[Serious]Why are you not a believer of the existence of God

Scientists will happily agree that they currently do not have all the facts. They will therefore seek further answers..it's called progress.

Anyway. To answer the original question. I do not believe in a deity of any kind because to believe that some divine being created this universe is preposterous. The earth is about the size of a pinhead compared to the sun when it comes to how big we are in the universe. How is it that such a being doesn't care about the rest of the universe, only our little dust speck of a planet. Little arrogant don't you think?

Religion is simply the early uneducated population trying to comprehend things they didn't understand. For example a scientist (who incidentally was also catholic) proved the existence of Moses. It was fascinating really. He proved that he was simply a man at the right place at the right time. Through Geological means we know that an underwater volcano (Thera) erupted in the Mediterranean Sea. Due to the curvature of the Earth they wouldn't have seen anything, only felt the earthquake.
Now he also proved the ten plagues were a result of that volcano. To cut a long story short the river turning red was pollution from the molten lava and all the animals were essentially fleeing the volcano en mass (behaviour we see now because animals can sense when a volcano is going to erupt). The hail of fire were the molten bombs being spewed out. The death of livestock and total darkness was due to the pyroclastic cloud. As for the firstborn being selectively killed this is easily explained. Modern times we call our firstborn as the literal first born child. Back then the firstborn referred to the highest echelons of the upper class, who would be given the freshest fruit and wheat. The problem is that the volcanic ash would have corrupted this food and as they'd have been the first to eat it they would have been the first to perish.

Food for thought eh?

Anyway, I am an atheist simply because there is not a shred of empirical evidence of the existence of a divinity.
I also do not forgive the organised religions for the billions of people in history that have been slaughtered in their name. Even now the Catholic church will not condone the use of contraception when the AIDS virus is killing millions in Africa (which is almost completely devout Catholics). It is short-sighted and irresponsible and so I cannot believe in a deity that would allow their own church to cause millions of deaths every year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

The islamic faith only began in 700 AD. Loads of people seem to think it's older than Christianity but it's not. In fact it's an offshoot of Christianity. It doesn't recognise Jesus as the son of God but does recognise him as a prophet. It basically takes the view (and I'm simplifying here) that Mohammed came along 700 years later and corrected some of the miss-interpretations of existing teachings. In essence it's Christianity Plus or a biblical erratta.

It's worked so far

---

this all may be true but their bible is older than the new testament. It's a modified version of the Jewish bible and includes the exact same stories.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

Anyway, I am an atheist simply because there is not a shred of empirical evidence of the existence of a divinity.
I also do not forgive the organised religions for the billions of people in history that have been slaughtered in their name. Even now the Catholic church will not condone the use of contraception when the AIDS virus is killing millions in Africa (which is almost completely devout Catholics). It is short-sighted and irresponsible and so I cannot believe in a deity that would allow their own church to cause millions of deaths every year.

---

why not? That would be an assumption on your part that he or she doesn't want them to die. Free-will = overbreeding therefore the diety releases new diseases to kill off a few million or so to preserve the ecological balance.

Gaia may be real.

Gaia is more likely to exist than a deity, still no empirical evidence however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

Anyway, I am an atheist simply because there is not a shred of empirical evidence of the existence of a divinity.
I also do not forgive the organised religions for the billions of people in history that have been slaughtered in their name. Even now the Catholic church will not condone the use of contraception when the AIDS virus is killing millions in Africa (which is almost completely devout Catholics). It is short-sighted and irresponsible and so I cannot believe in a deity that would allow their own church to cause millions of deaths every year.

---

God is a programmer: he created a universe and self evolving life by inventing a programming language called DNA. He quickly realised he couldn't control the evolution so introduced virus's as a way of making subtle changes to life forms through mutations. Virus's were ideal because the would travel between worlds, so if God saw a feature of life he liked on one plnet, he could isolate the code, make a virus and send it along to another with the help of a small rock. On arrival in the new world, the virus might have a disasterous affect, but some will make it and the new preferred feature will emerge.

