Atheists - which God don't you believe in?

[St0ne]

I have experienced as much evidence for the Buddhist "gods" as for any other god, none.

I haven't really come across many descriptions of gods in my research of buddhism, the desciptions I have come across although they are reffered to as gods nothing indicated to me god like attributes, like being the creater, giver and taker of life, etc. My take is that they are just 'beings' who have echieved enough\exessive karma to exist on a different level, from what I have read even their existance at that level is not for eternity. It's a point in buddhism that I'm not sure is fully fact or legend, eigther way my current understanding is that it's not important in what we are trying to echieve.

I know very little about pure land, now might be a good time to have a bit of a look.

 

[eudaimonia]

To the atheists on the forum, have you always been atheist or have you 'converted' from some form of theism?

I 'converted' to my nontheistic views from Catholic Christianity.

If you have 'converted', was it specifically issues with the God(s) of your old religion that you had a problem with?

The lack of convincing reasons for God's existence, mainly.

Have you/did you explore alternative religions such as Buddhism or Taoism before opting for complete atheism?

Yes, I took a careful look at Eastern beliefs, such as New Age and Zen Buddhism, for a few years.

If so, what about these religions did not appeal to you?

I realized that they not pro-reason enough for me. I came to take the view that metaphyiscal naturalism represented my view of existence, and that reason was the only means of coming to understand existence. I finally came "home" when I encountered the nontheistic ideas of Ayn Rand, and realized that something very similar was what I believed all along. I now have a philosophical and spiritual path which I find persuasive and meaningful. I call it Eudaimonism (as does the Fellowship of Reason, of which I'm a charter member.)


eudaimonia,

M.

 

[Zsr1973]

For my feeling I can't even see how they could be related at all.


For me atheism is not disbelieve in religion, but disbelief in God. So it doesn't matter how the identity of God according to religions is.


That just feels like giving something completelly differnt the name "God".
If I see my car as "god" than it would erase my need not to believe my car..:sarcastic
Besides, I don't heve 'the need' to disbelieve God. I just do..

I don't believe in substituting the word "God" for more correct words either, but its what I need to use with people who only beive in the word "God".

Ball, we all have a dormant inner divinity. It is this divinity that can put us in tune with the universe, our world, and ourselves. When we reach this divinity, we become Gods. This was a part of Jesus' original teachings (in the book of John) as well as a part of the Judaic teachings (Psalms). Of course these are originally Egyptian teachings, and its no coincidence that both Jesus and Moses were "raised" in Egypt (as well as Abraham in a completely symbolic way ).

The reason I said I felt my friend's athiesm contributed to her never feeling love is because i felt it cut her off from that divinity. That's in her specific case. However, if you have never experienced divinity, then there is no point in debating about it.

 

[BucephalusBB]

I don't believe in substituting the word "God" for more correct words either, but its what I need to use with people who only beive in the word "God".

Ball, we all have a dormant inner divinity. It is this divinity that can put us in tune with the universe, our world, and ourselves. When we reach this divinity, we become Gods. This was a part of Jesus' original teachings (in the book of John) as well as a part of the Judaic teachings (Psalms). Of course these are originally Egyptian teachings, and its no coincidence that both Jesus and Moses were "raised" in Egypt (as well as Abraham in a completely symbolic way ).

The reason I said I felt my friend's athiesm contributed to her never feeling love is because i felt it cut her off from that divinity. That's in her specific case. However, if you have never experienced divinity, then there is no point in debating about it.

Lol, I don't know the meaning of the word 'divinity'. So imagine how hard it is for me to read your text

 

[Smoke]

To the atheists on the forum, have you always been atheist or have you 'converted' from some form of theism?

I'm not exactly an atheist, but I'm not a theist, either. I have religious beliefs, but they don't extend to a personal god or gods, and I've taken to calling myself a non-theist as a way of indicating that I don't believe in what people generally mean by "God". I was a Christian till last November.

If you have 'converted', was it specifically issues with the God(s) of your old religion that you had a problem with?

My problem with Christianity had very little to do with Christian dogma; even when I was a Christian I saw dogma as metaphorical and not as a set of teachings that was literally true. I rejected Christianity primarily because of peace and justice issues, and was a little surprised when I realized that left me with no reason to believe what Christianity teaches about God, either.

Have you/did you explore alternative religions such as Buddhism or Taoism before opting for complete atheism? If so, what about these religions did not appeal to you?

Buddhism is as diverse as Christianity, and some forms of Buddhism are less appealing than others. In general I find Buddhism less objectionable than Christianity, but not so much so that I see any good reason to sign up. Philosophical Taoism is actually fairly close to what I believe, but I don't have any convenient opportunity to participate in any kind of organized Taoism, or see any particular reason why I should.

Religion in general seems to me to do more harm than good. Note that while I identify myself as a "Friend", and I like the Quakers -- well, some of them -- I'm not actually a formal member of any Quaker organization and I'm not entirely certain I want to be. But one of the things I like about them -- some of them -- is that they actually seem to do more good than harm. But I've become wary of spiritual conventions, even the better ones.

 

[Zsr1973]

Lol, I don't know the meaning of the word 'divinity'. So imagine how hard it is for me to read your text

You are right. That would make it very difficult. This is how I am using the word. The essence of anything divine or holy is in the nature and amount of truth it represents. This includes being true about one's situation, spirituality or religion, true to one's self, the truth about existence, etc.

the basis is that there is an ultimate truth. There is a truth to everything that exists. like: how did the universe come to be? We can debate forever, but there is only one true answer in reality.

In my experience, the most difficult truth for a human being is facing the truth about himself. About his faults and shortcomings. About being wrong.

using this definition, a person can have divinity yet not be at all religious.

