Reasons to not believe in God? Discuss....

[Ouroboros]

No it won't.
This thread as I see it...is about a focus on Someone Greater than yourself.

Do you really believe there is no One Greater?
No afterlife?

If there is an afterlife....Someone will be in charge.

The Universe is greater than me.

Every day and moment of life is a change of who you are. You're never the same. The "afterlife" is you becoming other things.

Someone doesn't have to be "in charge." The Universe is in charge, and we're part of it. "Someone" and "something" are all the same.

 

[Sha'irullah]

Nope.

I just find your claim of atheists as a whole replacing religious "absolutes" with science to be at the very least as ignorant a claim as your sad sorry attempt at dictation below.


[sarcasm]
Oh my.
You really got me there.
How can I ever begin to counter such well referenced and solid a claim?
[/sarcasm]

Please name me an atheist that does not find science to be relevant to their disbelieve in religion. I have never known an atheist who is not moderately knowledgeable in evolution for example. There is a reason why I said "as a whole".
To disbelieve in something you must have something solid and providing proof. You mean to tell me that most atheists had a revelation from god telling them he does not exist?

I am not saying it is bad what many atheists do because I do it myself, the issue though is that atheists often times just refill an empty hole with a filler of some sorts. Science and philosophy are good fillers

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Please name me an atheist that does not find science to be relevant to their disbelieve in religion. I have never known an atheist who is not moderately knowledgeable in evolution for example. There is a reason why I said "as a whole".
To disbelieve in something you must have something solid and providing proof. You mean to tell me that most atheists had a revelation from god telling them he does not exist?

I am not saying it is bad what many atheists do because I do it myself, the issue though is that atheists often times just refill an empty hole with a filler of some sorts. Science and philosophy are good fillers

I know plenty of atheists who aren't knowledgeable in evolution. They may have heard the term, but they wouldn't be able to describe it. I think but I don't know for sure that my husband is an atheist but wouldn't use science as a relevance to disbelief. But then he has me for a wife, I accept science and have a belief.

 

[McBell]

Please name me an atheist that does not find science to be relevant to their disbelieve in religion.

I cannot tell if you are moving the goal posts or Just had a serious bad time wording your original claim...

I have never known an atheist who is not moderately knowledgeable in evolution for example.

Being knowledgeable about evolution does not mean you have replaced religious belief with the science you are knowledgeable about...

I for one have not done so...

There is a reason why I said "as a whole".

please do explain.

To disbelieve in something you must have something solid and providing proof.

No you don't.

You mean to tell me that most atheists had a revelation from god telling them he does not exist?

Where did you pull that from?

I am not saying it is bad what many atheists do because I do it myself, the issue though is that atheists often times just refill an empty hole with a filler of some sorts. Science and philosophy are good fillers

I for one have not replaced religion with science.
I simply have no reason to believe in a deity, so I don't.
I have no reason to disbelieve in a deity, so I don't.

 

[SpeaksForTheTrees]

Reasons to disbelieve in God ?
No 1 reason is religion , requires one to abandon logic and reason opting for a blind leap of faith into a world of contradiction , greed and suffering.
No 2 the creation , sentient creatures devouring each other alive a dog eat dog world of exploitation .Suffering although im alright Jack suffering outweighs pleasure tenfold .
No 3 Selectivism as in one of us may live a healthy long life , one may get brain cancer and die slowly puking their guts up every day for months before death . Death is something we can never escape but is more horrific for some than others .
No 4 Science now suggesting the world some 4.5 bil years old if this is accurate , then humans have only filled a very tiny % of this time appears humans are a byproduct rather than something purposely created
No 5 Love , i love my family etc and if one of them are in trouble i would by default intervene. Like a good samaritan i would also intervene under this pretext regarding other situations God chooses to cross the road , saying shoot to them .

Actually im more fearful of if god exists than he doesn't we are not of the same nature .

 

[Sha'irullah]

I know plenty of atheists who aren't knowledgeable in evolution. They may have heard the term, but they wouldn't be able to describe it. I think but I don't know for sure that my husband is an atheist but wouldn't use science as a relevance to disbelief. But then he has me for a wife, I accept science and have a belief.

I have never meant an atheist who does not hold a strong reliance upon science as a reason for disbelief or at least philosophy, but age has a lot to do with it also. Younger individuals do not find value in theological disputes.

