NationStates Jolt Archive

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

I don't think humanity needs God.

I guess I was born that way, just like everybody else.

I don't think humanity needs God.

Seconded

because i dont believe in god

its almost "by definition"

because i cannot identify me with priest and their lore, that jesus is the son of god, and the people must spend money to build churches ... holy symbols, that god surely won´t like...

I use rationality to prove things faith seems an odd way to beleive something. Plus all the contradictions in every religion, I'm not neccessarily atheist just not religious and not egotystical enough to make up my own concept of God and really believe I come close.

Religion is a tool of social control and power differentials, transparently incompatible with the notion of a loving, caring god figure.

(Is what I sometimes think :))

Because I see no proof of such a being ever being in existence.

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?
I don't feel God.

EDIT: I'm really amazed at the elaborate, sociological explanations that people are coming up with to justify their atheism. Why should it be anything more than the above?

Because whether or not any gods exist (which I don't think they do), I really don't give a damn.

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

When I saw the title, I thought this would be a thread from that "The Loyal Christians" moron.

I'm Atheist because I believe God does not exist.

I'm in it for the babes.

I've never seen any evidence of god. God seems more fantastic than ghosts, dragons, unicorns, and other mythical beasts, so I'm not about to believe in it without a bit of evidence.

"God is dead" - Nietzsche.
He was right - by his time there was no need for God, and there certainly isn't now. Religion is simply a way of controlling people in an attempt to discipline them. Now we have developed justice systems and generally well organised social systems which control people just as well. There is simply no need for God in a modern society.

I'm not actually atheist, I'm agnostic.

but "because I don't beleive God exists" is kind of a given as an Atheist. I think the implied question is "why don't you beleive God exists".

The answer is, I haven't experienced anything that I could truly call evidence of God.

I think for most Christians their evidence is "the feeling". I think "the feeling" in no way really proves anything conclusive.

I don't feel God.

EDIT: I'm really amazed at the elaborate, sociological explanations that people are coming up with to justify their atheism. Why should it be anything more than the above?

If you're talking about my reason, I thought it was quite simple, hardly elaborate at all! If you want it spelt out though, I worry that religion is simply another invention designed to control people. Whether or not I 'feel' god wouldn't matter - perhaps I'm too insensitive to detect his presence.

But yours was a spiritual answer, mine was an intellectual one - both are good, make sense! :cool:

Elgesh']If you're talking about my reason, I thought it was quite simple, hardly elaborate at all! If you want it spelt out though, I worry that religion is simply another invention designed to control people. Whether or not I 'feel' god wouldn't matter - perhaps I'm too insensitive to detect his presence.

But yours was a spiritual answer, mine was an intellectual one - both are good, make sense! :cool:

Really? I don't think people would be that elaborate with it. I think it already existed for whatever reason, and then people used it for control afterward because of how effective it was.

Though I'm nowhere near being an athiest, and I disagree with pretty much everything in the following article (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5015557), I do respect Penn in his "athiest apologetic", as it were. It manages to not be whiny about religion or overly critical of theists, but a direct, honest, and actually emotional explanation of his belief.

When I saw the title, I thought this would be a thread from that "The Loyal Christians" moron.

I'm Atheist because I believe God does not exist.

I was going to do that, but I thought why go through the trouble.

but "because I don't beleive God exists" is kind of a given as an Atheist. I think the implied question is "why don't you beleive God exists".

The answer is, I haven't experienced anything that I could truly call evidence of God..

Well one concept of God is hes outside of time and the universe and interfering with free will is not something he can do. The main reason I don't believe in Christianity is they claim God interfered in the world, and they think Jesus was the "son" of God and the laws of science don't seem to matter when miricles happen.

cause I'm not a sucker. I dont go for somthing just cause its in a moldy old book with no backing from tests or evidence. If I said I was God, with no proof, would you believe it? So why should I believe anyone else who say anything about a God without proof?

but "because I don't beleive God exists" is kind of a given as an Atheist. I think the implied question is "why don't you beleive God exists".

The answer is, I haven't experienced anything that I could truly call evidence of God..

Well one concept of God is hes outside of time and the universe and interfering with free will is not something he can do. The main reason I don't believe in Christianity is they claim God interfered in the world, and they think Jesus was the "son" of God and the laws of science don't seem to matter when miricles happen.

Though I'm nowhere near being an athiest, and I disagree with pretty much everything in the following article (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5015557), I do respect Penn in his "athiest apologetic", as it were. It manages to not be whiny about religion or overly critical of theists, but a direct, honest, and actually emotional explanation of his belief.
I read that article before, and loved it, so I am very interested in what you have against it.

His point is that from a perspective of comfort or what is the most encouraging beleif, atheism is better. Is that the point of his you disagree with?

If there is a god, he hasn't done anything for me to prove his existence.

god is a figment of his imagination

I'm not aethiest per se...I do believe that there is a God. But as far as I know, not one religion stands for what I believe in. I know too much about too many religions to really believe that any of them are right. And yes, I do also believe that religion has been an excuse to justify unjustifiable actions, so I don't readily acknowledge any of them either.

Basically everything said from Solarea to York Island.

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

I lack a reason to worship.

I read that article before, and loved it, so I am very interested in what you have against it.

His point is that from a perspective of comfort or what is the most encouraging beleif, atheism is better. Is that the point of his you disagree with?
Well, my main disagreement with him is that he says there is no God. As a theist, I can't agree with him on that point.

I also disagree with his statement, "It [the world] has to be enough, but it's everything in the world and everything in the world is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more." To me, just looking around and saying "Everything I see is all there is" just doesn't try hard enough. Sure, he looks around and says "This is all there is, and it's good" is fine, but it just lacks... something. Can't put my finger on what.

As for saying athiesm is the most encouraging belief, I have to disagree with that, too. I can see his point, that non-spiritual secular humanism makes things a lot easier (not worrying about sin, afterlife, etc.), but I just don't agree with it. To me, beliving in a God and an afterlife is encouraging, because it says we're more than matter and thought, we're soul and divine. To me, that's more encouraging.

I do respect his thoughtful viewpoint, though (some of his views outside the article aren't so thoughtful or respective, however). He's making a point for something, not against religion. In his own words, he's "beyond atheism"; he believes in something rather than not believing something. That I can respect.

I don't believe in god because can explain the universe to myself (and others, if they want to hear it) without adding anything from ancient books, mythologies and/or traditions. I don't need angry Zeus to explain lightnings, and I don't need "God's Rightfull Anger" to explain AIDS.

It's all in the human.

I guess I was born that way, just like everybody else.

What s/he said.

I like that answer. 's the best one, so far.

Because I don't need primitive superstitions to guide my day to day actions.

I am an atheist as I believe nearly all unnecessary wars are caused by religion and through being a nihilistic non-believer I am somehow protecting the nation from further suffering.

I also believe that religion is a clever and old con to make heaps of cash. I wish I had invented God.

I am an athiest because some portions of the human species have evolved beyond the need for myths to support thier world-views. "Gods will" is no longer an acceptable explanation in a universe that has been explained by science.

in a universe that has been explained by science.

Nitpick: it hasn't, and probably never will. But contrary to religion science does not claim to have all the answers, so that's ok.

Nitpick: it hasn't, and probably never will. But contrary to religion science does not claim to have all the answers, so that's ok.

I stand corrected. I should have said "Better explained by science"

Well at first I considered myself atheist, but being atheist is believing there isn't a god, and that to me is just as stupid as when people who are "religious" affirm that there is a god. The truth is that there is no way to know. It is impossible for us to know wheter there is a god as portrayed in the bible or if we are an experiment from a higher entity. The only thing that can be said and be completely truth is that we dont know. Admiting that we are ignorant to the origin, meaning, or postexistance of our life is the only way to be truthful. So atheist :gundge: are just as wrong as "religious" people.

I guess I would have to describe myself as agnostic, because all I have are beliefs of what is possible. Will we ever know?:confused:

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

When was the last time God answered one of YOUR prayers?

I'm in it for the babes.
Quality.

Though I'd go with the Penn article as well.

Because whether or not any gods exist (which I don't think they do), I really don't give a damn.
That's the best answer. :D

Because there is no god, ONLY ZEUL!! ;)

I could be considered atheist because I think it doesn't matter one iota if god exists or not. I call myself theist, though, because I do believe that dispite god being a total unknown there is something there to believe in.

Because all religions are obviously just things people made up to explain stuff they couldnt understand. They are all as ridiculous as the easter bunny or space unicorns.

Its not that theres no proof god exists, or even that theres no evidence, its just that theres no reason whatsoever to think that he (or any other supernatural thing) exists.

Just to let you know,

G-d (does not equal) Religion


And saying "G-d does not exist" is a religious statement. Anyone with true knowledge ((that is, as much as is known)) of G-d would know G-d does not exist.
Any religious person knows G-d does not exist. We admit it. It just strengthens our point. If you don't get what I'm talking about, take a theology course, you ignorant Atheist/"Religious" person.

