NationStates Jolt Archive

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?

Because god and I disagreed on whether I should have a working pancreas.

He said no, I said I should.

Fucker.

I then discovered that human beings could be moral without religion, heck some times even more moral, and so god was confined to the waste paper bin once and for all.

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?
I am sure you will find people that use all thoes reasons (and I am agnostic but I know the atheist viewpoint) most are softcore athiests

It is simple ... you dont ASSUME something like a god (specialy if it is part of an organized religion which can effect your whole life)

Some of us started with issues with the organization (me) which lead me to question the information they were feeding me

And some of us just did not like what the religion was trying to teach ... we prefer free thinking (somethine not encouraged by many of the religions)

The structure, the hierarchy and the hypocrisy drove me away from the Catholic Church but since I really don't give a damn (no pun intended) about whether or not there's a "God" I didn't side with any Christian denomination.

After a relative died and everyone said "It's God's will", I just couldn't take people. Good things get attributed to God but bad things are our fault?

I'll avoid going on a rant, the end result is that I believe in myself. I try to learn as much as I can about everything, I try to better myself, to do right by those who I care about, so that when I die I'll have no angst about whether or not I'm going to heaven.

Besides, being a member of the Conservative Party of Canada, and formerly of the Canadian Alliance, I know I'm going to hell anyways ;)

I then discovered that human beings could be moral without religion, heck some times even more moral, and so god was confined to the waste paper bin once and for all.
That did it for me. And the realisation that there is no evidence for God, and that saying "ou can't prove the non-existence of a god" doesn't cut it at all.

There is no reason to believe. So I don't.

Oh, and religious thought is distateful as it often becomes an excuse to be a jerk and promote discrimination of others.

I never felt the presence of God.

Read the Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey - not the reason why I don't believe in god but it summerises my arguements quite nicely.

Read the Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey - not the reason why I don't believe in god but it summerises my arguements quite nicely.
hahah, sounds like a thumping good read.

Oh, and religious thought is distateful when it becomes an excuse to be a jerk and promote discrimination of others.

I don't think i have seen any religion that promotes or allows discrimination of others. People just misinterprate.

I don't think i have seen any religion that promotes or allows discrimination of others. People just misinterprate.

The Abrahamic ones are great examples of discriminatory religions and also often seem to spawn discrimination.

I don't think i have seen any religion that promotes or allows discrimination of others. People just misinterprate.
He dident say it promoted it anywhere ... he said it was distastefull when used as an excuse

And yes there are
Ever hear of gay marrige?

The Satanic Bible is funny. It has some good points, but mostly I couldn't keep myself from laughing when I read it. Especially the ceremonial hubbub. ;)

Anyway, I think religion is just a tool to control the masses, aside from being just plain unbelievable.

I don't think i have seen any religion that promotes or allows discrimination of others. People just misinterprate.

Most religions declare that they are the one and true religion. This automatically leads to a distinction between believers and non-believers, and the belief that the believers are better. This is discrimination.

Aside from that the positions of males and females are made very clear in most religions. One can argue that taking care of the children is not in any way less than providing the food for the family - but it does say that women are not supposed to fill the other function. This too is discrimination.

Then there are homosexuals. Lets not start that.

However, discrimination based on race does not seem to be endorsed.

Most religions declare that they are the one and true religion. This automatically leads to a distinction between believers and non-believers, and the belief that the believers are better. This is discrimination.

Aside from that the positions of males and females are made very clear in most religions. One can argue that taking care of the children is not in any way less than providing the food for the family - but it does say that women are not supposed to fill the other function. This too is discrimination.

Then there are homosexuals. Lets not start that.

However, discrimination based on race does not seem to be endorsed.

Well it dint help for example that for roughly 1900 years jesus was excusavly drawn as white.

Well it dint help for example that for roughly 1900 years jesus was excusavly drawn as white.

True. But the Bible does not claim he is. Nor does it say Adam and Eve were not black.

True. But the Bible does not claim he is. Nor does it say Adam and Eve were not black.
But the relgion that evolved around the early chruch, made it quite clear jesus was white.

saying otherwise was not a wise stratery untill about 100 years ago, and still.

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?


1) there is no reason to believe that a supernatural power exists.

2) there is no evidence that a supernatural power exists

3) there is a great deal of evidence saying that things do not happen the way the religions say they do

4) the religions themselves cannot agree on the supernatural power itself, and if they don't even know what the hell they believe, why should i believe it?

I believe in the morals of the christian faith and religion a itprovides a social structure for all.

HOWEVER, i do not believe in the existence of god because of the adage, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

It is well known that a good way to control and provide hope for a population in need was to glorify death and give them something to belive in, this is what religion was invented for, for nations in need during the many wars in Europe from really, 1066AD and through the medieval period into the tudors, stewarts and victorian/georgian times. As people became more clever and got more civil liberties in the C20th, they were able to make up thier own minds on god, which was NEVER allowed in the previous millenior (sorry spelling?!) even as if you did you would be condemened for blasphemy by the church...control!!!

i think it is good that nowadays people can decide if they want to believe in god, we should celebrate that certainly 100 years ago in Britain this would not be possible. I chose to be atheist, however i can see that other people hold different views on religion, which are obviously wrong :rolleyes: lol!

I hope this offers some insight into my beliefs

Graham Harvey
17, UK

*snip*

Read aboot Rule Utilitrainism, its in On liberty by John stuwart mill.

That has some very clear non relgious morals.

Well it dint help for example that for roughly 1900 years jesus was excusavly drawn as white.
That's not true at all. The current image of Jesus is from a medieval German saint.

And being in church all my life, I've seen two major reasons for disillusionment.
1. Hypocracy, bickering, and abuse of the bible from leaders/members of the church. Look at some of the famous people that are so bitter about the Catholic Church. (George Carlin, Alanis Morisette, pretty much the entire cast of Dogma)
2. Doing something you know you're not supposed to be doing, according to your own beliefs, so you drop the beliefs. I mean, what do you say about that? You try to justify, that doesn't ease the guilt, so you walk away entirely.

As for born and bred atheists...I don't know. Never met one that didn't have a sad story to tell.

You know, this morale thing has been around a lilttle longer than Christian faith...

*snip*

Find me a picture of jesus from before 1900, in which he is not white.

I think you'll find anyone who would have drawn of said jesus was other wise probally would have been tried with heracy.

I've heard no mention of the reconciliation of the idea of hell here...

IE, if you were raised a christian and now are not (and do not believe in Jesus, the key in Christianity per Romans 10:9, John 3:16, etc.)... and having been taught that non-believers are assigned to hell by God... I would imagine that'd be tough to deal with.

The existence of a god is not necessary to explain life and the universe. In fact it can be a barrier since you can always say "that's the way god wants it" instead of looking for a real answer.

HOWEVER, i do not believe in the existence of god because of the adage, if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
You think that spending an eternity in the pits of hades if you don't agree with proposed Deity sounds good? Bring on the sulphur power showers!! Lynx Inferno shower gel.. hmm.. that burning sensation

Lol fair point schnappslant, a fatal flaw in my argument no less!

well done!

But at the same time, i don't belive in christianity and hell is a christian belief and thus don't believe hell exists and nor does heaven

Graham

Find me a picture of jesus from before 1900, in which he is not white.

You can find a lot on American churches. Sincretism between Catholicism and the native religions meant that native artists often represented Jesus as a native too, and often carrying the suffering of the natives, above and beyond those described in the Bible.

There's a very interesting church in Mexico City, not too far from the Cathedral that has a lot of pieces like this. Also, San Juan Chamula in Chiapas is a perfect and sometimes disturbing example of sincretism. Not only Jesus, but the Virgin and most others are given brown skins and American features.

Its amazing how I know the basic gist of every post in this topic without looking at it.
I bet I could make a mint predicting what the next post of religion-debate topics would be.

Generaly 'debates' on NS are basicaly excuse-fests for people who really have no idea whatsoever as to WHY they feel the way they do about what they feel.
Most of the 'why I became an Atheist' arguements run along the lines of:
"I decided to be an Atheist because I dont like God." or "because God did something bad." or "Religion is stupid and/or evil."
And the ever favorite (At least in this topic):
"OMG JEZUS WAZ T3H WHI7E! IZ 3VUL!"

Which is not to say that I dont respect Atheists with clear reasons as to why they are Atheists. I just dont like the ones who run screaming into the 'post topic' section and declare that religion is dead, join us now before the rush, and so forth.
End Rant. (insert appropriate Emoticon)

Find me a picture of jesus from before 1900, in which he is not white.

I think you'll find anyone who would have drawn of said jesus was other wise probally would have been tried with heracy.
Tried by whom? I could search if you like, but you have to remember that the nation of Israel was semitic way back when. That means arab, not white. While the European/Roman cultures probably naturally changed him to white. Jesus would not have been white. Using the white devil argument is kind of pointless since it probably had nothing to do with that. Like the little black boy painting Jesus as black a few years back. It's a natural reaction and a pointless argument.

Lol fair point schnappslant, a fatal flaw in my argument no less!

well done!

But at the same time, i don't belive in christianity and hell is a christian belief and thus don't believe hell exists and nor does heaven

Graham
You make a fair point in return. All I can tell you is that they do exist. As does God. But hey.. you can lead a horse to water.. and you can kick it up the arse and dump it in the water with a crane.. but that's not really fair is it?

Its amazing how I know the basic gist of every post in this topic without looking at it.
I bet I could make a mint predicting what the next post of religion-debate topics would be.

Generaly 'debates' on NS are basicaly excuse-fests for people who really have no idea whatsoever as to WHY they feel the way they do about what they feel.
Most of the 'why I became an Atheist' arguements run along the lines of:
"I decided to be an Atheist because I dont like God." or "because God did something bad." or "Religion is stupid and/or evil."
And the ever favorite (At least in this topic):
"OMG JEZUS WAZ T3H WHI7E! IZ 3VUL!"

Which is not to say that I dont respect Atheists with clear reasons as to why they are Atheists. I just dont like the ones who run screaming into the 'post topic' section and declare that religion is dead, join us now before the rush, and so forth.
End Rant. (insert appropriate Emoticon)

So my reason for disbeliveing in god becuase he gave me a terminal illness is petty.

yeah shit i guess your right, my bad.

Find me a picture of jesus from before 1900, in which he is not white.

I think you'll find anyone who would have drawn of said jesus was other wise probally would have been tried with heracy.
Double post, but what the Hell, as it were...

Wow, you mean the European Roman-Catholic Church was RACIST in the Imperial/Dark-Middle/Rebirth periods?
This totaly shocks me, I mean, WOW, I never realized that people in Europe in this period would actually discriminate against Arabs, what with the Crusades and all.

Double post, but what the Hell, as it were...

Wow, you mean the European Roman-Catholic Church was RACIST in the Imperial/Dark-Middle/Rebirth periods?
This totaly shocks me, I mean, WOW, I never realized that people in Europe in this period would actually discriminate against Arabs, what with the Crusades and all.

I think you'll find the early protestant church was hardly a lot better. Its done allmost as much killing.

So my reason for disbeliveing in god becuase he gave me a terminal illness is petty.

yeah shit i guess your right, my bad.
Not petty, just rather silly.
If you read your post carefully, you should see why ;)

I think you'll find the early protestant church was hardly a lot better. Its done allmost as much killing.
Yes, but I generaly dont hold well with burning people now, aside from the marks on the carpet its against the law.

Its amazing how I know the basic gist of every post in this topic without looking at it.
I bet I could make a mint predicting what the next post of religion-debate topics would be.

Generaly 'debates' on NS are basicaly excuse-fests for people who really have no idea whatsoever as to WHY they feel the way they do about what they feel.
Most of the 'why I became an Atheist' arguements run along the lines of:
"I decided to be an Atheist because I dont like God." or "because God did something bad." or "Religion is stupid and/or evil."
And the ever favorite (At least in this topic):
"OMG JEZUS WAZ T3H WHI7E! IZ 3VUL!"

