A question for atheists

[AngelaLynn93]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

 

[Freodin]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

An evaluation of propability of theological claims, based on personal and educational experience.

Basically, it is the same method that all humans use to evaluate claims of any kind... and so to answer your second question: I think that religious people have gotten used to ignore the impropability of claims, simply because they are attributed to the divine.

 

[Gishin]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

I have no reason to believe he does exist. I assume something doesn't exist until I have evidence of its existence. I have not seen any compelling evidence of God existing.

I think the biggest emotion I have towards religious people is sympathy.

 

[Penumbra]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

I have many logical and personal reasons for not believing in any gods, and I can list a few here.

-For thousands of years throughout human history, cultures have believed in thousands of different gods. For me to believe in one, I need solid proof it exists. I'm not just going to pick one and hope it's right. Currently I have no reason to believe in any deities.

-Religions like Christianity, Islam, and Judaism don't seem to work well with what we've learned about our world through science and discovery. Our universe is much older and more complex than the Bible or Qur'an would suggest, and we certainly weren't among the first creatures on this planet. Suffering and death existed long before humans got here, which to me, undermines the concept of original sin or a truly benevolent god.

-Most gods I've heard of have some sort of inconsistency that I haven't seen explained well. Like how a loving god has created a hell, or how god is so omnipotent and powerful and wise, yet gets totally jealous and unstable when earthlings won't worship him, or how god is his own son and sacrifices himself to himself so that he can forgive us for doing stuff, or how a deity can command genocide of unarmed women and children in one half of a holy book, and then ask people to love their enemies later. Or how god "wants" us to believe in him but somehow has trouble convincing us. It just comes off to me as mankind continually creating gods in his own image throughout history, and then updating their gods when their understanding of the world changes.

-I've never seen anything supernatural or any solid reason to believe something that happens outside of the natural world.

-Being raised in a religion, I tried prayer and such for a number of years and it has left me with the conclusion that prayer doesn't work, that there is no deity interested in communication, and that humans are on their own to figure out their own path through life.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

That depends entirely on what type of religion they have and how they feel about it. I was raised in a Catholic family and some of my family members are Catholic, though they are rather relaxed about it so it doesn't cause an issue. None of them really think about their religion much. Evangelical, fundamentalist types of Christianity don't work well with me. I think they are claiming truth without evidence. I'm not a big fan of Islam, though I have met some more relaxed, liberal Muslims that I am friends with. People that believe in and condone the idea of hell (whether they be Christian, Muslim, or whatever) are people whom I am not able to be really close friends with, because I find the idea sickening and sadistic and it is in opposition to what I feel about life and ethics. I think it's a dark spot on human conscience and I feel a bit bad for and turned away from those who believe it.

I have some respect for Jainism, Sikhism, Hinduism, and Buddhism, though it depends on the individual person and the denomination.

Most religious people I've met are people who have not seemed to open their mind to other possibilities, such as by reading other religious texts or by learning about their own religion in depth. (Mainly in regards to Christians and Muslims, because those are ones I've met the most of.) They just kind of accept the religion of their locality and assume it's true. There are certainly exceptions to this, of course.

-Lyn

 

[JGL53]

Even as a small child I looked at the question of the possible literal truth of ANY "supernatural" religious claim as a combination problem of 1. default position and 2. burden of proof.

What is the default position?

It is that all religion is myth, plain and simple.

Who has the burden of proof?

Those who claim to believe in some religion literally have the burden of proof to show any good reason to believe otherwise than the default position of myth.

In all of recorded history religious believers have failed their burden - completely.

Ergo, ..... religion is assumed to be mythological IF and UNTIL proof to the contrary arises in the future.

Meantime, I shall not hold my breath.

(I think this may be called agnostic atheism.)

 

[Infernalfist]

though i am not an atheist, i feel that a few might agree with what i have to say.
i personally find it hard to accept the ideas of god from a people who had no idea of how the world worked, the concept of the atom, the way weather patterns worked, and even psychological disorders. even though you may say they were influenced by "god" in their writings, they were equally influenced by the way they viewed the world at the time. they had less intellectual development than our children now have, and you wouldn't hold the intellectual insights of a child in the same regard as your own. which also leads to the way i view those buried in the religious ideology. i view them like i view the characters in the lord of the flies. though i am able to respect their proposed innocence, i get a little frustrated when they hurt others out of a feeling of "necessity".

 

[Eudaimonist]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist?

It's simply that the idea that the universe is natural and uncreated stands up best to my life experiences, my philosophical ponderings, and my knowledge of science.

I have also spoken with dozens or perhaps hundreds of Christians who have explained why they believe in the existence of God, and I have not found their reasons persuasive. The case for the existence of God seems far too weak to me to compel an honest and justified belief.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

Several people in my life who have been very dear to me are religious people. Those people have had good qualities of character. I have no problem with religious people as such. It all depends on what they choose to do.