Just to let you know,

G-d (does not equal) Religion


And saying "G-d does not exist" is a religious statement. Anyone with true knowledge ((that is, as much as is known)) of G-d would know G-d does not exist.
Any religious person knows G-d does not exist. We admit it. It just strengthens our point. If you don't get what I'm talking about, take a theology course, you ignorant Atheist/"Religious" person.
what's with the G-d? why not just say God?

I have always wondered but always forget to ask. anyone who knows please answer.

what's with the G-d? why not just say God?

I have always wondered but always forget to ask. anyone who knows please answer.

Some people actually fear to speak or type the name God. They are afraid that God might just smite them for taking his name in vain.

I don't believe in god because can explain the universe to myself (and others, if they want to hear it) without adding anything from ancient books, mythologies and/or traditions. I don't need angry Zeus to explain lightnings, and I don't need "God's Rightfull Anger" to explain AIDS.

It's all in the human.
Religion is all in the human, too. What about yourself? Can you explain yourself without anything from ancient books, mythologies and/or traditions? I rather think not. ;)

Angry Zeus does not explain the lightning, he is the lightning ...in you.

FIrstly: has anyone read angels & Demons and The da vinchi code

secondly: i am an atheist but i still think the bible is a good book, not because of the dogma but because it teaches you moral lesons

A god's existence hasnt been demonstrated to be either factual or theoretically necessary.

I grew up in a mostly athiest family. My mother was a presbyterian and still is to this day. My brother and father had the most philosophical influence on me as I was growing up. The religious side of things is usually wrought with diminished thinking, unexplainable life-changing decisions, the challenge of always meeting traditionalist expectations, non-acceptance, and never really understanding your own nature because it's entirely explained by something that is unexplainable. The only way to truly understand the world is to truly understand yourself. If you want to see the religious side of things, and not some front that people are going to put up, some asinine antiquated already bludgeoned twist of logic about how you can't really ever understand because that's what makes it faith (which is true), then simply observe. You don't have to ask any questions to see the results that many of these people bring about in their own lives. Some of them achieve some sort of sense of security, as well as respect amongst their peers for worthy accomplishments. Others don't do as well. They all live, however, only within the framework of what is acceptable, of what won't upset the parish, of what doesn't upset the idea that maybe they might be able to explain something without (insert preferred deity here). That is only a glance of what is on the other side of atheism. Why would I not want to reject such?

In French, the word reserved for ‘spirit’, ‘esprit’ , did not receive metaphysical connotations until very recently. Instead, ‘ l’esprit’ indicates an entirely cerebral connotation: We allude exclusively to a person’s wit and mental acuity rather than an intangible metaphysical presence (what I like to call “Deus In Machina”)- for that particular entity , we reserve the word ‘ame’ (soul).

A very important distinction must be drawn between belief and faith- two words often clumped together, but not synonymous with each other.

When speaking about belief we refer to a conviction we hold, we speak of the certainty of something occurring, we speak of placing our psychological confidence upon something. These qualities are not extraneous to religious belief, but the distinction that must be stressed rests on the basis of a belief: Reason or Unreason.

I can say –for example- that through scientific observation, satellite images, measurements, etc, that I am confident that the earth will continue its 365 day cycle around the sun, and that therefore the sun will ‘rise’ tomorrow. In this, I ‘believe’ – that is, I place a healthy degree of confidence upon it. The cycle of the of the earth around the sun, however, is a verifiable fact and not a belief and it will continue to be so regardless off what I may or may not believe. As my will responds to the call of reason, I prefer to first verify a fact before cementing a belief.

Faith, however, requires an element of unreason to be present. Faith requires the foregoing of rational evidence in favor of an intangible and unverifiable pronunciation. A belief based on faith would require the individual to accept the flatness of the earth without asking for evidence- and, in the most extreme cases, to continue believing despite contradictory scientific proof (not unlike the creationist belief that the earth is only a mere 7000 years old, contrary to the copious scientific evidence to the contrary). At one point in our history, we did accept such things on faith alone.

Faith is the ultimate circular value: It cannot justify itself through any other means but itself. The faithful believe, these beliefs are based on faith…taken at face value. The beliefs of the faithful strive to change as little as possible. Lacking a solid, verifiable base of reason, and appealing entirely to metaphysical values, it cannot afford itself the luxury of revision- the more an allegedly immutable truth changes, the less authoritative it becomes.

Reason-based beliefs, by contrast, exist solely as the product of scientific thought and research, and although they may at times show themselves reticent to be revised, their very nature grants them a flexibility that their faith-born brethren lack: While faith claims an answer to all the mysteries of the universe with immutable truths (many of which erode in the face of scientific revelations), Reason admits ignorance and embarks upon a quest to understand the universe through cognitive tools. It is free to admit that an earlier observation was erroneous or incomplete because, being free from Dogma, it seeks no other authority than the power to keep asking questions.

The most powerful separation between faith and reason occurs when one tries to reconcile the concept of miracles with our understanding of the scientific universe over the past two hundred plus years. It is unavoidable, but one cannot reconcile the idea of the bending or canceling out of the laws of the universe (the way in which we have recorded the behavior of the universe, causes and effects, etc) when we have never personally observed such phenomena. We have no scientifically collected evidence of the red sea parting, nor do we have verifiable samples and observation of the multiplication of bread and fish, nor do we have a verifiable record of the repercussions of Joshua causing the sun to stop (that is, causing the earth to stop spinning in its axis, effectively sending its entire contents and population soaring into space and the orb’s subsequent calcinations) – nor do we have, incidentally, records from other cultures mentioning this phenomenon (eclipses were always faithfully recorded by many cultures, often with periods of fear and terror associated with them. One would think that an event of a billion times their magnitude would be recorded all over the globe and transmitted through oral and written traditions. It was not.)

It is an inescapable choice that the individual must make at this point: Be a person of faith, or be a person of reason. A dichotomy is not truly possible due to the demonstrated incompatibility of Reason and Unreason.

That one cannot be an individual of faith does not exclude belief, as it was indicated earlier: those of us that are agnostics or atheists have beliefs. What differences us from our religious counterparts is that we often have a firm base of arguments and observations based on Reason to support them, and that they are open to updating in the face of new and concise evidence.

What, then, would the spirituality of the Reason-oriented individual be? Taking upon the French idiom (which derives from the Latin ‘spiritus’ or ‘breath’) that underlines cerebral activity, I define the spirituality of the agno-atheist as the very thing that defines him: Reason. Through the exercise of reason and objective thinking, he reinforces his ‘spirit’ (esprit) and his spiritual stance in the world.

The spirituality of the agno-atheist is not related in the least to the spirituality of the faith-based individual, but it concerns itself with the concrete ‘spirit’ that is his intelligence, with the only thing he can identify as himself –this not being a soul or a metaphysical construct but the palpable reality of his body, his personality, and the working of his capacity for reasoning. It is, therefore, a fallacy when the argument of unbelief and lack of spirituality is used against the reasoning individual. The fact is that his spirituality and his belief are based upon entirely different precepts. We do not recognize (or entirely deny, in the case of the agnostic) the existence of the metaphysical entities upon which others base their beliefs on… but this does not mean that beliefs focusing on reason and objective reality are invalid. It simply means that the religious faithful wish it to be so.

I am an atheist because I find faith to be easy. It's easy for me to make something up and then say that it's the truth. It's much harder and much more rewarding for me personally to observe reality and accept reality as it is. There is NOTHING reliable in reality that shows itself to require ANY supernatural explanation beyond any other doubt.

I was brought up without God in my life, and having learned of him, I fail to see the attraction. This surely makes a rather large statement about religion; if people stoped talking about it it would simply vanish. With that in mind, religion seems awfully foolish. That the person who is not indoctrined with God at an early/vulnerable age finds it nigh on impossible to have belief in him is all the proof I need to say without any regret that he does not exist. It isn't even a small probability, if there was a God in the sense of any religion of today, I wouldn't be in such a hopeless situation (In the eyes of the Churches).

New Viteria, saying that your definition of religion is different to the common consensus does not make us all ignorant.

(Sorry is this post is slightly incoherant, it's late and I'm tired.)

Just to let you know,

G-d (does not equal) Religion


And saying "G-d does not exist" is a religious statement. Anyone with true knowledge ((that is, as much as is known)) of G-d would know G-d does not exist.
Any religious person knows G-d does not exist. We admit it. It just strengthens our point. If you don't get what I'm talking about, take a theology course, you ignorant Atheist/"Religious" person.
wtf does that mean???

anyone with "True knowlege" of god would know that god does not exist??

what is that TRUE KNOWLEGE and how would knowing god mean you know he doesnt exist??

and do you really think that GOD is god's name and thus may not be written??

