Why are you not an atheist?

[Epic Beard Man]

Like the atheist I principle but I an opposite way I'm not atheist because there is not substantial enough proof that there is NO incorporeal deity that is autonomous and authoritative in the universe.

 

[Apologes]

I'm not an atheist because I think a better case can be made for theism than atheism.

 

[QuestioningMind]

Because I think it is not reasonable to claim that God doesn’t exist.

You do realize that atheist simply state that they have no evidence to believe that a god(s) does exist, NOT that god doesn't exist , right?

 

[SalixIncendium]

Experiencing an 'alternate perspective' (for lack of a better descriptive) of temporal reality places me outside the atheist camp.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I'm an atheist because there is no religion with credible claims to its god(s) existence.

How dare you question His noodly goodness??!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111one

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

So, why aren't you an atheist?

I talk to God and God talks back. Don't really need anything else and I don't believe evangelism is a good thing. If God wants to talk to people, He can do it Himself.

I'm an atheist because there is no religion with credible claims to its god(s) existence.

I would agree on the surface, though I also accept that many gods were most likely tribal leaders whose reps got way out of hand. In that sense, the gods DID exist.

I am not sure how much further disassociated interpersonally from nature we can get, but it's not healthy.

Agreed. We have lost a lot of that sense of interconnectedness. When I had a fish pond in the backyard way back when, it was rough keeping that stupid filter clean. Until the frogs and fish reproduced and then most of the algae problem went away. In fact, dozens if not hundreds of frogs entered the world thanks to that pond. My family hated the ribbiting, though, LOL. I have known since I was at least a teenager that encouraging a more ecologically natural setup is far superior than forcing nature to do what we want because usually we want shallow and meaningless things.

Dr. Ellie Sattler: Well, the question is, how can you know anything about an extinct ecosystem? And therefore, how could you ever assume that you can control it? I mean, you have plants in this building that are poisonous, you picked them because they look good, but these are aggressive living things that have no idea what century they're in, and they'll defend themselves, violently if necessary.

(emphasis mine)

 

[Starbuck]

I used to be an atheist and a pretty amendment one on these boards a couple years back. Still remember a lot of the faces. I've read a lot about it and much from Christopher Hitchens. A brilliant man who had friends in almost all religions. The reason I was an atheist was the rejection of currently held beliefs that I viewed as toxic. Which all Abrahamic religions are in my opinion. Eventually I stopped caring as much as I realized most followers don't even understand or see the contradictions. Or they ignore them because questioning them would require them to question one of the foundations of their identity. Most people don't have the balls to do it. Atheism is a very reasonable reaction to the evidence that we have at the current level of human consciousness.

Why am I no longer an atheist? I find the concept of more intelligent beings than humans not existing highly improbable. As well as from person experience not true. That is my definition of a God. A being who has reached a certain power. I believe that there are powerful beings out there that seek to guide humanity. There are also power beings who don't give a **** and those who seek humanity harm. Just too many coincidences throughout history for there not to be higher beings. Therefore I seek to gain knowledge from what would many would describe as the Old Gods. However, I define as higher beings reaching out to those who wish to listen and gain knowledge. Yet my roots of confronting people who wish to silence knowledge still persists. That is originally thanks to Atheism.

 

[David T]

I talk to God and God talks back. Don't really need anything else and I don't believe evangelism is a good thing. If God wants to talk to people, He can do it Himself.


I would agree on the surface, though I also accept that many gods were most likely tribal leaders whose reps got way out of hand. In that sense, the gods DID exist.


Agreed. We have lost a lot of that sense of interconnectedness. When I had a fish pond in the backyard way back when, it was rough keeping that stupid filter clean. Until the frogs and fish reproduced and then most of the algae problem went away. In fact, dozens if not hundreds of frogs entered the world thanks to that pond. My family hated the ribbiting, though, LOL. I have known since I was at least a teenager that encouraging a more ecologically natural setup is far superior than forcing nature to do what we want because usually we want shallow and meaningless things.

Dr. Ellie Sattler: Well, the question is, how can you know anything about an extinct ecosystem? And therefore, how could you ever assume that you can control it? I mean, you have plants in this building that are poisonous, you picked them because they look good, but these are aggressive living things that have no idea what century they're in, and they'll defend themselves, violently if necessary.

(emphasis mine)

So spot on I couldn't have said it better. I have said here "in order to understand god you must understand nature, to understand nature you must understand god. To split that is to negate that, to negate that is to not understand that". I might add that is sin.

I can accept atheism specifically if it's directed at theology itself as a confused well meaning but misguided joke. After All its the development of the intellect over the last couple thousand years. It's my degree and its confused but a handy psych tool. What I cannot accept is the whole Christian without jesus and have the identical interpersonal disregard for mother nature. I am not talking simple environmental concern here deeper. Deep ecology.

I personalize and family the word nature into mother nature for a particular reason. Nature is not a house and nature is not governed by laws. She is a wild woman not some slave to the intellect and she is deadly. She can kill us all by taking a nap.

I like to add my metaphorical inverse of the bible story here," and she took a nap, man became extinct, on the third day Pan proclaimed she has risen, and there born again into new life, and the forest danced".


My entire world view and philosophy is informed by children's stories.!!!! Trees make more sense than a lot of people.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

atheism is plain wrong. atheism can be justified only when religions start talking crazy. bad religions promote atheism. if religions work properly, then atheism will be eliminated.

Nope.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I'm not an Atheist because I understand that the Cosmos is the source of my life....