The way that some religious people act is a cause for concern. I am greatly concerned that some try to put their flock into a tiny mental cage of dogma. They, for instance, try to prevent their flock from understanding science by spreading lies about it in favor of some dogma of theirs, and even to protect them from reflective thought. I personally see this as stunting their spiritual growth. My feelings towards such people is sympathy, and maybe even pity in extreme cases.

Also, some religious people try to impose their religious values through political means. I feel endangered and annoyed by such people, because I see them as not only trying to take away my liberties, but also implying that I am a second-class citizen because I don't share their religious views or culture.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[The Nihilist]

The quirks of our cognitive processes account for religion much better than would the existence of the actual deities they posit.

 

[DeathMagus]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

A lack of argument that doesn't rely on circular reasoning, special pleading, appeals to authority, walls of ignorance, or countless other logical fallacies. I am an atheist pending presentation of evidence with a bit more substance. I am, of course, open to the possibility of God, but my current estimation of likelihood falls somewhere behind aliens and accessible alternate dimensions.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

Been there, done that. It depends on what sort of person they are. I really don't care what you believe - except how it influences the rest of the world. Many people have their faiths, and understand that it's theirs, that it's built upon faith and not evidence, and that others walk a different path. I'm usually fine with those people. Then there are others who try to manipulate and control others based upon their unsupported beliefs. I have no tolerance for that sort of behavior.

 

[jayem]

Another naturalist here. I believe everything in the universe is a purely a function of matter and energy and the natural properties thereof. Thus, by logical extension, I don't believe in any kind of supernatural god. I reach this conclusion by inductive reasoning. Everything that was once thought to be mystical or supernatural, but which we now understand, has been proven to be a natural phenomenon. True, there are many things we still can't explain. But in the entire history of human knowledge, a supernatural explanation has never proven valid for anything. So, a posteriori, I conclude that everything is a natural process.

But even if there was some force, or some realm of existence outside of, or beyond the physical universe (and this is just a thought experiment, since there is no reason to believe this) we would have no way of knowing anything about it. Because to leave any information we could detect, it would have to interract with us through natural processes. So it too, would have to be a natural phenomenon.

 

[uberd00b]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

I am an atheist because gods appear not to exist, and I am honest.

No good argument for believing that gods exist has ever been advancd to my knowledge, and I'm familiar with many of them.

<staff edit>

 

[ragarth]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

Oh man, there are so many arguments. Since I fell into atheism, I've tested it many times in many ways. In this way, I could probably write a book as to why atheism is my opinion. I'll give my earliest reason though, that realization that initially let me see something was inherently wrong with religion:

None of the currently existing religions are the/one of the original religions. This means that there is no single belief in a god/s that is original, and that no single be belief in a god/s has survived the test of time. Given this, we can conclude that any god/s out there do not play an active role in perpetuating belief in them- they neither originated the belief nor maintained the belief. If any god/s out there have no vested interest in maintaining belief in them, then why should I care to believe in them?

From that initial query I began testing my religious beliefs and considering why it is that I wanted so badly to believe in a religion (amusingly, by this time I was practicing wicca. ) From here I found additional arguments for atheism:

No significant common themes exist amongst all religions that cannot be ascribed to naturalistic phenomena, except those that which can be ascribed to universal human fears. ie Belief in afterlife arises from fear of death.

Most every religious account of world, universe, human creation fails Occam's Razor because of an excess of assumptions. By default, the presumption of intelligence is not necessary for creation, meaning even the simplest religious argument for creation has 1 extra assumption over a non-religious argument.

The default position on the presumption of most any supernatural phenomena is that it doesn't exist- ie, Santa Clause. If this weren't the case then we'd believe in all kinds of crazy things because the nonexistent is surprisingly difficult to show it doesn't exist. Therefore the burden of proof is upon those wanting to prove the existence of said supernatural phenomena. Since religion is supernatural, the default position is that it doesn't exist, and no effective proof has been given showing that it does indeed exist.

There are more, but these two are my major themes right now.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

I'm still working on this. At the moment I hold two distinct and mutually incompatible views- Religious people can be good and productive members of society, as capable as nonreligious people due to the human ability to partition different modes of thinking in their minds. (fundamentalist scientists, for instance.)

And: Religion rots the brain and damages the ability to critically assess reality. Faith has no checking mechanism to disprove belief based upon it, and no mechanism by which to limit what can and cannot be believed in based on faith. Since human logic is hierarchical (this is true, therefore this is true), the acceptance of information based entirely on faith produces a poor foundation for extrapolating further facts- anything argued for using a belief based in faith is not grounded in reality and therefore not properly critically assessed. (conspiracy theorists are an example of this.)

The truth of the matter lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[Gracchus]

Well, I am actually a panentheist, but Dawkins maintains that is just "sexed up" atheism, so, on that basis, I will answer.

