Why are you Atheist?

[GaGirls]

Give a valid reason and not a vague answer please. And which definition of God do you follow?

Atheist - A person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
God 1 - A creator (not an authority or judger) from which all things spring.
God 2 - A creator and an authority and judger.


I am not religious myself but I am not Atheist anymore either.

[Joeshamo]

You’re not religious or atheist? Then maybe you’re agnostic like me? I believe there might be a god out there, but I don’t know what kind of god it is. I mean look at all the technology and skyscrapers out there. All these thing we’re able to do; there must be something out there that created us. Is it god or a supernatural being who knows? And is this thing that created us still alive? I mean if you’re looking for what religious beliefs I think might be the closes to being a real god. I’d say Islam because Mohamed was the least super natural one and can’t be easily disproven by science. Most of it is you just do it because Mohamed told you to do it. It’s no snakes raining from the sky’s or anything too crazy. And look at whatTaliban is doing, they beat the us army. Everyone said no way the Taliban can beat the us army, they’d need stealth boom and nuke. All they was come running in with guns and barely any armor on. I think they had god on there side. Now no one will trust the US army again. But I don’t believe in any religious, I just think there might be a god or thing that created us. If the Taliban takes over the US I’m definitely converting to Islam though. A lot racist people say that they’re primitive and savage, but they’re the ones having all the kids. In 100 years they’ll be here and Christian church will be just a forgotten memory. I mean they’re winning, so you can’t really say nothing.

[GaGirls]

I looked up the definition. - A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God. -

I am not agnostic. I am the opposite. I have a strong belief in God but it didn't come from Faith. I also believe the only religious book worth studying is the Bible but I also believe 99% of Christians misinterpret the Bible. So what I think of the Bible and what atheist think of it are 2 different things. But yet an atheist is a nonbeliever do to that very interpretation that Christians give them. I am not familiar with Islam. Reminds me of David vs Goliath or USA vs Great Britain. You say this Mohamed was super natural?

[Joeshamo]

No I think he’s the least supernatural out of all of the religions. My religion before was catholic tho. I still follow it’s teachings even though I’m agnostic now. Like virgin till marriage and so on. I I guess I had the wrong idea of agnostic. I thought it meant you weren’t sure. I tried abandoning my religious beliefs, but they’re still strongly ingrained into my psyche. I tried having casual sex, but I got too scared. It shames me to admit, but you just kind of made me realize I was being ignorant. You opened up my eyes a little and I thank you for that. My idea of religion and god we’re kind of ignorant. Before speaking with you. I thought religion was just something rich, noble, people made up to keep the common man in check and keep them working for the kings and people with high social status. It seemed like to the perfect tool to use against the poor. “Do it because god told you to do it.” And “even though all these people are hurting me they will pay for their sins in the after life.” I thought it was just something create to keep people docile and omnipotent. Damn, I’m quite embarrassed lol. I never talked to anyone about religion before. Always keep it to myself. Thank for waking me up.

[Joeshamo]

@gagirls sorry for sounding so foolish.

[normalice]

Magic continues not to exist. I need to see something before i can believe it. And i have not seen anything that can't be explained by normal physics. I fundamentally can't understand people who are willing to jump to a conclusion just because it's something they would prefer to be true. I get the appeal. I get the desire. But i dont get the ability to actually commit your own energy to the propoagation of something that has no evidence except as an act of profound despair and insecurity. To that end, there is a perfectly reasonable explanation (i. e. conforms to the normal laws of physics) for how religion even came to exist in the first place. And as religion is the main way the existence of a god is proposed to most people, it seems we have a situation where something of nonmagical origins is claiming magic exists but not giving any proof of that - and indeed can't even offer itself as proof.

Or put another way, I'm not entirely sure there isn't a god, but I am entirely sure that if there is a god no religion has correctly guessed it's nature.

But that's why i remain an atheist. It is not why I became one in the first place. The reason i became one in the first place is simply because i was raised a Puritanism. And when I moved out of my parents house the options were either to go absolutely mad with guilt over all the compromises I had to make to my faith just to survive the real world, or start considering the possibility that I was wrong. I chose the latter. The transition took a few agonizing years but it was pretty much inevitable.

