Why I'm an atheist...

DJSupreme23

neocortex activated
Registered Senior Member
...because every morning I can wake up to a mystery, instead of knowing that I got the whole world figured out.

...because the world is still a 1.000.000.000 piece puzzle in progress, and not a 300 piece ditto almost done with.

...because i dont like easy answers, but find challenges interesting and evolving.
 
Well theres an interesting twist.

Atheists live for the mystery,religous people live for the fact they think they have the answer.

You know what?,i think you just completed 1 piece of the 1,000,000,000 jigsaw :)
 
BJSupreme, I hope you see the irony. You say you like waking up to a mystery but instead of saying "maybe there's a god I don't really know" you assert that there is definitely not a god. You say for sure that the there is no god but then go on to say you like not knowing that you got the whole world figured out. Maybe you like easy answers just a little bit.
 
Grover,

So where did he say there is definitely no god?
 
...because every morning I can wake up to a mystery, instead of knowing that I got the whole world figured out. ...because the world is still a 1.000.000.000 piece puzzle in progress, and not a 300 piece ditto almost done with. ...because i dont like easy answers, but find challenges interesting and evolving.

So theists can't wake up to mystery? All Theists think the world is simple puzzle? All Theists like easy answers?

Atheists and Theists can do these things , therefore whether you believe in god or not should not affect any of these things.
 
Originally posted by Cris

So where did he say there is definitely no god?

In case you didn't know this, Cris, you being the Moderator of the RELIGION FORUM AND ALL, "atheist" means "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods"(Dictionary.com). You know "a" is a negative prefix and "theos," or god, from the Greek? He did say that he was an "atheist," did he not?
Atheists are the ones claim that God is a fallacy. It's AGNOSTICS that are indifferent and unsure about the whole thing.
:D:p
 
I think, DJSupreme, that you should try calling yourself an agnostic. If you don't have the whole world figured out, if you like the puzzle and the mystery, you're probably agnostic.

Join the club.
 
I think B.R. put it best.

Here there comes a practical question which has often troubled me. Whenever I go into a foreign country or a prison or any similar place they always ask me what is my religion.

I never know whether I should say "Agnostic" or whether I should say "Atheist". It is a very difficult question and I daresay that some of you have been troubled by it. As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God.

On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods.

None of us would seriously consider the possibility that all the gods of homer really exist, and yet if you were to set to work to give a logical demonstration that Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, and the rest of them did not exist you would find it an awful job. You could not get such proof.

Therefore, in regard to the Olympic gods, speaking to a purely philosophical audience, I would say that I am an Agnostic. But speaking popularly, I think that all of us would say in regard to those gods that we were Atheists. In regard to the Christian God, I should, I think, take exactly the same line.

www.inquiria.com/russell/atheist_agnostic.html
 
Originally posted by DarkEyedBeauty
CA I'm not claiming that he is. I'm just saying that he sounds as though he is agnostic rather than atheist.
I understand, and I am claiming that that there is absolutely nothing intrinsic to atheism that prevents the atheist from acknowledging and appreciating the mysteries inherent in the natural world. I would also claim, by the way, that agnosticism and atheism are not mutually exclusive.
 
Be both agnostic and atheist. God(s) are unknowable and choose not to believe in them. I mean even an agnostic has to make the choice - do they truly believe of don't they. For the record many Muslim and Christian scholars are agnostic theists (at least the honest ones).
 
Redoubtable,

In case you didn't know this, Cris, you being the Moderator of the RELIGION FORUM AND ALL, "atheist" means "One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods"(Dictionary.com). You know "a" is a negative prefix and "theos," or god, from the Greek?
Ah ha gosh is that so?

So let me see – theist means “belief in the existence of a god” OK? I took that from Webster, so I hope you approve.

So if we put the ‘a’ in front to mean ‘no’ for negation as you say then we obtain –

Atheist means “no belief in the existence of a god” OK? Simple right?

But no belief in something is not the same as believing something is the opposite. I.e. a disbelief in something is not the same as believing the proposition is false.

So your dictionary definition seems to be wrong doesn’t it? We still don’t find anything in that structure that says there is definitely no god, agreed?

He did say that he was an "atheist," did he not?
Sure, and that seems to mean he disbelieves in the existence of a god and not that he believes a god definitely does not exist.

Atheists are the ones claim that God is a fallacy.
They do? But we have just established that atheists have no belief in the existence of a god. Where is it that they are making a claim?

It's AGNOSTICS that are indifferent and unsure about the whole thing.
Are you sure? Gnosticsm is all about knowledge of God. And Agnosticsm is about not having knowledge of God.
 
Repo Man,

they always ask me what is my religion
Agnosticism and atheism are not religious beliefs. You seem to be one of these so your answer should be “I have no religion”.

None of us would seriously consider the possibility that all the gods of homer really exist, and yet if you were to set to work to give a logical demonstration that Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, and the rest of them did not exist you would find it an awful job. You could not get such proof.
It is really a matter of credibility. Do you have any doubt that Santa Clause does not exist? Can you prove it?