 

[Zsr1973]

Lol, I don't know the meaning of the word 'divinity'. So imagine how hard it is for me to read your text

Lets do an experiment. Lets look at these questions:

1. Can death be cured?
2. Is there other intelligent life out there?
3. Can the time barrier be broken?
4. Can we visit other dimensions and universes in this earthly life?

These are questions that have not been definitively answered & proven as of yet by science, yet the answer to each of these questions already exists and has existed from the beginning. Why can't a human being tap into this "realm of truth" to get the answers, circumventing science? If you have any other answer besides "they can't", then that is the doorstep of human spirituality. It is the quest for the highest truth. If we look at 99% of valid people considered prophets, their stature within their spiritual circle is given not for the most part because of any miracles or signs, but for the truth in their words. It all comes down to truth. Who has it, how much of it can we accept, and can we live by it.

 

[mr.guy]

These are questions that have not been definitively answered & proven as of yet by science, yet the answer to each of these questions already exists and has existed from the beginning.

And the pre-ordained answers may also be "no".

If you have any other answer besides "they can't", then that is the doorstep of human spirituality.

A fascinating promise. Believe anything, and you're proximity to truth is better assured.

It all comes down to truth. Who has it, how much of it can we accept, and can we live by it.

One could say that that atheists are most distinguished by their allergies to truthfullness.

 

[Zsr1973]

And the pre-ordained answers may also be "no".

A fascinating promise. Believe anything, and you're proximity to truth is better assured.

One could say that that atheists are most distinguished by their allergies to truthfullness.

They teach in law school that there are three versions to every story:
1. A's version
2. B's version
3. the actual true story.
Spirituality is the earnest search for the actual true story. Religion doesn't have to be involved. To many scientists, their search for answers almost becomes a spiritual experience for them. your reference to athiests' allergies to "truthfullness" is refering to the assumption by most religious people that they have "the truth". That is not what I am talking about. Do you doubt that an actual true story even exists?

You should consider that the reason so many highly spiritual teachers insist there is a greater consciousness is because they've experienced it.

 

[Zsr1973]

And the pre-ordained answers may also be "no".

How many things that people at one time considered impossible has man actually accomplished?
At the rate science is going, we should have at least three of those questions confirmed within one generation.

 

[mr.guy]

They teach in law school that there are three versions to every story:
1. A's version
2. B's version
3. the actual true story.

Is it a good thing to deduce spirituality by litigious standards?

Do you doubt that an actual true story even exists?

I've little doubt there to be plenty of "truthiness". You're arguing a duality of being and appearance.

You should consider that the reason so many highly spiritual teachers insist there is a greater consciousness is because they've experienced it.

There are many possible positions regarding what they've "experienced". I make no claim either way.

 

[royol]

Most Atheists would say they are Atheists because it makes more sense to be an Atheists, after all, all religions are based on stories told to someone by someone else, passed down from generation to generation, and then written down,
and now being re-written every day to suite some agenda or other throughout the world, I would also say that most Atheists can understand the need for religion of sorts, but not the 'Fanatical' devotion to fundamentalist beliefs religion brings about.
An Atheist will think for themselves, you telling me something, or me reading it, does not make it true, I must decide for myself, and if it looks like a dog and barks like a dog, I will think it's a dog, not a messenger from God.

 

[BucephalusBB]

Most Atheists would say they are Atheists because it makes more sense to be an Atheists, after all, all religions are based on stories told to someone by someone else, passed down from generation to generation, and then written down,
and now being re-written every day to suite some agenda or other throughout the world, I would also say that most Atheists can understand the need for religion of sorts, but not the 'Fanatical' devotion to fundamentalist beliefs religion brings about.
An Atheist will think for themselves, you telling me something, or me reading it, does not make it true, I must decide for myself, and if it looks like a dog and barks like a dog, I will think it's a dog, not a messenger from God.

That's nonsense.. If I don't want to follow a religion I can easilly decide that God exists, only not as with religion. You don't need to follow a reigion to believe God exists..

 

[Tiberius]

But in that case, aren't you just making it up as you go? And a religion practiced by only one person is still a religion.

 

[BucephalusBB]

But in that case, aren't you just making it up as you go? And a religion practiced by only one person is still a religion.

Yes it is, but Royol came with the idea that it is not thinking for yourself when you follow religion. So it might be a one-man-religion, but it is thinking for yourself.
Making it up as you go..? perhaps, but does that matter?

 

[demonchild88]

It's not that we lost our faith, its that we realized that there is no faith. You have lost hopes that your life might mean something more than just living to die. And religion is what gives you an answer, in other words were not lost you're just blinded by your own fears.

 

[logician]

Since the multiverse has always existed, no creator being is needed. Personally, reason and freethought are much more important to me than believing in some myth that requires closing one's mind to the investigation of truth.

 

[Halcyon]

Since the multiverse has always existed...

Scientifically testable evidence, please.

 

[royol]

Scientifically testable evidence, please.??????????
Where do you think you are ???????
this is a 'Religious Forum', there is no such thing as 'Scientifically testable evidence'
everything is taken on trust, they believe because they were told by people they trust, (parents)
there is no need for Scientifically testable evidence, what they were told is the absolute truth.

 

[BucephalusBB]

Scientifically testable evidence, please.??????????
Where do you think you are ???????
this is a 'Religious Forum', there is no such thing as 'Scientifically testable evidence'
everything is taken on trust, they believe because they were told by people they trust, (parents)
there is no need for Scientifically testable evidence, what they were told is the absolute truth.

You appear to be forgetting those who do not believe in God, those who do believe in God AND science and those who follow religion and want to know the science-version.

O, and you talk about "they" as if you are not part of the forum yourself?