[GaGirls]

Yeah that's how belief works. It is identical to habits. In order to change them you have to give yourself opposing ideas or question them over a period of time. That was my experience when I went from being religious to being Atheist or maybe agnostic. But then the same thing happened to develop my belief in God but it is of no religion and I am not religious and it isn't restricting in any way.

[MoodyJazz]

I think it's possible that some kind of God created the universe, but I think the humans/creatures back then were more like cavemen than what the bible suggests. I definitely believe in the theory of evolution because of the evidence for it, but I do believe shit doesn't just exist out of nowhere. Personally, I don't think he paid attention to us earthlings, but simply created everything and just let everything brew and evolve.

I used to be a Christian but kind of lost faith + learned more about science. The bible is good for morals and stuff (most of the time), but I recently got into Zen as I find the idea of being equal to the Gods or simply a frog (all beings have the same value) very intriguing. But yeah I don't believe in any religion because faith is blind trust and it's never good to be blind.

[CountessSarah]

I am an atheist. Theists have failed to present any evidence or so much as a compelling argument for their claims, so I reject them.

"I am not religious myself but I am not Atheist anymore either."
Atheism and theism are binary - everyone is one or the other, regardless of how they feel about labels.
You're either a stamp collector or a non-stamp collector.

[Madhatter920]

I'm atheist because I have not been presented with any credible evidence as to the existence of any deity or magic. I have, throughout my life, come to understand that it is natural for people to lie or simply be mistaken. I know religious leaders have a lot of wealth and influence that they maintain through the belief of others, giving them incentive to lie. Religious leaders have frequently been caught lying and using their position for their own gain.

Religion often contradicts itself. Christianity, for example, states both "thou shall not kill" and "suffer not a witch to live." It states that a parade was held for Jesus when he came to town and that the Romans needed to bribe someone to tell them who Jesus was, because they didn't know.

The bible is also outright wrong about things, such as the age of the earth. Carbon dating proves beyond a shadow of the a doubt that the world is much older than what the bible claims. Fossil records also show that humans were not created, but instead evolved over a long period of time from other apes.

There is mountains of evidence to discredit religion and no evidence whatsoever in support of it. Logic and experience both leave me with no doubt that there is no such thing as gods or magic.

[Shizunk]

Atheism is the result of simply not being convinced by supernatural claims at all. The definition of god doesn't matter. There is no good evidence speaking in favor of any of them, and as such it is a waste of energy to pursue hypothetical thoughts of what could be. Fun exercise, but not relevant to my life.
I read the Quran and a lot of the Bible, I listened to the followers of all the monotheistic religions who made the case for their religion, most of it is frankly pathetic. Until someone is able to put forward a convincing argument, I am going to assume it's a bunch of wishful thinking. I started out as a Christian, but then I realized over time that there is nothing behind the curtain.

[Kaneki05]

Proof ageist god speaks louder than the proof for god.

Black holes, like the universe before the Big Bang, condense into a singularity. In this ultra-packed point of mass, gravity is so strong that it distorts time as well as light and space. Simply put, in the depths of a black hole, time does not exist.

Because the universe also began as a singularity, time itself could not have existed before the Big Bang. Hawking's answer, then, to what happened before the Big Bang is, "there was no time before the Big Bang."

"We have finally found something that doesn’t have a cause, because there was no time for a cause to exist in," Hawking wrote. "For me this means that there is no possibility of a creator, because there is no time for a creator to have existed in."

[Archerer]

I’m an Atheist because no definition of God fits with the natural world, and adding a God to the mix is superfluous. It also seems to me that when you get down to it everyone who believes in a God wants to believe in a God, and wants there to be a God. As an Atheist, I don’t want there not to be a God, I just can’t see any reason for me to believe there is one because of the lack of evidence and contradictory ideas surrounding it.

[Archerer]

This applies for both definitions

[GaGirls]

Yeah makes sense. I use to be the same way.

[Archerer]

And now you want some form of God to exist

[GaGirls]

No I know that God exist I just don't define God like religious people do nor do I have a blind definition or concept.