God told me he doesn't exist.

what's with the G-d? why not just say God?

I have always wondered but always forget to ask. anyone who knows please answer.

"Jews do not casually write any Name of God. This practice does not come from the commandment not to take the Lord's Name in vain, as many suppose. In Jewish thought, that commandment refers solely to oath-taking, and is a prohibition against swearing by God's Name falsely or frivolously (the word normally translated as "in vain" literally means "for falsehood").

"Judaism does not prohibit writing the Name of God per se; it prohibits only erasing or defacing a Name of God. However, observant Jews avoid writing any Name of God casually because of the risk that the written Name might later be defaced, obliterated or destroyed accidentally or by one who does not know better."

http://www.jewfaq.org/name.htm

I'm an agnostic. I used to be very christian, but it made me feel empty, even moreso after I had an experience at an evangelical youth event. They had an altar call and I went up and I opened my heart to Jesus and nothing happened. I was empty. Everyone around me was hugging and crying and I just felt like shit because nothing happened to me. When I went home, I studied the bible intensively and through my study, I felt more and more distant from the idea of the judeo christian god. I went and studied a couple other religions and then I figured that nobody really had the answers, we're all just as stupid and blind as the next people, we don't know whether there's a god after this life or not, nobody does and really, I don't consider it possible for anyone to know this. And there I stay. An apathetic and somewhat militant agnostic.

I don't know and you don't either, nor do I care.

The pay's better and the hours are shorter.

FIrstly: has anyone read angels & Demons and The da vinchi code

secondly: i am an atheist but i still think the bible is a good book, not because of the dogma but because it teaches you moral lesons

I've read all of the Dan Brown books and they're bullshit (quite fun to read though).

And lets be honest shall we? We're all Atheist for the extra-marital sex.:p

Even when I was little I found the idea of god quaint, by the time I was about 7 I had concluded that there was no rational way to justify the existance of god.

This did not sit well at Catholic school.

And lets be honest shall we? We're all Atheist for the extra-marital sex.:p
I only wish...

I've read all of the Dan Brown books and they're bullshit (quite fun to read though).

And lets be honest shall we? We're all Atheist for the extra-marital sex.:p
dammit i knew i shouldnt be skipping the meetings!

Because some people don't need a God, feeling that they hold their own lives in their own hands. Of course, you do infact. Either way, you control your own life except both ways you lead your self into things because Relgion does this and Atheism does that. Some people find it easier to rely on thereselves and loved ones ( that includes close friends fyi ) instead of a beyond power in the Heavens in which we have no inept way of communicating with in actual conversation.

I for one believe in God, yet I do wonder why some people believe that Mortals don't deserve the voice of God but only signs. God loves us so much, why doesn't he make it an effort to speak? I understand testing our beliefe and all, but you can imagine those really hard times when you need someone large whether you believe in him or not. Infact, even Atheists believe in God but in other ways. They believe in Angels and Jesus too. They just don't believe in them directly. God may be the one who has actual power over them, God may also actually be just a large cloud of space dust that keeps creating big bangs as we speak. Angels are those who save them in their deep time of need, and Jesus is the person who takes their own time to guide you through your hardships.

Really, you don't need religion to survive even in what some people call 'Jesus Land' ( IE The states that voted Red...I am Conservative but I think Jesus Land is a funny term ). But some people choose to believe in something, infact we all do. Faithful ones believe in God and Jesus and Guardian Angels, Atheists believe in their friends and their family and their own selves.

Really, both cultures arn't verry different. I am like most Atheist people I know, I believe in something more powerful than all our military might combined and at the same time I like to call him, or her or it, God. People think if you are somewhat religious then you are some Hick Freak who goes around going "PRAISE THE LORD AND PASS THE AMMUNITION!!!" and going to Sunday school where you are whipped by Nuns and going to Church every chance you get. Hell, I'm pretty religious and I havn't gone to churche since the 1st grade and I don't think God'll hate me for it.

So yea, that is just me. Wonder if anyone will actually read the entire post.

If you son't believe in God, how do you explain that the bible predicts 9/11:mp5: :sniper: ? Look:
The sixth angel sounded his trumpet and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God. It said to the angel who had the trumpet ' Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates'. And the four angelswho had been kept ready for this very hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind." Revelations 9:13-15

There were fur planes involved in 9/11, one heading for the white house, one for the pentagon, and two for the twin towers. These are the four 'angels'. Notice how this verse pays special attention to the 'hour and day and year', as if it knew how everyone would remember the date of 9/11. If you would like to hear more weird predictions of the bible, telegram me.:D :p :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :upyours:

If you son't believe in God, how do you explain that the bible predicts 9/11:mp5: :sniper: ? Look:
The sixth angel sounded his trumpet and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God. It said to the angel who had the trumpet ' Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates'. And the four angelswho had been kept ready for this very hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind." Revelations 9:13-15

There were fur planes involved in 9/11, one heading for the white house, one for the pentagon, and two for the twin towers. These are the four 'angels'. Notice how this verse pays special attention to the 'hour and day and year', as if it knew how everyone would remember the date of 9/11. If you would like to hear more weird predictions of the bible, telegram me.:D :p :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :upyours:
How do you explain that god didn't know that New York city and Washington DC were nowhere near the river Euphrates? The terrorists weren't from the land of the Euphrates river either. They were from Saudi Arabia. Is god a psychic and a retard?

EDIT: About 3000 people died in the 9/11 attacks. That's not nearly a third of all mankind.

I feel dumb now. You were obviously joking. You got me.

If you son't believe in God, how do you explain that the bible predicts 9/11:mp5: :sniper: ? Look:
The sixth angel sounded his trumpet and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God. It said to the angel who had the trumpet ' Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates'. And the four angelswho had been kept ready for this very hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind." Revelations 9:13-15

There were fur planes involved in 9/11, one heading for the white house, one for the pentagon, and two for the twin towers. These are the four 'angels'. Notice how this verse pays special attention to the 'hour and day and year', as if it knew how everyone would remember the date of 9/11. If you would like to hear more weird predictions of the bible, telegram me.:D :p :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :upyours:

wow that made the hair stand up on the back of my neck



not

If you son't believe in God, how do you explain that the bible predicts 9/11:mp5: :sniper: ? Look:
The sixth angel sounded his trumpet and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God. It said to the angel who had the trumpet ' Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates'. And the four angelswho had been kept ready for this very hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind." Revelations 9:13-15

There were fur planes involved in 9/11, one heading for the white house, one for the pentagon, and two for the twin towers. These are the four 'angels'. Notice how this verse pays special attention to the 'hour and day and year', as if it knew how everyone would remember the date of 9/11. If you would like to hear more weird predictions of the bible, telegram me.:D :p :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :upyours:
...What Drunk Commies said.

Plus, doesn't the bible say that fortune telling was sinful?

No not fortune telling. Predicting someone's future for profits was the works of the devil because it was greed and lying combined.

You combine Liberalism into your counterbeliefe saying that Iraq had no way involved, not even sending a few of their own volunteers to aid in the training. Also, the passage means that the attack will spark WWIII in which a third of the world's population shall die in. If you ask me, with the shit happening now especially with China I believe WWIII is quite possible.

Also, don't pull that old 'China has been threatening Taiwan for years' bull shit because China hasn't authorized a full scale invasoin up till recent times. ( Being with-in a year. )

But really, why should you even respond when from your stand point you believe he was immature for thinking so? Doesn't that lower your self too?

Also -

A lot of people from around the Euphratese Migrated to Saudi Arabia in the 1800s. Saddam's men may infact be descendants of those. Don't believe me? Look up the immigrations to Saudi Arabia.

No not fortune telling. Predicting someone's future for profits was the works of the devil because it was greed and lying combined.

You combine Liberalism into your counterbeliefe saying that Iraq had no way involved, not even sending a few of their own volunteers to aid in the training. Also, the passage means that the attack will spark WWIII in which a third of the world's population shall die in. If you ask me, with the shit happening now especially with China I believe WWIII is quite possible.

Also, don't pull that old 'China has been threatening Taiwan for years' bull shit because China hasn't authorized a full scale invasoin up till recent times. ( Being with-in a year. )

But really, why should you even respond when from your stand point you believe he was immature for thinking so? Doesn't that lower your self too?
Show me evidence that Iraq was involved. Until then stop parroting Bush administration lies.

-snip-
Drunk Commies, are you at it again?

I've never seen any evidence of god. God seems more fantastic than ghosts, dragons, unicorns, and other mythical beasts, so I'm not about to believe in it without a bit of evidence.
I can't be bothered to sum my reasons up so I'll quote DCD because he put it well.

