a theist

someone who believes in a deity. not to be confused with an atheist.
bob: look! there’s jeff, he’s a theist.

bill: jeff’s not an atheist, he believes in god!
there are two in-use definitions of the word ‘atheist’:

1.) a person who lacks belief in a god or gods. people who use this definition categorize atheists as either negative (or implicit or weak) atheists or positive (or explicit or strong) atheists. negative atheists, while they don’t believe in a god, do not positively -ssert that no gods exist. positive atheists, however, do.

2.) a person who believes that no god or gods exist.

those who consider themselves atheists (who are usually positive atheists) tend to define ‘atheist’ using the former definition, and those who believe in a god or gods tend to define ‘atheist’ using the latter. in both cases, this seems to be a demagogic practice intended to cl-ssify either as many or as few people as atheists as possible. negative atheists are usually referred to as agnostics.

while neither definition of atheism entails any personality traits of atheists or of those who do believe in a god or gods (sometimes referred to as ‘theists’), both atheists and theists tend to believe that certain traits apply to all atheists/theists. common myths about atheists include: all atheists are arrogant, immoral, rebellious, and/or intolerant; all atheists really believe in (the christian) god and are simply in denial; all atheists are depressed and believe life is meaningless. common myths about theists include: all theists are naive and/or intolerant; all theists don’t really believe in their god(s) and just pretend to because they’re afraid that if people realised that no god exists, there will be complete chaos; all theists are weak and look to their god(s) for comfort. it hardly needs to be said that while these myths apply to a select few individuals in each group, the claim that they apply to every atheist or every theist is false.

negative atheists justify their lack of belief in god(s) by pointing out that no evidence exists for the existence of god(s), and justify their lack of disbelief by pointing out that no evidence exists for the nonexistence thereof. positive atheists often -ssert that while no evidence for god(s) exists, it should be by default -ssumed that they do not, until evidence is found. some also try to use logic to prove that god does not exist, but this is often attached by theists and weak atheists as being mere wordplay. some theists and weak atheists also -ssert that logic is superficial and meaningless (which is an easily refutable claim), and that only one’s inner feelings can lead them to truth. some positive atheists (and deists), however, are led to their stance through their feelings. some feel that because the world is filled with evil and malice, and all-loving, benevolent god cannot exist. those who are led to their stance through this feeling, however, cannot justify their disbelief in a malevolent god in the same way. some reject the idea of the christian god because the bible states that non-christians are condemned to h-ll, and reject the idea as being too disturbing. while the same argument can also be made against the gods of various other religions, including islam and zoroastrianism, it cannot be made against every god (in judaism, for example, h-ll does not exist).
“do you believe in god?”
“no, i don’t.”
“then you’re an atheist?”
“i suppose. i don’t believe god doesn’t exist, so i could probably be called an agnostic instead. some atheists may consider me a ‘negative atheist’, though.”
“don’t you think atheists.. er, would i call them ‘positive atheists’? don’t you think they’re intolerant?”
“yes, you’d call them ‘positive atheists’, and no, i wouldn’t say they’re all intolerant. while some may come off as arrogant, they’re just unable to understand how you can believe in god; you probably come off as arrogant to them, also, because you’re unable to understand how they can disbelieve in god. people on both sides really need to make an effort to be more tolerant, and to discuss their stance on religion without using childish, immature insults.”
atheists: people who lack belief in a god or gods. from the greek: ‘atheos’ a+theos “without god” or godless.
“those people are atheists, they lack belief in a god or gods”
okay, little kids. atheists are not bigots, racists or satanists.
atheists don’t believe in god, or satan.
true atheists are not -ssholes who run around saying defend atheism. it’s not a religion. i’m atheist and i don’t go around doing it.
infact i’m completely embarressed about arrogant people running amiss saying stuff like that.
anyways, atheists are normal people, who just don’t believe in god, or satan.
they aren’t demon-possessed.

and with the whole suing people for saying god in cl-ss, that is a little rediculous.

but if you’re christian, would you want someone going ‘there is no god’ in the middle of your cl-ss? i think not.

they’re normal people who are tolerant of any religion unless it’s being shoved down their throat.

i mean i don’t think any religion tolerates that.

so please, stop saying we are satanists, demon-possessed, stupid, bigots, and racists.

do you want me calling you stupid for believing in a supreme being? i think not, and i don’t think you’re stupid for that, anyways.

but please stop.

we’re just people who don’t believe in god, or satan.
we are not satanists. we are atheists.
a person who believes that there is no god. a person who rejects the validity of religion as a concept and generally has more faith in science and logic.
no, i don’t go to church; i’m an atheist.
a person who believes in the absence of any supreme being or anything regarding the supernatural…there are 2 kinds

good atheist: a person who has read and studied thoroughly the concepts of science and religion. he/she has come to the conclusion that there is no supreme being and therefore does not believe in any god or gods. in spite of this however they are open to the concept and enjoy having mature, intellectual debates on the issue without being critical or condescending.

bad athiest: a self-involved, egotistical jack-ss who does not believe in a supreme being not because what they have read or studied but usually because they hate religion or religious people. they usually go out of there way to make religious people feel bad and accuse them of being close-minded while they, themselves, will not listen to any other arguments but there own. they are impossible to try to reason with because they are usually self-centered, condescending,unscientific, and downright immature. their arguments are usually full of anti-religious cliches and therefore easy to break apart.
religious person: i believe in god
good atheist: really? that’s interesting. i don’t personally but i’d love to sit down with you and discuss the issue sometime

religious person: i belive in god
bad atheist: what!!!?!? you belive in god?….hahahahaha i don’t believe in god i have absolute faith in science because it’s completley accurate and irrefutable
someone believing in no religion and or afterlife.
because susie was an atheist, she was not bothered by the other students chanting “go to h-ll susie! go to h-ll!”