~25% of Americans do Not Believe in God

[JimBowie1958]

I am not an atheist, but to link atheism with stupidity shows someone's true character, very UnChristian like.

No it is simply being honest as Our Lord Jesus was with the Pharisee and lawyers.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Jesus sent a message to me in the form of a potato chip in a Lay's bag that was in the image of the Virgin Mary! I tried to sell it on Ebay, but they won't list edible items like that. She was delicious!

Another atheist demonstrating their total ignorance of the topic.

Amazing how atheists like to wallow in their own stupidity.

How do you know he is atheist and not agnostic, or perhaps simply of non-Christian belief?

I dont know that he is atheist; he ACTS and EXPRESSES himself like an atheistic fool

 

[JimBowie1958]

We all believe you exist and yet there is no proof that you are not a figment of our imagination

There is no proof Matthew exists. I believe it is computer program -- low level AI

Not even artificial intelligence could be that stupid!

Call it “artificial stupidity”.

Matthew is a very intelligent person, I think, but not too wise.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If theism is a belief in the existence of god or gods, then atheism certainly can be defined as not believing in the existence of god or gods. Many people may see atheism as a denial of the existence of any god rather than a lack of belief in any god, but that doesn't make it the only valid definition of the word.

I agree that the process used to come to the 25% number does seem like a stretch.

This is not a binary choice, but a trinary choice, as are most questions of belief. The possibilities are in general;

1. I agree/endorse/believe/affirm

2. I deny/disagree/reject/contradict

3. I am undecided/will neither affirm nor deny/ admit to possibility but not to probability.


If we look at the matter of the possible, etc, we have

1. the possible (not impossible assertion)

2. the plausible (it is consistent with what we know, but it could still be false)

3. the probable (it is most likely true)

4. the proven

5. the impossible

Theism is affirmation of at least the probability of a higher power existing.

Atheism is a denial of at least the plausibility of a Higher Power.

Agnosticism says it is possible or even plausible that there is a higher power but denies it is anything more than plausible and is still unknown.

At least that was the use of the terms when I took college Critical Thinking about 40 years ago.

 

[Montrovant]

If theism is a belief in the existence of god or gods, then atheism certainly can be defined as not believing in the existence of god or gods. Many people may see atheism as a denial of the existence of any god rather than a lack of belief in any god, but that doesn't make it the only valid definition of the word.

I agree that the process used to come to the 25% number does seem like a stretch.

This is not a binary choice, but a trinary choice, as are most questions of belief. The possibilities are in general;

1. I agree/endorse/believe/affirm

2. I deny/disagree/reject/contradict

3. I am undecided/will neither affirm nor deny/ admit to possibility but not to probability.


If we look at the matter of the possible, etc, we have

1. the possible (not impossible assertion)

2. the plausible (it is consistent with what we know, but it could still be false)

3. the probable (it is most likely true)

4. the proven

5. the impossible

Theism is affirmation of at least the probability of a higher power existing.

Atheism is a denial of at least the plausibility of a Higher Power.

Agnosticism says it is possible or even plausible that there is a higher power but denies it is anything more than plausible and is still unknown.

At least that was the use of the terms when I took college Critical Thinking about 40 years ago.

I don't think that is a fair definition of agnosticism. In this context agnostic, from just about every source I've come across, is a person who considers god or a first cause unknowable. Agnosticism is about knowledge. Theism/atheism are about belief.

Of course, agnostic has come to be seen as also being about belief through common usage; nowadays the terms are often seen as meaning belief in god (theist), belief there is no god or lack of belief in god (atheist), and uncertain (agnostic).

I've seen it argued that atheist is actually an older word than theist; that atheist was drawn from ancient Greek rather than simply the addition of an a- prefix to theist, and that originally it meant without god or godless, and was at times used to describe those who had a different faith.

I'm not sure where your scale of belief and theism/atheism comes from. However, based on what you wrote, it would seem that theists are willing to admit the possibility there is no god, while atheists are willing to admit the possibility there is a god.

Atheism and agnosticism are often used with different meanings, I think it's usually good to agree on the usages in these kinds of discussions.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Matthew is a very intelligent person, I think, but not too wise

I know a lot of people like that. Intelligence and common sense are not always qualities possessed together.

