Why I'm an atheist.

[BigBarry]

You're just a frustrated atheist who thinks that if something hasn't been proven TODAY to exist, then it can NEVER exist.
"I'm sure you do believe in bigfoot" would be my statement.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

One word. Faith.

gcomeau is getting frustrated, and I can understand why and empathize because I've already been through this with believers. But, I've, for the moment, still got patience and so I'll be as polite about this as I can and if I seem rude or anything like that, I dont' mean to be.

Sorry, Frank, but that isn't an answer. What does faith mean, in your own way of thinking? And why is religious faith necessary in a practical sense, as it applies to the real world?

How does one simply choose to believe in God when there isn't any way of proving it or even knowing it? Were God to appear before me and command me to believe and uphold his teachings in the Bible, I would still doubt. I would doubt my sanity. I would doubt that I wasn't just having an acid flashback. I might change and strive to be more Christ-like, but I wouldn't dogmatically cling to the belief that the experience I had was absolutely, 100% without-a-doubt God.

The only reason Christians believe what the Bible says is because they want to. Period. And that's fine. As long as you realize that those beliefs affect your worldview and your worldview affects your actions and your actions affect others who don't want to believe or can not believe as you do. And monotheism tends to breed self-righteousness and arrogance because those who are monotheists believe they are God's chosen ones, and all others are damned. They believe that what they believe is 100% true and all others are wrong. They believe that they are righteous and all others are rejected by God. They believe that they do God's work and anyone who interferes is evil or a victim of Satan. This type of belief can lead to things like abortion clinic bombings, inter-religious wars, suicide bombers, plane hijackers, oppression of those who do not hold the same beliefs, stratified class, and a popular mindset that does not align well with reality among other things.

 

[gcomeau]

You're just a frustrated atheist who thinks that if something hasn't been proven TODAY to exist, then it can NEVER exist.

Way to dodge the question while spouting ridiculous irrelevancies (and, once again, demonstrating a lack of understanding of the meaning of the word atheist even after having the definition provided to you... impressive!)

I'm going to take that as an "oops, I realized I've made an idiot of myself but don't want to admit it".

 

[JW Frogen]

I'm considered an atheist because I don't believe in God as he is conceived of in the Bible. I believe that all beings have buddha nature and can awaken to enlightenment.

Well then you are not an atheist, because you believe in things that are not proven, like enlightenment, karma, re-birth.

Not mocking, just saying your poem is every bit as unproven as every other religious poem.

 

[JW Frogen]

God, Enlightenment, Karma, Bliss, it can not be proven, it can only be experienced, stop trying to prove it and just experience it.

 

[gcomeau]

I'm considered an atheist because I don't believe in God as he is conceived of in the Bible. I believe that all beings have buddha nature and can awaken to enlightenment.

Well then you are not an atheist, because you believe in things that are not proven, like enlightenment, karma, re-birth.

There is exactly ONE criteria that determines whether you are an atheist.

"Do you believe a deity exists?"

Yes = theist.
No = atheist.

And the last time I checked "enlightenment" was not a deity. Nor was karma. Nor was re-birth. I personally think the last one in particular is nonsense... but there's nothing that says atheists can't believe nonsense or 'things that aren't proven'.

They just don't believe a deity exists. That is all. The one, single, solitary thing that makes a person an atheist.

 

[JW Frogen]

I'm considered an atheist because I don't believe in God as he is conceived of in the Bible. I believe that all beings have buddha nature and can awaken to enlightenment.

Well then you are not an atheist, because you believe in things that are not proven, like enlightenment, karma, re-birth.

There is exactly ONE criteria that determines whether you are an atheist.

"Do you believe a deity exists?"

Yes = theist.
No = atheist.

And the last time I checked "enlightenment" was not a deity. Nor was karma. Nor was re-birth. I personally think the last one in particular is nonsense... but there's nothing that says atheists can't believe nonsense or 'things that aren't proven'.

They just don't believe a deity exists. That is all. The one, single, solitary thing that makes a person an atheist.

Anything that asserts a non empirical purpose for the universe is a religion, it is based on faith.

Ok, go for it, I will not condem you. I have faith, or rather non empirical experience too.