Which is not to say that I dont respect Atheists with clear reasons as to why they are Atheists. I just dont like the ones who run screaming into the 'post topic' section and declare that religion is dead, join us now before the rush, and so forth.
End Rant. (insert appropriate Emoticon)

Actually if you read the thread, most atheists gave reasons based on logic...

I've heard no mention of the reconciliation of the idea of hell here...

IE, if you were raised a christian and now are not (and do not believe in Jesus, the key in Christianity per Romans 10:9, John 3:16, etc.)... and having been taught that non-believers are assigned to hell by God... I would imagine that'd be tough to deal with.
How do you figure? If it's all bullshit, then why wouldnt' that part be bullshit too?

So my reason for disbeliveing in god becuase he gave me a terminal illness is petty.

yeah shit i guess your right, my bad.
So you disbelieve because your body was irreversibly and inexplicably altered from its natural state for no apparent reason. Nice one. You think that's just chance, huh?

What you mean is, you could feel (almost) righteously peeved with God.

Not petty, just rather silly.
If you read your post carefully, you should see why ;)

No really i dont see, i was trying to state that i dint belive why any other being higher or not had the right (assumming we take the classical all powerfull view of god) has the right to make me ill.

So what if hes my creator, would not a father who gave his son a disease be sent to prison.

(sorry if i fly off at you, you must realise you are really hitting a nerve.)

FYI

Everyone's talking about Jesus' color portrayal (surely thinking how *politically incorrect* it is...), but not one word has been said of his ethnicity:

Jesus was a Jew from the area that is now Israel (fact)

Jews are generally fair- or dark-complected white.

Go figure, then, how Jesus is portrayed as a white person...

FYI

Everyone's talking about Jesus' color portrayal (surely thinking how politically incorrect it is...), but not one word has been said of his ethnicity:

Jesus was a Jew (fact)

Jews are generally fair- or dark-complected white.

Go figure, then, how Jesus is portrayed as a white person...

That is becuse the jews, have become more 'white' since the dispersia (hate to say it like that) ill think youll find jesus would have been an arabic jew, not a mordern 'europeanised' jew.

God i hate to put it that way.

That did it for me. And the realisation that there is no evidence for God, and that saying "You can't prove the non-existence of a god" doesn't cut it at all.
Actually that sentence pretty much defines the difference between an atheist and an agnostic. An atheist absolutely believes there is no god taking that fact as an article of faith. The agnostic admits that they can't prove it one way or the other but doesn't really give a shit either way.

No really i dont see, i was trying to state that i dint belive why any other being higher or not had the right (assumming we take the classical all powerfull view of god) has the right to make me ill.

So what if hes my creator, would not a father who gave his son a disease be sent to prison.

(sorry if i fly off at you, you must realise you are really hitting a nerve.)
Its no problem, Ive been repeteadly told to 'go fuck myself with a chainsaw' in one topic on this forum.

As to the arguement, Ill point out Schnappslant's post.

There are many proofs that sugges tthe Divine command theory is at least shaky if not wholly implausible, thus it can be proved that God has no bearin gon morality, which i believe. I also have not had one shread of proof of god's existence and dont understand how, if he wanted to create humans, he didnt just do that, instead he set into work an entire million-year evolving chain of evolution with us as the end-result? and why oh why was he so malicious in the Old Testament, why has he stopped talking to human's. There are simply too many wholes in catholicism, which is the only religion i am able to speak about, and far too few proofs. The only decent proof for god's existence is based on a wager, Pascal's wager, and that my friends isnt enough.

FYI

Everyone's talking about Jesus' color portrayal (surely thinking how *politically incorrect* it is...), but not one word has been said of his ethnicity:

Jesus was a Jew from the area that is now Israel (fact)

Jews are generally fair- or dark-complected white.

Go figure, then, how Jesus is portrayed as a white person...
It's called majority rule, kind of the same principle as post-war history texts: the winner can write what it likes about the loser.

but more probably in this case it's just chance: the guy/lady who painted/drew the first image probably just assumed a caucasian ethnicity. When all's said and done, what he looked like doesn't really matter.

2. Doing something you know you're not supposed to be doing, according to your own beliefs, so you drop the beliefs. I mean, what do you say about that? You try to justify, that doesn't ease the guilt, so you walk away entirely.

3. Doing something you know your religion forbids, but you consider perfectly acceptable or even the right thing to do. Like considering homosexuals to be normal human beings. Or refusing to indoctrinate your children with religion until they are 16 years old.

For levity:

When Cameron was in Egypt land...
Let my Cameron go.

That is becuse the jews, have become more 'white' since the dispersia (hate to say it like that) ill think youll find jesus would have been an arabic jew, not a mordern 'europeanised' jew.

God i hate to put it that way.
Thank you, couldn't have said it better myself.

Actually that sentence pretty much defines the difference between an atheist and an agnostic. An atheist absolutely believes there is no god taking that fact as an article of faith. The agnostic admits that they can't prove it one way or the other but doesn't really give a shit either way.
Hear, Hear.

I've quit the debate except to interject on either side as I see fit. Go agnosticism!

I don't think i have seen any religion that promotes or allows discrimination of others. People just misinterprate.

Let' see, Christianity promted slavery, still promotes keeping women down (to some extent) and of course there is the ever present and rampant homophobia and denial of civil equality to homosexuals--something that should have nothing to do with religion.

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?

Originally I declaired myself an atheist because I refused to be lazy about it anymore. I was only a Christian in the same respect that if a cow was born in a tree, you'd call it a bird. My family hardly ever brought me to church, and I only ever felt anything IN church after I stopped believing their bullshit and actually connected with the message that they refused to promote.

Then I went through the angsty goth atheism years of my teenhood. What fun.

And now i've settled into my own religion. It isn't a religion per se, just a philosophy, somewhat akin o Buddhism and Taoism, but very dissimilar as well.

You seem to make an assumption in this post that there is only one God and that if you don't follow Him you are an Atheist. The feeling I get is a very smug, negative one, especially with the phrase "he just didn't do it for you". It seems your outlook on those non-Christian is very poor indeed.

Hear, Hear.

I've quit the debate except to interject on either side as I see fit. Go agnosticism!
and the agnostic mathematician believes that one cannot disprove the existence of anything.

..I'll catch those giant pink space-bunnies from Mars one day...

Actually that sentence pretty much defines the difference between an atheist and an agnostic. An atheist absolutely believes there is no god taking that fact as an article of faith. The agnostic admits that they can't prove it one way or the other but doesn't really give a shit either way.
That's what I meant... I think agnosticism is an untenable position, because if you acknowledge that the existence of a god is possible, even though there is NO evidence, surely you must acknowledge that ANY crackpot theory with no evidence to support it is possible?

I was just curious if we've actually heard from anyone who left a religion other than Christianity, since this was meant for all monotheistic ex-believers?

Anyway, on the racism in the Church concept, the Crusades were not really about racism so much as the desire to control the highly-profitable areas around the Holy Land. In reality, while Muslims were a rare sight in Europe, around the trade lanes they were just regular citizens, and as I understand it many of the people slaughtered by Christians in the First Crusade were fellow Christians

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?
I was raised Catholic. I firmly beleived in god. I did research into other religions to find out how to get closer to him. I prayed and meditated. In my search for god I stumbled upon Alt.atheist. I beleived that nobody in his right mind could be an atheist, but I looked at their arguments. Their arguments about the lack of evidence for the existance of god made more sense than I thought they would.

Now I'm an atheist because I realize that beleiving in a god without any evidence to support that beleif is no more reasonable than beleiving in dragons or leprechauns.

Let' see, Christianity promted slavery, still promotes keeping women down (to some extent) and of course there is the ever present and rampant homophobia and denial of civil equality to homosexuals--something that should have nothing to do with religion.
(re: homosexuality) But then that's a problem with your government and your country. Not with Christianity. As you well know. Christianity views things in a different light than short texan men who like to play golf when they should be working.

Why atheism? It is kind of funny that people assume that belief is an actual choice. For those of you who believe in god, could you just "choose" to no longer believe? Did you ever just decide one day that you would believe?

For me, it is not that I chose not to believe. It is just that the more I learn of the world, the more I see that there is no god in it. There is no evidence of his presence. He does not act. If he exists, he is so hands off that he is irrelevant.

I never suddenly came to a decision that I would not believe in god. I only realized at some point that I had stopped believing long before.

Maybe it is different for some. Maybe some really do make a conscious decision to believe or not to believe. As for myself, that is not how it was.

(re: homosexuality) But then that's a problem with your government and your country. Not with Christianity. As you well know. Christianity views things in a different light than short texan men who like to play golf when they should be working.

Perhaps it is just a problem in my country (though the Pope's standards also qualify as discrimination). However, it IS a problem and it IS a problem that stems from the Christian dogma of many, many people here. To say that no religion has ever promoted discrimination is like saying that the shine isn't yellow. It simply isn't true. All of the major Western religions have in fact promoted hatred and discrimination at some point and certain sects (in some cases the majority) of each of those religions STILL does so.

And its not just short Texan men. Look at people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and you quickly see that its not just Bush. It's the Christian right and their leaders.

That's what I meant... I think agnosticism is an untenable position, because if you acknowledge that the existence of a god is possible, even though there is NO evidence, surely you must acknowledge that ANY crackpot theory with no evidence to support it is possible?
Yes.

Anything is possible, that doesn't mean that everything is probable.

That's what I meant... I think agnosticism is an untenable position, because if you acknowledge that the existence of a god is possible, even though there is NO evidence, surely you must acknowledge that ANY crackpot theory with no evidence to support it is possible?
yep, because humans can't prove that there exists no evidence. For anything. Space-bunnies

Perhaps it is just a problem in my country (though the Pope's standards also qualify as discrimination). However, it IS a problem and it IS a problem that stems from the Christian dogma of many, many people here. To say that no religion has ever promoted discrimination is like saying that the shine isn't yellow. It simply isn't true. All of the major Western religions have in fact promoted hatred and discrimination at some point and certain sects (in some cases the majority) of each of those religions STILL does so.
It is very likely that it stems from Christian dogma. It is also fact that it stems from non-Christians perception of Christianity. Because they haven't been bothered to examine the underlying reasons. Papal STANDARDS may contravene your views but the beliefs which underlie those standards are in a different plane of thinking to the norm.

Let' see, Christianity promted slavery, still promotes keeping women down (to some extent) and of course there is the ever present and rampant homophobia and denial of civil equality to homosexuals--something that should have nothing to do with religion.
Have you even READ the New Testament? You're right, the Bible is against homosexuality. But Paul said you shouldn't have slaves, but if you are one, be content because God can still use you, Jesus said "Love your neighbor.", Paul did say the woman was to answer to her husband but there's one part people always forget. He also says "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it." Now, what did Christ do for his bride, the church? Doesn't sound like dominance to me...
Of course people are people and will abuse things to fit themselves, but the Bible doesn't necessarily agree with what people actually do, regardless.

So my reason for disbeliveing in god becuase he gave me a terminal illness is petty.

yeah shit i guess your right, my bad.


not to be crude or anything but stuff happens... thats all there is to it. If anything actualy does influence the diseases and disabilites that a human body manages to pick up I would hate to think how much either God hates me or I've been evil ( ive had three brain tumors, turrets, torn and hypershortened hamstrings, constant seisures and migranes, my best friend died infront of me... I could go on but that would be pointless) stuff just happenes and its not for any reason. The world is corrupt but it helps to know that this isn't the end of it, this is just a stop in the road.

Have you even READ the New Testament? You're right, the Bible is against homosexuality. But Paul said you shouldn't have slaves, but if you are one, be content because God can still use you, Jesus said "Love your neighbor.", Paul did say the woman was to answer to her husband but there's one part people always forget. He also says "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for it." Now, what did Christ do for his bride, the church? Doesn't sound like dominance to me...
Of course people are people and will abuse things to fit themselves, but the Bible doesn't necessarily agree with what people actually do, regardless.


Funny that I wasn't arguing about what the Bible says. I was arguing about what Christianity says because frankly, they aren't the same thing. They haven't been the same thing since, oh, the time the Bible was compiled.