 

[skye]

So

If Americans don't believe in God

What do they believe in

******* Satan?

 

[skye]

I believe in GOD
Always have and will

 

[skye]

Americans believe in GOD

 

[Montrovant]

So

If Americans don't believe in God

What do they believe in

******* Satan?

No one said "Americans don't believe in God." The article linked in the OP estimated that 25% of Americans don't believe in a god. As to what they believe in when it comes to religion, presumably either nothing or some sort of spiritual belief that does not involve any god.

 

[JimBowie1958]

If theism is a belief in the existence of god or gods, then atheism certainly can be defined as not believing in the existence of god or gods. Many people may see atheism as a denial of the existence of any god rather than a lack of belief in any god, but that doesn't make it the only valid definition of the word.

I agree that the process used to come to the 25% number does seem like a stretch.

This is not a binary choice, but a trinary choice, as are most questions of belief. The possibilities are in general;

1. I agree/endorse/believe/affirm

2. I deny/disagree/reject/contradict

3. I am undecided/will neither affirm nor deny/ admit to possibility but not to probability.


If we look at the matter of the possible, etc, we have

1. the possible (not impossible assertion)

2. the plausible (it is consistent with what we know, but it could still be false)

3. the probable (it is most likely true)

4. the proven

5. the impossible

Theism is affirmation of at least the probability of a higher power existing.

Atheism is a denial of at least the plausibility of a Higher Power.

Agnosticism says it is possible or even plausible that there is a higher power but denies it is anything more than plausible and is still unknown.

At least that was the use of the terms when I took college Critical Thinking about 40 years ago.

I don't think that is a fair definition of agnosticism. In this context agnostic, from just about every source I've come across, is a person who considers god or a first cause unknowable. Agnosticism is about knowledge. Theism/atheism are about belief.

Of course, agnostic has come to be seen as also being about belief through common usage; nowadays the terms are often seen as meaning belief in god (theist), belief there is no god or lack of belief in god (atheist), and uncertain (agnostic).

I've seen it argued that atheist is actually an older word than theist; that atheist was drawn from ancient Greek rather than simply the addition of an a- prefix to theist, and that originally it meant without god or godless, and was at times used to describe those who had a different faith.

I'm not sure where your scale of belief and theism/atheism comes from. However, based on what you wrote, it would seem that theists are willing to admit the possibility there is no god, while atheists are willing to admit the possibility there is a god.

Atheism and agnosticism are often used with different meanings, I think it's usually good to agree on the usages in these kinds of discussions.

Well, I think that the group of theists includes those who think it possible that there is no God, though I think it also includes those who think that is not possible that there is no God. And the inverse is true for atheists.

I personally think that it is most probable that it is impossible that there is not a Creator. If I understand my basic facts correctly, always a big iff for the honest person, there simply MUST be a Creator of Space and Time as these two things must have a beginning and sentience cannot have come from nothing either. These three things point to an Eternal Being that gave it all a start eons ago, the Ancient of Days.

 

[Montrovant]

If theism is a belief in the existence of god or gods, then atheism certainly can be defined as not believing in the existence of god or gods. Many people may see atheism as a denial of the existence of any god rather than a lack of belief in any god, but that doesn't make it the only valid definition of the word.

I agree that the process used to come to the 25% number does seem like a stretch.

This is not a binary choice, but a trinary choice, as are most questions of belief. The possibilities are in general;

1. I agree/endorse/believe/affirm

2. I deny/disagree/reject/contradict

3. I am undecided/will neither affirm nor deny/ admit to possibility but not to probability.


If we look at the matter of the possible, etc, we have

1. the possible (not impossible assertion)

2. the plausible (it is consistent with what we know, but it could still be false)

3. the probable (it is most likely true)

4. the proven

5. the impossible

Theism is affirmation of at least the probability of a higher power existing.

Atheism is a denial of at least the plausibility of a Higher Power.

Agnosticism says it is possible or even plausible that there is a higher power but denies it is anything more than plausible and is still unknown.

At least that was the use of the terms when I took college Critical Thinking about 40 years ago.