[Archerer]

What is it and what is your evidence

[GaGirls]

Start of comment 1: Well to give you a logical basis it's best to start with my definition of God in the most basic or limited articulation without going to deep e. g Thomas Troward. My definition in its most basic articulation would be : God - An infinite intelligence that is amoral (Lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something) and responsible for the creation of all that we see and can't see. A foundational, omnipresent source from which all things of matter spring.(<--This being by far most important) An intelligence that is never created or destroyed. An intelligence only concerned with growth. A power that operates on already established lines (Laws etc) after the Big Bang or creation of the universe. NOT something that judges nor cares about the individual man/woman. Thus no hell or such nonsense. We will limit it there, for sake of simplicity, effort, and my lack of ability to articulate. (End of comment 1)

[GaGirls]

Start of comment 2: We can start with the intelligence part, providing a basic level of reason and limited evidence for time sake. If we follow the train of thought that the higher the grade of life, the higher the intelligence; from which it follows that the supreme principle of Life must also be the ultimate principle of intelligence. This is clearly demonstrated by the grand natural order of the universe. In the light of modern science the principle of evolution is familiar to us all, and the accurate adjustment existing between all parts of the cosmic scheme is too self-evident to need insisting upon. Every advance in science consists in discovering new subtleties of connection in this magnificent universal order, which already exists and only needs our recognition to bring it into practical use. If, then, the highest work of the greatest minds consists in nothing else than the recognition of an already existing order, there is no getting away from the conclusion that a paramount intelligence must be inherent in the Life-Principle, which manifests itself as this order; and thus we see that there must be a great cosmic intelligence underlying the totality of things. Obviously you already have been made aware of some Laws and truths which we have been intelligent enough to recognize as some small part of this totality of order. (End of comment 2)

[GaGirls]

Start of Comment 3A: Let us move on to the last part, “A foundational, omnipresent source from which all things of matter spring.”, which I am sure you have been waiting for. This one is the most simple but yet the hardest to explain. Science is the study of the force outside or around humanity. Theology is the study or is more concerned with force within humanity. Force being the power that animates, penetrates, and motivates the cosmos. Many may think they are antagonistic but I will give a basic grounds to express that they are in fact in harmony. These two conceptions are respectively the conception of the abstract and the concrete, of the unconditioned and the conditioned, of the absolute and the relative. They are not opposed to each other in the sense of incompatibility, but are each the complement of the other, and the only reality is in the combination of the two. The error of the extreme idealist is in endeavoring to realize the absolute without the relative, and the error of the extreme materialist is in endeavoring to realize the relative without the absolute. (End of Comment 3A)

[GaGirls]

Start of Comment 3B: If you go to a scientist and ask them what is the great power that animates, penetrates, and motivates the cosmos they give you one word. Energy. Their definition will be energy just is. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted from one form of energy to another. It is the cause and effect of itself and it is omnipresent. Omnipresent meaning it is evenly present in all places at the same time. It is present in all things. Now let us think, how will the theologian answer this same question. What is the great power that animates, penetrates, and motivates the cosmos? The theologian will give you one word. The word is God. How will they define God? (End of Comment 3B)

[GaGirls]

Start of comment 3C: God just is. God is never created nor destroyed. He/she is the cause and effect of itself and she/he is omnipresent. Everything is made in his/her image. When we take a look at the tools we have in this world, like kirlian photography, we come to see that the human body is nothing but a mass of energy. “Everything is made in his/her image”. (Our pretend Theologian from earlier)
“Matter has both mass and energy”(The Equivalence of Mass and Energy on Stanford edu)
Anyway the point is energy/god is all. When there is form, energy is there and when there is no form, energy is there. (End of Comment 3C)

[GaGirls]