I personally feel that the Bible is a wonderful book with a lot of good guidance on life, but that it has been greatly abused over the years. And by whom? By Christianity. I'm not arguing against what should be the true core of the religion--just what the religion is.

That's what I meant... I think agnosticism is an untenable position, because if you acknowledge that the existence of a god is possible, even though there is NO evidence, surely you must acknowledge that ANY crackpot theory with no evidence to support it is possible?
Which they are. It's all a simple matter of probabilities. Any postulate, without direct evidence or proof otherwise may in fact be true. The more complex and/or unlike anything we yet know the scenario becomes, the slimmer the probability that something is likely. For instance, it's a relatively high probability that something created the universe. Stemming from this comes the question of whether it was a natural phenomenon in another universe/plane of existence/ dimension or whether it was caused by something 'sentient'. That breaks down further into whether it was created on pupose or on accident. The chain keeps going until you get to the Christian postulate that God created humans etc... etc.... In the grand scheme of things highly unlikely, but still possible.

Let' see, Christianity promted slavery, still promotes keeping women down (to some extent) and of course there is the ever present and rampant homophobia and denial of civil equality to homosexuals--something that should have nothing to do with religion.
Hmm, pretty much indistinguishable from Islam then.

Find me a picture of jesus from before 1900, in which he is not white.

I think you'll find anyone who would have drawn of said jesus was other wise probally would have been tried with heracy.
how about this one? he looks pretty jewish to me

http://www.istanbulinfolink.com/images/photo_mix/Christ_165x250.JPG

of course that is because its from istanbul.

religious art isnt about accurate representation. especially since there are no actual pictures of jesus by anyone who would have seen him, its not considered all that important to get the little details right. so they make jesus look like THEM no matter where they are from. that way people can relate to him better.

I figured this would be fitting
(from Tool's website)

ood news, April fools fans. The writing and recording is back under way. When approached for comment on his recent encounter with the Son of God, Maynard said, "That guy's a punk!"
As it turns out, Maynard was out "location scouting" near the Fourth Street bridge in downtown Los Angeles when he "found Jesus."
"Turns out he was here the whole time, and not that difficult to find if you know where to look," Maynard reported. Apparently Jesus offered him the position of campaign manager for his new line of "Holier Than Thou" sparkling holy water, which Maynard of course accepted. What wasn't obvious was that this guy is a total drunk. It's an occupational hazard. Every time our Lord goes to get a glass of water, it transforms into a generic grocery store Merlot. Because the alcoholic is the Son of God and an all-knowing being, he knew of Maynard’s extensive interest in collecting wine. So he went to work trying to get his lips on it. Maynard caught J.C. in his cellar transforming his precious wine collection into urine, then pissing it into the empty "sparkling holy water" bottles for the eventual sale to all those people who bought, read, and embraced "The Celestine Prophesy." Tragic.
"Truth be told," Maynard confessed, "I wasn't feeling top notch when I found him. The evening prior to the day in question I had over-indulged in a series of bad Molotov shrimp cocktails with a side of Makers Mark and twin strippers. So after an entire night of G.I. Blowouts, hot/cold sweats, and blurred vision, it's very possible that the guy I met wasn't even Jesus at all. For all I know, it was Willem Dafoe."

[edit - I say "I believe" all the time because this was taken from a beliefs thread on www.thecritique.tk forums - check that out for some informed debate btw]


I was raised a catholic until I was sixteen, including getting taught by nuns all the way through school. I've been on religious retreats, batpised, confirmed and only missed four sunday services between being born and being 16. Used to say nightly prayers and go to 8am mass in the convent during Lent...in primary school. Suffice to say, I had religion shoved down my throat my whole life. Over time, I began to question and reject many of the tenets of roman catholicism, and then of wider christianity. Eventually I became more aware of alternative relgions as my school started to let in (gasp), people of other faiths, or no faith. My best mate at school is now a priest for f**k's sake. I am not unaware of how organised religion works. Was it Karl Marx who said that religion was the opiate of the masses? IMHO, that's quite an accurate description.

Anyway, over time I have read widely, had loads of debates online and off, and formed the following beliefs, or opinions:

There is no monotheistic deity, who just happens to look like a human.

There are no gods. I believe that the thousands of gods worshipped by everyone from the mayans to the american indians to the romans and greeks, the hindus and just about every other organised religion and cultish off-shoot merely satisfy man's desire to believe in something greater.

I believe that organised religion has profoundly been a force more for (to put it simplistically) bad than good. From the crusades, to islamic fundamentalists ruling nations and oppressing its people, to missionaries indoctrinating african tribes to this day, to the current war on terror, which being led by an evangelical, under-educated, criminal, dangerous frat-boy, might as well be called the war on islam.

I do not believe in heaven, hell, or purgatory. The problem with major religions is that they are constructs of mankind, and as such are subject to our weaknesses.

I believe that people should be free to practice religion, but not be allowed to actively convert others to it.

I believe that the religious right is dangerously close to the seats of power in the west, and that their influence is damaging.

I believe that all religion merely symbolises man's fundamental need to believe in something more powerful to explain the unexplained.

I believe that science has served to disprove the majority of religious theory. The study of evolution, forensic anthropology, geology, paleontology and other disciplines provides substantial proof of the nonexistence of God (yes I ripped that from HH)

The point of science, it that it is continually questioned, refined and analysed. Scientific theories such as evolution, atomic theory, germs, gravity, thermodynamics and countless more stand up to constant scrutiny.

Religion does not stand up to scrutiny, because by its very nature, faith precludes questioning. This idea is another construct of man, of religious leaders who wanted to centralise power. The vatican, anyone ?

I do not believe that religious beliefs should be held sacred automatically. It is completely correct to question someone's beliefs if you find them misguided. After all, how many atheists have been subject to misguided abuse on this very forum, by religious people?

The fact that organised religion is controlled fanatically by an elite raises a lot of questions.

I believe that many religous people are good people, but misguided. Many people pratice religion in a harmless personal way, and get something from it. Fair play to them, it's just not how I choose to live my life.

I believe that children should not be made to follow the religion of the parents, because at a young age, children are very susceptible and easily influenced. Without being able to make an informed decision, children are effectively indoctrinated into a way of life that they may not have chosen otherwise.

At the ages of 6 and 12, I had to take part in a ceremony where I had to recite a number of rules dedicating myself to god and rejecting satan and his freaky mates. I had no idea what I was doing, I just did what I was told to do.

Forcing children to go into a darkened room and confess their sins to a priest behind a screen is cruel. For those who haven't done it, it's a frightening process. It was common to try and feign illness to not have to go in there and make shit up to then be rewarded with clemency after saying a few hail marys and an our father.

Religion distorts, deceives and controls. To subscribe to any religious belief is to submit yourself to altering your behaviour, to following a moral or religious code which defines your actions, criminalises your thoughts and instills fear.

I believe that I am better off out of that environment.


This is a quote from a guy on somethingawful who put it better than I did.:


“I'll field this, assuming you really want to know. I hate religion because it takes a natural human function, that is wonder at the infinite, beautiful miraculousness of life, and perverts that in the minds of its followers, in order to serve its own ends, those ends being coercion and control. In other words it exploits the innate potential and desire for spirituality, in order to commit crimes that are the exact opposite of what a true spiritual leader would encourage. This is the most basic function of religion that sets the stage for worse crimes, but this in itself the most awful. Spirituality, and wonder at the divine, is the most important and beautiful thing humans can do. Religion completely robs its followers of the potential to have a real religious experience (that is, real contact with god), because it displaces the follower from the divine, and places itself in a position of middleman. You don't need an old fat guy to interpret god for you, as a human being you have more of a right than anyone else to figure out how you feel about the divine on your own, but religious people are brainwashed from birth so they will inevitably fail to grasp this truism.

As for the much worse crimes I mentioned, religious leaders take the very large amount of power garnered by their tool of control, and use that power to some of the most malicious and evil ends in history. It's no surprise because every system of coercion in history follows the same pattern. Religion is one of the greatest, and so logically too were its crimes. There are two major categories of crimes that I hate religion for causing, other than its fundamental crime which I described in the previous paragraph. One is the most basic and quantifyable, and that is the damage done to victims when religious followers commit violence. So many people have been tortured to death and so many wars have been fought over religion. The other one is the damage done to the followers themselves. It should come as no surprise that the prime victim of people who hate, fear, and do violence is always the person himself. Simply put religion makes people miserable. It's not a fun world where you have to hate a large chunk of everything you come into contact with because it's hated by your god. This includes even your own family, and even your own body and your own feelings. Religion creates a struggle within oneself, where the person is constantly taking his own natural desires and knowledge of what is right, and is forced to pit that against what he's been taught. The result is a stressful life in the best case and utter self-loathing in the worst and much more common case.” – Fishes&Cream

There are many proofs that sugges tthe Divine command theory is at least shaky if not wholly implausible, thus it can be proved that God has no bearin gon morality, which i believe. I also have not had one shread of proof of god's existence and dont understand how, if he wanted to create humans, he didnt just do that, instead he set into work an entire million-year evolving chain of evolution with us as the end-result? and why oh why was he so malicious in the Old Testament, why has he stopped talking to human's. There are simply too many wholes in catholicism, which is the only religion i am able to speak about, and far too few proofs. The only decent proof for god's existence is based on a wager, Pascal's wager, and that my friends isnt enough.

God hasn't stopped talking to humans...

its the part where god doesnt exist that makes me decide to be an atheist

God hasn't stopped talking to humans...
Well who's he talking to lately and what's he saying?

Well who's he talking to lately and what's he saying?
He tells them to burn things :p

He tells them to burn things :p
No, silly, that's the leprechaun that hangs out with little Ralph Wiggam.

Well who's he talking to lately and what's he saying?
he seems to have the sick habit of goofing on mormon men and telling them that THEY are the real prophet of god and that he wants them to practice polygamy. then they have to move to the wastelands of arizona north of the grand canyon and start building a new and improved mormon church.

he seems to have the sick habit of goofing on mormon men and telling them that THEY are the real prophet of god and that he wants them to practice polygamy. then they have to move to the wastelands of arizona north of the grand canyon and start building a new and improved mormon church.
Well, polygamy sounds like a divine idea to me.

i'm atheist mainly because i believe in science, but also because of how much religion has changed.
what will religion say if *homosexual marraiges* become acceptable by the main body of their congregation? they'll suddenly say, *homosexual marriages are sacred and acts of god!* yet at the moment the are saying *blashpehous! kill the scum.*
all religions have changed drastically to hold onto their worshippers, instead of saying *it works like this, you either accept it or you dont follow our religion*. the bible is periodically interpreted differently to justify peoples lifes.
it's hard to take a religion seriously when it has a set of rules, that everyone would rather change than actually follow.

No, silly, that's the leprechaun that hangs out with little Ralph Wiggam.
:) YAY you got the quote! :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:

Just thought it was worth mentioning about Jesus art. First of all, that picture of Jesus from Istanbul is Roman Catholic.. *Roman*
Now, a short explanation on WHY all these pictures of Jesus look like they do.Pictures of Jesus weren't drawn by Jews. Icons began popping up after the Roman Catholic church was started. That means, icons were based on white, ROMAN images. Makes sense, doesn't it? Early early christians didn't go about drawing pictures of Jesus, much less with those funky shiny things around their heads. That's purely Catholic.
If you're gonna tell me that Istanbul was full of Arabs, think again... it was full of Romans. Ever listened to that They Might Be Giants song? It used to be Constantinople, one of the main cities of the Roman empire, and I believe one of the centers for the early Roman Catholic church.
All in all, you probably won't find any early pictures of Jesus that are based on Arab or Jewish images, because Catholics were the ones doing all the funky icon stuff. Doesn't mean they were racist, just that they liked drawing Jesus in their image (teehee funny). Also because of this, you probably won't find any pictures of Jesus AT ALL prior to 450AD, and no one at that time had any idea what he looked like.