I don't think that is a fair definition of agnosticism. In this context agnostic, from just about every source I've come across, is a person who considers god or a first cause unknowable. Agnosticism is about knowledge. Theism/atheism are about belief.

Of course, agnostic has come to be seen as also being about belief through common usage; nowadays the terms are often seen as meaning belief in god (theist), belief there is no god or lack of belief in god (atheist), and uncertain (agnostic).

I've seen it argued that atheist is actually an older word than theist; that atheist was drawn from ancient Greek rather than simply the addition of an a- prefix to theist, and that originally it meant without god or godless, and was at times used to describe those who had a different faith.

I'm not sure where your scale of belief and theism/atheism comes from. However, based on what you wrote, it would seem that theists are willing to admit the possibility there is no god, while atheists are willing to admit the possibility there is a god.

Atheism and agnosticism are often used with different meanings, I think it's usually good to agree on the usages in these kinds of discussions.

Well, I think that the group of theists includes those who think it possible that there is no God, though I think it also includes those who think that is not possible that there is no God. And the inverse is true for atheists.

I personally think that it is most probable that it is impossible that there is not a Creator. If I understand my basic facts correctly, always a big iff for the honest person, there simply MUST be a Creator of Space and Time as these two things must have a beginning and sentience cannot have come from nothing either. These three things point to an Eternal Being that gave it all a start eons ago, the Ancient of Days.

I disagree; I think we simply do not know how the universe, or reality, began.....assuming there was a beginning. Maybe some sort of intelligence created things, but then that leads to the question of whether the creator must have a creator, in an endless chain which once again leaves us not knowing. There are so many things that humanity does not know or understand, many more that I as an individual do not know or understand, so that I find it impossible to believe I do know.

I understand why someone would believe that the universe requires a creator. I have problems understanding how people believe they understand the nature of that creator, or even believe that it must be a single creator.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

I disagree; I think we simply do not know how the universe, or reality, began.....assuming there was a beginning. Maybe some sort of intelligence created things, but then that leads to the question of whether the creator must have a creator, in an endless chain which once again leaves us not knowing. There are so many things that humanity does not know or understand, many more that I as an individual do not know or understand, so that I find it impossible to believe I do know.

I understand why someone would believe that the universe requires a creator. I have problems understanding how people believe they understand the nature of that creator, or even believe that it must be a single creator.

It's not possible for you to KNOW if He hasn't revealed Himself to you. He will not reveal Himself to those who don't honestly SEEK Him. Those who have had that experience know exactly what I'm talking about. If you haven't made a COMMITMENT to FOLLOW Him, as you understand Him, He will always be out of your reach.

Man cuts himself off from the Creator. He hasn't abandoned you.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I disagree; I think we simply do not know how the universe, or reality, began.....assuming there was a beginning. Maybe some sort of intelligence created things, but then that leads to the question of whether the creator must have a creator, in an endless chain which once again leaves us not knowing. There are so many things that humanity does not know or understand, many more that I as an individual do not know or understand, so that I find it impossible to believe I do know.

The Creator of Time by definition does not have a Creator as He is timeless, thus there is no before.

And time Must have a beginning due to the Infinite Regression Fallacy, which states that there cannot be an infinite series of causal events for any event. The Present could not exist if there was an infinite regression of time, but it does therefore we know time is not of infinite duration into the past.

I understand why someone would believe that the universe requires a creator. I have problems understanding how people believe they understand the nature of that creator, or even believe that it must be a single creator.

Well, I dont think that one can know very much about the Creator without Revelation. But I also believe for many reasons that the judeo-Christian tradition of faith has been a receptacle of that revelation.

 

[Snouter]

Read up on the jewish bible and the new testament. Yahweh and Jesus were not ever "gods." So to answer the question about believing the ridiculousness of the jewish gods of the Old and New Testament, of course not.

Is there so supernatural something that created everything intentionally, maybe. Definitely not the deities in the jewish bible though.

 

[sealybobo]

Shame.

-Geaux
------------

After signing an executive order earlier this month that seeks to relax restrictions on the political activities of tax-exempt churches, President Trump said the order was an important affirmation of the American identity. “We’re a nation of believers,” he said. Trump is right in one sense — 69 percent of Americans say a belief in God is an important part of being American — but he’s wrong demographically: Atheists constitute a culturally significant part of American society.