Also -

A lot of people from around the Euphratese Migrated to Saudi Arabia in the 1800s. Saddam's men may infact be descendants of those. Don't believe me? Look up the immigrations to Saudi Arabia.
Yeah, let's ignore the fact that this "prophecy" states that a third of humanity would die. Unless we're down to our last 9000 people god is really bad at math.

Plus the "prophecy" doesn't mention an exact time or place where the events would happen. Other than the part about a third of humanity being killed off it could describe almost any event with any tenuous link to the river Euphrates. If god can't do any better than a carny with a crystal ball I hope you'll excuse me for thinking god doesn't exist.

Drunk Commies, are you at it again?
No. I finally got a nation to last long enough to break 1 billion people. I'm not about to get it deleted now.

I'm not Parrating, and I am only trying to say there is realism to Saddam not even authorizing a few men going to Saudi Arabia at all to aid. I'm not even saying it happened. I'm saying it COULD have happened. Your sitting there thinking I completely believe him and am saluting the bastard. There are several other ways Saddam could have indirectly have helped, there are thousands of other people in the world who may have helped too. But I'm not saying for sure. All I said was 'not even sending a few of their own volunteers to aid in the training' which generally means - 'You can't discredit the entire beliefe that Iraq as a whole could have aided in some way shape or form.'

So you can take your damn biases and shove them up your wide ass when your boyfriend decides to back away for a few seconds. I really hate it when everyone calls you a Bush supporting lackie when you say anything with Iraq aiding at ALL.

I'm not Parrating, and I am only trying to say there is realism to Saddam not even authorizing a few men going to Saudi Arabia at all to aid. I'm not even saying it happened. I'm saying it COULD have happened. Your sitting there thinking I completely believe him and am saluting the bastard. There are several other ways Saddam could have indirectly have helped, there are thousands of other people in the world who may have helped too. But I'm not saying for sure. All I said was 'not even sending a few of their own volunteers to aid in the training' which generally means - 'You can't discredit the entire beliefe that Iraq as a whole could have aided in some way shape or form.'

So you can take your damn biases and shove them up your wide ass when your boyfriend decides to back away for a few seconds. I really hate it when everyone calls you a Bush supporting lackie when you say anything with Iraq aiding at ALL.
Dude, for all we know YOU could have been involved. Leave that pointless speculation alone. If the prophecy is to be believed it must be more specific and it can't be wrong about tiny details like a third of the world's population being killed.

Oh, and about your insults. I won't respond in kind because I'm better than you. I'll just leave you with this warning.

http://tinypic.com/i3z90n.jpg

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

I am, religionist, for the same reason you are, agnostic.

I don't consider myself an atheist or a theist (nor am I agnostic, in case you were wondering). But I agree with what Eliphas Levi said,
"It is probable that such a God as the majority of atheists conceive does not exist."

I don't consider myself an atheist or a theist (nor am I agnostic, in case you were wondering). But I agree with what Eliphas Levi said,
"It is probable that such a God as the majority of atheists conceive does not exist."
since this thread has already been tossed off track....


why did you choose that nation name?

I don't consider myself an atheist or a theist (nor am I agnostic, in case you were wondering). But I agree with what Eliphas Levi said,
"It is probable that such a God as the majority of atheists conceive does not exist."

I'd disagree, when believing in something that doesn't exist, if it doesn't then we're not exacly slightly wrong or pretty close we're right and we have the right concept.

Well at first I considered myself atheist, but being atheist is believing there isn't a god, and that to me is just as stupid as when people who are "religious" affirm that there is a god. The truth is that there is no way to know. It is impossible for us to know wheter there is a god as portrayed in the bible or if we are an experiment from a higher entity. The only thing that can be said and be completely truth is that we dont know. Admiting that we are ignorant to the origin, meaning, or postexistance of our life is the only way to be truthful. So atheist :gundge: are just as wrong as "religious" people.

I guess I would have to describe myself as agnostic, because all I have are beliefs of what is possible. Will we ever know?:confused:

You are telling me I am wrong for knowing there is not a "God"? If so then you are wrong in your agnostic beliefs.
How can my acceptance in knowing that God does not exsist be wrong?
It is as simple as: you are born, you live and you die. Nothing more nothing less.
There is the slightest of chances that our exsistence may have been brought about by a more intelligent more advanced life form, but they would in no way be God like in any respect.

I am, religionist, for the same reason you are, agnostic.
Atheist not agnostic. There is a difference.

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?
Because as much as I'd like to believe in a fantasy, I can't. Sorry about that.

If you son't believe in God, how do you explain that the bible predicts 9/11:mp5: :sniper: ? Look:
The sixth angel sounded his trumpet and I heard a voice coming from the horns of the golden altar that is before God. It said to the angel who had the trumpet ' Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates'. And the four angelswho had been kept ready for this very hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind." Revelations 9:13-15

There were fur planes involved in 9/11, one heading for the white house, one for the pentagon, and two for the twin towers. These are the four 'angels'. Notice how this verse pays special attention to the 'hour and day and year', as if it knew how everyone would remember the date of 9/11. If you would like to hear more weird predictions of the bible, telegram me.:D :p :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :upyours:

A postdiction just as any of Nostradamus's. Same load fo bull. Can not be called a prediction unless it was before the fact. For example: august 31 2001
Hey Bob look here in the bible. It says here that Tower 1 and Tower 2 of the World trade Center and the Pentagon will be intentionaly flown into with airplanes and a fourth plane will go down in Pennsylvania that was supposed to hit the White House on september the 11th 2001, next month. Oh Yea, and about 2 billion or so people will die too.
And if someone did predict 9/11 they should be brought up on, what is it now 2,752 dead, 2,752 counts of murder for doing nothing to prevent it.

...

I for one believe in God, yet I do wonder why some people believe that Mortals don't deserve the voice of God but only signs. God loves us so much, why doesn't he make it an effort to speak? I understand testing our beliefe and all, but you can imagine those really hard times when you need someone large whether you believe in him or not. Infact, even Atheists believe in God (funny)but in other ways. They believe in Angels and Jesus too(uh..... NO). They just don't believe in them directly. God may be the one who has actual power over them, God may also actually be just a large cloud of space dust that keeps creating big bangs as we speak. Angels are those who save them in their deep time of need, and Jesus is the person who takes their own time to guide you through your hardships.

Really, you don't need religion to survive even in what some people call 'Jesus Land' ( IE The states that voted Red...I am Conservative but I think Jesus Land is a funny term ). But some people choose to believe in something, infact we all do. Faithful ones believe in God and Jesus and Guardian Angels, Atheists believe in their friends and their family and their own selves.

...

So yea, that is just me. Wonder if anyone will actually read the entire post.
Comparing friends, family and the working of nature to angels, Jesus and God. Seriously, LOL.
Directly or indirectly, I have no belief in God, angels, ghosts or Jesus.
Read the whole thing. Sure did.

I'm a soft-atheist/agnostic hybrid. (If I've got the term right. Atheist as in "a-theist"/"no believer in God" rather than "athe-ist"/"believer in no God").

As others have said, I've not seen anything to support a deity. There are many things (the whole world [edit: Actually I meant to say "universe"!]in fact) that could have arisen from the hand of the supernatural, but for the time being there's no reason to presume that happened, what with more mundane and (at least vaguely) understandable mechanisms governing us all.

At the same time, I don't tear down cathedrals (well, me chiselling away at the base of one would be fairly quickly noticed) and appreciate workship as something that helps some people personally deal with life and live their lives (on top of whatever supernatural aid it may or may not have managed to evoke).

I also like to attend an Armistice Day service, every year. That's for standard plain-old-mortal rememberance, to give credit to those still able to appreciate such things and if it happens that passed-on souls exist and are bolstered by what we're doing, up there in Heaven or Valhalla or whatsoever, then all power to them.

(Incidentally, I interact appropriately with the hymns and prayers and things at such services, also at church weddings and other occasions when I attend a place of worship of whatever denomination or sect or sub-division of the world-religions. It's mainly a social thing, however silly I may personally feel some of the words may be, but I couldn't lie about my feelings to any decently-empowered almighty, so why bother...)

What I think is that if I be not evil, do no evil, and also try to think no evil to frequently it'll definitely be a bonus to humanity, and maybe even a credit in my favour for any non-evil supernatural beings that may exist, but being self-rightous about it isn't really going to pass muster in the long-run, in mortal or eternal realms...

Hence I'm a soft-athiest (bordering on agnostic), by my initial definition (at other times I may claim agnosticism bordering on atheism, if the latter term is based upon the more extreme definition). And I've yet to hear anyone give good reasons why I'm wrong about life or going about life wrongly.

I'am Atheist. I choose to be Atheist and defend my stance, because I believe that since the enlightenment, religion has no basis. I therefore use extreme sarcasm when dealing with missionaries, or anyone who tries to convert me after I tell them my reasoning. Thank You.