OK, that is a bit stupid, but my point is, that if the Universe was "created"; the creator would only have macro control over it and is probably not even aware that a small population of aliens, living in some random galaxy go to funny shaped buildings every week to thank him / her for the life they live.

Probably make him/her feel all fuzzy inside if he/she found out

not read all the post so appolegies if this has been posted before.

if there was a god why would we be having this discussion ? we would surely know the god was there?

this will go on till doomsday.

END OF
Thread Closed!

Surely though if there was some form of deity that ensured justice and such then why is there such injustice in the world?
Religion is simply for those who fear death and need their lives to have some meaning. Face the fact that you only have one life, a mere speck in the grand scheme of the universe so make the most of the life you have instead of spending it looking up and thanking someone who doesn't exist, or if they did is currently away sorting out another planet somewhere

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978

Religion is simply for those who fear death and need their lives to have some meaning.

---

This.

Unless, of course, they have been brainwashed by their parents to believe it to be true (most likely the main reason there are still religious people around today).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davadvice

not read all the post so appolegies if this has been posted before.

if there was a god why would we be having this discussion ? we would surely know the god was there?

this will go on till doomsday.

END OF
Thread Closed!

---

:confused: :eek: :D :ehh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BadgerBadger

This.

Unless, of course, they have been brainwashed by their parents to believe it to be true (most likely the main reason there are still religious people around today).

---

True true. Sad isn't it. Are they that scared about they're religion that the force their kids to believe in what they believe?

Atheism is a form of religion too. Do you atheists feel that you have to convince others that there is no God. I don't think anyone should force anyone to believe anything. I know there is a God but I can't prove it to anyone nor do I feel that it is my responsiblity to try to. I think we should all respect everyone else's beliefs and leave everyone free to believe as they choose to believe. I think it's good that believers in God encounter the views of atheists and try to get along with them and I think it's good for atheists to try to get along with people who believe in God.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blakk_Majik

One big example is the birth of Jesus Christ. How, with all the knowledge we have of the human body, can one believe a virgin gave birth to another human being (especially considering artificial insemination was not around back then)? ...

---

How do you know that it was not around back then? People of that time period were definatly technologically advanced enough to perform artificial insemination. There is supposedly evidence that Arabs of that time period were performing this on their prized horses well before the birth of Jesus. I would venture a guess that this tequinique was being used thousands of years prior.

I'd be more inclined to believe Joseph knocked Mary up out of wedlock and claimed immaculate conception to keep her from getting her head chopped off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

God is a programmer: he created a universe and self evolving life by inventing a programming language called DNA. He quickly realised he couldn't control the evolution so introduced virus's as a way of making subtle changes to life forms through mutations. Virus's were ideal because the would travel between worlds, so if God saw a feature of life he liked on one plnet, he could isolate the code, make a virus and send it along to another with the help of a small rock. On arrival in the new world, the virus might have a disasterous affect, but some will make it and the new preferred feature will emerge.

OK, that is a bit stupid, but my point is, that if the Universe was "created"; the creator would only have macro control over it and is probably not even aware that a small population of aliens, living in some random galaxy go to funny shaped buildings every week to thank him / her for the life they live.

---

that's an interestng point and i will add to it: If God was capable of knowing exactly what was going on everywhere in the universe at once, then the universe itself wouldn't be necessary and the brain of this God would contain everything. On the other hand this means that the theory of a living universe is more likely to be true than one of a random God that somehow had a child.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blakk_Majik

One big example is the birth of Jesus Christ. How, with all the knowledge we have of the human body, can one believe a virgin gave birth to another human being (especially considering artificial insemination was not around back then)? ...

---

Well I think a couple of questions need to be answered, but the primary one is what is a virgin and how does one know if she is or is not a virigin.

I think a virgin, in most definitions simply means hasn't had sex yet. That is more of a broad definition since the word "sex" can be interpreted differently too, but let's say sex = vaginal intercourse.

