I Am An Atheist

I am an anti-theistic agnostic atheist and a skeptic and I do not believe in a god or gods.

Theists seem to believe their god is an elderly white haired man with a beard sitting on a cloud and I believe that is completely ludicrous but that is what religious art work has portrayed for hundreds of years. Millions of them believe that kindly looking gentleman created the universe about 5000 years ago.

There may have been a force that played a part in the creation of the universe and everything in it.

There may have been, but I don't know so I am not going to worry about it.

There are far, far more things in this universe that I will never understand than things that I will. I am still trying to grasp the concept of a "Multi-verse".

If a "force" does exist that created the universe it would be a force that is so far beyond our comprehension that we have neither the language to describe it nor the intelligence to understand it.

Yet theists talk about "God's will" as if they not only understand this force but they also know what it is thinking. They are saying "We can read the mind of a force that created the universe". They can read their god's mind but have difficulty balancing their cheque book.

If that force does exist, is "create" even the correct term, or are theists simply reducing the process to something they can grasp, something they are not afraid of.

Theists like to use words like "Create", "Holy", "God", words that they can understand, that they can wrap their minds around, that they can picture in their imagination. Rather than just accepting there are things in this universe they can't comprehend, theists have reduced this possible "force" to something they can.

An old man, sitting on a cloud.

Theists can understand that image.

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

MrBrownstone · 46-50, M

[image/video deleted]

KingLionHeart

Awesome

MrX2017 · 51-55, M

First of all, no one knows exactly what God looks like, so he might look much younger, with no beard. Secondly, despite depictions of God in art, I doubt that he sits on clouds. I believe that God created man in his own image and in the bible. One thing is for sure, in the not too distant future, you're going to meet him.

View 1 more replies »

MrX2017 · 51-55, M

I try not to shove anything down anyone's throat. I do believe that since God didn't even show himself from the front to Moses, I highly doubt that he displayed his appearance to anyone else. As for my final statement, I don't need a book or the contents of a test tube, my heart and soul tells me that upon death you will be standing tall before the Man. What happens to you after that, is entirely up to him.

lostcanadian · 70-79, M

@Lewis47: I wish you all the luck in the world.

MrX2017 · 51-55, M

@lostcanadian: Thank you. In all honesty, I wish you well both now and whatever you think happens in the hereafter.

doctorlove · M

Well you should have a busy evening ;)

lostcanadian · 70-79, M

Thanks but I am in Vietnam. It's 6:30 am here

SW-User

You're a low atheist. Try reasoning the natural provision of afterlife and become a high atheist.

View 4 more replies »

lostcanadian · 70-79, M

@SuperCute: I am a bit lost about what you are trying to say. A strong or gnostic atheist doesn't believe there are gods and feels there is evidence to show that. He/she then has the onus to provide that evidence as he/she is making a claim. A weak or agnostic atheist doesn't believe there are gods but does not have any evidence to support that belief, it is simply a belief, and therefor he/she is not making any claim. As he/she is not making any claim other than one of a personal belief he/she has no onus of proof. Gnostic atheists and gnostic theists are both out to lunch as far as I am concerned. They both make unsupported claims and provide no evidence for those claims.
There is a big difference in saying "I don't believe in gods" and saying "There are no gods".

SW-User

How might a strong atheist feel there is evidence against the existence of gods? Something is strange here. The strong atheist puts the onus on the faithful and by their inability registers their belief as a failed attempt. The weak atheist does exactly the same thing, but puts no time constraint on proof submission.

And they use the same 'unscientifically rigged' half onus system. This will definitely prove a relationship between strong and weak atheists.

lostcanadian · 70-79, M

@SuperCute: I have no idea how a strong or gnostic atheist feels there is evidence against the existence of a god. Why are you asking me? I am a agnostic atheist. Ask a gnostic atheist. Try reading some of the things they have written. Try emailing Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris.
Perhaps they just accept the image below as saying enough.

Furiousfrog · 31-35, M

Jesus loves you anyway

View 8 more replies »

Furiousfrog · 31-35, M

Not quite.

Agnostic is doubts and questions around a certain beleif/s.

So there is your encertainty or the address if he lack of knowledge.

Atheism, is still a theology.

The new atheist ideass are promoting the definition if atheism as a lack or a non theology. Which is impossible.

Without the existence of a postice claim you cannot have the negative to it. Otherwise the absolute value would still exist. Basically, you are negative 1 which is absolutely 1. If you want it to be zero you must admit the existence of the theology in order to negate it. Which creates a paradoxical problem. How can you both admit the existsence of a thing you are denying while denying it? There is something illogical there.

So basically, no matter.which way you claim, you are making a positive claim. Your ideas and beliefs leave you with the burden of proof. It's almost better to make no claims or make claims that are grand no evidence can support or disprove it.

Theology sucks.

lostcanadian · 70-79, M

@Furiousfrog: I will try one more time. Agnostic atheists are atheistic because they do not hold a belief in the existence of any deity and agnostic because they claim that the existence of a deity is either unknowable in principle or currently unknown in fact.
Try looking the definition of the words up.

Furiousfrog · 31-35, M

You are missing your mark.

Look im always up for these mindfuck discussions, but I dont want to bother you if you aren't. Ignore the rest if this if you aren't, in which case, Jesus loves you.

So, we are dealing with a concept that isn't deacrible by our five senses. It's an experience much like beauty, where it exists aomehwrre beyond the physical ot empirical manifestation of it. The phenomenonology of its existence is what is at question at the core of either. So its completely impossible to admit the phenomenonolgy of something is prevalent enough that you can deny its existence. At that point it exists in some mode. This isn't an imperic claim. You can't point to it.

Its like saying I am an anti unicorn person. Uniforms don't exist. But in order for me t make that claim, uniforms must exist in some mode in order for me to deny it. So in that moment I am both admitting to he existence of unicorns while denying it. It's a logical fuck. An impossible statement. I am limited to the parameters of the statement then.

I can only state, uniforms do not exist in the imperical world. The world of matter and energy.

So when we move that back over to the god question, si ce the concept of god usually exists in a "spiritual world", how can the existence of such a deity be anything but outside the measure of human knowledge and reason.

If the agnostic atheist is claiming the principles if god is unknown in fact, then you are indeed agreeing with the majority of any thrust. The core if both beliefs are the same, and the difference is simply the conclusion you draw from that point. But the core resides the same.

DFDGsdfffss · M

I agree.
Although I wish that I believe in a god. I would handle it so much easier when people die or when Im feeling down.

But I do not.
I cannot.

sighmeupforthat · 46-50, M

People and label crusade.

Add a comment...