either a person can be an agnostic or atheist.

Agnostics are those who are doubtful about Gods existance and donot deny Gods existance but an atheist is the one who confidently rejects the existance of God based on his or her logic and understanding.


Let me give you a simple example:

Once a person was arguing that God doesnot exist because we cannot see Him,hear Him or feel Him,so we don't have any evidence for Him.

Another person striked him with a stick on his head and he replied in anger:

"Why did you hit me"?

The person who hit said "what evidence do you have that I hit you?
He futher said "how can you prove that I hit you" maybe their is someone else around us who hit you?

The other guy remained silent.

The person who hit said "If you cannot prove such simple thing inspite of knowing that I hit you than on what basis do you reject the existance of God who is beyond your grasp and limited power?

What is exactly going to happen on this day, during this hour, one year from now?

Sort of a stupid question isn't it. Why? I think that you'll agree that there simply is not enough information to draw a conclusion.

That's the way I feel about there being a deity or deities. Maybe there are some. Maybe there is only one. But how would I possibly know? What evidence do I use? Scripture? Which scripture? How do I know which one is right?

So if I asked you what was going to happen exactly one year from today, would it be a weakness on your part to simply say "I don't know"?

To me, you'd be showing strength in that you're not willing to jump to a possibly unwarranted conclusion, and you would also be willing to admit that which you do not know. One of my favorite quotes comes from Confucius: the more you know, the more you know you don't know.

Shalom,
Vern

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

I have some observations on the subject of Atheism. They are only my own observations. They are not all encompassing, and reflect the bias of where I've been posting.

I have never met an atheist that has been one their whole life. In fact, I think all of the ones I’ve meet are ex-christians. Specifically the more vocal Christian groups. In fact, I’ve never meet an atheist that wasn’t this way. Which begs the question: What God doesn’t exist?

Atheists claim ‘god’ doesn’t exist. I feel what they really mean is “The God of the Bible doesn’t exist”, since that’s all they’ve ever known. Therefore, logically, if the ‘god’ of the bible is false, and the only ‘god’ they’ve known is the ‘god’ of the bible, there is no ‘god’ (insert ‘of the bible for clarity’).
Frankly, a number of atheists I’ve talked to are EXACTLY like their fundamental ex-brothers. Only, instead of fearing the wrathful god, they have no fear of god. Without the fear of a vengeful god, they proselytize exactly the same way as they ex-brothers. Just substitute ‘burning in hell’ for ‘there is no god’. The litanies are remarkably parallel. It seems to me there is a lot of anger associated with what happened earlier in their lives? Finding out what they’ve been told is false? Or was it for daring to have Faith?

Can an Atheist shed some light on the subject? I happen to know I'm not going to rot in the ground when I die, although there's no way to prove it 100% scientifically. I do have proof, but it's proof for me and other people may not see it. The non-proof is even better, but science is woefully behind on the technology needed, so far.

__________________
I am what I have always have been and will be, I just remember better at times. Thank you for helping me remember, I will return the favor!

Rastus...I too have personal proof for me...can you shed light on what yours is...I very much enjoy your posts

I don't know if this qualifies as having "met," but if it does, you've now met someone who has been an atheist his whole life. I have never -- not for a moment that I can recall from when I was very small -- believed in the existence of a god, although I was raised in an essentially Christian milieu.

And the answer to your question, "What God doesn't exist?" is very simple: to the atheist such as myself, no deity exists with powers that transcend nature, with purposes of its own and that has anything at all to do with humankind. Now, while it might be possible that a deity exists that has powers that are perfectly natural, most people would hardly consider that a deity. And while it is just possible that a deity exists that has no interaction with humans whatsoever, so what? No interaction means you'll never know about it, and it will never do you any good.

It is, in the same way, just possible that there's a treasure chest with a billion dollars in U.S. money lying on the surface a world orbiting Tau Ceti -- but nothing you can do will show that to be the case, and it will never do you any good, so you might just as well assume that it is not there. Which is the far more likely case anyway.
As I've just pointed out, most atheists (I can't claim to speak for all) will say that no deity exists. There is no reason to hold such a hypothesis, and therefore we don't. Not anymore than we hold to the hypothesis of that billion dollars on Tau Ceti IV.