The next question is how to prove virginity. Can we really, especially back then? Obviously the honor system doesn't really work unless you are from a noble family or a family of impeccable credentials (like that is good proof!).

Well, what about the hymen.

So does detached hymen = non-virgin. Definitely not. They hymen can be detached for many reasons/events other than sexual activity.

Does intact hymen = virgin? Maybe, probably, but not 100% of the time. It is possible to have vaginal intercourse and not detach the hymen: some women must have their hymen surgically removed before the birth of their first child because it is so flexible or small that it remains intact during intercourse.

The above discussion, though interesting, is a bit off topic. The question/point I believe is: Can a true virgin give birth without it being an immaculate conception? Answer: Yes. A woman can become pregnant even if her hymen is intact, is a virgin, and no wee-wee has entered her vagina. If sperm comes in contact with the labia or general vaginal area, it can move through the opening in the vagina and possibly lead to a pregnancy.

Biology 101 is now over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaVolpe

Well I think a couple of questions need to be answered, but the primary one is what is a virgin and how does one know if she is or is not a virigin.

I think a virgin, in most definitions simply means hasn't had sex yet. That is more of a broad definition since the word "sex" can be interpreted differently too, but let's say sex = vaginal intercourse.

The next question is how to prove virginity. Can we really, especially back then? Obviously the honor system doesn't really work unless you are from a noble family or a family of impeccable credentials (like that is good proof!).

Well, what about the hymen.

So does detached hymen = non-virgin. Definitely not. They hymen can be detached for many reasons/events other than sexual activity.

Does intact hymen = virgin? Maybe, probably, but not 100% of the time. It is possible to have vaginal intercourse and not detach the hymen: some women must have their hymen surgically removed before the birth of their first child because it is so flexible or small that it remains intact during intercourse.

The above discussion, though interesting, is a bit off topic. The question/point I believe is: Can a true virgin give birth without it being an immaculate conception? Answer: Yes. A woman can become pregnant even if her hymen is intact, is a virgin, and no wee-wee has entered her vagina. If sperm comes in contact with the labia or general vaginal area, it can move through the opening in the vagina and possibly lead to a pregnancy.

Biology 101 is now over.

---

did they call it a wee-wee in biology? It's been a few years, but i am almost positive there's a more correct term.:bigyello: However this reminds me of a story a guy that works in a hospital told me. This girl came in to the hospital complaining of severe stomache pains. She was not only pregnant but her belly button was infected. Her boyfriend had been doing sexual things to her belly button and she was never cleaning up. At one time or another it ran down and inseminated her. She was arguing with the nurse (him) that there was no way she could be pregnant since she was a virgin.

There was an even stranger story from the Civil War, when a musket ball removed a human ball from a soldier, then continued its journey until it struck a gal in the abdomen. She became pregnant.

I heard that story from a fairly reliable source, but would like to find confirmation of it. I've done fairly extensive reading on the Civil War, yet have never encountered that story in any book, though none of the books would really have dwelt on such a thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orwell

did they call it a wee-wee in biology?

---

Nope, however, most other words I tried ended up as ***** instead. The sensorship evidentally approves of wee-wee. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orwell

...At one time or another it ran down and inseminated her. She was arguing with the nurse (him) that there was no way she could be pregnant since she was a virgin.

---

Sometimes commonsense just doesn't apply to the masses and some of those are adults, not just horny teens. Hmmm, if a virgin can menstrate and blood flows from inside to outside, I wonder if sperm can flow from outside to inside? Hmmm....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShaggyHiker

There was an even stranger story from the Civil War, when a musket ball removed a human ball from a soldier, then continued its journey until it struck a gal in the abdomen. She became pregnant.

I heard that story from a fairly reliable source, but would like to find confirmation of it. I've done fairly extensive reading on the Civil War, yet have never encountered that story in any book, though none of the books would really have dwelt on such a thing.