But Nirvanna, Karma, Enlightenment can not be empirically proven, it is a faith based purpose for existence, which would make it a God, not a being, but a God, it is an unproven force that some of humanity believe in without any proof what so ever.

 

[gcomeau]

Well then you are not an atheist, because you believe in things that are not proven, like enlightenment, karma, re-birth.

There is exactly ONE criteria that determines whether you are an atheist.

"Do you believe a deity exists?"

Yes = theist.
No = atheist.

And the last time I checked "enlightenment" was not a deity. Nor was karma. Nor was re-birth. I personally think the last one in particular is nonsense... but there's nothing that says atheists can't believe nonsense or 'things that aren't proven'.

They just don't believe a deity exists. That is all. The one, single, solitary thing that makes a person an atheist.

Anything that asserts a non empirical purpose for the universe is a religion, it is based on faith.

And?

The definition of atheist is not "doesn't have religion". Nor is it "doesn't believe ANYTHING based on faith."

It's "doesn't believe a deity exists".

To repeat. You can be an atheist and still believe all kinds of other silly crap without any evidence.

Ok, go for it, I will not condem you. I have faith, or rather non empirical experience too.

But Nirvanna, Karma, Enlightenment can not be empirically proven, it is a fiath based purpose for existence, which would make it a God, not a being, but a God, it is an unproven force that some of humanity believe in without any proof what so ever.

You know, I'm beginning to feel like this entire thread is going to be consumed with me explaining the definitions of words to people. And it isn't funny.

The definition of a "God" is sure as heck NOT "a faith based purpose for existence". Where the hell did you get that idea from anyway?

 

[BigBarry]

You can be an atheist and still believe all kinds of other silly crap without any evidence.

Like that you're smarter than everyone else here?

 

[gcomeau]

You can be an atheist and still believe all kinds of other silly crap without any evidence.

Like that you're smarter than everyone else here?

I have little doubt that the odds of me being the smartest person here are relatively low.

The odds of me being smarter than someone who can't understand the difference between such massively different terms as "PROVE and "EXIST" however are damn near unity. Or have you finally figured that out yet? Let's test!

Did you or did you not, when you posted this:

So what do you call someone who doesn't believe a god has ever been proven but leaves the door open in case of the (unlikely) event that someone does come up with empirical proof of god?

...provide sufficient information to tell whether the person you were speaking of was an atheist or a theist? (Hint: Did you tell me if they belief a deity exists, or didn't you?)

 

[JW Frogen]

There is no one definition of atheism, atheists debate what means to be one. See the debate between “hard” and “soft” atheists.

My argument is that the initial premise of atheism must hold true of other improvable belief systems in unscientific explanations for a reason for being such as the Buddhist concept of Enlightenment or render the term atheist meaningless.

Buddhism of course believes in unscientific forces or reasons for being such as Karma, rebirth, and Enlightenment.

The initial premise of the atheist is that the concept of God or Deity must be rejected because there is no empirical proof, this also holds true of Buddhism and so Buddhist concepts must also be rejected or invalidate the initial premise of atheism.

Indeed I would argue that belief in Enlightened is in it self a form of God belief. Buddhist Enlightenment is an improvable ultimate reason for being. Many deists hold the same definition for the term God.

One can not be a Buddhist and an atheist without rejecting the main premise of atheism or rendering atheism every bit as subjective, non scientific, non-rational as any religion that believes in God.

 

[rdean]

I don't care for the term "atheist". The religious try to turn that into a kind of "negative" belief. The truth is, "atheism" is really a word for nothing. It is a lack of belief in mysticism and the occult.

I made this analogy before. "Cold" is the absence of "heat". Heat is NOT the absence of cold because cold is "nothing". Heat is energy. That's atheism. It's "nothing". A lack of man made and made up supernatural beliefs.

 

[gcomeau]

There is no one definition of atheism, atheists debate what means to be one. See the debate between “hard” and “soft” atheists.

Why? The debate between "hard" and "soft" atheists isn't a debate over what atheism means.

My argument is that the initial premise of atheism must hold true of other improvable belief systems in unscientific explanations for a reason for being such as the Buddhist concept of Enlightenment or render the term atheist meaningless.