Also evolution is not the primary issue, just any scientific claim that counters a religion and if science is used as a way of replacing that religion. Philosophy does the same thing also along with skepticism

 

[Truth_Faith13]

I have never meant an atheist who does not hold a strong reliance upon science as a reason for disbelief or at least philosophy, but age has a lot to do with it also. Younger individuals do not find value in theological disputes.

Also evolution is not the primary issue, just any scientific claim that counters a religion and if science is used as a way of replacing that religion. Philosophy does the same thing also along with skepticism

While I agree some scientific claims counters some organised religions...the age of the earth for example and six day creationists. I dont know of a science claim that disproves God exists entirely since God is neither provable nor disprovable (is thats even a word?)...we can create theories and make suggestions and hope, but never know for sure.. Some atheists may just not want to believe as has been pointed out on this thread and have no real reason to believe...science isnt involved.

 

[Thief]

The Universe is greater than me.

Every day and moment of life is a change of who you are. You're never the same. The "afterlife" is you becoming other things.

Someone doesn't have to be "in charge." The Universe is in charge, and we're part of it. "Someone" and "something" are all the same.

No really....regardless of the nature of your 'change'.....
Someone will always be Greater.

No one with the power of creation?
Then substance begets substance.
No spirit.
In the hour of your last breath 'you' cease to be....anything but dust.
This life is then a complete mystery.
No cause for the development of your spirit.
No 'need' for 'you'.

 

[LuisDantas]

Please name me an atheist that does not find science to be relevant to their disbelieve in religion.

I don't disbelieve in religion, I just am an Atheist.

And I am at a loss understanding what you mean here. Science being relevant to my disbelief? How does that work? How can I tell if it is to me?

I have never meant an atheist who does not hold a strong reliance upon science as a reason for disbelief or at least philosophy, but age has a lot to do with it also. Younger individuals do not find value in theological disputes.

Also evolution is not the primary issue, just any scientific claim that counters a religion and if science is used as a way of replacing that religion. Philosophy does the same thing also along with skepticism

That is not how I remember it. Going far back into my childhood, I just lacked an affinity to supernaturalist thinking. I remember when they taught me a song at school that mentioned that Mary somehow knew that her child would be divine. I was puzzled and very unconfortable. Up until that point, I assumed that everyone saw Christianity as an admiration society of sorts, and Jesus was simply seen as a wise man, much as several people are admired for their athletical prowess. I vividly remember wanting to ask people something like "surely you don't believe in that?" or "Uh? How come Mary would think such a weird thing?". Maybe I actually did ask something like that.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

While I agree some scientific claims counters some organised religions...the age of the earth for example and six day creationists. I dont know of a science claim that disproves God exists entirely since God is neither provable nor disprovable (is thats even a word?)...we can create theories and make suggestions and hope, but never know for sure.. Some atheists may just not want to believe as has been pointed out on this thread and have no real reason to believe...science isnt involved.

Russell's Teapot illustrates the problems with - and IMO unscientificness - of accepting a claim for which no evidence exists for or against it.

You say that God is not disprovable... IOW that God is unfalsifiable. This means that God doesn't even qualify as a hypothesis.

 

[LuisDantas]

While I agree some scientific claims counters some organised religions...the age of the earth for example and six day creationists. I dont know of a science claim that disproves God exists entirely since God is neither provable nor disprovable (is thats even a word?)...we can create theories and make suggestions and hope, but never know for sure.. Some atheists may just not want to believe as has been pointed out on this thread and have no real reason to believe...science isnt involved.

Even "not wanting to believe" seems a bit too forceful to me. There is simply no good reason to attempt to believe in God, much like no one is expected to believe in the teapot that Russell proposed.

 

[Ouroboros]

No really....regardless of the nature of your 'change'.....
Someone will always be Greater.

No, because a "someone" that is greater would be a giant. We have no 3 billion light year giants in this world. We would have noticed.

No one with the power of creation?

All things are one. Someone and something are the same.

Then substance begets substance.

How do you know? Our mind emerges from the brain. Remove a part of the brain and a person will lose some of his/her mind. Remove piece by piece, and piece by piece of mind will disappear.

No spirit.
In the hour of your last breath 'you' cease to be....anything but dust.
This life is then a complete mystery.
No cause for the development of your spirit.
No 'need' for 'you'.