:) YAY you got the quote! :fluffle: :fluffle: :fluffle:
Ralph should be a deity in some religion. He's always comming up with some wise saying that can improve people's lives. For example, "And my doctor said my nose would stop bleeding if I'd just keep my finger out of there!"

Ralph should be a deity in some religion. He's always comming up with some wise saying that can improve people's lives. For example, "And my doctor said my nose would stop bleeding if I'd just keep my finger out of there!"
As well as my favorite saying
"hello principal skinner ... hello super nintendo chalmers"

actually i'm pretty sure that picture is orthodox...

Funny how most atheists here seem to have defected from the Catholic faith. If I'd been raised a Catholic I sure would've been an atheist by now, too. I think it's about having an image of God in your mind all your life that was fabricated by an establishment that had power and control in its mind, rather than actual faith, when it was started (maybe still?). Even funnier still is that these atheists' logic to disprove the existence of God often falls into paradoxes with Catholic teachings ("but if I was good, why did my liver take a shit on my life?" "If God is always good, why does he let catastrophes happen?" "If God created the planet, and then us, what of these dinosaurs?") Which is mostly pretty silly, because most of it is exclusively Catholic. Many other faiths (including some Christian ones!) make a lot more sense than Catholicism. I'm agnostic myself, but I am this because I dislike the idea of religion organized by man, and based on a few men's ambitions rather than true and heartfelt faith.

Funny that I wasn't arguing about what the Bible says. I was arguing about what Christianity says because frankly, they aren't the same thing. They haven't been the same thing since, oh, the time the Bible was compiled.

I personally feel that the Bible is a wonderful book with a lot of good guidance on life, but that it has been greatly abused over the years. And by whom? By Christianity. I'm not arguing against what should be the true core of the religion--just what the religion is.
So your question isn't about the religion, it's about the people in the religion...and that's your argument? See statement 1. of my first post.

i just checked and *it is* orthodox, constantinople was a center for the eastern orthodox church, and it was the orthodox's who were into all the funky *icon* stuff.

Umm, so it's orthodox, doesn't disprove my point, Catholics did the same thing, and still do ^^

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?


13 reasons why I don't believe in God:

1# if it does exist he is really neglectful

2# if it does exist then it is a genocide maniac who kill's without mercy and discriminates

3# Christianity isn’t really that old so how could your God claim to have made the Earth

4# Jesus told you to turn the other cheek which is suicide

5# the devil started a rebellion lost and made hell that’s the most we know for all we know God could be the devil

6# the bible has stolen things from other religions

7# all other beliefs are false and those who believe them will go to hell (sounds a bit discriminatory doesn’t it)

8# according to the bible women where made purely for the pleasure of men

9# all the horrible things that have happened where was God?

10# God is all superior and only the best of us will ever even enter heaven

11# according to some sources there can only be 10,000 people in heaven so by now it is full up and we have no hope

12# looking at all the descriptions of heaven would you like to go there the sheer niceness would be torture

13# God just doesn’t work e.g. monarchy was supposed to have God deciding who was born into the "superior role" of leader
does this work? of course not!

Umm, so it's orthodox, doesn't disprove my point, Catholics did the same thing, and still do ^^
its an orthodox mosaic but its not an "orthodox" thing or a "roman" thing. it is a HUMAN thing to make your religious icons (those that are human anyway) look like you. all christian religious art made jesus looke pretty much like he'd fit into the local population. except for the more stiff necked protestant missionaires who insisted that the locals should start looking like them.

check out the various looks of buddhas around the world.

I would like to know why those of you who were once part of a monotheistic religion decided to declare yourselves atheist. Is it because you have no proof God exists, found proof denying his existince or that he's just not done anything for you lately? Or are there other reasons?

Let me ask you a question: what do you see in the world, truely, that proves God exists? You may say natural beauty, a strong arguement. However, if he created humans, why in holy hell would he give us an appendix? It never gets used, and does more harm then good. That's just an example, but you see my point. Theres too much wrong with the world for God to exist. Some people say that God doesn't intervene, so we can learn from our mistakes. With people like George W. Bush Jr in charge of our nations, we won't have anybody let to learn the lessons

However, if he created humans, why in holy hell would he give us an appendix? It never gets used, and does more harm then good.

The appendix is part of God's plan! We are just too ignorant of His greatness to comprehend it! ;)

Let me ask you a question: what do you see in the world, truely, that proves God exists? You may say natural beauty, a strong arguement. However, if he created humans, why in holy hell would he give us an appendix? It never gets used, and does more harm then good. That's just an example, but you see my point. Theres too much wrong with the world for God to exist. Some people say that God doesn't intervene, so we can learn from our mistakes. With people like George W. Bush Jr in charge of our nations, we won't have anybody let to learn the lessons
Not to mention that beauty is purly subjective ... iti s all in the eye of the beholder

The appendix is part of God's plan! We are just too ignorant of His greatness to comprehend it! ;)

Quiet you

Not to mention that beauty is purly subjective ... iti s all in the eye of the beholder

Something I hadn't considered, thank you

Quiet you



Something I hadn't considered, thank you
No problem ... I mean people find beauty in all kinds of crazy things including randomness. it is a response we have to an image or sound
But for BEAUTY to prove the existance of god you would have to prove that we wouldent find something beautifull whatever situation we are in

We seem to find it everywhere we go

I used to find my ex beautiful, till she left me for my best friend. Anyway, i have another answer to Eh-oh's question: 'Why Atheism?'. My response (And I'm sure someone will have used this) - Why not?

yIt is very likely that it stems from Christian dogma. It is also fact that it stems from non-Christians perception of Christianity. Because they haven't been bothered to examine the underlying reasons. Papal STANDARDS may contravene your views but the beliefs which underlie those standards are in a different plane of thinking to the norm.

It doesn't matter what the reasons are. No one said whether or not there was logic behind it. Regardless of etiology Christianity (or large sects of it) HAVE an DO support discrimination. That was the only point I was making.

Hmm, pretty much indistinguishable from Islam then.


From some sects of Islam, yep. I don't have the firsthand experience with it that I do with Christianity however which is why I elected to speak of it after someone said that "No religion has ever supported discrimination."

Not to mention that beauty is purly subjective ... iti s all in the eye of the beholder
You mean there are people who find crap floating in a toilet beautiful?

You mean there are people who find crap floating in a toilet beautiful?

Well... if I was a blind man who suddenly regained sight and that was the first thing I saw... yes.

Hell it could be beautiful even without all that.

So your question isn't about the religion, it's about the people in the religion...and that's your argument? See statement 1. of my first post.

The religion is only what its members make it be. It's effects on our world are not the Platonic ideal of what the religion could be--but only what shadows its follwers pick out. Christianity (and indeed many other religions) does not do the good that the Bible espouses (though I won't deny that it does a lot of good too). You seem to have taken my point that Christianity has committed discrimination as an all out attack on the religion--and I can see where that could happen. However, it wasn't. All I was doing was pointed out that the religion has been used to support discrimination. I believe in looking on both sides of an arguement and seeing the good and the evil that exist in anything--and that includes Christianity and every other religion.

Not to mention that beauty is purly subjective ... iti s all in the eye of the beholder

Or beerholder as my sister so correctly told me on my 21st birthday (back in the days when I was still a fundamentalist. It's amazing what three years can do).

You mean there are people who find crap floating in a toilet beautiful?
Unfortunately, yes. There are people who watch porn based on fecal matter. It's a beautiful thing to them.

I havn't been presented enough proof that god exists. That and the fact that I was at my friends church a while ago and the preist kept going on and on about stuff that was mentioned in the devinci code. The whole situation made me loose even more faith in god.

I havn't been presented enough proof that god exists. That and the fact that I was at my friends church a while ago and the preist kept going on and on about stuff that was mentioned in the devinci code. The whole situation made me loose even more faith in god.

LOL, kind of sounds like when the minister the church I grew up in preached about the seven layers of Hell as if it were Biblical. . .and instead it was straight from Dante!

You mean there are people who find crap floating in a toilet beautiful?
Depends. What was lunch?

I personaly think this is a bad and faithless reasoning but if it able to convince anyone then I fell that it is best to atleast post it. It's attributed to C.S. Lewis:

'I would rather spend my whole life living for the possible God that I have been told of for so long than spend the rest of eternity knowing that if I had just accepted Him I wouldn't be suffering here.'

It's a matter of the better choice, a first step if you will, fear. I fear God, I fear the possibility of there being a God who decides where I go when I pass from this world. I choose to follow what appears to me to be the best way to keep from the possible punishments of the afterlife and so I serve Him.

That would be Why Not perhaps the better question is Why take the chance?

I personaly think this is a bad and faithless reasoning but if it able to convince anyone then I fell that it is best to atleast post it. It's attributed to C.S. Lewis:

'I would rather spend my whole life living for the possible God that I have been told of for so long than spend the rest of eternity knowing that if I had just accepted Him I wouldn't be suffering here.'

It's a matter of the better choice, a first step if you will, fear. I fear God, I fear the possibility of there being a God who decides where I go when I pass from this world. I choose to follow what appears to me to be the best way to keep from the possible punishments of the afterlife and so I serve Him.

That would be Why Not perhaps the better question is Why take the chance?

Yawn Pascal's Wager blah fear driven propaganda blah superstition blah threat of eternal torture blah.

Sorry, that's all I have to say on that.

I chose atheism because I don't agree with any of the religions on some grounds.

That would be Why Not perhaps the better question is Why take the chance?
What if there is nothing after death?
Can you imagine all the stuff I could have done if only I wasn't restrained by a church that tell me not to experience some things. (And I'm not talking about murder or rape)

Why not take a chance? After all, I can always recant on my deathbed.

I find that fear i not a good reason for anything. What would happen if people would stop doing stuf because they're afraid? Well, for starters, there would be a great many invention that wouldn't exist. Plane for example...

Why not take a chance? After all, I can always recant on my deathbed.

I find that fear i not a good reason for anything. What would happen if people would stop doing stuf because they're afraid? Well, for starters, there would be a great many invention that wouldn't exist. Plane for example...


I agree that fear is not a good enough reason as I said earlier but I definately dissagree with taking the chance. This isn't just a couple years. This is eternity. I'd rather hve spent this time living a good clean spiritual life than be condemned to hell for a few years of pointless pleasure.

There is a bit of a difference between fear of eternal suffering and fear of some invention not working.

Close your eyes and say to yourself "An omnipotent and supremely benevolent being created the universe a rules it."

Now open your eys and look around the world, turn on the news, browse some history books - do you find the statement above easy to believe!

Speaking as an agnostic, I don't deny the existence of God as a dogma. But reason makes me believe that if something like a God exists, then he is not what the world's religions make of HIM (or HER, more likely IT).

He dident say it promoted it anywhere ... he said it was distastefull when used as an excuse

And yes there are
Ever hear of gay marrige?

there is no organization in this world which is truely non-discriminatory to all groups

Rather long post, text taken from this forum:

http://www.runuo.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4327&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=god+perfect&start=0

Rather than going into specifics on the Bible's teachings or even the chemical makeup of Earth, I will divulge my assertation that God(as defined by major monotheistic religions) cannot exsist simply because the definition is contradictory and impossible in nature. First, lets assert our premises.




According to major theistic belief, God (is):
Perfect
Has no flaws
Has no needs
Has no wants
Is in all ways good
What he creates is good at the time of its creation, but is capable of becoming evil over time, else evil would not exist.
Ever-present (exists simultaneously in every point in space and every point in time)
Transcendental (exists separately from the material universe)
Omnipotent
Created the Universe


Universe (n) 1. All existing things regarded as a whole. All that exists. 2a. The Earth, 2b. The human race.