(:rolleyes: )

I've seen the same thing done here, that I see so often... some 'attack' Atheism for being a faith, the same as, but juxtaposed to, 'religious' belief.

I only recall seeing oNE person here, who actually made the distinction - that there are TWO kinds of Atheists... the Implicit (or Weak, or Soft) Atheist, and the Explicit (or Hard, or Strong) Atheist.

An Implicit Atheist LACKS BELIEF in a 'god' or 'gods'.

An Explicit Atheist BELIEVES there is a LACK of 'god' or 'gods'.

We are all BORN Implicit Atheists... since we have no conception of any given idea of 'god' or 'gods' until they are shown to us.

I am an Implicit Atheist, because I see no reason TO believe in a 'god'. I've seen nothing that I can VERIFY, that REQUIRES a supernatural touch.


Most Atheists are Atheists for the same reason people don't believe in ghosts... or aliens... or goblins... there just isn't enough compelling evidence to accept something that adds a 'mysterious' explanation to a 'real' existence.

And yet... for SOME reason... we only make this big 'division' when it comes to 'god'...

I struggled with religon for a long time. Read lots of the Bible, did lots and lots of thinking about it. Then when I heard a sci-fi author had basically made up a religion and has millions of followers, I realized that the Bible probably started in the same way. I was supposed to trust a book written by men two thousand years ago that is full of contridictions, and basically paints God as a prick. So I became an athiest, until empherical evidence of God can be found.

Although that left me with no explanation for WHY the universe happened. Although I do like the explanation from "Gods Debris"

"God is dead" - Nietzsche.
He was right - by his time there was no need for God, and there certainly isn't now. Religion is simply a way of controlling people in an attempt to discipline them. Now we have developed justice systems and generally well organised social systems which control people just as well. There is simply no need for God in a modern society.

I'm not actually atheist, I'm agnostic.

Exactly my view.

Well, there's plenty of things to put your faith in out there to understand right from wrong. Let's look at the legal system. When someone is in trouble, who do they put their faith in? Lawyers. But, who do the lawyers look up to? The judge. Now, where does the judge look for guidance? The law. You could say that the laws are created by judges, but ultimately, it is the laws that are followed. I would think that former Alabama supreme court justice Roy Moore's example of what happens when one thinks that they are greater than the law and not the other way around. You could even say that God made all the laws of the universe, but even He chooses to follow them.

So that's what I put my faith in: the laws of the universe.

I would like to beilieve in god but cant .. . .not after te way that so many religions are used to control the beliefs and actions of their "flocks" often for the worse

I think people don't believe in God (as in Christianity) is that the sinful nature of people makes them want to do immoral things, and God dosen't really allow those. Basically, it's like a politician changing a law so he can do something he wouldn't be able to before - because it was illegal back then.
[off topic] Besides, if evolution is right, there would have been a animal smarter than us before us, right? [/off topic]

I think people don't believe in God (as in Christianity) is that the sinful nature of people makes them want to do immoral things, and God dosen't really allow those. Basically, it's like a politician changing a law so he can do something he wouldn't be able to before - because it was illegal back then.

While I already disagree with your comparision an sich, it is also incomplete. God after all never backs up his rules with reasoning - he just states them. So every change backed up with reason is better than the laws of God.

If God wants us to follow his laws, he should provide the underlying principles. No list of laws can ever be complete after all.

Evidence hasn't presented itself to shake me into believing in a higher power. To paraphrase Michel de Montaigne, if you aren't concerned about where you were before you were born, why should you care about what happens after you die?

/all right, all right, I'm really just an agnostic... sheesh!

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?
That's a bit like asking why we are human. We are all born that way - human and atheist.

The question is why some people then choose to start believing ancient superstitions and myths.

That's a bit like asking why we are human. We are all born that way - human and atheist.

The question is why some people then choose to start believing ancient superstitions and myths.

Well, they aren't all ancient. The one about Xenu (Scientology) is pretty recent.

I always thought it would be fun to write some short stories about some fictional future where present day figures have become deified in some way or another. Unfortunately, I'm lazy and untalented.

Why am I an athiest?

Becuase when you ask yourself if God exists, you in essence, put God's existance on trial.
In a trial, you are presumed innocent, until proof can be shown to the contrary.

In God's case, we can presume he does not exist, unless it can be proven otherwise.

If the above were to be taken as literal, then there would be no proof, that would be admissable by any jury, to prove that any god existed at all.

In fact, to go on the offensive, the only "proof" the other side can show, is a book whos origins are in question, as is its supposed "eye witness" accounts of any supposed divinity.
In truth, the Bible is no more proof of God's existance, than Harry Potter's books are proof of a school of wizardy in England.

Ergo, the only logical, and perhaps sane verdict, is that God does not exist.

I am atheist because Jesus never returns my calls.

I am atheist because Jesus never returns my calls.

You have to unblock your number.

All that weed makes him paranoid.

There's no reason not to be atheist. There are, however, a near endless list of damn good reasons for not being religious.

So what's the OP's excuse?

There's no reason not to be atheist. There are, however, a near endless list of damn good reasons for not being religious.

So what's the OP's excuse?
List a few reasons for not being religious. I can list one: being associated with the Catholic Church. I can also list a reason for not being athiest: you come off sounding like a jerk (no one in particular, just in general.)

I think people don't believe in God (as in Christianity) is that the sinful nature of people makes them want to do immoral things, and God dosen't really allow those. Basically, it's like a politician changing a law so he can do something he wouldn't be able to before - because it was illegal back then.
[off topic] Besides, if evolution is right, there would have been a animal smarter than us before us, right? [/off topic]

Yes that's right, we're all evil demon worshippers who eat babies.:rolleyes:

And if you explain your evolution point a bit more clearly then I'll try and respond to it.

List a few reasons for not being religious. I can list one: being associated with the Catholic Church. I can also list a reason for not being athiest: you come off sounding like a jerk (no one in particular, just in general.)
Religion these days seems to be all about hating various minorities & trying to dictate the behaviour of perfectly innocent strangers. To me that's a pretty good reason for not touching religion with a ten foot pole.

And on a very basic level, I think it's horrible that people submit to an authority they can't question or challenge.
The most basic concept of religion seems greatly at odds with freedom. And I value my freedom.

Lack of proof. I withold belief in deities.

Lack of proof. I withold belief in deities.

I withhold belief just to piss off God.

Smite this.

Perhaps God is testing us - he created us, gave us the potential for reason and failed to give us sufficient evidence to believe in him by rational means. He wants to preserve those who rise above primitive superstition, and so he'll only save those with the sense not to believe in him :)

And lets be honest shall we? We're all Atheist for the extra-marital sex.:p

Or for the next best thing: masturbation without guilt.

Or for the next best thing: masturbation without guilt.
Or rather, the freedom to actually decide for ourselves what we want to do.

Or rather, the freedom to actually decide for ourselves what we want to do.

Well of course. I just thought we were naming the most important aspects of said freedom.

Humanity no longer needs God, reason/logic, but foremostly because I'm a Raëlian

While I already disagree with your comparision an sich, it is also incomplete. God after all never backs up his rules with reasoning - he just states them. So every change backed up with reason is better than the laws of God.

If God wants us to follow his laws, he should provide the underlying principles. No list of laws can ever be complete after all.
oh id be happy if there were ONE unjustified list that had been given to all humanity. after all, as a mom, there are times when i have said "because i said so" and expected it to stand

but not only isnt there one set of laws for all humanity, the one WE are supposed to follow (the bible) is full of inconsistant rules that make them all impossible to follow.

its just not right.

Don't blame me, I was born that way.

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

Soft Atheist because I see no compelling evidence for the existence of a god, nor the reason for one to exist. The very nature of most deities makes their existence an assumption based on assumed facts with zero verifiable (causal) facts.

And I would hate to start feeling guilty about masturbation, orgies and wanton killings.;)

Atheist not agnostic. There is a difference.

Twas a poor attempt to make a facetious point concerning the reason we all exist is the same. Labels of belief being irrelevant.

As for why an atheist: (soft converted) There is no compelling, verifiable, quantifiable or simply visibly measurable evidence for the existence of a deity. I personally do not see the need for a deity either.

Elgesh']If you're talking about my reason, I thought it was quite simple, hardly elaborate at all! If you want it spelt out though, I worry that religion is simply another invention designed to control people. Whether or not I 'feel' god wouldn't matter - perhaps I'm too insensitive to detect his presence.

But yours was a spiritual answer, mine was an intellectual one - both are good, make sense! :cool:
Of course religion existed originally to control people! Most of those "moral laws" actually had a sensible purpose in ancient times. Religion has also given hope to many people who had otherwise miserable lives.

I am an Atheist because when I was told I was apparantley naughty when a young boy, the argument about Jebus or watever sort of was as much as went.