All your "spirit" is dependent on the world, not only to exist, but to experience. You can't experience or exist or be or act without the things around you, the time, and your interaction with all of it. Spirit can't exist without Nature.

We've been down this road several times before. I'm not going to change just because you're a broken record.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I cannot tell if you are moving the goal posts or Just had a serious bad time wording your original claim...

I have a good feeling you did not understand a single thing I said as last I recall you 100% stoop to semantical arguments based on the level of one's knowledge of English.

Being knowledgeable about evolution does not mean you have replaced religious belief with the science you are knowledgeable about...

Evolution is only an example as many atheists find it to be a "religious killer"
I for one have not done so...

please do explain.

Again you getting ready to enter semantical territories.

No you don't.

You cannot justify something with nothing so if you disbelieve in a god on the basis of nothing then you are not replacing this belief with anything which makes the topic of an apatheist or an uninformed atheist irrelevant.

Where did you pull that from?

You don't justify your disbelief in something so obviously you must be pulling a wild card out on the table if you say you do not justify your atheism with neither science, philosophy or skepticism. If nothing natural promotes justifiable atheism then all that is left is the supernatural. You are putting yourself in a dilemma here.

I for one have not replaced religion with science.

That is cool.

I simply have no reason to believe in a deity, so I don't.

So you are ignorant and uninformed, brilliant because considering that you enjoy semantical arguments I can tell. Semantical arguments are only used when attempting to avoid a truth or avoid one's own mistakes, very common in debating but you on the other hand start with a semantical failure.

I have no reason to disbelieve in a deity, so I don't.

So you are an apatheist and justifying atheism which you have no affiliation with.
And just like that I cannot find your argument remotely serious.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I don't disbelieve in religion, I just am an Atheist.

Being an atheist is one thing but justifying your position is another. How do you justify your Atheism?

I am not referring to religion vs atheist I am only mentioning the idea of theism vs atheism. Although theism incorporates religion to a moderate degree.

And I am at a loss understanding what you mean here. Science being relevant to my disbelief? How does that work? How can I tell if it is to me?

How did mankind come about biologically?
Does the Bible hold historical facts?
Why is the Qur'an not true?
And why do you think it is unlikely for a god to exist?

That is not how I remember it. Going far back into my childhood, I just lacked an affinity to supernaturalist thinking. I remember when they taught me a song at school that mentioned that Mary somehow knew that her child would be divine. I was puzzled and very unconfortable. Up until that point, I assumed that everyone saw Christianity as an admiration society of sorts, and Jesus was simply seen as a wise man, much as several people are admired for their athletical prowess. I vividly remember wanting to ask people something like "surely you don't believe in that?" or "Uh? How come Mary would think such a weird thing?". Maybe I actually did ask something like that.

So your atheism is not justified with something other than personal opinions? I really doubt this.

You do know that I am not referring to how a person became an atheist right? I am skipping over the origins story you can say

 

[LuisDantas]

Being an atheist is one thing but justifying your position is another. How do you justify your Atheism?

By swearing that I do not believe in the literal existence of any deities.

Is there any other proper way?

I am not referring to religion vs atheist I am only mentioning the idea of theism vs atheism. Although theism incorporates religion to a moderate degree.

Fair enough.

How did mankind come about biologically?

We have of course had various answers along time according to the level of scientific knowledge... but ultimately it does not (or should not) matter from a religious standpoint. This is not a question of interest to religion, far as I understand it.

Does the Bible hold historical facts?

Perhaps a few. It does not seem to be trying to, going by the text itself.

Why is the Qur'an not true?

Among other reasons, because it disapproves of Atheism just because, of course.

A slightly more rigorous analysis shows also that it is technically flawed, since it encourages people to take it as a perfect, and unchanging reference for religious purposes. That amounts to a call for ignoring the reality of societal change and anthropological variety.

And why do you think it is unlikely for a god to exist?

Because I looked around.

It helps that when I learned of the concept it was from sources that taught specific versions of it that almost seem to have been designed to be disbelieved, I suppose.

So your atheism is not justified with something other than personal opinions? I really doubt this.

Really? Why would you?

More to the point, what other proper justification could either exist or be called for? None occur to me right now.

You do know that I am not referring to how a person became an atheist right? I am skipping over the origins story you can say

I became an atheist by being born and eventually learning of the concept of God and realizing that it was not for me.