One more time... there is exactly one premise of atheism. "I don't believe a deity exists". That is the first, last and only one. And if you don't believe a deity exists, voila! It holds true. The reason for that lack of belief is irrelevant to determining the classification.

 

[BigBarry]

If we go by this thread, an atheist is someone who gets bent out of shape if you don't agree with them what an atheist is.

 

[JW Frogen]

One more time... there is exactly one premise of atheism. "I don't believe a deity exists". That is the first, last and only one. And if you don't believe a deity exists, voila! It holds true. The reason for that lack of belief is irrelevant to determining the classification.

If you are saying you don't believe a deity exists simply because you don't believe a deity exists, that is a statement of personal faith. It is no more valid than saying you believe a deity exists because you simply believe it.

If you say you do not believe a deity exists because their is no empirical, scientific proof a deity exists then you have accepted the basic premise of atheism, and the same holds true with the Buddhist concepts of re-birth, nirvana, enlightenment.

There is no empirical, scientific proof.

The initial premise of atheism has implications beyond the simple term deity.

The basic premis of atheism is things must be proved, if it is not, it is simply another form of faith.

 

[JW Frogen]

I don't care for the term "atheist". The religious try to turn that into a kind of "negative" belief. The truth is, "atheism" is really a word for nothing. It is a lack of belief in mysticism and the occult.

I made this analogy before. "Cold" is the absence of "heat". Heat is NOT the absence of cold because cold is "nothing". Heat is energy. That's atheism. It's "nothing". A lack of man made and made up supernatural beliefs.

This is the straightfoward, honest, dare I say brave, Christopher Hitchens route (even Dawkins practices Zen) and it is the most logical route for the atheist to take, indeed the only one an atheist can without rendering the term a form of, as you put it, "negative belief."

I do not subscribe to it, but it is the only honest positision a real atheist can take and really be one.

 

[Newby]

I don't know if I've asked you this before Newby, but, why do you believe in God?

Because this universe, this solar system and this planet didn't happen coincidentally. When you look at the order and the purpose, it is intelligent design. Until someone can explain to me how it all came to be, my logic states that there is a higher order. To assume that the human mind is capable of understanding it all is ridiculous. I admit to the inadequacy of the brain to understand and explain it. As I said in an earlier post, humans have logically explained things throughout history completely incorrect because of lack of understanding or lack of technology to explain it correctly. To assume that we're at some pinacle of human existance where we now 'know' everything is completely naive.

So many things wrong with what you just said it's difficult to know where to being...

First of all, what indication do you have the universe, solar sytem and planet didn't happen coincidentally? I've never seen any.

Second, you just saying there is order and purpose to look at doesn't create it, particularly the latter. What purpose???

Then you proceed top declare it is ridiculous to think you could ever understand it. And yet you seem able to jump directly from that to "therefore this is the answer. God did it!". That's a really, really neat trick that is. How exactly does that work? I'd love to hear you explain how "I could never understand it" leads directly to you being shown the answer to the cause of the universe somehow. Care to lay out the steps that get you from A to B there.

And then there's the fact that even IF you could somehow establish that there was some kind of governing, guiding entity responsible for all this... which frankly I highly doubt you can come anywhere near doing... you then all of a sudden know exactly what the identiy of that entity is! Wow! That's incredibly impressive! How did you rule out that it was Zeus? Or Mithra? Or hyper intelligent aliens from another plane of existence who died out long ago after setting our universe in motion? Or magic space fairies? Or my cat (who, quite secretly, has unlimited supernatural powers and has existed for all eternity in one form or another but chooses not to reveal that to anyone because he doesn't like the publicity)?

Please, enlighten us as to how you figured all this out. I'm dying to hear this.

There is no 'enlightening' you about anything, and I don't BELIEVE in wasting my time. Why don't you try believing what you believe and letting everyone else believe what they want to believe without being an ignorant bastard? Regardless of what you believe, perhaps you should look inwardly at yourself and how you treat people that don't think the same way that you do. What exactly are you getting out of bashing people? There must be some reward to it or you wouldn't do it? Do you really convince yourself that you're so much more intelligent? Does it feel good to pat yourself on the back then? You are obviously so empty inside that you feel this constant need to belittle those who don't think like you in order to lift yourself up somehow. You have my sympathies.