Can create matter and energy
Can create non-physical (supernatural) substances
Can create life in both of the above mediums
Will Destroy the World
The Universe will remain; only the Earth will be destroyed.
Ability to destroy matter, energy and supernatural substances is implied but not stated
Omniscient
Has infinite wisdom
Has infinite knowledge
Has infinite perception
Demands Service
Has a chosen people
Grants free will, but demands total obedience
Is forgiving of the repentant, but merciless to the sinner
Will sit in judgment of all souls
Knows all of the deeds of his creations, and thus is the only person fit to judge his creations
Will cast guilty souls into Hell
Will take righteious souls to Heaven




Perfection:
It is said that God is perfect. If this is the case, he cannot have flaws. He has no needs. Nor can he have any wants, for to suggest otherwise implies that he is not satisfied with his current state. Dissatisfaction is a product of imperfection, thus a perfect God would be totally satisfied with a static existence; that is to say, he would change nothing.
Yet, according to our definition, he changes everything. He creates. He spends six days doing so. Granted that to a timeless being six days would be instantaneous, but still, he is not static. This is a contradiction. An all-powerful being that neither needs nor wants to change does not change. Therefore, either God is not perfect, or he did not create the Universe.

In the latter case, either the Universe does not exist at all (a statement which we have strong reason to doubt is true) or the Universe came about without the aid of God. In either case, Gods existence becomes irrelevant; He has no importance to us for our existence, nor does our existence matter to him. Also, an unchanging, perfect being wouldn't be bothered by us at all (no interventions on his behalf, since he is satisfied with everything as it is).

In the former case, it was an imperfect being that created the universe. This point can be further illustrated by what God creates. He creates servants. All three monotheistic faiths considered here claim their members as Gods faithful servants. Yet a perfect being would need no servants, even if he created them, and the servants would soon find themselves with nothing to do. Their existence would be pointless.

Further still, God need not instill free will upon his servants. They need only be automations. They need not even be self-aware. Why would they be granted self-awareness, then? Why would they be granted the ability to disobey? Does god require some means to alleviate boredom, so he grants us an ability to be unpredictable? If God is omniscient, there is no such thing as unpredictability. Also, a perfect god would need no alleviation from boredom. Does God want his creations to entertain him with their conflicts? That again suggests a desire, and also adds maliciousness to Gods personality, which suggests a fault. A perfect being has no faults.

Thus, we have disproved the first supposition in the definition of God. The being cannot be both perfect and the creator. Since we have disproved a part of the definition, the whole definition is at fault. The being described cannot exist. God cannot exist.

Creator:
In an effort to save God from non-existence, let us say, for the moment, that disproving one part of the definition simply refines the definition so that God can exist without being subject to that part of the definition. That is to say, once a part is disproved, it is dropped, and we redefine God to suit the remaining points in the old definition. God is no longer both perfect and creator, but he could still be the creator of the Universe without being perfect. Let us examine this point.

Looking at the definition of the Universe, we see that there are three definitions for the term Universe. The first definition is that the Universe is all that exists. That is to say, if it isnt part of the Universe, it cannot exist. We will ignore the second and third definitions of the Universe, which define the term as meaning the Earth and the human race, respectfully. We can dismiss the third right away since there is more to the monotheistic interpretation of the Universe than the human race. The second can also be rejected, as there was more to the monotheistic Universe that just the Earth. According to the book of Genesis, versions of which are accepted by Christians, Jews and Muslims, God also created the stars, the Sun and the moon. In short, he created all there is. This is the first definition of Universe, so it is the one we will pay attention to.

Our definition of God says that he created and rules the Universe. It is impossible for him to be a part of the Universe, since that would suggest that he created himself. He cannot have created himself because he would have to already exist in order to create himself. Thus, God cannot be ever-present, as defined above. He can only be transcendental if he is the creator. Which is fine, since transcendentalism and ever-presence within the universe are contradictory anyway. You have to be either/or or neither, you cant be both.

Having said that, we now have two objects: God and the Universe. The Universe is all there is, or everything that exists. Anything that is not part of the Universe, therefore, does not exist. God is not part of the Universe. He therefore does not exist.

Incidentally, this also makes another part of the definition impossible; Gods transcendental nature. So God could be neither ever-present nor transcendental if he were the creator. He cant exist in the universe, and he cant exist out of it. Therefore, he cant exist.

Our definition has failed another analysis. We can choose to declare, once again, that God therefore cannot exist, or we can continue with our attempts to save him by again dropping the disproved point and redefining what God is. Just once more, I shall attempt to give God a chance.

Omnipotent:
So God is neither perfect nor is he the creator. Can he still be omnipotent? Let us consider the following.

If God is to exist, he must either BE the Universe or be a PART of the Universe. In the former case, he can still be omnipresent, since by being the Universe he is automatically everywhere at once. In the latter, he looses his omnipresence. This limits him, since he needs to be able to travel to places that he currently does not occupy, and thus he looses his omnipotence, since someone with infinite power could by default be everywhere at once. So for God to be omnipotent he must be the Universe.

Now, if God is the Universe, he is observable, since the Universe is observable. The Universe also behaves in predictable ways, which humans have described in the scientific laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and others. Since these behaviors are true in all inertial frames of reference (all perspectives regardless of relative velocity), which indicates a finite Universe, Gods behavior is limited to those behaviors and to the resources of a finite Universe. This is contrary to the idea of omnipotence. While he would still be vastly powerful, especially to the eyes of a human, he is not all-powerful.

Gods definition has thus been whittled away even further. Again we can declare God a fictional being, or we can continue to refine the definition and attempt to save him.

Sorry. Three strikes. Gods out.

Conclusion:
It is impossible for the monotheistic God worshipped by Christians, Jews and Muslims to exist. We are left with three possibilities; another god exists which we have yet to define, multiple gods (defined or undefined) exist, no gods exist. The most probable of these, if we are to follow Ockhams Razor (do not multiply entities unnecessarily / take the simplest explanation possible, but no simpler an explanation), is that there are no gods.

And what of the God we have debunked? He is best described as the ultimate imaginary friend, a delusional source of security for a people who find it difficult to deal with the hardship of everyday life. Yet like the child who must relinquish his fantasy friend and face the real world in order to truly mature, so to must the human race face reality if it is to mature into a truly advanced species.

And that is what I believe and why I am at least not religious.

I agree that fear is not a good enough reason as I said earlier but I definately dissagree with taking the chance. This isn't just a couple years. This is eternity. I'd rather hve spent this time living a good clean spiritual life than be condemned to hell for a few years of pointless pleasure.

There is a bit of a difference between fear of eternal suffering and fear of some invention not working.
IF hell exists
and IF the christians are right in their belief
and IF I am automatically sent there even if I lead a morally good life

With that many IFs, I can put Paris in a bottle.

Besides, with your way of thinking, you would have to be following the Muslim, Jewish, Buddism, Christian and Hindu faith. Why take a chance. What if the one you're following is wrong?

"That would be Why Not perhaps the better question is Why take the chance?"

Are you going to be enbalmed after death? Why not?
If you don't, Anubis might feed your soul to a demon for not following the proper burial rites.
Why take the chance?

Actually if you read the thread, most atheists gave reasons based on logic...

Actually, no. Many reasons actually contain very identifiable logical fallacies. Many instances of personal attacks, begging the question, some prejudicial language, some very blatant inconsistencies, and that atheist favorite: the straw man. But please, why don't you tell me about Levitical laws again.

I became disenfranchised with the Christian church due to some inconsistencies in both what I was taught and what I have observed in the world. I initially rebelled into full on atheism, but have settled into an almost militant agnosticism.

I consider agnosticism to be the best for me, as I feel my moral decisions are more meritorious when arrived at by careful consideration of the situation and when they reflect my own personal beliefs, rather than that of a handed down superstition.

there is no organization in this world which is truely non-discriminatory to all groups


The Secular Humanist Association? Mind you I'm just asking, but I can't think of anything they disciminate based on.

Actually, no. Many reasons actually contain very identifiable logical fallacies. Many instances of personal attacks, begging the question, some prejudicial language, some very blatant inconsistencies, and that atheist favorite: the straw man. But please, why don't you tell me about Levitical laws again.

Heh! Yes, because no THEIST would favor straw man arguments. It's THE atheist favorite. Hell, atheists INVENTED the straw man! ;)

I personaly think this is a bad and faithless reasoning but if it able to convince anyone then I fell that it is best to atleast post it. It's attributed to C.S. Lewis:

'I would rather spend my whole life living for the possible God that I have been told of for so long than spend the rest of eternity knowing that if I had just accepted Him I wouldn't be suffering here.'

It's a matter of the better choice, a first step if you will, fear. I fear God, I fear the possibility of there being a God who decides where I go when I pass from this world. I choose to follow what appears to me to be the best way to keep from the possible punishments of the afterlife and so I serve Him.

That would be Why Not perhaps the better question is Why take the chance?

I don't believe that was C.S. Lewis, but I could be wrong.

Pascal's Wager is erroneous. More can be found here (http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/pasc-wag.htm) and here (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/).

Why not fear Zeus or Allah or Kahli or any number of other superstitions?

My scientific argument against atheism: Quantum physics

...discuss

My scientific argument against atheism: Quantum physics

...discuss

Explain.

It's Quantum Physics! What else do you want me to say, I told you to discuss, infidel!!!

wikipedia.org if you don't know what Quantum Physics are.
I like to call it the synthesis of religion and science... NOT Scientology

there is no organization in this world which is truely non-discriminatory to all groups

1. If that were true, would that make discrimination acceptable?

2. Define discrimination in a way that this is true. Then tell me all forms of discrimination under this defintion are equally wrong.

Heh! Yes, because no THEIST would favor straw man arguments. It's THE atheist favorite. Hell, atheists INVENTED the straw man! ;)

No, I think everybody loves the straw man. I must say, you've got a nice one there...

1. If that were true, would that make discrimination acceptable?

2. Define discrimination in a way that this is true. Then tell me all forms of discrimination under this defintion are equally wrong.


You're here! I could kiss you!

It's Quantum Physics! What else do you want me to say, I told you to discuss, infidel!!!

wikipedia.org if you don't know what Quantum Physics are.
I like to call it the synthesis of religion and science... NOT Scientology

Why does it prove anything either way? It is on you to provide a little detail for your argument.

I have a basic knowledge of quantum physics and would like to hear your argument.

Well for me this was quite simple. I was born into a catholic family and was being told to do my first communion (whatever that is). I at the time was learning how to program in c++ and said I had no time for communion, so I became an atheist to fix the conflict. Simple as that.

Quantum physics say: We are one with the world, we are one with each other, nothing is certain, but all probable, there is more than one universe, etc etc. It sounds like a wonderful religious belief, nee?

there is no organization in this world which is truely non-discriminatory to all groups
Sure there is ... Here is one

The group of UpwardThrust ... anyones welcome human plan living or not existant or not (imaginary friends welcome) we have no doctorine to offend and you can do no wrong

You dont have to contact me you dont even have to be able to
You dont have to believe nor not believe
You just are
There are no limits and everyone is a member

(there no rules that limit membership to ANY group ... no restrictions ... hell you dont even have to exist to be a member)

Quantum physics say: We are one with the world, we are one with each other, nothing is certain, but all probable, there is more than one universe, etc etc.
Partially.
It sounds like a wonderful religious belief, nee?
No, it sounds like quantum physics.

Quantum physics say: We are one with the world, we are one with each other, nothing is certain, but all probable, there is more than one universe, etc etc. It sounds like a wonderful religious belief, nee?

Not particularly.

Well for me this was quite simple. I was born into a catholic family and was being told to do my first communion (whatever that is). I at the time was learning how to program in c++ and said I had no time for communion, so I became an atheist to fix the conflict. Simple as that.
C++ at the same age as communion? And not being able to participate in an event does not get rid of the belief

I realize I am entering a realm which is far beyond my scope of knowledge but Quantum Mechanics is just a theory. A theory that really has very little to do with atheism. Atheists use this theory as it has some funding but we need not.

it didnt work out so well.... fed my psychosis' but no longer and im much happier as well

it's a pretty widely accepted theory with some pretty solid basis. Namely that scientist have already created a qubit (basically a piece of material that obviously exists on two planes). Of course, lasers and semi- and super-conductors are also in that "Quantum Physics" category.