Jebus want you to vote conservative. tat was a very good reason for me to start to really disagree with religion

Jebus saves (but mohammed scores on the rebound) complete and utter disegard of any physical evidence for the argument of evolution (yes I know both Darwins were devout Jebusians... who give a flyin' arsehole)

the fact that wenever I asked a question it was aswered (by the powers tat were (teacers strange people etc)) as well that is how God (who the feck is this god bloke and why is he so vague, allah on a dildo, if I was omniescent I would make sure people knew about it)

essentially I found that religion and religious belief was laughable and that have belief whilst honourable in a sort of laughable manor, give me something talk about in a pub.

Atheist and fucking in yur face about it (if you can wear a crucifix then I can wear a T-Shirt that informs you that your god is non existant (ooops just checked te law apparantly I am not allowed to do that 'cos atheists have no rights))

I'm an atheist. Not hard or soft of agnostic just an atheist. Im tired of trying to label everyones unique thoughts. It's a generalized category for a reason. All the hairspitting is slowly becoming an irritation.

I'm an atheist because the idea that there is no such thing as nothingness does't sit well with me. I think there is a non-existence and sentience could not rule in this. Therefore, I dont follow any theist teachings that hold to a creationist ideal.

Religious tombs are flawed. Even if there is a (insert powerful deity) humanity has existed for thousands of years and the writing and doctrines therewithin have been altered changed interpreted and re-interpreted. By following one of these your as likely to damn yourself as save yourself in the eyes of the all mighty.

Morality is subjective to perception. I follow no one guide for this, instead freely observe incorporate and adjust. Doing the best I can.

Where most people see a hole that needs faith or conviction, i see a hole and think home.

I am an Atheist because when I was told I was apparantley naughty when a young boy, the argument about Jebus or watever sort of was as much as went.

Jebus want you to vote conservative. tat was a very good reason for me to start to really disagree with religion

Jebus saves (but mohammed scores on the rebound) complete and utter disegard of any physical evidence for the argument of evolution (yes I know both Darwins were devout Jebusians... who give a flyin' arsehole)

the fact that wenever I asked a question it was aswered (by the powers tat were (teacers strange people etc)) as well that is how God (who the feck is this god bloke and why is he so vague, allah on a dildo, if I was omniescent I would make sure people knew about it)

essentially I found that religion and religious belief was laughable and that have belief whilst honourable in a sort of laughable manor, give me something talk about in a pub.

Atheist and fucking in yur face about it (if you can wear a crucifix then I can wear a T-Shirt that informs you that your god is non existant (ooops just checked te law apparantly I am not allowed to do that 'cos atheists have no rights))

What the hell is a 'Jebusian'? An alien from planet Jebus?

I won't even try to comprehend the rest of your typing.

To answer the initial question, I might believe to a degree in something like a god, but I'm not going to worry about it nor pay it any homage. To do so would be an exercise in futility.

I just don't see any proof of any G-d, and as far as I'm concerned religion does nothing but divide people and cause trouble, says the Marxist. :D

I just don't see any proof of any G-d, and as far as I'm concerned religion does nothing but divide people and cause trouble, says the Marxist. :D
So sayeth this freedom-loving pseudo-anarchist as well.

I'd be interested in knowing if any religious readers of this thread believe they'd be paying homage to <whatever> if your religious institutions and/or holy scripture didn't tell you to do so?

Because there is no evidence of a god and thus no good reason to believe one exists.

because i'm a scientist, so i'm a logical person who goes on what is proven fact or logical thought from proven fact.

I am also a 2nd gen athiest

the only way I would admit there was a god would be if he/she/it/them came down and proved they were god.

still wouldn't have religion as most of them require faith without proof

Here I'm a slight oddball. It's not a kneejerk against a wacko happy-clappy family and it's not an idea built into me by my parents. My parents are Anglicans (fairly accepting of just about any religion) and i slowly came to think less and less that there could be divine stuff going on. It took me a while to confess this to my dad (who is currently training to be a priest), and when I did about 7 years ago he was fine with it. He'd worked it out, even though i did spend most of sunday with the family away doind what I'd said (Can you blame a teenage boy for that though?)

I did say that they're quite accepting. If I randomly decided to tell them i was gay, they'd not bat an eyelid. I've been in a stable relationship with my girlfriend for over a year, but still they'd be fine. England is good in terms of wacko to normal ratio. it's the thing of people shutting up when they're outnumbered by a lot.

So there's something that I've been trained to hate - Bible bashers. Dad would rather talk to anyone but a bible basher, in his own words "I'm a christian and i choose to ignore certain parts of the bible that clearly were written as a guide to surviving in the desert, so please remove the book of leviticus from my face and stop telling me my gay brother is going to hell before I call the police and report you for harrasment".
He stayed surprisingly calm that time. Watching him quote the sale of goods act at a shop that tried to rip him off is fgreat fun.

Don't blame me, I was born that way.
The cry of the lonely fatalist. ;)

I don't believe in God for the same reason I don't believe in unicorns, goblins, elves, Santa Claus, the Greek pantheon, ... None of those things exist.

Hmmm, I'm going to give my own opinion because I want to. I presume hardly anyone will read it for the same reasons that I didn't read most of the opinions on this thread - there are too many.

1) I was raised an atheist
2) I dislike the baser elements of humanity that organised religion provokes.
3) The benefits of religion/spirituality can be achieved by other means.
4) I don't feel I need a god to justify my life or my existence.
5) All good religious laws can be, alternatively, justified by sociological considerations and without having to resort to the uncontestable opinion of a supreme authority figure.
6) I dislike unquestionable authority
7) The gods of organised religion are imperfect
8) So even if the jewish/christian/muslim god existed I still wouldn't worship him.
9) The present warrants much more consideration than the beginning
10) The concept of an immortal soul scares me more than the concept of a mortal soul. I still find the concept of a mortal soul scary, just less scary than the immortal soul.

reading this thread makes me want to cry. anyways, (this is more a confession than anything else, maybe even a reason why there are so many atheists) for you who say you don't see any evidence, or there is no prrof, the bible has no backing, etc., i know, for sure, that there is enough evidence to prove beyond reasonible doubt that there is a god. if this were a court case, and it were fair, impartial, and fully informed on both sides, the judge would be forced to rule in favor of god. but this evidence is so scattered, incoherent, hard to make sense of and the like, that for whatever reasons, and to my shame, i am too lazy/busy/selfish to invest the amount of time it would take to compile and present such an argument for god. i apologize for this, i feel as though you all might be saved if even one of us would take the time to do this. maybe some time in the future, we will manage to do so. but for now, i'll just sit here feeling guilty. that's pretty much all i have to say about that.

reading this thread makes me want to cry. anyways...meh, I never mentioned anything about existence of a god, just that I don't need him/her/them in my life. And if this god is so grand then he'll surely be more gratified by the way I live my life with respect to other people than by the way I live my life with respects to him/her/them. If not, then I'd rather not be a part of his flock.

I'd be interested in knowing if any religious readers of this thread believe they'd be paying homage to <whatever> if your religious institutions and/or holy scripture didn't tell you to do so?

you mean would i worship my god even if nothing told me to? likely. the bible says it is good to do so, but even before it was around, thre were peopl worshiping god, presumably just because they wanted to. i would probably worhip god whether or not i was told to. and i'm not told to on a very regular basis anyways...just reminded that it is good every now and then. usually when i worship, it's because i want to, because i feel like he deserves it or i feel grateful for something, etc.

meh, I never mentioned anything about existence of a god, just that I don't need him/her/them in my life. And if this god is so grand then he'll surely be more gratified by the way I live my life with respect to other people than by the way I live my life with respects to him/her/them. If not, then I'd rather not be a part of his flock.

he doesn't care so much about how you live, more than anything else, he just misses you. wishes you'd quit ignoring him and come back home. or something like that, anyways, i should probably not pretend like i can speak for him. but i do believe he just wants to spend time with you, like any other good friend.

Some people actually fear to speak or type the name God. They are afraid that God might just smite them for taking his name in vain.