(Start of Comment 3D ) It is a mathematical truth that the infinite must be a unity. You cannot have two infinites, for then neither would be infinite, each would be limited by the other, nor can you split the infinite up into fractions. The infinite is mathematically essential unity. That’s as far as I wish to go but as you know everything vibrates. The glass you drink from was once sand. We altered the vibration (frequency in which it vibrates) using heat until we got glass. Energy moves or vibrates on frequencies (rates of vibration). Law of Conservation of Energies - energy can neither be created nor destroyed only converted from one form of energy to another. So in a nutshell, without continuing on, I’m saying Science and Theology are in fact talking about the same power. There is a lot I left out. If you wish to go deeper or for it to be said by someone who can better articulate this, I’d suggest The Edinburgh Lectures 1909 by Thomas Troward (130 pages). William James, often referred to as the father of American Psychology, said that Troword was one of the best authors of the past 500 years. It’s pretty heavy stuff. I’d be remiss if I didn’t recommend the more simpler Law of Success 1925 or 1928(1925 being the original) which was made to be the philosophy for noteworthy Achievement. The author was employed by Andrew Carnegie to study 500 of the most successful men and women of that time. He got up close and personal with people such as Carnegie, Ford, Edison, and former presidents of the USA. The book is over 500 pages and is a literal textbook. (End of comment 3D)

[GaGirls]

Start of Comment 3E: If you wish for the most simple thing that springs from people like Emerson, Hegel, Descartes, Troward etc, um then The science of getting rich by Wallace Wattles may be the most simple but doesn’t really explain because it is meant to just give the how to. How to, may imply there is some type of benefit to be had that I didn’t mention. I didn’t mention them because that wasn’t what the topic was about nor did I want to try to use that much evidence. Would have been typing a mini book. Now if you read the bible you may find that I didn’t really tell you anything different. Maybe dehumanized it to some degree. I mean isn’t it right there in the Bible (john) if I remember, it says first was the word and the word was God. That would make more sense if I had explained Energy better. I’m sure you got the understanding that matter is mass and energy thus matter is form but I never said Energy is blank therefore energy is… Blank. I left that out on purpose because I did not wish to go down the lane of benefits. And it would make no sense unless I was going to go down that road fully. So there is more to it all but I’d be typing forever to explain it all and don’t think one can understand this type of stuff in one read or five reads even. (End of Final Comment)(The END)

[Archerer]

That was a lot of word salad

[OfDeath]

Simply because there is no valid reason for believing in god. No verifiable and reliable evidence has ever been presented for the existence of a supernatural agency and a causally indifferent, fundamental nature is not a god.

A creator of the universe god is also self contradictory. In order for a creator god to exist, it needs to either have always been there or have come out of nothing. So it is reliant on these qualities and therefore a contingent being. A contingent being cannot be a first cause by definition. If something can exist eternally or ex nihilo apparitions are possible, no god is necessary and the concept becomes maximally improbable. The requirements necessary for a creator god to exist, obviate its existence.

[BillyBalls]

A thousand years ago it was a fact that the earth was flat.

Things we don't know does not prove something does not exist.

I hope that makes sense to you.

A thousand years from now who knows what will be proved to be true.

[OfDeath]

@BillyBalls The burden of proof is borne by the one making the positive claim. The earth was shown not to be flat. The proponents of flat earth theory failed I'm meeting the burden of proof.

If nobody can prove god exists, I have no reason to believe it exists. On top of that, the basics of logic point to a creator god being self contradictory as I explained.

[BillyBalls]

I have no proof to believe their is life on other planets. Does not mean it does not exist.

[BillyBalls]

Lack of proof of the existence of something is not proof it doesn't exist.

[OfDeath]

@BillyBalls So you're misinterpreting my position. I am not stating God doesn't exist. I'm saying I don't BELIEVE God exists.

*Dont believe.

Not *believe doesn't.

Do you see the difference now?

Lack of evidence for something which has been searched for actually does count towards evidence against it though. That has to be pointed out. For example, if you have a box and tell me there's a $100 bill in there and then I open it and there is no $100 bill, the absence of the $100 bill is evidence of its absence.

[BillyBalls]

The proof is the empty box... so there concrete evidence there is no $100 bill in the box.

That is not the same as having no evidence of a things existence. If you didn't look in the box, you would have no proof that the box was empty or not.

Your logic is flawed.

[OfDeath]

@BillyBalls ok, what if someone else claimed they could see $100 in the box?

How could I prove that person wrong?

I can't. However, the burden of proof rests with them since they're making a positive claim.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

(No god seen in the universe but there are people who claim to have seen it).