And yes, you can very well have Quantum Physics as a form of religion. Without the bullshit :)

And yes C++ at the age of communion. It's at that age that one learns best. Unfortunately it's at that age that the church seeks to indoctrinate the masses. Why at such a vulnerable age? Children at that age don't reason, they accept! Conincedence? I think not.

I realize I am entering a realm which is far beyond my scope of knowledge but Quantum Mechanics is just a theory. A theory that really has very little to do with atheism. Atheists use this theory as it has some funding but we need not.
Lol are you saying to dont have to obey laws of phisics lol

You're here! I could kiss you!

I wish I got that reaction in more threads.

... or real life! ;)

Nice to see you too, Pracus. :D

And yes C++ at the age of communion. It's at that age that one learns best. Unfortunately it's at that age that the church seeks to indoctrinate the masses. Why at such a vulnerable age? Children at that age don't reason, they accept! Conincedence? I think not.

You sound like a pseudo-atheist who will slink back into Christianity later in life.

Quantum physics means the physical universe can be described in probabilities, that's all. It's not a philosophy or religion even if some wish to take it that far (there's always someone willing to take something too far).

Do you really want to find God in the fact it's impossible to tell the exact state and location of a quantum particle? Is God an error of margin, a probability? Quantum physics is physics, theology is theology.

I wish I got that reaction in more threads.

... or real life! ;)

Nice to see you too, Pracus. :D

All you have to do is visit here.

Quantum physics means the physical universe can be described in probabilities, that's all. It's not a philosophy or religion even if some wish to take it that far (there's always someone willing to take something too far).

Do you really want to find God in the fact it's impossible to tell the exact state and location of a quantum particle? Is God an error of margin, a probability? Quantum physics is physics, theology is theology.
"A toll is a toll and a roll is a roll ... and if we dont get no toll's then we dont eat no rolls"
(sorry popped in my head)

it's a pretty widely accepted theory with some pretty solid basis. Namely that scientist have already created a qubit (basically a piece of material that obviously exists on two planes). Of course, lasers and semi- and super-conductors are also in that "Quantum Physics" category.
Yes, we know.
And yes, you can very well have Quantum Physics as a form of religion. Without the bullshit :)
So in what way does that disprove atheism?
:confused:

"A toll is a toll and a roll is a roll ... and if we dont get no toll's then we dont eat no rolls"
(sorry popped in my head)

Robin Hood! But I can't remember if that was Men in Tights or Prince of Thieves.

Robin Hood! But I can't remember if that was Men in Tights or Prince of Thieves.
Tights :)

That's not "all" there is to Quantum physics. It also involves a lot of philosophical implications, there's MANY interpretations to the Quantum Theorem. Plus, Einstein, one of the early theorists behind quantum physics, argued that it WASN'T based on unpredictable probabilities (I'm fairly sure about this).

And, according to some interpretations, namely the multiverse one, it means that even when you die you have a sort of afterlife, or continue to live on. Because there's the possibility that you can live forever, according to some philosophical ideas, particularly Daniel Dennett's, you have nothing to worry about, because you do live forever.

Thus, Quantum Physics can prove that there is an afterlife. Not quite the same afterlife described in the Bible, though. Sounds more like the Buddhist idea for an afterlife.

Upward, apparently you lack even more of a scientific background than I. DO you know why we call something a theory? Not because it's not true but because we can't prove it to be true 100%. A thoery can change and unlike religion accepts that change. It's very probable that the theories basics might be right but that some of its assumptions are wrong. Pick up any Science book and see for yourself.

"A toll is a toll and a roll is a roll ... and if we dont get no toll's then we dont eat no rolls"
(sorry popped in my head)

Is that a troll song?

I think I heard it last time I crossed a footbridge.

I don't believe in God, but I do believe in trolls 'cuz one ate my brother.

That's not "all" there is to Quantum physics. It also involves a lot of philosophical implications, there's MANY interpretations to the Quantum Theorem. Plus, Einstein, one of the early theorists behind quantum physics, argued that it WASN'T based on unpredictable probabilities (I'm fairly sure about this).

And, according to some interpretations, namely the multiverse one, it means that even when you die you have a sort of afterlife, or continue to live on. Because there's the possibility that you can live forever, according to some philosophical ideas, particularly Daniel Dennett's, you have nothing to worry about, because you do live forever.

Thus, Quantum Physics can prove that there is an afterlife. Not quite the same afterlife described in the Bible, though. Sounds more like the Buddhist idea for an afterlife.

But then we come to the proplem is it really "you" because that other you had to be different/make different decisiions (because if it was the same person and made the same choices you would have also lived forever)

The reason I hate threads like this is that people get it in their heads that they have to prove or disprove the opposing viewpoint, when the subject is obviously incapible of either.
the·ol·o·gy
n. pl. the·ol·o·gies

1. The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.
2. A system or school of opinions concerning God and religious questions: Protestant theology; Jewish theology.
3. A course of specialized religious study usually at a college or seminary.
Theology is a collection of organized opinions, which no one can really prove or disprove. If someone says, "Pepsi is good," can you conclusivly prove that "Coke is better?"

Is that a troll song?

I think I heard it last time I crossed a footbridge.

I don't believe in God, but I do believe in trolls 'cuz one ate my brother.
Well ya at least got some proof to believe in trolls :D

Upward, apparently you lack even more of a scientific background than I. DO you know why we call something a theory? Not because it's not true but because we can't prove it to be true 100%. A thoery can change and unlike religion accepts that change. It's very probable that the theories basics might be right but that some of its assumptions are wrong. Pick up any Science book and see for yourself.

WTF is your point?

Sorry to be blunt, but you are now attacking people when you aren't making sense.

UpwardThrust

Read yourself some Dennett. That IS the whole point. According to Dennett's lagic (which is pretty damn good if you ask me), yes, you WOULD live forever, because it would essentially be you, thus, nothing to worry about :P

Upward, apparently you lack even more of a scientific background than I. DO you know why we call something a theory? Not because it's not true but because we can't prove it to be true 100%. A thoery can change and unlike religion accepts that change. It's very probable that the theories basics might be right but that some of its assumptions are wrong. Pick up any Science book and see for yourself.
I was calling it a LAW because that is the NAME associated with it … I was not sure you would understand what I meant if I called it the theory of physics

I understand the difference but you did not bother asking, now if you care to debate rather then flame I would be most happy to

UpwardThrust

Read yourself some Dennett. That IS the whole point. According to Dennett's lagic (which is pretty damn good if you ask me), yes, you WOULD live forever, because it would essentially be you, thus, nothing to worry about :P
But it COULDENT be you otherwise YOU would live forever not the other you ... you can approach infinitely close but never achieve otherwise the outcome would be identical

Certanly an opinion cannot be disbanded but a statement as such: God exists, he oppeses Homosexual marriage, he opposes women preachers, can be made devoid of any truth. The person may still, in his opinion, beleive it but not have it supported by any facts,

First off, the thread asks about atheism. Atheism is the belief that there is no god.

Atheism is not -
rage against god
unhappiness with organized religion

Agnosticism, to me, implies some kind of searching. It is not a "it doesn't matter if god exists". It's "I don't know whether or not god exists."

That said, for me, the road to atheism probably did start as rage against god because I found out I was bipolar. I started thinking about how that meant I didn't really have free will. If I don't have free will, then I am predestined to go to hell. Then I started thinking in a different light. I started thinking that all organisms do not have free will. They think they choose, but all choice is simply the logical consequence of their experiences and chemical makeup. I believe that god did not create people, people created god. Some people have the need to believe in something greater than humanity. I don't. I guess you could call me an atheist secular humanist.

Interesting test by the way... Belief-O-Matic (http://www.beliefnet.com/story/76/story_7665_1.html)

To sum up.
There is as much evidence for the existence god as there is for the existence of dragons, faeries, unicorns, and a jolly fat man in a red suit coming down chimneys. (Sorry kids)
I am happier in the realization that god does not exist.
I have no need to believe in an afterlife. - Either science will extend life to immortality, or I will die. Doesn't really matter.
Everything I need to be happy in life I can find right here on earth.

Have a little faith in humanity, not god. ;)

But the other you IS you, because there are infinite possibilities, and infinite universes. And then there are infinite "you"s that live forever. On top of that, there really isn't a true "you" because you are one with the multiverse, and all the universes are one with each other. It really doesn't matter because there's really no qualia (again according to Dennett), so therefore a perfect clone of you with all your memories and all your experiences from the very moment one of your "entities" died in ONE universe would be just as good as living forever. Think about it this way. You're not the same person that you were when you were 5. How can you know that you havent died once every year with your "consciousness" replaced by the one you have now? All you really have is memories to have that continuity. Therefore, if the other entity in another multiverse has all you memories, experiences, ideas, everything, PLUS a perfectly identical body, it's the same as living forever. :)

I grew up nonreligious, and when people started asking me why I didn't believe in god.. I pretty much had to come up with my own reasons.
I think that the number one reason that I don't think that ANY religion is correct is that religion has always seemed like the easiest answer to life. Just ask "Why?" and all you have to answer is "Because God says so". That isn't a good enough reason for me. There is NO proof of any God, and just because no one's come up with a better idea doesn't make God more real. I come saythe universe was caused by an amoeba's orgasm and it would be jsut as believable because it's just as easy to prove.
So I never "became" aetheist, I always have been, and I suppose that's what made me pessimistic about it... but it just doesn't make sense. The world would be a much better place without it. Bush wouldn't have been elected, for one thing.

But the other you IS you, because there are infinite possibilities, and infinite universes. And then there are infinite "you"s that live forever. On top of that, there really isn't a true "you" because you are one with the multiverse, and all the universes are one with each other. It really doesn't matter because there's really no qualia (again according to Dennett), so therefore a perfect clone of you with all your memories and all your experiences from the very moment one of your "entities" died in ONE universe would be just as good as living forever. Think about it this way. You're not the same person that you were when you were 5. How can you know that you havent died once every year with your "consciousness" replaced by the one you have now? All you really have is memories to have that continuity. Therefore, if the other entity in another multiverse has all you memories, experiences, ideas, everything, PLUS a perfictly identical body, it's the same as living forever. :)
Ohhh so you are talking about exact copies of you … immortality through copies I thought you were inferring there was ONE copy of you that achieved imortality through random chance … there is a difference (sorry my mistake)

I chose atheism because I don't agree with any of the religions on some grounds.

Are part of Neo-Anarchist's movement to spread the gospel of Blu-tac? :D

That IS what I'm talking about. Some exact copy of you in another universe (or infinite copies thereof, since it's all infinite), lives forever, unlike you, yet you share all the exact experience, although on different universes, that are identical to the very point in which you die in yours, and then fork immediately so that your identical entity in another universe DOES live forever. It's in another universe, but it's still you, you're still living forever, and there's a comfort factor there I guess :P

Well, I went from an Abrahimic, God-ordered system of Anglican Christianity to Theravada Buddhism, which is a religion that has no god or central spiritual figure to pray to for help/money/a good harvest/good test marks, etc. Buddha's not a god, just a really good teacher, and Buddhism is a faith that demands that one be responsible for one's self.

So I don't believe in a god, since my faith doesn't have one, but I am religious.

If you really think about it, physically, nothing i am currently made up of physically is necessarily the same as what i was made up of at birth!! The body is constantly changing, everytime a cell dies, it is replaced with a new cell. Mitosis is ever current, and what we ingest, what we breath in and out and what we egest and what simply falls off of us, determines what we are made up of. Eg. the body generally replaces its skin every 2 years (this is of course gradual and constant).

We are chemically and physically costantly changing and parts of matter that make up our bodies now, were once part of something else. Eg. the calcium atom in a bone in my body was once part of a cow!!

My point is: the only self that we retain is thought and memory (which are chemical storage configurations of electrical energy, that are conserved).

Can someone explain to me how this applies?