Fear is always a good thing. It is good to wake up every morning and worry that you may have pissed off G-d because if you aren't constantly careful he will come down and take your first born. It's not like fear has ever led to mass genocide or pretty much all hatred. Embrace it.:headbang:

reading this thread makes me want to cry. anyways, (this is more a confession than anything else, maybe even a reason why there are so many atheists) for you who say you don't see any evidence, or there is no prrof, the bible has no backing, etc., i know, for sure, that there is enough evidence to prove beyond reasonible doubt that there is a god. if this were a court case, and it were fair, impartial, and fully informed on both sides, the judge would be forced to rule in favor of god. but this evidence is so scattered, incoherent, hard to make sense of and the like, that for whatever reasons, and to my shame, i am too lazy/busy/selfish to invest the amount of time it would take to compile and present such an argument for god. i apologize for this, i feel as though you all might be saved if even one of us would take the time to do this. maybe some time in the future, we will manage to do so. but for now, i'll just sit here feeling guilty. that's pretty much all i have to say about that.
Right, there is evidence because you say so. Of course you can't be bothered to present the evidence, but we should take you at your word. Sorry, to use your analogy of a court case; you're commiting legal malpractice. God's council seems incompetent.

he doesn't care so much about how you live, more than anything else, he just misses you. wishes you'd quit ignoring him and come back home. or something like that, anyways, i should probably not pretend like i can speak for him. but i do believe he just wants to spend time with you, like any other good friend.I've had periods of... what's the best way to put this... wanting god to exist, or searching for spirituality. I tried praying, but more than anything I just felt silly. Meditation was good, but I felt that was more like getting in touch with myself. But either way, there have been over 10 billion humans that have lived or are living over the last 10,000 years. I'm sure a god wouldn't mind waiting another 60 odd years to get in touch with little old me.

I've had periods of... what's the best way to put this... wanting god to exist, or searching for spirituality. I tried praying, but more than anything I just felt silly. Meditation was good, but I felt that was more like getting in touch with myself. But either way, there have been over 10 billion humans that have lived or are living over the last 10,000 years. I'm sure a god wouldn't mind waiting another 60 odd years to get in touch with little old me.

That brings up another intersting point. Homo sapiens have been on the go for over 100,000 years or so, and some other hominids (e.g. homo neadertalensis, heidelbergensis [sp?]) appear to be very close in form and brain size (better than us, in the case of neanderthals), which is usually used as a proxy for brain power when comparing homonids.

Judiasm is only a few (between 3 and 4, I think?) thousand years old. What happened to all the humans, and thier souls (if we have them) before then? They couldn't 'know God' in the way Christianity or Judaism posits, so...? A religious person, help me out here, what do your lot believe!

reading this thread makes me want to cry. anyways, (this is more a confession than anything else, maybe even a reason why there are so many atheists) for you who say you don't see any evidence, or there is no prrof, the bible has no backing, etc., i know, for sure, that there is enough evidence to prove beyond reasonible doubt that there is a god. if this were a court case, and it were fair, impartial, and fully informed on both sides, the judge would be forced to rule in favor of god. but this evidence is so scattered, incoherent, hard to make sense of and the like, that for whatever reasons, and to my shame, i am too lazy/busy/selfish to invest the amount of time it would take to compile and present such an argument for god. i apologize for this, i feel as though you all might be saved if even one of us would take the time to do this. maybe some time in the future, we will manage to do so. but for now, i'll just sit here feeling guilty. that's pretty much all i have to say about that.

Well, thanks for your time, and thanks for the thought... but, I'm afraid I can't agree with you.

There is far FROM enough evidence to prove AT ALL, let alone 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

I'm a creature of logic... it was EASIER for me when I was a believer... so I looked for evidence... GOOD evidence... and it just isn't there.

reading this thread makes me want to cry. anyways, (this is more a confession than anything else, maybe even a reason why there are so many atheists) for you who say you don't see any evidence, or there is no prrof, the bible has no backing, etc., i know, for sure, that there is enough evidence to prove beyond reasonible doubt that there is a god. if this were a court case, and it were fair, impartial, and fully informed on both sides, the judge would be forced to rule in favor of god. but this evidence is so scattered, incoherent, hard to make sense of and the like, that for whatever reasons, and to my shame, i am too lazy/busy/selfish to invest the amount of time it would take to compile and present such an argument for god. i apologize for this, i feel as though you all might be saved if even one of us would take the time to do this. maybe some time in the future, we will manage to do so. but for now, i'll just sit here feeling guilty. that's pretty much all i have to say about that.
better (smarter, more knowlegeable) men than you have tried and failed.

if it were so easy to prove the existance of god beyond a reasonable doubt, who would be an atheist??

Just like earlier comrades who said before me (An other Marxist and Anarchist) :D

Religon is the tool of the ruling class, it replaces real suffering with religous suffering. If the masses are ever going to liberate theirselves, they must reject and crush the church, its clergy, and the "holy word", to be truly revolutionary, we must have obiedence or servitude to no master! Not on earth or in heaven! Workers of the World Unite! :cool:

PS, And if God really did exist, it would be nessecary to abolish him.

better (smarter, more knowlegeable) men than you have tried and failed.

if it were so easy to prove the existance of god beyond a reasonable doubt, who would be an atheist??

Exactly... ESPECIALLY among the 'Implicit' variety, it would be illogical to resist CONVINCING proof.

Hell, I kind of wish there WAS good enough evidence... it would be so much EASIER not having to make your OWN moral judgements, etc...

Exactly... ESPECIALLY among the 'Implicit' variety, it would be illogical to resist CONVINCING proof.

Hell, I kind of wish there WAS good enough evidence... it would be so much EASIER not having to make your OWN moral judgements, etc...

aha but that is the idea

I'd be interested in knowing if any religious readers of this thread believe they'd be paying homage to <whatever> if your religious institutions and/or holy scripture didn't tell you to do so?
Considering I don't have a religious institution nor scripture, I'd have to say 'yes'.

Well, thanks for your time, and thanks for the thought... but, I'm afraid I can't agree with you.

There is far FROM enough evidence to prove AT ALL, let alone 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

I'm a creature of logic... it was EASIER for me when I was a believer... so I looked for evidence... GOOD evidence... and it just isn't there.
She is not talking about "GOOD evidence," she is talking about evidence that leaves her without doubt.

if it were so easy to prove the existance of god beyond a reasonable doubt, who would be an atheist??
Just so. That is why those who don't doubt are theists. :)

1) Religions came out of the need for people to have comfort in death.

2) There are several religions in the world. This shows how areas of the world molded religions to better fit the social/environmental status around them into a religion they used for comfort.

3) All of the religions on Earth do not mention anything off of this planet. Knowing that there HAS to be other life in the universe, if there was an alien civilization that, for some reason had the same morals as say, Christanity.. than the souls of the aliens could get into heaven as defined under christan religion.

This being said. Religion cannot exist, it is a primitive hope that after we die some part of us will be in "paradise".

In 20 billion years when the universe we reside in collapses back down into a pre-big bang state.. what will religions do after intelligent life evolves... THERE SOULS WILL HAVE TO BE SAVED OF COURSE! Will God send down another jesus/mohammed/abraham to preach to these new civilizations?

And even if there is god, heaven would be so boring. They way they describe it as some sort of christan Nirvana. It's like a state of not wanting- yet being in a fuzzy electric blanket. Now.. think of that until the end of the world on earth, than the city of Jerseulem will be raised into the skies and the souls will live in the city in heaven.

Better have rent money.

God has only himself to blame for my disbelief. You'd think it wouldn't be too hard for an omnipotent being to show some actual proof of his existence.

I haven't seen any miracles that defy scientific explanation lately, have you? There's just no reason for me to believe.

I don't balive in a big beard up in the sky. Heres a question,

What I be called if I started somthing that required you to wear pink torusiers on Thusdays and talked to my Imagary freind-Len

A: Insane

Q: What would it be called if millions of people wore Pink trousiers of Thursdasys and talked to there imgainary freind-Len

A) A Relgion.

God has only himself to blame for my disbelief. You'd think it wouldn't be too hard for an omnipotent being to show some actual proof of his existence.

I haven't seen any miracles that defy scientific explanation lately, have you? There's just no reason for me to believe.

Exactly.. if he is so powerfull, why can't he show the non-beleivers if he cared about them so much.

because athiests read too much nietzsche

oh, and if you have to ask, you won't understand.

i, by the way, am not an athiest, though i'm certainly not christian (too smart for that). however, i'd suggest to athiests the book "mere christianity" by c.s. lewis on the grounds only that it is interesting.

i find this whole thread rediculous.
anyway, athiests > christians.

love, sam

She is not talking about "GOOD evidence," she is talking about evidence that leaves her without doubt.
it doesnt have to be ALL Doubt. just beyond a reasonable doubt

id be VERY happy with "preponderance of the evidence"

i might even accept (for a specific religion) a "pretty darned good" reason to believe.

im not counting that innate feeling that there exists something supernaturally greater than ourselves. while compelling, that does not imply any specific belief system.

because athiests read too much nietzsche

oh, and if you have to ask, you won't understand.

i, by the way, am not an athiest, though i'm certainly not christian (too smart for that). however, i'd suggest to athiests the book "mere christianity" by c.s. lewis on the grounds only that it is interesting.

i find this whole thread rediculous.
anyway, athiests > christians.

love, sam
*shudder* i could never stand cs lewis.

because athiests read too much nietzsche

oh, and if you have to ask, you won't understand.

i, by the way, am not an athiest, though i'm certainly not christian (too smart for that). however, i'd suggest to athiests the book "mere christianity" by c.s. lewis on the grounds only that it is interesting.

i find this whole thread rediculous.
anyway, athiests > christians.

love, sam



Hmm...C.S. Lewis is a literary genius, and I greatly admire him.