---

The US tv show Mythbusters had an episode on that very thing and "busted" the myth; in their determination it was highly unlikely and was simply a myth. Here is a quick link of the reason: jump to "Son of a Gun"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EntityX

Atheism is a form of religion too. Do you atheists feel that you have to convince others that there is no God. I don't think anyone should force anyone to believe anything. I know there is a God but I can't prove it to anyone nor do I feel that it is my responsiblity to try to. I think we should all respect everyone else's beliefs and leave everyone free to believe as they choose to believe. I think it's good that believers in God encounter the views of atheists and try to get along with them and I think it's good for atheists to try to get along with people who believe in God.

---

The number of people murdered, raped, tortured and generally abused for NOT believing in one religion or another is vastly greater than those placed in similar circumstances by atheists for BELIEVING.

Although YOU have adopted your own spiritualism and frequently express that people should respect others' beliefs, unfortunately that opinion is not held by everybody. There are few people who adopt atheism and use it as a tool to manipulate and influence others into horrendous acts of violence, but there are plenty who hijack a religion and do the same thing.

You are also in the fortunate position in which your religious beliefs lead you to believe that wishful thinking along the lines of "if only we could all be nice to each other..." actually, physically CAN change the world. Although I share the sentiment, I do not believe that it will actually occur from the power of thought alone.
I express disagreement with religion primarily when people try to use religious arguments as a tool to motivate ME, or when I see it used to oppress or restrict others.
And, of course, when people ask me questions about atheism or suggest that I am a militant non-believer who really holds a religious position just like everybody else :)

it's getting heated.

i've never seen anyone on the street chanting that God does NOT exist. i get harrased even at my house teling me to believe in all sorts of gods.

if you pester me with your god i will just insult you(cause you wont like what i have to say), as you should not be telling me how to feel or believe.

Well said zaza :thumb:
Atheists are generally more passive and respective of others beliefs than those of a religious persuasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

There was an even stranger story from the Civil War, when a musket ball removed a human ball from a soldier, then continued its journey until it struck a gal in the abdomen. She became pregnant.

I heard that story from a fairly reliable source, but would like to find confirmation of it. I've done fairly extensive reading on the Civil War, yet have never encountered that story in any book, though none of the books would really have dwelt on such a thing.

---

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/bullet.asp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kfcSmitty

http://www.snopes.com/pregnant/bullet.asp

---

I should have thought to look there. I figured it was too out in space for Snopes to have it, but I guess I sold them short.

Remember someone mentioning this was supposedly the source of the phrase "Son of a gun". Occam's Razor explains the most simple explanation is often the truth. Hence Mary and Joseph likely had an affair and blamed the big man upstairs for it :D

The greeks were FAR more inventive. They didn't bother with the virgin birth, they relied on the livestock (Europa and the bull, Leta and the swan, etc.).

I will start believing whenever the flying pigs land on the cold plains of hell.

its a joke... but seriously, no proves, no believe...

Every age has its god(s). Every god denies the existence of all prior gods. The only logically consistent solution to this state is that no god exists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Merrion

Every age has its god(s). Every god denies the existence of all prior gods. The only logically consistent solution to this state is that no god exists.

---

thats not true. The jewish one specifically goes on a rampage against the followers of Baal because he hates him. read genesis. plus the panthenon of greek, viking, etc. Native American is my favourite. oNE GREAT SPIRIT(COMPLETE WITH FLOOD MYTH) and a bunch of smaller ones.

I actually am a believer in God, my difference is, I don't believe in religion. I think all the organized religions of this world are a total bunch of hooey, especially any that originated in the Middle East.

I'm a scientist, not only a degreed Mechanical Engineer and self-taught professional Programmer, but also an amateur Astronomer and Astrophysicist. Weirdly, the more I learn of astrophysics, the more I believe in a God. Why? I believe there just seems far too many oddball coincidences to have shaped our current existence; whether on a universal scale or just on a planetary one. I believe something or someone is responsible for our life and our consciousness. I call that "God".