We’re not sure how significant, though. The number of atheists in the U.S. is still a matter of considerable debate. Recent surveys have found that only about one in 10 Americans report that they do not believe in God, and only about 3 percent identify as atheist. But a new study suggests that the true number of atheists could be much larger, perhaps even 10 times larger than previously estimated.

Way More Americans May Be Atheists Than We Thought

If they can convince you a virgin birth happened it's easy to convince you Iraq had a.WMDs or that global warming isn't real

 

[Montrovant]

I disagree; I think we simply do not know how the universe, or reality, began.....assuming there was a beginning. Maybe some sort of intelligence created things, but then that leads to the question of whether the creator must have a creator, in an endless chain which once again leaves us not knowing. There are so many things that humanity does not know or understand, many more that I as an individual do not know or understand, so that I find it impossible to believe I do know.

I understand why someone would believe that the universe requires a creator. I have problems understanding how people believe they understand the nature of that creator, or even believe that it must be a single creator.

It's not possible for you to KNOW if He hasn't revealed Himself to you. He will not reveal Himself to those who don't honestly SEEK Him. Those who have had that experience know exactly what I'm talking about. If you haven't made a COMMITMENT to FOLLOW Him, as you understand Him, He will always be out of your reach.

Man cuts himself off from the Creator. He hasn't abandoned you.

Rather than go any further afield than we already are, I'll just say that we disagree about the nature of revelations.

I can accept the possibility that there are more non-believers than are usually seen in polls; disbelief can still be stigmatized, although certainly not nearly so much as in decades past. I didn't find the study from the OP article convincing, however; the methodology seems flawed in my eyes.

 

[Geaux4it]

Shame.

-Geaux
------------

After signing an executive order earlier this month that seeks to relax restrictions on the political activities of tax-exempt churches, President Trump said the order was an important affirmation of the American identity. “We’re a nation of believers,” he said. Trump is right in one sense — 69 percent of Americans say a belief in God is an important part of being American — but he’s wrong demographically: Atheists constitute a culturally significant part of American society.

We’re not sure how significant, though. The number of atheists in the U.S. is still a matter of considerable debate. Recent surveys have found that only about one in 10 Americans report that they do not believe in God, and only about 3 percent identify as atheist. But a new study suggests that the true number of atheists could be much larger, perhaps even 10 times larger than previously estimated.

Way More Americans May Be Atheists Than We Thought

If they can convince you a virgin birth happened it's easy to convince you Iraq had a.WMDs or that global warming isn't real

Well sane people know Global Warming is a Red Herring

-Geaux

 

[Carl in Michigan]

If they can convince you a virgin birth happened it's easy to convince you Iraq had a.WMDs or that global warming isn't real

Iraq Had WMDs After All
Until now, I have been willing to go along with the conventional wisdom that Iraq did not possess significant stockpiles of WMDs prior to the 2003 war. Leftover chemical munitions were discovered here and there during and after the invasion, but it was plausible to think that they were odds and ends, not part of a usable stockpile subject to the regime’s control.

Today, however, the New York Times dropped a bombshell: in the aftermath of the Iraq war, the CIA purchased from an unidentified intermediary no fewer than 400 Borak warheads filled with sarin, a deadly nerve gas:

The analysis of sarin samples from 2005 found that the purity level reached 13 percent — higher than expected given the relatively low quality and instability of Iraq’s sarin production in the 1980s, officials said. Samples from Boraks recovered in 2004 had contained concentrations no higher than 4 percent.

The new data became grounds for concern. “Borak rockets will be more hazardous than previously assessed,” one internal report noted. It added a warning: the use of a Borak in an improvised bomb “could effectively disperse the sarin nerve agent.”

 

[usmbguest5318]

In 2013, according to Public Policy Polling, 43% of Americans believed in Santa Claus.

Even scarier than that is that 7% of Americans don't actually know whether they do or do not believe in Santa Claus. That's about 22.4M Americans who don't have a f*cking clue of what's in their own minds. I guess they're waiting for someone to tell them what they believe.

Today, apparently, fewer people believe in Santa, but a greater quantity of people don't know what the hell they believe about Santa.