Would you have any difficulty stating that Santa Clause does not exist? I hope not.

Santa Clause is just a fantasy character invented for children. The Christian god is another fantasy character invented by politically motivated individuals for the control of an ignorant, highly superstitious, and gullible population. You should have no more difficulty declaring that the Christian god does not exist in the same way that you can declare Santa Clause non existent.
 
Your santa analogy is pure crap because the methods of science could be applied to determine whether santa exists, but not god. For instance it could be mathematically proven that santa could not deliver toys to all the children in one night, and someone that fat definitely couldn't fit down a chimney. And at some point adults admit that they just made it up.
Do you honestly think that people sat down and decided to invent god for purposes of social control. Or does it make more sense that people were having spiritual experiences in which god was directly revealed to them which then led them to believe in its existence. I do agree that organized religion sometimes use a certain concept of a vengeful god for purposes of social control but just because a vengegul christian god does not exist does not mean that no god exists.
And for all of you arguing over whether or not DJ is agnostic or atheist here is what he himself say in another post: "From a logical POV, I'm agnostic too, but I tend to bend to the side og atheism - I have never sensed or experienced anything that can make me believe in the existence of a higher being. And certinly not one that interferes in worldly affairs."

His worldview makes 100% sense to me.
 
Last edited:
Agnosticism and atheism are not religious beliefs. You seem to be one of these so your answer should be “I have no religion”.

That is how I would answer. But when Bertrand Russell was imprisoned for protesting British involvement in WW-1, and when he as traveling abroad in the the early part of the last century, I doubt those were options.
His point is that popular usage of language can alter the technical meaning of words.

It is really a matter of credibility. Do you have any doubt that Santa Clause does not exist? Can you prove it?

Would you have any difficulty stating that Santa Clause does not exist? I hope not.

Santa Clause is just a fantasy character invented for children. The Christian god is another fantasy character invented by politically motivated individuals for the control of an ignorant, highly superstitious, and gullible population. You should have no more difficulty declaring that the Christian god does not exist in the same way that you can declare Santa Clause non existent.

I have no problem stating that Santa Claus does not exist. But it is a different matter than proving that he does not exist, because you cannot prove a negative.

I refer you to the Invisible Dragon argument used by Carl Sagan in The Demon Haunted World.

Suppose I told you I had an invisible, fire-breathing dragon living in my garage. "Bullshit!" you would probably say. But now, suppose I responded with "Oh yeah! Well, if he doesn't exist then prove it!"

I've encountered many Christians who have given me that very same argument: "If God doesn't exist, then prove it!" Of course, I cannot. I cannot prove that God does not exist. Nor can I prove that all crop circles have been hoaxes. Nor can I prove that Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster never existed. And I cannot prove that, of all the UFO's that have been reported, none of them have ever been actual spacecraft from other worlds. I cannot even prove that, in all of the Universe, there exists nowhere a planet that is in the shape of a perfect cube and is comprised chiefly of cow dung. There are a whole lot of things I cannot prove.

Fortunately for me, the burden of proof does not rest with me. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the burden of presenting that evidence is with the person making the claim.

More
http://www.chestnutcafe.com/cafe/index.html?manifesto
 
Last edited:
Cris

Santa Clause is just a fantasy character invented for children. The Christian god is another fantasy character invented by politically motivated individuals for the control of an ignorant, highly superstitious, and gullible population. You should have no more difficulty declaring that the Christian god does not exist in the same way that you can declare Santa Clause non existent.
The problem with that particular brand of insanity is that it is sold primarily to children. What may seem a small distinction, that between children's insanity and adult's insanity, is in fact made quite large by the indoctrination of the latter insanity. To be sure, we on the outside see the merit of that argument. I suppose the fact that personal circumstances always bias the observer will stop the majority from accepting certain absurdities.

Also remember other points of dissimilarity keep the symbolic argument from working properly. You see Santa is tangible. A deity is the opposite of character.

This reminds me of a line being tried by the state department involing the WMDs not being found in Iraq. They argued that they did not need to find Saddam to know if he existed and that the same could be said of the WMDs. I guess in that way it might be argued that there is more evidence that Santa exists, because we have seen him and it is known that a true Santa did exist. Maybe it is something as simple as the fact that flawed reasoning often trumphs logical conclusions. People will believe what they want to believe.
 
Originally posted by Cris
Atheist means “no belief in the existence of a god” OK? Simple right?

No, that is not what atheism means, Cris. Atheism is the belief in the absence of God.

a·the·ism Pronunciation Key (th-zm)
n.
1.
1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods.
2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods.

(Dictionary.com)



"Agnosticism" is "no belief in God."

Perhaps I was a little to quick to mention those roots and was offensive, so I apologize.

Originally posted by Cris
Sure, and that seems to mean he disbelieves in the existence of a god and not that he believes a god definitely does not exist.

He's not really an atheist if he doesn't deny the existence of God.
 
I'm not sure that's your real reason for being an athest. Is God's creation more mysterious than God?
 
Back
Top