Ok back on topic:

First off I'd like to point out that you said, though i'm certainly not christian (too smart for that). You say you are "too smart" for Christianity, and yet you spelled ridiculous wrong. [You also spelled atheists wrong.] So it's kind of hard for me to take you seriously.

Second of all I'd like to say: I am a Christian, a proud Christian. I find the act of a Divine Creator the only logical way possible for the earth to come to be, for mankind to come to be, I should say.

I also would like to point out, that at the end of Charles Darwin's book, he states, that he too believes that a divine creator is the only logical explanation for the creation of the world. If you don't know what I'm talking about then you obviously have not read the book, and are not up to speed with your beliefs.*

*=Though I'm not saying all atheists believe in evolution.

Thank you. :] good day.

Elgesh']That brings up another intersting point. Homo sapiens have been on the go for over 100,000 years or so, and some other hominids (e.g. homo neadertalensis, heidelbergensis [sp?]) appear to be very close in form and brain size (better than us, in the case of neanderthals), which is usually used as a proxy for brain power when comparing homonids.

Judiasm is only a few (between 3 and 4, I think?) thousand years old. What happened to all the humans, and thier souls (if we have them) before then? They couldn't 'know God' in the way Christianity or Judaism posits, so...? A religious person, help me out here, what do your lot believe!


Hmm...and what you say brings up another point.


I've asked scientists, how they go about "aging the earth" and they can't really give any biological evidence as to HOW OLD THE EARTH IS. They are merely theories. Fossils? maybe. The rocks where fossils are found date the fossils, and the fossils date the rocks, so really it is nothing more than a great big circle of confusion.

Also, there are many denominations of religions relating to God. So the people that came about before Judaism who believed in God might have gone about it a different way.

But really there is no proof the earth has been around that long.

If you are atheist, why are you atheist?

Because any other belief (with the possible exception of Buddhism), is contrary to my logic and my experience. And often my morals.

Hmm...and what you say brings up another point.


I've asked scientists, how they go about "aging the earth" and they can't really give any biological evidence as to HOW OLD THE EARTH IS. They are merely theories. Fossils? maybe. The rocks where fossils are found date the fossils, and the fossils date the rocks, so really it is nothing more than a great big circle of confusion.

Also, there are many denominations of religions relating to God. So the people that came about before Judaism who believed in God might have gone about it a different way.

But really there is no proof the earth has been around that long.

Ever heard of carbon dating?

"Religion ist doch nur Opium für's Volk" (frei nach Nietzsche)

Well, I was raised as a Catholic, but I am an Atheist. I don't know enough about non-Christian Religions, so I can't believe in them or outright deny them, so I'll just give my belief on the Christian God.

There's as much proof for God as there is for any Unicorn, Dragon or Loch Ness Monster, so what logical reason is there for me to believe in him? People question the existence of God, purely because he is not of this World. No-one goes to lengths to make us believe that Unicorns exist because they would exist here on Earth and supposedly we've explored the whole Earth and know that they don't exist. Since God's outside the Earth, we haven't found him, which means that he's capable of existing, but by that logic, there's as much proof of the Christian God, as there is for an intergalactic Turnip with the same powers as God, but of course, no-one wants to join a Religion that worships an all-powerful, all-knowing Turnip, because of course, that's just stupid...

She is not talking about "GOOD evidence," she is talking about evidence that leaves her without doubt.

No no... the specific claim is that it would be enough to make a judge decide enequivocally in favour of 'god'... if the evidence that does 'exist', were presented.

We MUST, therefore, be talking about something more convincing that something that hints at her(her?) personal faith... we must be looking at something 'beyond a shadow of a doubt'... something incontavertible.

First off I'd like to point out that you said, You say you are "too smart" for Christianity, and yet you spelled ridiculous wrong. [You also spelled atheists wrong.] So it's kind of hard for me to take you seriously.

Might I just point out, that spelling and intelligence are not, necessarily, related?

Not that I agree, particularly, with the idea that one is 'too smart' for any given religion... I'm not convinced it 'works' that way.

(By the way, I don't know if your settings allow you to see 'signatures'... but I seem to recall that "Lucida Sans" actually states that he/she is dyslixic in their signature...).

Because any other belief (with the possible exception of Buddhism), is contrary to my logic and my experience. And often my morals.
Good answer !! I totally agree with that...

OK here is my message to all the religious people all over the world:
please try to find a logical explanation for the fact that miracles and "devine intervention" completely "vanished" from our Planet !
There's no reason for a so called GOD to stop interacting right !?
So... WHERE is your goddamned god !?

Not that I agree, particularly, with the idea that one is 'too smart' for any given religion... I'm not convinced it 'works' that way.

Well... you cannot say that everyone who's very smart is an atheist...
but if you read the books of Steven Hawking (for example) you MUST come to the conclusion that there's no spiritual power anyway... so in my opinion there is a relation between 'being smart' (well let's say VERY smart) and religion

Hmm...and what you say brings up another point.


I've asked scientists, how they go about "aging the earth" and they can't really give any biological evidence as to HOW OLD THE EARTH IS. They are merely theories. Fossils? maybe. The rocks where fossils are found date the fossils, and the fossils date the rocks, so really it is nothing more than a great big circle of confusion.

Also, there are many denominations of religions relating to God. So the people that came about before Judaism who believed in God might have gone about it a different way.

But really there is no proof the earth has been around that long.

Hi :)

I can't imagine which scientists you asked, but they can't have been very good ones!

As the Cat-Tribe points out, there's carbon-dating; matching geology states across continents; matching preserved biological matter across continents (both cross-referenced with the pace of tectonic plate motion); varying saline content in the depths of ice floes in the Artic and Antartic; cross-referencing the transmission of mitochondrial DNA across human populations...

the list goes on :)

We can tell fairly easily that the fossil record for homo sapiens goes back at least 100,000 years, and various figures (I think is the current one is 4 billion years? I forget :p) for the age of the earth itself. These figures aren't being pulled out of the air to spite you, there's hard science behind them :)

it doesnt have to be ALL Doubt. just beyond a reasonable doubt
If you doubt the existence of god, you doubt.

id be VERY happy with "preponderance of the evidence"

i might even accept (for a specific religion) a "pretty darned good" reason to believe.

im not counting that innate feeling that there exists something supernaturally greater than ourselves. while compelling, that does not imply any specific belief system.
I don't understand what you're getting at in your last sentence.

Hmm...and what you say brings up another point.


I've asked scientists, how they go about "aging the earth" and they can't really give any biological evidence as to HOW OLD THE EARTH IS. They are merely theories. Fossils? maybe. The rocks where fossils are found date the fossils, and the fossils date the rocks, so really it is nothing more than a great big circle of confusion.

Also, there are many denominations of religions relating to God. So the people that came about before Judaism who believed in God might have gone about it a different way.

But really there is no proof the earth has been around that long.

Now you're just being ridiculous, man. You are going against commonly accepted theories in order to justify your own faith..? These theories are not just rubbish made up to prove that the Bible is wrong; there's rock hard science behind these theories. I have to ask if you believe in those monks in the middle ages who "calculated" that the earth was a little over 4000 years old, which would make it close to 5000 now? 5000 years? That leaves little room for dinosaurs and ice ages...
I must say that I truly respect Christians (and other religious people) and their faith. What I don't respect is fanatiscism and blind belief. If you believe in the symbolism of the Bible, and try to be a good person (which is basically what the Bible tells you to do), I understand you. If you really believe that Christ made wine out of water, or walked on the Genesaret lake, sadly I must say that I find you quite naïve.

Myself, I don't believe in any gods, though I believe there might be some sort of Power that set the creation of the Universe in motion. In spite of this, I consider myself an agnostic, as I don't REALLY believe in anything, until someone has proved it.

No no... the specific claim is that it would be enough to make a judge decide enequivocally in favour of 'god'... if the evidence that does 'exist', were presented.

We MUST, therefore, be talking about something more convincing that something that hints at her(her?) personal faith... we must be looking at something 'beyond a shadow of a doubt'... something incontavertible.
And I rather suspect that she, and each of us, is the judge in our own courts, and any convincing she could do would open subjective, not objective, eyes. We'll see, if she or someone really does "take the time to do this."

OK here is my message to all the religious people all over the world:
please try to find a logical explanation for the fact that miracles and "devine intervention" completely "vanished" from our Planet !
There's no reason for a so called GOD to stop interacting right !?
So... WHERE is your goddamned god !?
The reason that there are no more miracles is that people began expecting them to be real, when in fact they were only ever real (i.e. the miracles didn't change, just the meaning of "real".)