Are part of Neo-Anarchist's movement to spread the gospel of Blu-tac? :D
What?
There's a player named Blu-tac?
:eek:
Wierd.

http://www.artastik.co.uk/media/blu_tack.jpghttp://www.wrensworld.com/praying%20smiley.gif

That IS what I'm talking about. Some exact copy of you in another universe (or infinite copies thereof, since it's all infinite), lives forever, unlike you, yet you share all the exact experience, although on different universes, that are identical to the very point in which you die in yours, and then fork immediately so that your identical entity in another universe DOES live forever. It's in another universe, but it's still you, you're still living forever, and there's a comfort factor there I guess :P
But if there is a change ... any change (which would HAVE to happen) in order for there to be a different outcome ... but I got class now ... later :-D

First off, the thread asks about atheism. Atheism is the belief that there is no god.

I have a dream... and that dream is that before I die people learn the actual definition of atheism.

Atheism is the lack of a belief in a deity.

Belief that there is no God is a subset of atheism.

Agnosticism, to me, implies some kind of searching. It is not a "it doesn't matter if god exists". It's "I don't know whether or not god exists."

No, actually it's "it is unknowable whether or not god exists".

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=agnosticism

I have a dream... and that dream is that before I die people learn the actual definition of atheism.

Atheism is the lack of a belief in a deity.

Belief that there is no God is a subset of atheism.



No, actually it's "it is unknowable whether or not god exists".

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=agnosticism

I don't know and it's unknowable are essentially equivlent.

as to the definition of atheism, Wikipedia gives "Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities."
It later clarifies that the former is weak atheism, and the latter is strong atheism. I am a strong atheist, and I'm sorry for overlooking the weak ones. :-P

Atheism is a waste of a "religion". Why only hate gods? What about the religions that don't have gods? Are they cool? I think not. You could at least go "lacking in religion".

but because there are infinite possibilities, this change can happen at the very moment of your death, or right afterwards (pick whatever satisfies you, since both are possible), thus, you remain constant with your "alternate" until the very moment you die, at which point you are still the same person, yet this "other" goes on a path different than yours just as you stop existing in THIS world.

Again, read Dennett. He's a bit of a smug bastard (he wrote a book called Consciousness Explained), and it IS a pretty thick read, but it's quite enlightening.

For just a moment back to Quantum Physics.
There's infinite possibilities in different universes. By that logic, God COULD exist, and have the power that the Catholic church claims He has, thus his existence cannot be definitely disproven. In this world, he may still exist and have a very small role in affecting the world, or he may not exist at all. Then again, maybe he does exist and has all this power that we don't notice because we take it for granted. Thus, this is why I consider myself agnostic :P

Massive hypocrisy of religion drove me off- also, I haven't really seen any proof of the big guy's existence. And it pisses me off that people think prayer works, when I'm pretty damn sure that 6 million Jewish ppl were praying their friggin heads off as their friends, neighbors, and family were summarily and ruthlessly executed. If there was a God, how could something like that happen? I'm not buying this "god's will" crap. In a world where twelve year old girls have been kidnapped, raped, mutilated, and shot, I have a hard time finding the "good in people."

How is "lack of believe in a diety" and "belief that there is no god" different? Aren't they the same thing?

Reformentia-
But God definitely exists, and definitely does not exist.

Also, most agnostics I know consider themselves to be in a limbo state, clinging to their faith but rejecting the spoon-fed crap that whatever religion they were in before gave them. A lot of times, we just seek a nice comfy faith that makes sense that we can settle comfortably in. We don't always find something satisfactory though :P

Massive hypocrisy of religion drove me off- also, I haven't really seen any proof of the big guy's existence. And it pisses me off that people think prayer works, when I'm pretty damn sure that 6 million Jewish ppl were praying their friggin heads off as their friends, neighbors, and family were summarily and ruthlessly executed. If there was a God, how could something like that happen? I'm not buying this "god's will" crap. In a world where twelve year old girls have been kidnapped, raped, mutilated, and shot, I have a hard time finding the "good in people."

How is "lack of believe in a diety" and "belief that there is no god" different? Aren't they the same thing?


Really, "how could god let this happen?" is a shit arguement. It is just as likely that there is a mighty evil vengeful god as there is that there is a merciful forgiving one.

Elanos- It's possible :D

Why aithiesm? I've never seen any reason that there is a choice. I don't believe in religion for the same reasons I don't believe there are giant fluffy rabbits living on the moon, common sense (sorry if that offends anyone, but it's true). Even when I was very young and I was told by adults that some people in other famillies believed in a magical being who created everything, even though he never seemed to have any contact with them at all and there was no proof, I thought it was really strange. I still think it's strange, I can't understand it and find it amazing that otherwise intelligent human beings can believe in things like that.
My stance on religion is that it saddens me. I have a strong sense that we should always seek the truth, no matter what, so when I see people choosing religion over sceientific contemplation it seems that they are throwing away any chance they have of contemplating the wonders the of the universe for themselves. I can't imagine a worse fate than going though life never questioning or wondering why. I see religious people as being blind in a land of great beauty.

I became agnostic when the religious school I was at ridiculed other religions and in the same day read a story where a donkey talked to a dude. Seemed just a silly to me as anything else, so I started to wonder where they got off.

Then the question became-why am I in a position of assuming there is one? Didn't hold. Logically speaking it's unneccisary. So, nope. Too much of a shoe horn to make a god fit in the universe as we know it. (and that whole "he can't prove himself, it has to be faith" bit-he showed up constantly in that book, but in the last 2000 years he's decided, "Eh, fuck it. I'll keep 'em guessin', no matter what crap they pull in 'my name'" What the hell is that all about? Doesn't wash.)

But stories like that abound here I'm sure-I just wanted to note something I found interesting. I watched Touching the Void a while ago. It was the first time I've seen an athiestic test of faith, it was pretty cool. (The guy was left on the mountain to die and facing death didn't return to faith in a time of crisis, it didn't cross his mind. He said he had always wondered if that would happen, if he would panic back and he didn't)

we have so much disbelief because we live in a world where people don't see religion as the only way to keep sane in a crazy world. With the things that happened in ancient times (plagues, massacres, constant war, famine) People really needed faith to have some motivation to keep going and not collapse into anarchy. Granted, we do have many of these problems today, but not only do most people REALLY suffering them fall back to religion, many of the problems really aren't as far-reaching or serious as they used to be. In this wonderful modern society concentrating on scientific discovery, lengthening lives, understanding our world, a society that's pretty damn carefree, there is no real need for a strong faith system that is designed to comfort (and control) the miserable masses, giving hope for better lives after death if they kept to moral values. Fewer and fewer people now find a need for this. Many people, in fact, feel they're probably happier now than they could be in a heaven. Thus, we are able to easily question traditions, religions, long-standing beliefs, and try and make sense of them. That, or we can be angsty when our perfect lives get fucked and blame some higher power, thinking the best way to "punish" this higher power is to yell "nya nya, I don't believe in you anymore *raspberry*".
Atheism is a pretty funk topic to go about, and one I definitely disagree with on a logical basis. It doesn't make sense to me, I've never heard a valid argument from an atheist, yet I understand why they feel as they do. I've also seen both the good and bad sides of religion. It's comforting, it's VERY comforting, and can help a person move on and be happy in the worst fucking times of their lives, it's an embracing cushion for the miserable. Then again, it's a kick in the balls to free thinking, logical thinking, and general world harmony in many cases.
I have many times wished that I was able to have strong faith, let myself stick to a religion and just follow, because I know I'd be a lot happier simply following blindly. Then again, I like thinking for myself too much to do that.

How is "lack of believe in a diety" and "belief that there is no god" different? Aren't they the same thing?
One doesn't believe in anything.
The other believe (strongly I might add) that there is nothing.
One believes in a set of parameters. The other doesn't.

In the end they both end up the same in real life but the definition is different.

Same as If I said I don't have an apple while you said there are no apples at all. We both end up with nothing to eat but only one thinks that apple as a concept is make believe.

Atheism is a waste of a "religion". Why only hate gods? What about the religions that don't have gods? Are they cool? I think not. You could at least go "lacking in religion".
You do know that there are religion that are atheistic in their belief?

Atheist != No religion

I don't know and it's unknowable are essentially equivlent.

No the're not.

If you ask me the square root of 38976239, I would not know. It doesn't mean it's not possible to know.

So "I don'T know" and "It's not possible to know" are very different indeed.

IF hell exists
and IF the christians are right in their belief
and IF I am automatically sent there even if I lead a morally good life

With that many IFs, I can put Paris in a bottle.

Besides, with your way of thinking, you would have to be following the Muslim, Jewish, Buddism, Christian and Hindu faith. Why take a chance. What if the one you're following is wrong?



That My friend is where fait comes in. not before

The reason I hate threads like this is that people get it in their heads that they have to prove or disprove the opposing viewpoint, when the subject is obviously incapible of either.

The study of the nature of God and religious truth; rational inquiry into religious questions.

Theology is a collection of organized opinions, which no one can really prove or disprove. If someone says, "Pepsi is good," can you conclusivly prove that "Coke is better?"


wow brilliant you just boldend the SECOND point from that and ignored something that the rest of you are trying to argue. Note the rational written in your quote. Theology is a rational and logical study.

That My friend is where fait comes in. not before
So we go back to square one. Either you believe there is a god and act accordingly or you don't and act accordingly.

Great argument you have there... :rolleyes:

So we go back to square one. Either you believe there is a god and act accordingly or you don't and act accordingly.

Great argument you have there... :rolleyes:


But were not at the start, we have established it as foolish to assume and lose everything on a slight possibility that there is no God. Now the faith is used to choose which God it is.

But were not at the start, we have established it as foolish to assume and lose everything on a slight possibility that there is no God. Now the faith is used to choose which God it is.
Let's assume there is a god.
Your argument is that we should not take a chance and act according to his teaching. Right?

I posit that, if your argument is true, you have to act according to every single religion there is since you don't want to take the chance to go to hell if you were wrong.

Of course, if you beleive there is no god, then the point is moot anyway and you have convinced no one.

or there is a very simple explination for all of this. Some people like to think that we are not alone...that there is some supreme being ruling over everything. Some people do not. Who is to say that the other is wrong. There is no proof that there is a god, no proof that there isnt one. As long as u dont press ur beliefs on another person then there are no fights about all this...and if the pope croaking wasent on every fucking news channel.. then noone would really care what or what you dont belive in.

Why I'm Atheist:
#1: God (if he/she/it exists) is apparently "all knowing".

#2: God (if he/she/it exists) has apparently been around since before the beginning of time.

#3: If God is all knowing, then he MUST know both the exact position & the exact velocity of every atom in the universe.

#4: If God knows the exact location of everything, and it's exact speed, then, as a result, he knows how every particle will interact with every particle, causing more interactions, which he can predict.

#5: If God can predict every interaction, for all eternity, then the Future MUST be set, because the particals will all have a state, a speed, and a posistion, and as long as God knows them all, he knows EXACTLY how the future will turn out.

#6: If God knows how it will all turn out, then you have no free will.

#7: If you have no free will, merely the idea of one, then there is no need of faith, because you can't change the way God made you turn out (cause and effect, cause and effect, down the millennia).

#8: If you can't change the way you turn out, then God MUST have made you to do what ever you do, if he exists.

#9: If what you do is NOT believe in God, then, if he exists, you are doing what he wants you to do.

#10: If you do what God wants, then you go to heaven.

#11: If God exists, everyone goes to heaven, even Atheists, murderers.

As a result, I'd rather do what I want, then going to church, or follow 4000 year old book.

No the're not.

If you ask me the square root of 38976239, I would not know. It doesn't mean it's not possible to know.

So "I don'T know" and "It's not possible to know" are very different indeed.

If something is knowable, and important to know, and you don't know it, then you are lazy.

Why I'm Atheist:
#1: God (if he/she/it exists) is apparently "all knowing".

#2: God (if he/she/it exists) has apparently been around since before the beginning of time.

#3: If God is all knowing, then he MUST know both the exact position & the exact velocity of every atom in the universe.

#4: If God knows the exact location of everything, and it's exact speed, then, as a result, he knows how every particle will interact with every particle, causing more interactions, which he can predict.

