History of Atheism

On what EvilBible.com’s author refers to as the “few morons”
who are “so damn stupid” for defining atheism as “lack of…”

In considering the contents of evilbible.com, Atheism is Dead has previously posted on rape and the Bible.

With regards to the history of atheism, particularly the definition of the term “atheism” and “atheist” evilbible.com’s author has something to say to those atheists who follow the public relations definition of atheism as “lack of belief” or “lack of belief in god(s).” Evilbible.com’s author seeks to correct those in what is perceived to be the folly of you “few morons” who are “so damn stupid.”

Indeed, one issue is that the history of atheism alerts us to when and how atheism’s various sects came to be. There are even certain sects that seek to excommunicate others and there are those who demand a one world definition of atheism and even one atheist symbol or atheism symbol.

For instance, American Atheist’s webmaster authoritatively declares,

“Atheists are NOT ‘secular humanists’, ‘freethinkers’, ‘rationalists’ or ‘ethical culturalists’…Often, people who are Atheists find it useful to masquerade behind such labels.”[1]

It appears that Dan Barker’s The Freedom From Religion Foundation is, at least in this case, more tolerant, in stating,

“Freethinkers include atheists, agnostics and rationalists.”[2]

The American Atheists have attempted to promulgate “An international symbol for Atheism.”

While the Atheist Alliance International attempted an “international symbol of freethought.”

The history of atheism is riddled with conflicts about just what is “atheism” as a concept and a word and thus, what is an “atheist.” In this case, evilbible.com’s author wrote an introductory page on the subject that is entitled, “On the Definition of the Words Atheism and Atheist.”

Evilbible.com’s author claims that the “lack of” “definition would include babies, agnostics, and people who have not come to a conclusion about the existence of gods.” Then the following are included in the list of the “few morons” who are “so damn stupid” as to define atheism as “lack of…”: infidels.org, atheism.about.com, alabamaatheist.org and en.wikipedia.org. Moreover, it is claimed that some such atheists have “used lies and distortions…and some have made extremely ignorant and grossly incorrect statements.”

Evilbible.com’s author writes:

A “lack of belief” definition is a bad definition for many reasons. It is not commonly used. It is not defined that way in any reputable dictionary. It is too broad because most agnostics and babies don’t consider themselves atheists. And it makes no sense for an “-ism” to be a based on a lack of belief.

These atheists are usually motivated to redefine the word “atheist” because they want to enlarge the definition of “atheist” to include as many people as possible, or because they perceive it to be an advantage in debates with theists. Unfortunately, some of these people have used lies and distortions to support their opinions, and some have made extremely ignorant and grossly incorrect statements that may reflect badly on all atheists.

In considering the history of atheism three groups are categorized:

Group A believes that gods do not exist (atheists).
Group B neither believes that at least one god exists nor do they believe that gods do not exist. This would include agnostics, babies, and the undecided.
Group C believes that at least one god exists (theists).

The question being “whether the people in group B are considered atheists or not.” Note that while “Many of the people who are pushing a ‘lack of belief’ definition call group A ‘strong atheists’ and call group B ‘weak atheists’” positiveatheism.org itself employs that “lack of” definition (read about them here and here).

As it pertains to the history of atheism; ever since circa 1876 AD when Charles Bradlaugh defined “atheism” as “lack of…” the atheists who adhere to that definition became a sect of atheism that is really agnostic but do not know it, or do not realize it, or do not admit it, or who knows what.

Yet, at least the modern history of atheism goes back a bit further as we note that the very reason that Thomas Henry Huxley coined the term “agnostic” [3] in 1869 AD was that he noted two extremes:

1) Theists positively affirmed God’s existence (claimed to know that God exists).
2) Atheist positively affirmed God’s non-existence (claimed to know that God did not exist).

Therefore, Thomas Huxley concluded that he did not posses enough evidence to positively affirm either position. Thus, he coined term the term “agnostic” (from Greek or “ignorant” from Latin) which he considered to be a middle position which was that of lacking knowledge to go either way, to either extreme.

Vox Day has provided a, shall we say, unique differentiation between “agnostic” and “atheist”:

…the following pair of definitions have proven to be useful in distinguishing between the High Church atheist and the agnostic.

Agnostic: I don’t believe there is a God. Because I haven’t seen the evidence.
Atheist: There is no God. Because I’m an ***hole.[4] [expletive censored

Now, consider the words of Wired Magazine’s Gary Wolf who included himself in the following description,

we lax agnostics, we noncommittal nonbelievers, we vague deists who would be embarrassed to defend antique absurdities like the Virgin Birth or the notion that Mary rose into heaven without dying, or any other blatant myth.

Gary Wolf wrote:

At dinner parties or over drinks, I ask people to declare themselves. “Who here is an atheist?” I ask.
Usually, the first response is silence, accompanied by glances all around in the hope that somebody else will speak first. Then, after a moment, somebody does, almost always a man, almost always with a defiant smile and a tone of enthusiasm. He says happily, “I am!”
But it is the next comment that is telling. Somebody turns to him and says: “You would be.”
“Why?”
“Because you enjoy pissing people off.”
“Well, that’s true.”
This type of conversation takes place not in central Ohio, where I was born, or in Utah, where I was a teenager, but on the West Coast, among technical and scientific people, possibly the social group that is least likely among all Americans to be religious.[5]

Now, I know very well that evilbible.com’s e-address will be flooded by atheists attempting to both correct the error of rejecting the preferred definition de jour “lack of…” and also giving them what'fer for referring to the “lack of…” sect as the “few morons” who are “so damn stupid” who have “used lies and distortions…and some have made extremely ignorant and grossly incorrect statements.”

For that matter Gary Wolf’s e-address will be flooded by atheist who are pissed off at being told that they “enjoy pissing people off.”

Let me know how it goes, would you?

[1] THE WEBMASTER, Atheism — What It Is, and What It Isn’t, American Atheists
[2] What Is A Freethinker? Freedom From Religion Foundation, Inc.
[3] Britannica Online Encyclopedia entry for “agnosticism.”[4] Vox Day, The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens (Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc., 2008), p. 17
[5] Gary Wolf, “The Church of the Non-Believers,” Wired Magazine, (found here and here)