So, as you should now be able to see, my logic isn't flawed at all.
We haven't seen everywhere in the universe, but we have seen so much that we can detect things we can't see without the high powered scientific instruments. And even a hint of god has not been seen despite such a deep search. I'm not claiming god is definitely not there, I'm simply pointing to the favtvit hasn't been seen and absence of evidence is evidence of absence until evidence of presence can be ascertained.

Pointing to aliens is also a straw man fallacy. This is avoiding the issue by raising an unrelated subject. It is also true that we know life can exist in the universe and we know some of the conditions in which it can evolve. Whereas we know nothing about the conditions which might accommodate
for a supernatural being. That is a very big difference in probability.

[Anonymous]

With regard to a God as a creator; it doesn't help to say God started off the big bang beacuse all it does it change the question from 'What started the big bang?' to 'What created God?' Nothing has been gained in terms of understanding you just have a layer of bullshit there now.

What is outside of our universe is unknowable. This means that unless you believe that God spoke to a bunch of illiterate iron age peasants and couldnt come up with a better story than basically the same story that had already been told for hundreds of years before that, that nothing can be know about Gods intentions and desires etc.

Spoiler alert : All religious dogma is the creation of man.

So, there is absolutely no evidence for the existance of any Gods and even if an entity with Godly qualities did initate the big bang, we cannot know anything about that entity.

I dont know why you have 2 definitions, I know of no religion which teaches one and not the other.

[Guanfei]

The existence of a god itself is just so ridiculous.
Seriously, a being who was never created, who was always there, all knowing, all powerful, it's already so stupid.
But now, you tell me that being created a planet and put small, insignificant beings on it and care more about them than the rest of the universe. Again, stupid.
But on top of that, also add that instead of giving them everything to make them happy, since he supposedly has the power to do so, he just put them through different kind of shit, whether they're innocent or not, young or old, men or women. Just like that. Because... because.
And finally add the cherry on top, he threatens you with eternal damnation if you dare not obeying and worshiping him your whole life. Fucking narcissist behavior it is.

Do I need to say more to show how fucking ridiculous this is? Even if such a god existed, why would anyone be stupid enough to worship him?

[Sonorous]

I consider myself an agnostic who only identifies as an atheist in response to religion. I'm an atheist in response to religion because people don't yet know what many claim to know. And you can tell because they won't be able to form logically sound deductive arguments. This is due to the fact that science and mathematics are the only ways we will learn about the unknown. The subjective must come to understand the objective on it's terms.

[Sonorous]

And any definition of God is insignificant in my opinion. We just aren't advanced enough to know if our origin. So my answer is in response to all of them.

[slatyb]

For the same reason I don't believe in other fairy tales. Prayer doesn't work.

[GaGirls]

What is your definition of prayer. How do you pray?

[slatyb]

I don't pray, I'm not saying that prayer doesn't because it doesn't work for me. I'm saying it doesn't work because there's never been any evidence of it's effectiveness. Hospital patients that were prayed over, or prayed for, did no better than those who were not. Religious believers in general are no better off than skeptics.

[genericname85]

let me ask you with a counter question: if i tell you i have a loaded gun behind my back that i can shoot you with. so give me 100000 dollar or i'll shoot you.

will you wanna see the gun first or just give me the money not asking any questions?

[Alexandrubaschet08]

i will punch you before you show you have a gun or not and even if you have or not i will bet you so bead that you will wish to take the money from the gun back or at las to use the money for your hospital treetment

[genericname85]

@Alexandrubaschet08 that's just avoiding the answer.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

your question have no point.
In such a moment you don't stay "show me/don't show me", from the very start moment you will go whit the idea that ther is a gun and your life can be in danger and because of that you will do evrething that is posible to save yourself >give the money, fight, run, try to prvent that guy to show what ever they have ther.
But whit God not evrybody care if ther is or no God.
Personal i belive in God very much.
But in your example is clear that the victim will 100% asum ther is a gun in order to save themself

[genericname85]

@Alexandrubaschet08 my question has a point. it is a hypothetical one not a realisitc one and i know that you underestand the point being: are you a gullible fool or do you actually wanna see proof for the shit people claim.

and yes i understand that you are NOT too dumb to understand this. you just don't wanna acknoledge it since you chose to be a gullible fool so now you have to be aggressive to anyone who challenges that decision cause you're too invested at this point. that's the trap of christian delusion. instead of questioning if your faith makes actual sense or not, you'll just fight everyone that challenges your faith as if they were fighting you personally.

