sketches, artists of the drawings. No non-belief is required.
Please present your evidence. And are you talking about the Bugs Bunny of cartoon fame, or any Bugs Bunny? And how could you possibly have evidence that he doesn't exist when I am positive that I have seen him on TV?
Are you saying that 'belief' or 'non-belief' constitute positions not backed up by concrete evidence? Who decides when evidence is concrete? Are there levels of concreteness or is evidence merely concrete or not concrete?
Are you suggesting that my belief in a god does not require "concrete evidence" in order for you to believe? What would you constitute as "concrete" in that scenario? Does my personal evidence for me that there is a god, fall into what you would classify as "concrete" and if not why not?
Originally posted by divegeesterThere are also human creators of the Bible, as well as sketches and drawings of God and Jesus, and artists of those drawings.
There is a human creator of the bugs bunny cartoon, evidences of sketches, artists of the drawings. No non-belief is required.
Are you suggesting that my belief in a god does not require "concrete evidence" in order for you to believe? What would you constitute as "concrete" in that scenario? Does my personal evidence for me that there is a god, fall into what you would classify as "concrete" and if not why not?
14 Aug 15
Originally posted by divegeesterMy point is that human writers and artists created the stories depicted in the Bible, as well as the images of God, just like with Bugs Bunny.
What has the Bible got to do with a belief that there is a god? The Bible is just one platform that describes who this God may be.
14 Aug 15
1 edit
Originally posted by vivifyA belief that there is a god is not dependent on the Bible.
My point is that human writers and artists created the stories depicted in the Bible, as well as the images of God, just like with Bugs Bunny.
As to the veracity of the Bible, one could argue that it is written by men and therefore not the Word of god and this is strong rational argument for non-belief in the bible. The same could be said of bugs bunny. But you are still left with a belief that there is a god and contemporary evidence that bugs bunny isn't it.
14 Aug 15
Originally posted by vivifyYes I would agree and in fact say that the "Christian" interpretation is fully dependent on the NT at least.
For a general belief that some type of god exists, yes; but belief in the Christian god is largely dependent on the Bible.
As an example: I would probably still be a theist or at least an agnostic theist if had never read the Bible, but I would not accept the possibility of bugs bunny being either real nor a god, as I know through actual evidence it is a man-made drawn animation.
14 Aug 15
2 edits
Originally posted by vivifyA good question to me would be why do I now accept the NT and not Koran as being the word of god and I can't answer that in a way you would accept as my evidence of the god of my theism being expressed as Jesus/Jehovah is very personal and independent to me and if I told you what it was it would not be "evidence" for you.
For a general belief that some type of god exists, yes; but belief in the Christian god is largely dependent on the Bible.
Originally posted by divegeesterAgain, we also have evidence that the Bible was written by men, and the depictions of God were also created by men. Both Bugs Bunny and God have human creators, for both their stories and depictions. How do we know Bugs isn't based on a real person?
Yes I would agree and in fact say that the "Christian" interpretation is fully dependent on the NT at least.
As an example: I would probably still be a theist or at least an agnostic theist if had never read the Bible, but I would not accept the possibility of bugs bunny being either real nor a god, as I know through actual evidence it is a man-made drawn animation.
14 Aug 15
"Based on a real person' doesn't make the cartoon somehow real.
But this Atheism Must Be a Belief, would be in the same category as I BELIEVE in gravity.
I don't believe in time travel. Ah, so that is your religion,
It is theists who want to force atheists into the category of religion because somehow that seems to validate their own religious choices.