Truth be told, I don't think it really fits in a healthy way with a very many people either. Perhaps 10% of people actually make a good match with the concept. Others basically pretend to believe or just don't care to say that they do not. Far too many are enabled in various kinds of derangements by it.

 

[Thief]

No, because a "someone" that is greater would be a giant. We have no 3 billion light year giants in this world. We would have noticed.


All things are one. Someone and something are the same.


How do you know? Our mind emerges from the brain. Remove a part of the brain and a person will lose some of his/her mind. Remove piece by piece, and piece by piece of mind will disappear.


All your "spirit" is dependent on the world, not only to exist, but to experience. You can't experience or exist or be or act without the things around you, the time, and your interaction with all of it. Spirit can't exist without Nature.

We've been down this road several times before. I'm not going to change just because you're a broken record.

Not a broken record....just having difficult opening your mind.

You are here to learn all you can before you die.
Your spirit is separated from all things beyond the length of your arm.
Beyond your reach...you have to move.

Beyond your last breath...you have to leave your body.
Otherwise....you follow your body into the box and into the ground.
Eternal darkness is physically real.

Was that the serious reality you are seeking?

 

[McBell]

You don't justify your disbelief in something so obviously you must be pulling a wild card out on the table if you say you do not justify your atheism with neither science, philosophy or skepticism. If nothing natural promotes justifiable atheism then all that is left is the supernatural. You are putting yourself in a dilemma here.

What dilemma?
I have no reason to believe or disbelieve in a deity.
It really is as simple as that.

Why you feel the need to try and complicate while whining about my semantics is beyond me.

So you are ignorant and uninformed, brilliant because considering that you enjoy semantical arguments I can tell. Semantical arguments are only used when attempting to avoid a truth or avoid one's own mistakes, very common in debating but you on the other hand start with a semantical failure.

Ignorant and uninformed simply for not believing in god?
Now that is a stretch...

So you are an apatheist and justifying atheism which you have no affiliation with.

I am "justifying atheism"?
Since when?

And just like that I cannot find your argument remotely serious.

No worries.
Seeing as you are not the least bit interested in understanding it....

 

[Ouroboros]

Not a broken record....just having difficult opening your mind.

You are here to learn all you can before you die.
Your spirit is separated from all things beyond the length of your arm.
Beyond your reach...you have to move.

Beyond your last breath...you have to leave your body.
Otherwise....you follow your body into the box and into the ground.
Eternal darkness is physically real.

Was that the serious reality you are seeking?

I was Christian for most of my life....... Then I got better.

How about you?

 

[Sha'irullah]

What dilemma?
I have no reason to believe or disbelieve in a deity.
It really is as simple as that.

Then why are you making implications to being an atheist? You are quite the dishonest character

Why you feel the need to try and complicate while whining about my semantics is beyond me.

It isjsut that considering you do your best to manipulate any one argument you come across I find it historical that you expect me to take you seriously.

Ignorant and uninformed simply for not believing in god?
Now that is a stretch...

I never said anything like this now I know you were never being serious. There is a massive difference between argumentation and circle talk. Conversation ended.

 

[Sha'irullah]

By swearing that I do not believe in the literal existence of any deities.

Is there any other proper way?



Fair enough.




We have of course had various answers along time according to the level of scientific knowledge... but ultimately it does not (or should not) matter from a religious standpoint. This is not a question of interest to religion, far as I understand it.




Perhaps a few. It does not seem to be trying to, going by the text itself.




Among other reasons, because it disapproves of Atheism just because, of course.

A slightly more rigorous analysis shows also that it is technically flawed, since it encourages people to take it as a perfect, and unchanging reference for religious purposes. That amounts to a call for ignoring the reality of societal change and anthropological variety.




Because I looked around.

It helps that when I learned of the concept it was from sources that taught specific versions of it that almost seem to have been designed to be disbelieved, I suppose.




Really? Why would you?

More to the point, what other proper justification could either exist or be called for? None occur to me right now.




I became an atheist by being born and eventually learning of the concept of God and realizing that it was not for me.

Truth be told, I don't think it really fits in a healthy way with a very many people either. Perhaps 10% of people actually make a good match with the concept. Others basically pretend to believe or just don't care to say that they do not. Far too many are enabled in various kinds of derangements by it.

I hope you know that what you are describing is apatheism not traditional atheism.