#5: If God can predict every interaction, for all eternity, then the Future MUST be set, because the particals will all have a state, a speed, and a posistion, and as long as God knows them all, he knows EXACTLY how the future will turn out.

#6: If God knows how it will all turn out, then you have no free will.

#7: If you have no free will, merely the idea of one, then there is no need of faith, because you can't change the way God made you turn out (cause and effect, cause and effect, down the millennia).

#8: If you can't change the way you turn out, then God MUST have made you to do what ever you do, if he exists.

#9: If what you do is NOT believe in God, then, if he exists, you are doing what he wants you to do.

#10: If you do what God wants, then you go to heaven.

#11: If God exists, everyone goes to heaven, even Atheists, murderers.

As a result, I'd rather do what I want, then going to church, or follow 4000 year old book.

First off, let me say that I am an agnostic atheist.

That said, the answer my Christian friends and family give is that God's Word is the only thing more powerful than God Himself, and as such once he gave people free will, he could never violate it by knowing the future, or stopping the evil, or the like. I don't like it much, but it's the best answer I've heard yet.

For the record, the square root of 38976239 is ~6243.09530601607907249203713048585

I don't know and it's unknowable are essentially equivlent.
no, they most certainly are not. believing that it is possible to know something but that you yourself don't know it (yet) is very different from believing that it is IMPOSSIBLE to know that thing. i don't yet know how to fly a plane, but i believe it is quite possible for human beings to learn to fly planes; on the other hand, i don't believe any human can know whether or not God exists, and therefore any human who claims they can is either crazy, lying, or mistaken.

More so agnostic.
Most atheists realize that there is no way to prove either side. But we remain atheists instead of agnostic because we think science can prove everything.

String theory may prove how the universe was created. Yeah, you know the deal.

God told me he wasn't real. :(

Atheism is a waste of a "religion". Why only hate gods? What about the religions that don't have gods? Are they cool? I think not. You could at least go "lacking in religion".


Yet again, atheism has nothing to do with hating gods or anything. It's simply not believing in one.

Yet again, atheism has nothing to do with hating gods or anything. It's simply not believing in one.

Exactly, you do not have to hate gods or religeon to be an atheist,

i dont really believe in a god or goddess or watever but i do all at the same time i mean i have never seen them or personally talked to them and personally i think the only reason we belive in a god or goddess or higher being is because when we screw up we need someone to blame and when we need help we need someone to ask basically the higher beings are just a sign of hope and defeat we can all share no matter the religion i think there should be no orginized religions so that people can focus more on life than worring about constantly having to go to church or worship i means thats ok but all this crap about prayer in school and everything is mostly because of orginized religion people should just focus on what they wanna believe and stop following the teaching of some book or books

badger pope, I have 3 things I'd like to tell you.

1. comma
2. period
3. capital "I"

I'll try and ignore the rest of it. But please: Think of the children.

edit: I misspelled half the stuff I wrote.

badger pope, I have 3 things I'd like to tell you.

1. comma
2. period
3. capital "I"

I'll try and ignore the rest of it. But please. think of the children.

return of the gramar nazis!
for all you know he could have learning difficulties

return of the gramar nazis!
for all you know he could have learning difficulties

You cant refer to people like that. You sicken me. :sniper: :sniper:

return of the gramar nazis!
for all you know he could have learning difficulties

Here, I'll help you with that.

(The) (R)eturn of the (G)ram(m)ar (N)azis! (F)or all you know(,) he could have learning (disabilities)(.)

The Return of the Grammar Nazis! For all you know, he could have learning disabilities.

Now, isn't this new and improved version much better than your previous nonsensical jabber?

Here, I'll help you with that.

(The) (R)eturn of the (G)ram(m)ar (N)azis! (F)or all you know(,) he could have learning (disabilities)(.)

The Return of the Grammar Nazis! For all you know, he could have learning disabilities.

Now, isn't this new and improved version much better than your previous nonsensical jabber?

....thanks :D both for the spell check and proving my point

First of all, I am atheistic of my own free will and decision making. Nobody made me not believe or brainwashed me. I chose not to believe, because some of the things mentioned in the bible are either disproven with science, or just don't adhere to society anymore. For instance, gay marriage. This topic is frustrating to debate with bible thumpers :headbang: So, I just go to my happy place where I can make fun of all the illogical reasoning made up by the church to explain why certain things happened. SUCH AS EVOLUTION! (For those of you who want a good laugh, look up Ron Carlson. He is a speaker on why creationism is right and evolution is impossible) In this speech that I listened to, I found over two pages worth of notes that Ron Carlson stated... AS FACT, that were in fact FALSE! I see religion as more of a brainwashing that is used to conform the masses. Religion (no matter what it is) is a vital part of culture and society. Humans need a faith base in order to live. Even Atheism counts. Therefore, I have no problem with organized religion, I have just lost all faith in the Catholic church and do not believe in a higher diety that believes I am sinner and must repent for my entire life in order to get into heaven. I prefer to think of myself as a good person who can be nice to others and don't have to worry about going to hell for every little mistake I make. After all I did only evolve up from a monkey.

Here, I'll help you with that.

(The) (R)eturn of the (G)ram(m)ar (N)azis! (F)or all you know(,) he could have learning (disabilities)(.)

The Return of the Grammar Nazis! For all you know, he could have learning disabilities.

Now, isn't this new and improved version much better than your previous nonsensical jabber?

Stop saying that word.

badger pope, I have 3 things I'd like to tell you.

1. comma
2. period
3. capital "I"

I'll try and ignore the rest of it. But please: Think of the children.

edit: I misspelled half the stuff I wrote.


Thank you so very much. I realize I don't use correct spelling and grammer when i type in the forums, but you're not my grammer teacher and I'm not in my school at the moment. By the way, Badger Pope is a name. Badger Pope has to be capitalized.

First of all, I am atheistic of my own free will and decision making. Nobody made me not believe or brainwashed me. I chose not to believe, because some of the things mentioned in the bible are either disproven with science, or just don't adhere to society anymore. For instance, gay marriage. This topic is frustrating to debate with bible thumpers :headbang: So, I just go to my happy place where I can make fun of all the illogical reasoning made up by the church to explain why certain things happened. SUCH AS EVOLUTION! (For those of you who want a good laugh, look up Ron Carlson. He is a speaker on why creationism is right and evolution is impossible) In this speech that I listened to, I found over two pages worth of notes that Ron Carlson stated... AS FACT, that were in fact FALSE! I see religion as more of a brainwashing that is used to conform the masses. Religion (no matter what it is) is a vital part of culture and society. Humans need a faith base in order to live. Even Atheism counts. Therefore, I have no problem with organized religion, I have just lost all faith in the Catholic church and do not believe in a higher diety that believes I am sinner and must repent for my entire life in order to get into heaven. I prefer to think of myself as a good person who can be nice to others and don't have to worry about going to hell for every little mistake I make. After all I did only evolve up from a monkey.

One of the popes said that most of the things in the Bibal were metaphorical. Now you can't correct my grammar.

You cant refer to people like that. You sicken me. :sniper: :sniper:

wich part?

Thank you so very much. I realize I don't use correct spelling and grammer when i type in the forums, but you're not my grammer teacher and I'm not in my school at the moment. By the way, Badger Pope is a name. Badger Pope has to be capitalized.

Yes, usually that would be correct, but it is widely accepted, specially in modern pop culture, that when a "proper name" is "properly" uncapitalized, it is a sort of aesthetic aspect of the writing of the word, and thus should remain uncapitalized.

Mmmm.... commas make me feel good.

Thank you so very much. I realize I don't use correct spelling and grammer when i type in the forums, but you're not my grammer teacher and I'm not in my school at the moment. By the way, Badger Pope is a name. Badger Pope has to be capitalized.

Wrong. If it is a name then it would have to be capitalized but since the name itself is not normally capitalized then the name can not be capitalized even at the beginning of a sentence.

by the way E Blackadder its she not he

Mmmm.... commas make me feel good.


i see...........

wich part?

The part where the person(s) called the grammar correcters the abbreviation of the Nation Socialist German Workers Party. It is fun messing with people's grammar and this is the first time i did it. NO more. Tis for commies.

Wrong. If it is a name then it would have to be capitalized but since the name itself is not normally capitalized then the name can not be capitalized even at the beginning of a sentence.

Beat you to it! ^^

by the way E Blackadder its she not he

i do apologies :)

The part where the person(s) called the grammar correcters the abbreviation of the Nation Socialist German Workers Party. It is fun messing with people's grammar and this is the first time i did it. NO more. Tis for commies.

you find messing with peoples grammer fun?.......ooohkeay

Wrong. If it is a name then it would have to be capitalized but since the name itself is not normally capitalized then the name can not be capitalized even at the beginning of a sentence.


But the beginning of a sentence is always capitalized.

Beat you to it! ^^

Competetion is best reserved for capialist :)

Capitalist :mad:

i do apologies :)

You're provoking me.

(I) do apologi(ze). :)

I do apologize. :)


...It's my first time doing this, too. I feel like a terrible human being, but I can't stop.

...and Jibea, I think you want "Capitalist(s)". ;)

But the beginning of a sentence is always capitalized.

Nien, thats what the democrats and republicans want you to think.

You're provoking me.

(I) do apologi(ze). :)

I do apologize. :)


...It's my first time doing this, too. I feel like a terrible human being, but I can't stop.

...and Jibea, I think you want "Capitalist(s)". ;)

.......yeah?....am i provoking you?....well...dear me...what to do?...how about fuck off!!! :D :D

Is it me or does :mad: look like a frowny face because its dark and hard to see the eyebrows making a \/?

Nien, thats what the democrats and republicans want you to think.


im pretty sure thats not it because i think for myselves most of the time and i dont believe in republicans or demorcrats

.......yeah?....am i provoking you?....well...dear me...what to do?...how about fuck off!!! :D :D

OK, here goes:

Yeah? Am I provoking you? Well, dear me. What to do? How about fuck off?! :D :D

And by your word order and choice of question, it leads me to think that you have chosen to fuck your own self off out of frustration. I am sorry that I have taken you to such extremes.

P.S.: You're not really provoking me all that much. badger, on the other hand, is making my left eye itch.

.......yeah?....am i provoking you?....well...dear me...what to do?...how about fuck off!!! :D :D

(...) (Y)eah? () Am I provoking you? () Well, dear me, what to do? () How about fuck off(?)

...Yeah? Am I provoking you? Well, dear me, what to do? How about fuck off?

(...) (Y)eah? () Am I provoking you? () Well, dear me, what to do? () How about fuck off(?)

...Yeah? Am I provoking you? Well, dear me, what to do? How about fuck off?


I am victorious once more, foolish communist.

im pretty sure thats not it because i think for myselves most of the time and i dont believe in republicans or demorcrats

:mad: Liberalists :mad:

Sorry but you are not one of the magic four. Good bye.

didnt this start out as a thread about atheism not grammer :confused:

(...) (Y)eah? () Am I provoking you? () Well, dear me, what to do? () How about fuck off(?)

...Yeah? Am I provoking you? Well, dear me, what to do? How about fuck off?


I am victorious once more, foolish communist.

(...) (Y)eah? () Am I provoking you? () Well, dear me, what to do? () How about fuck off(?)

...Yeah? Am I provoking you? Well, dear me, what to do? How about fuck off?


I am victorious once more, foolish communist.

im pretty sure thats not it because i think for myselves most of the time and i dont believe in republicans or demorcrats

:mad: Liberalists :mad:

Sorry but you are not one of the magic four. Good bye.

One time when I was a little kid I asked my mother if there were really ghosts and goblins out on Halloween. She said, “no dear, those are just silly stories.” Now my mother couldn’t absolutely prove that there were no ghosts and goblins out there but seeing no evidence whatsoever of their existence she had the common sense to say the belief in those things was silly.
Can it be proven there is no supernatural? Not at this time, probably never. But to believe in the existence of something when there is no evidence of that something is just plain “silly, dear.”

magic four?