Whether it's an alien being or some metaphysical one, I really don't care anymore. All I know is that hopping on one foot while eating Ritz crackers only on the third Tuesday of each month while listening to the Grimm's Fairy Tales being recited in pentameter verse isn't going to somehow magically win me "afterlife points" with it. If there are any kind of "afterlife points" being earned, it'll be in how I live the life I was given; not how well I know and perform dogma. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jenner

I actually am a believer in God, my difference is, I don't believe in religion. I think all the organized religions of this world are a total bunch of hooey, especially any that originated in the Middle East.

I'm a scientist, not only a degreed Mechanical Engineer and self-taught professional Programmer, but also an amateur Astronomer and Astrophysicist. Weirdly, the more I learn of astrophysics, the more I believe in a God. Why? I believe there just seems far too many oddball coincidences to have shaped our current existence; whether on a universal scale or just on a planetary one. I believe something or someone is responsible for our life and our consciousness. I call that "God".

Whether it's an alien being or some metaphysical one, I really don't care anymore. All I know is that hopping on one foot while eating Ritz crackers only on the third Tuesday of each month while listening to the Grimm's Fairy Tales being recited in pentameter verse isn't going to somehow magically win me "afterlife points" with it. If there are any kind of "afterlife points" being earned, it'll be in how I live the life I was given; not how well I know and perform dogma. :)

---

you could look at it this way (and i think it's been mentioned): There could be millions of universes all different. And the reason the universe looks the way it does to us is because if it wasnt exactly capable of supporting life then no life would be here to look at it!

It's also arrogant in the extreme to believe that life doesn't exist elsewhere because we are what life IS. There will be thousands of planets capable of supporting life in the universe.

This is us from 4 billion light years away: [URLhttp://news.softpedia.com/newsImage/Did-You-Know-How-Insignificant-the-Earth-Really-Is-in-the-Universe-8.jpg/[/URL]

The observable universe is 93 billion light years in diameter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orwell

you could look at it this way (and i think it's been mentioned): There could be millions of universes all different. And the reason the universe looks the way it does to us is because if it wasnt exactly capable of supporting life then no life would be here to look at it!

---

I know all about multi-universe theory; the hook is though there would have to be an improbably large number of universes to have produced ours which is apparently "just right", with some factors being accurate to 10^-32; the tiniest bit of variation throwing off things like the strong force by several orders of magnitude and thus making it impossible for atomic elements to exist.

Sure, there's a lot of theory and speculation... maybe in an alternate universe, where baryons and leptons don't exist, other matter forms can exist that do similar things, yadda yadda... but at this point in theoretical physics, you might as well argue there exists universes filled with nothing but Muenster cheese.

Heck, we could be "particle explosion experiment #49920" in a test tube in some giant alien lab somewhere for all we know. Maybe God is nothing more than a lab tech named Sleeborghh who clocks in, whips up a universe or two in some particle creation lab daily and slips them into a tester for observation before clocking out and heading home to his beloved Ghorzurrr and twenty seven Grumpflings. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jenner

... Heck, we could be "particle explosion experiment #49920" in a test tube in some giant alien lab somewhere for all we know. Maybe God is nothing more than a lab tech named Sleeborghh who clocks in, whips up a universe or two in some particle creation lab daily and slips them into a tester for observation before clocking out and heading home to his beloved Ghorzurrr and twenty seven Grumpflings. :D

---

Nice, I'll have to try to remember this analogy in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaVolpe

Nice, I'll have to try to remember this analogy in the future.

---

Or remember it in the past, depending on the curvature of space-time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jenner

I'm a scientist, not only a degreed Mechanical Engineer and self-taught professional Programmer, but also an amateur Astronomer and Astrophysicist. Weirdly, the more I learn of astrophysics, the more I believe in a God. Why? I believe there just seems far too many oddball coincidences to have shaped our current existence; whether on a universal scale or just on a planetary one. I believe something or someone is responsible for our life and our consciousness. I call that "God".