 

[glade]

Well, apparently my little story has failed to attract any interest in discussion...

Maybe if I changed it to a couple line entry that said something intentionally derogatory and provocative I could generate more traffic... hmmm...

It' s too long to read..try to be short and straight to the point....
I think Atheist people only find thier satisfaction on material stuff...they dont look at the big picture..believing in God is like being corny/mellow because we love and appreciate everything around us: the rain, the trees, the air, the sky.... and it is so beautiful that we find that SOMEONE to thank for it...

 

[glade]

thats one thing about god he want force you to accept him he left it your choice he knew times would be this way when he said many are called but few are choosen.you athies believe what you want but quit trying to cramus with your ways.

In your opinion what are those reasons to WANT God to exist?
And just you know God is not forcing me to accept him but my heart, by faith, knows that He is there.

 

[froggy]

For anyone who may be interested for some reason...

Firs of all, to answer a question asked by another thread here, no it was not a "handed down" thing. My parents weren't terribly observant religious practitioners but they believe in God, or at least they did last I checked. The bottom line is I'm an atheist because I've never been given any reason to be anything else.

Growing up I bought into the usual pleasant fictions we sell young children. Tooth fairy... Easter bunny... Santa Clause. They were happy things to believe existed. Made the world a more magical place you know? But, as you grow older and start to develop slightly more refined critical thinking skills the puzzle pieces start assembling themselves and those beliefs go away. It's just silly to think some magic fairy is sneaking into your room at night to pay you for old teeth. And the bearded guy with the flying reindeer needs to be breaking the light speed barrier to get all those deliveries done in one night, not to mention the payload his sleigh needs to carry. And come to think of it that time you thought you saw him he looked an awful lot like dad with lots of facial hair... and you know about fake beards now.

So, even though it's nice to think these things exist, you leave them behind and face reality.

Or at least, that's what I thought the idea was supposed to be.

Now like I said... my parents weren't terribly religiously observant. The concept of god played very little actual role in my life so I never gave it much thought until I was older. I mean, I was aware of the concept but it was always something going on on the periphery.

But, once I got to around 12 or 13 I think I started taking more notice of it and it sunk in that people were actually serious about this. Not just kids... adults. And lots of them. And frankly the only reaction I had to that was that people were trying to tell me there was this magical being who could supposedly see me when I'm sleeping, knows when I'm awake, knows if I've been bad or good so I should be good for goodness sake... and I'd already ridden that ride thank you very much. And while it was a fun ride, well, fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice...

(Spare me the exclamations that I was giving it insufficiently rigorous theological analysis. 12 or 13 remember?)

Anyway, basically I wasn't indoctrinated with this belief when I was very young. No regular visits to church, no Sunday school bible study, etc... so I didn't currently possess it. Which means in order to adopt it I was going to have to be given a reason to believe it. And it was going to have to be a lot better than "just believe it, god totally exists". That one had already been proven to me to be less than reliable.

And people kept coming up really, really short on the "reasons to believe it" front.

Early attempts to get me to accept this idea, once people around me started realizing I didn't already, tended to center around three central themes.

1. But you'll go to hell!!!!

2. Where do you THINK all this stuff came from???

3. EVERYONE believes in God! You think you know better than EVERYONE?

All three of which I found, to be blunt, pure idiocy.

People telling you their magical superbeing is going to condemn you to a nasty fate if you don't believe in it lacks intimidation power considering you... you know... don't believe in it. I was about as worried by pronouncements I would end up in hell as I would have been by ominous warnings that the troll under the bridge was going to leap out and eat me on my way to school if I didn't walk across really quietly so it didn't hear me.

As for the "where did this stuff come from then" crowd... they weren't presenting me with any actual answers to their question. "We don't know, therefore it was obviously magic... duh" lacks any explanatory power whatsoever. And I was considerably more interested in finding real answers to those questions than just pretending I knew the answer because I'd slapped a name on some totally inexplicable supposed "cause" that didn't explain a single thing. It's all well and good to say "God did it" but what the hell does that mean? HOW did he do it? WHY did he do it? What processes were utilized? What does this tell us about future behaviors of the system?

