In a message dated May 21, 1998 No Magic 1 writes:

Not exactly. Atheism = ABSENCE OF GOD-BELIEF.

Atheism in general makes NO claims.

Brief survey of Greek roots: (for the fiftieth time!!)

A = without, lack of, absence, non-

Theos = ‘god’ (an illegitimate concept)

‘ism’ = suffix meaning ‘doctrine’ ‘theory’ ‘cult’ ‘system of belief’ ‘belief’

‘THE-ISM’ = god-belief

‘A-THE-ISM’ = absence of god-belief

The two concepts are jointly exhaustive. Either one HAS a god-belief, or one does NOT have a god-belief. There is no ‘in-between’.

The atheist has NO god-belief, regardless of the reason why this may be. All humans are born ATHEIST: human infants are born without a priori knowledge; i.e., WITHOUT ANY KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE WORLD WHATSOEVER. Therefore, it would be impossible to argue that a child is born with a god-belief, since god-belief presupposes familiarity (i.e., knowledge) of god-belief claims. Hence, I was born atheist. In this very sense, and precisely because of this principle, atheism is correctly termed a default position in discussions regarding god-beliefs. It is up to the THEIST (i.e., the one positing god-belief claims - such as Christians) to argue FOR their god-belief claims. (Remember the onus of proof rule that is so often overlooked???)

I know that some will have a hard time accepting this fact, and we will see more contortions and acrobatics on the definitions by theists. This particular form of intellectual squirming is a consequence of the theist’s reluctance and inability to argue FOR his god-belief claims. Instead, the average theist, while rejecting the legitimate concept atheism (i.e., context-dropping) as I inform above, builds a straw man by in fact re-defining the term to suit his subjective goals.

I don’t think we’ll ever see an end to this ruse among the religionists, however. In fact, I would wager that many will try to twist the words of this very post to the service of their agenda.

Tindrbox

_________________________________