---

Curiously, the more I learned of astrophysics, the more my disbelief in God was affirmed. When you discover how so much of the natural world from the largest scales to the smallest can flow from one event to the next, when so much of the mystery is taken away, you realise that there need be no "mysterious creation event", just a sequence of events that you don't fully understand yet.

But you don't believe that there is some source of intelligence and power that is beyond human power that is framing all the phenomena that you and I and everyone else are trying to understand. Even if there was no creation event there is this universe that is existing by some power. I believe that that power is intelligent and is also beyond human power and intelligence. Do you think that the forces that are powering the atom just happen to be and there is no power or intelligence from which those forces are founded on? I know it's not very likely I'm going to turn you around. People on opposite sides of the argument could go on and on and each person may never back down from their original position.

I personally believe that all atheists will one day become believers in God's existence but it might be many incarnations from now. Perhaps you'll hold to your atheistical beliefs for a couple more hundred or a couple more thousand incarnations. Get into a situation where you know there are forces far beyond your control that could end up killing you and you might find yourself believing at least at those times that there is a Higher Power upon which your existence depends. There's a saying, "There are no atheists in foxholes." I'm not sure that's how it goes but it's something like that.

dont forget sinners are allowed in heaven too. You just have to believe Jesus died for your sins. Of course if you believe that, you must also believe that every time you sin, you become more and more responsible for his death!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EntityX

But you don't believe that there is some source of intelligence and power that is beyond human power that is framing all the phenomena that you and I and everyone else are trying to understand. Even if there was no creation event there is this universe that is existing by some power. I believe that that power is intelligent and is also beyond human power and intelligence. Do you think that the forces that are powering the atom just happen to be and there is no power or intelligence from which those forces are founded on? I know it's not very likely I'm going to turn you around. People on opposite sides of the argument could go on and on and each person may never back down from their original position.

---

I think part of the trouble is that often, the language that is used serves to confuse all concerned. There is nothing "powering" an atom; there are simply 4 fundamental forces, the interplay of which can describe all the interactions between all atoms in the universe. Those 4 forces are electromagnetism, the strong and weak nuclear forces, and gravity. So far, the electromagnetic and nuclear forces have been shown to be manifestations of the same thing under certain conditions (those thought to have been present around the time of the Big Bang), and much work is underway to unify gravity with these three; so called "Grand Unification theory". Einstein spent a lot of time on this.

So, as far as the universe existing in the first place, there is much speculation as to what caused it. Some say multiverse theory (ie a new universe created for each possible decision), some say branes and strings, some say Big Crunch - Big Bang, some say God....
Regarding the first three, and many other such theories, there are a lot of people who spend their careers and much of their time searching for evidence to support or disprove one or other of these. Creating mathematical models which make predictions that can be verified within the current universe, measurements that can be taken, evidence gathered.
With the last one, there's no need! You've got your get-out clause...why investigate further? At every stage of scientific advance, people have been asking "so why did that occur?" And the answer from the religious community has always been "Because God made it so". And they have always been wrong. And every time, the next question from the scientific communitiy has been "So why did THAT occur?" And, once again, the religious community have said "Because God made it so".
God can ALWAYS be touted as the explanation, because to believe in God requires the suspense of logic and evidence; that's faith! But if we ever once accepted "Because God made it so" as the explanation, we'd still be in the Stone Age.

On a more personal note, I particularly like that fact that, in my understanding of the world, there doesn't need to be a question "Why do we exist?" That's not a valid question. There is NO reason why. As a result, I can make my OWN reasons why; I can live my life as I choose and make of it whatever I will and whatever I can. The truth really CAN set you free, and it is very empowering.

There are many different types and qualities of religionists. You're generalizing when you talk about them. There are some religionists that think the way you are saying they do but not all. Einstein was a believer in God but he was also very scientific and precise in his thinking so you can't lump all religionists into one group and say they all think like such and such.