[genericname85]

because it is part of your doctrin that it is "weakness" or "sin" to question your faith. that which you are not allowed to question, should not be accepted in the first place.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

Is my fate, God is real and i question evry time if he is by my side and where is God.
You just don't want to turn your face and open your eyes to God, because is something that you can't see phisical, you can't touch God, you can hear God like you hear all the other people and animals and sonds...
God by been a divine entity is much more the a phisical manifestation.
God is evrywere, God see you, God can talk to you if you want to listen to him.
You belive God doesn't exist, but how did you search it, when all people who belive tell you is not a phisical creature and is a divine one.
Is more similar whit the air, you can see it, you can't smell it, but you know is ther because you can feel it and keep you alive.
What make you not belive and see God? One person on this site try to talk about this and start to put properly questions afther our conversations.

[genericname85]

@Alexandrubaschet08 the only reason to see god is to tell yourself really hard that there is god. And i just don't do that. I refuse to believe in things that aren't evidently there. I Know its harder for people who live in environments where everyone around them does the same. I'm lucky in this, cause most people i know don't believe in god either for the same reason.

[Alexandrubaschet08]

I hate when people don't belive in a divinity because then, life start to have absolut zero meaning.
If ther is no God why we don't suicide all togeders? If ther is nothing and nothing will hapen?

[TheSpaceGnome]

Definition 1: The creator of everything.
Impossible since eternity/infinity exists, and also because energy/matter cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed.

Definition 2: An omnipotent being.
Also impossible, since opposites exist.

I'm an atheist because I'm too smart to buy into contradictory religious claims.

[devilman666]

Because nobody has ever shown me a good reason to believe in any particular God. There are literally dozens if not hundreds of religions I could choose from, what makes your religion so special? Why should I think it's true?

[devilman666]

The definition of God I use is irrelevant. Not just in terms of the conversation but in general, it's like asking what definition of unicorn I use, it's just ridiculous because I don't believe in unicorns, so why would I make a differentiate between unicorns with horns and unicorns with wings? Some religions like the ancient Greek Gods were not creators nor authorities, not every religion is like yours.

[110907]

I don't believe in any higher power. I have never really understood I guess. People try to explain but I can always think of why what they are saying can be wrong. The whole Bible story doesn't make sense either. None of it adds up. And if she/he really wanted the best then why does she/he have to such terrible things. It's not to teach us a lesson bc clearly that isn't working.

[Belgie]

Either definition of a god is fine. I don't believe because there's no compelling evidence to believe in such an extraordinary concept.

[EnglishEuropean]

I don't need a reason to be an atheist. I would need a reason to believe in God.

[cmarrott]

This ^^^

[Jayplays900]

Man, I'm religious, and even I'll admit that was a spot-on answer.

Gotta post that quote on a wall or something.

[kittengrrl]

God 2 because I’m a Christian and seriously believe it’s wrong to disrespect God but I don’t think atheists are evil tho like some people do they just don’t know but sure some are

[call_me_scar]

God 1. As for why well the idea of a loving and intelligent God just didn't make sense given the world we live in

[GaGirls]

I probably should have put a God 3 to clarify. God 3 would be the same as God 1 but has intelligence. I believe in God 1 but with intelligence but amoral. For a number of reasons but the most fundamental reason being how the universe operates in an orderly fashion. The most evidential reason requires much more words and sources. So we agreed on God 1 and the amoral part but not the intelligence part.

[_no_one_]

1. Lack of proofs validating any such deitic entities.
2. Negative extent that religious aspect of this subject has gone.
3. Definition itself.

[Paradox316]

Theists have not met their burden of proof. Simple as that. You make a positive claim, you have to back it up. Not the people who are not convinced.

[disgustingweebtrash]

Holy shit genuine LEDDITOR

[admles]

Born an Atheist, raised one, will die one.

I've not been given any reason to believe in "god" either definition.