 

[Spiderman]

I used to be an atheist and a pretty amendment one on these boards a couple years back. Still remember a lot of the faces. I've read a lot about it and much from Christopher Hitchens. A brilliant man who had friends in almost all religions. The reason I was an atheist was the rejection of currently held beliefs that I viewed as toxic. Which all Abrahamic religions are in my opinion. Eventually I stopped caring as much as I realized most followers don't even understand or see the contradictions. Or they ignore them because questioning them would require them to question one of the foundations of their identity. Most people don't have the balls to do it. Atheism is a very reasonable reaction to the evidence that we have at the current level of human consciousness.

Why am I no longer an atheist? I find the concept of more intelligent beings than humans not existing highly improbable. As well as from person experience not true. That is my definition of a God. A being who has reached a certain power. I believe that there are powerful beings out there that seek to guide humanity. There are also power beings who don't give a **** and those who seek humanity harm. Just too many coincidences throughout history for there not to be higher beings. Therefore I seek to gain knowledge from what would many would describe as the Old Gods. However, I define as higher beings reaching out to those who wish to listen and gain knowledge. Yet my roots of confronting people who wish to silence knowledge still persists. That is originally thanks to Atheism.

great post! I agree

 

[PureX]

How does that work on relation to the fact that there is no proof that I am not the Alpha Centurian lycanthropic legitimate heir of the thrones of Norway and France?

When you have a legitimate question, I'll get back to you.

 

[qaz]

i don't believe in transcendence. but i "believe" in many concepts that have no scientific meaning or demonstrated relation with the physical laws , e.g. life (is a virus "life"?) , will, love, the european or chinese cultures , the cuteness of a woman, etc.

 

[LuisDantas]

When you have a legitimate question, I'll get back to you.

It is very much a legitimate question.

Believing in such an unlikely god simply because it has not been "proven against" is, if anything, a much more serious matter than your doubting of my just as unproven lack of lycanthropic qualities.

 

[PureX]

i don't believe in transcendence. but i "believe" in many concepts that have no scientific meaning or demonstrated relation with the physical laws , e.g. life (is a virus "life"?) , will, love, the european or chinese cultures , the cuteness of a woman, etc.

Isn't life an example of transcendence from matter? And then consciousness a transcendence from life? In each instance a whole new realm of existence, with a whole new realm of possibilities that did not previously exist, come into being.

 

[PureX]

It is very much a legitimate question.

Believing in such an unlikely god simply because it has not been "proven against" is, if anything, a much more serious matter than your doubting of my just as unproven lack of lycanthropic qualities.

"Proven" to who's satisfaction, and by what criteria?

We all "believe in" a reality and truth that we can't prove beyond our own subjective experience and reasoning. It's the fundamental limitation/gift of the human condition. I understand why atheists choose not to believe in gods. But in doing so they are denying themselves the benefits of that particular act of faith. And for what; the illusion that they are somehow more "right" (more realistic and true) then everyone else?

 

[LuisDantas]

"Proven" to who's satisfaction, and by what criteria?

Indeed, those are proper questions to ask.

We all ought to take responsibility for what we choose to believe in.

We all "believe in" a reality and truth that we can't prove beyond our own subjective experience and reasoning. It's the fundamental limitation/gift of the human condition.

Perhaps. That is not very settled a matter, and not very satisfactory for dealing with consensual reality.

I understand why atheists choose not to believe in gods.

That is a bold claim, since we don't always have a clear reason or even a clear choice.

But in doing so they are denying themselves the benefits of that particular act of faith.

Assuming that we have any choice on the matter, that is probably right.

Still, faith, by your definition, has rather formidable drawbacks. It leads to an affinity to self-delusion, moral and emotional fragility. It is also not very helpful in developing rational clarity or moral honesty, either. At least when compared to the alternatives.

And for what; the illusion that they are somehow more "right" (more realistic and true) then everyone else?

Why, of course not.

Rather the love for pursuing accuracy, honesty and truth to the best of human ability, as opposed to half-truths and lies that may sometimes be of immediate confort but all too often lead us astray.

 

[qaz]

Isn't life an example of transcendence from matter? And then consciousness a transcendence from life? In each instance a whole new realm of existence, with a whole new realm of possibilities that did not previously exist, come into being.

"transcendence" has to me a very precise meaning - that is, something which exists but i can't experience.
the examples of your post (and mine too) refer to "transcendentality".
god , afterlife, etc are transcendent. life, friendship, consciousness , etc are transcendental.

 

[paarsurrey]

Why are you not an atheist?

I don't find any positive reality in Atheism/Agnosticism. I believe, Atheism has no basis, please.
Others are welcome to believe in whatever they think suits them with reason and arguments, if any, or without them, please.
Regards

 

[HonestJoe]

I'm not an atheist for many reasons, many of which I shared.

I disagree. You’re not atheist for a single reason; a belief in the existence of a god or gods.

And maybe...just maybe, there will be reward on the other side...

And you claim it was atheism that made you selfish?

You present all these negative things in your life when you (believe you) were an atheist and all the good and positive things you now do because of your belief in some kind of god. The problem is that there are loads of other people out there, many non-believers who do good things regardless, for their own varied reasons and many believers who do bad things, either despite or because of their beliefs.

However easy an excuse it might be for you, blaming atheism for your problems and using your beliefs almost literally as a crutch is logically flawed and possibly not positive for you in the long run. Maybe you need to accept that while you remain capable of all the negative things from your past, it is you who moved on to the more positive ones too. Even if you did have spiritual support, it still requires you to independently decide to do the right thing.