Blank stares were generally the only responses to any of these questions. I quickly realized that most religious people I was conversing with didn't think anything beyond the three words "God did it" were actually required to understand how the entire universe took on its present form even if those three words gave them exactly zero knowledge of anything involved. They had slapped a name on a state of total ignorance, decided that naming it and explaining it were the same thing therefore mystery solved, and were content.

And as for the "Everyone belives it" folks. They did make me think twice for a while. A short while. After all, if everyone beliveved it there must be SOME reason I was missing? Except I quickly realized everyone most certainly didn't believe "in God". They believed in a thousand different sometimes totally mutually exclusive concepts that they all just slapped the same label on. One minute they might be telling me "everyone" believes god exists but 5 minutes later the same person is arguing that most of the planet doesn't know what they're talking about because they obviously believe in the wrong damn version. So everyone CAN be wrong as long as it's the "everyone" that disagrees with them. In fact, considering the different competing claims on the subject not only could the vast majority of the world be wrong, it almost had to be. They sure as heck couldn't all be right.

In short, religious people around me were not exactly covering themselves in glory when these discussions occured. That state of affairs continued until I was about 20, ran across some online discussion forums, and discovered that the internet was more than just an e-mail and porn delivery system.

While online discussions of religious matters still tended to be dominated by, to put it bluntly, the same idiots I had already been dealing with before... I began encountering people who believed in God and actually appeared to have given the matter a respectable amount of thought. Which in turn kicked my brain into higher gear on the subject (It's difficult to take a subject too seriously when the people arguing in favor of it are of the caliber previously described).

One of the people who rose above that crowd was an evolutionary biologist I encountered who spent a lot of his time laying the smackdown on creationists. Had no patience for these people, considered them reality denying morons, but was a conscientous practicing Catholic and believed god certainly existed. That intrigued me. So I started trying to figure out why. And eventually, a few things became clear. The man had a firm grasp of scientific principles. Completely understood the importance of objective investigation and observation to reach conclusions. Knew that unfalsifiable appeals to supernatural mechanisms to explain something just because you don't undertand how it happened was a bogus approach.

And deliberately elected not to apply those rules when it came to god existing.

Knew he did it too. Simply declared that god's existence was a "special case", the same rules didn't apply, and that was that. He chose to live his life believing god existed because he wanted to and if everything he knew about legitimate ways to evaluate knowledge of the world around him didn't match up with that belief then he was just going to ignore them because hanging on to that belief was more important to him personally.

I could understand it. I was sypmathetic to it. I was also incredibly dissapointed. He had made a decision to live in a state of total cognitive dissonance and abject hypocrisy because it made him feel better to hold onto this belief.

In the meantime I was also interacting with other more intellectually engaged theists of various stripes, and I was beginning to pick up on a pattern. There were in depth arguments about first causes and discussions of the proper manner in which to interpret the philosophical teachings of the bible and al manner of other attempts to rationalize belief but if you talked to them long enough it would always come around to one thing eventually.

They were all afraid of living in a world where god didn't exist.

It scared them. Thinking about lost loved ones never ever being seen again saddened them. Thinking there was no ultimate benevolent guiding purpose to the universe upset them. And mostly, they were afraid of dying and not having anything on the far side but oblivion. Just being... gone. Over. No more you. Terrifying. And god is presented like the world's biggest life preserver that can rescue you from that fate.

And this pattern held with the people whose opinions on the matter of god's existence I held worthy of considerably less respect when I went back and looked at their patterns of arguments. And over the years I've seen that pattern hold up as I watch these discussions play out. Ultimately, it's been my perception that people don't believe in god because they have a good reason to think he DOES exist. I have yet to encounter anyone who could provide me with one of those I found even marginally convincing, although they insist THEY find them convincing.

They believe in god because they have good reasons to WANT god to exist. 

And that doesn't cut it with me. Wanting doesn't make it real. So, an atheist I remain.[/quote]

thats one thing about god,he want force you to choose him. so what ever happens to you in the afterlife is your doing . so whose to blame YOU. all youathies quit pushing your way on us.