I certainly don't believe in the Christian god, original sin, vicarious atonement, and all that nonsense. It involves too many contradictions and paradoxes.

 

[quatona]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist?

"God"? What do you mean??
I´d need to have a proper concept/definition of "God" in order to make the claim that "God" does not exist.
As it stands, "God" is a pretty loose concept, and there are as many "God"-concepts as there are theists out there.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

Depends on the people.

 

[InkBlott]

What is your logic behind believing that God does not exist? I am curious to see how the majority of atheists feel.

And also, what are your feelings about religious people?

Hello AngelaLynn93. Thank you for asking. My answer is similar in some ways to quatona's.

I don't feel compelled to give consideration to the factuality of statements in which any of the terms lack definition. I not only lack belief in God, I have yet to hear a definition of God that has stirred me to agnosticism. Is there a God? My response is silence.

As for your second question, my feelings about religous people are as varied as the people themselves. I do have feelings about particular religious beliefs and the role they play on the human stage, but I do not hang those feelings wholecloth onto individuals themselves.

I might mention that I sometimes find theology rather alarming. When we talk about God, this ill defied, wide open term has a way of receiving anything we wish to project upon it. Of course, what we project onto it is going to be human, but our mutual God talk has a way of reinforcing and magnifying these traits, removing the ameliorating effect of personal responsibility and writing them onto a canvas that can be stretched to inhuman porportions. I'm endlessly wary. I prefer any ill will (as well as any charity for that matter) that is going to be directed my way to be kept in human terms and human proportions, please.

I hope that's helpful.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

i personally find it hard to accept the ideas of god from a people who had no idea of how the world worked, the concept of the atom, the way weather patterns worked, and even psychological disorders. even though you may say they were influenced by "god" in their writings, they were equally influenced by the way they viewed the world at the time. they had less intellectual development than our children now have, and you wouldn't hold the intellectual insights of a child in the same regard as your own. which also leads to the way i view those buried in the religious ideology. i view them like i view the characters in the lord of the flies. though i am able to respect their proposed innocence, i get a little frustrated when they hurt others out of a feeling of "necessity".

Feelings put aside, this is partially false. For example, in case of my Scriptures and those who authored them, we deal with only certain men, not the common men of first century Palestine... St. Luke was a physician and noted some medical stuff in his writings, science doesn't deny it but St. Luke didn't have to know the concept of the atom in order to deliver his message of Christ. He also authored the book of Acts which is an accurate historical testament. Therefore I don't compare him to my child just because we live in 21st century and drive cars, fly planes. You have a point but it doesn't necessarily apply to everyone that is seen as religious authority, and certainly it is not a reason to deny religion. Just my $.02...

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

Well, I am actually a panentheist,...
I certainly don't believe in the Christian god, original sin, vicarious atonement, and all that nonsense. It involves too many contradictions and paradoxes.

Nonsense eh? To each his own. In panentheism, God is viewed as creator and/or animating force behind the universe, and the source of universal truth. This concept of God is closely associated with the Logos as stated in the 5th century BCE works of Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), in which the Logos pervades the cosmos and whereby all thoughts and things originate; e.g., "He who hears not me but the Logos will say: All is one." A similar thought espoused by Jesus and interpreted by Unity as being synonymous: "The Father and I are one." (John 10:30)

 

[InkBlott]

Nonsense eh? To each his own. In panentheism, God is viewed as creator and/or animating force behind the universe, and the source of universal truth. This concept of God is closely associated with the Logos as stated in the 5th century BCE works of Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), in which the Logos pervades the cosmos and whereby all thoughts and things originate; e.g., "He who hears not me but the Logos will say: All is one." A similar thought espoused by Jesus and interpreted by Unity as being synonymous: "The Father and I are one." (John 10:30)

Hello, Bushmaster. I hope you don't mind if I reply.

Some concepts in the scriptures impress me as being quite profound. (Particularly those that are not quite theistic. ) Others...not so much. I do not find it necessary to disrespect all of the writers of the books of the Bible and utterly disregard all of their philosophical statements in order to be an atheist. The concepts of logos and mythos do deeply interest me. I simply find the concept of God to be too ill defined to warrant serious consideration.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

I simply find the concept of God to be too ill defined to warrant serious consideration.

I find this statement quite profound in itself. Thank you. In the light of this statement, what Infernalfist said can be understood better. It is again us, regardless of our philosophical and intelligence level, defining the concept of God. I guess that is when I introduce "faith", to find out the real concept one day. Hmm. Quite Orthodox!

 

[InkBlott]

I find this statement quite profound in itself. Thank you. In the light of this statement, what Infernalfist said can be understood better. It is again us, regardless of our philosophical and intelligence level, defining the concept of God. I guess that is when I introduce "faith", to find out the real concept one day. Hmm. Quite Orthodox!

Does faith require an object? Can we float it out there without attaching it to any definition whatsoever?