Of course, all of the Tau Ceti-ists out there can certainly claim that we can't prove the money isn't there -- and they would be absolutely correct. But until they can provide just one plausible reason for supposing that it is there, why should we suppose it? And we atheists feel precisely the same about God, or god, or even lower-lower-case deities.
I don't know who you've been talking to, but it hasn't been me, or any of the atheists that I speak to regularly. Certainly we don't fear a wrathful god. (Why would anybody invent such a horrible thing, anyway?). No, what most deists/theists can't understand is that there are certain things that religion commands of its adherents that we find frankly frightening. Attitudes about sex and who is allowed to have it springs rapidly to mind (I'm gay), and the effort of many religions, including Protestant Fundamentalists in the U.S., Muslims and the Catholic Church to render us into non-persons is a rather hurtful -- and specifically religious -- thing.

Atheism, by contrast, makes no demands of anybody except that nobody is permitted to cause their religious beliefs to impact upon anybody else's life.

I must say something else about what atheists dislike about some (certainly not all) theists/deists, and it is in keeping with what you said. We hate the fact that children are brought up to fear a wrathful God prepared to send them to screaming agony for all eternity. That, in my view, is a form of psychological torture that is unwarranted on the evidence.

Given time and inclination, I could certainly come up with a long list of these kinds of thing, but as I said before, these are views held by only some, not all believers.
Well, whether "you" are going to rot in the ground when you die or not, I can promise you that a very great deal -- and probably all -- of the material that makes you "you" will most certainly do exactly that. For evidence, go visit any grave of any person buried in the last year who was not embalmed, dig them up, and see if they aren't rotting.

Now, you make the supposition -- for which there is not the slightest bit of evidence -- that "you," the real you, are not your body but something else. That sort of begs the question though, doesn't it? If the "real you" that was created by God is not your body, why on earth would God go to all the trouble of creating this physical you to carry the other you around for 70-odd years, only to have it die and rot?

There, I've explained to you, now you explain that last question to me.

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

It didn't.

Biological evolution is one of the most solid scientific theories in existence.

I think you will find that not only are many atheists ex-Christians, but that they are specifically ex-fundamentalist Christians.

Many of us who are not (or no longer) fundamentalist Christians have said for years that fundamentalism is a breeding ground for atheism.

You are spot on in remarking on the similarity of thinking. More than once I have had atheists tell me I can't be a Christian because I reject the fundamentalist form of Christianity, and as far as they are concerned only fundamentalism is genuinely Christian. Anything else is a compromise or a temporary stopover on the way to atheism.

I have visited various on-line sites and forums where ex-evangelicals gather, and more than once, I have been accused rather forcefully by atheists of not fully letting go of my "addiction to religion" just because I have found a much different kind of spiritual life on my way out the Fundamentalist door. For some, it is either the Biblical version of God or no God at all. I find this very sad, as they have allowed someone else to define God for them, and they are clinging to that definition when rejecting the notion of God altogether.

Many of these people also seem very bitter, often quite vitriolic in their posts, lashing out intentionally against their Fundamentalist past or upbringing and anyone who chooses to pursue any kind of spiritual life whatsoever (I don't think it is fully necessary to have believed what you were taught - I think a dark secret of many evangelicals, especially those raised in the church, is that they don't fully believe it but are afraid to admit it, even to themselves and family members, since the penalty for not believing is so severe, but that is another topic altogether).

And a couple notes to evangelicalhumanist, who wrote:


You are making assumptions already based on whatever exposure you had to Christianity, as you mentioned. Again, whether you believed it or not doesn't matter, you still had that exposure. I happen to believe in a God who most certainly does NOT have powers transcending nature (it depends on how you define "nature" too, something we don't fully understand yet). Nor do I believe this God has "purposes of its own", imposing its will on humankind. And not only DOES it have EVERYTHING to do with humankind, the God I know is INSEPARABLE from humankind. So evangelicalhumanist, let me respectfully say that your very post actually validates some of what Rastus had to say since you are assuming we all embrace the same definition of what a deity truly is.


Again, you are making assumptions about "deist/theists". Don't forget the pantheists and variations thereof (and there are many variations not always talked about). And you know what, as an ex-evangelical indoctrinated thoroughly about hell in my youth and any number of harmful, psychologically scarring concepts, I completely understand where you are coming from here, but I would urge you not to assume that ALL "religion" (I would prefer to replace "spirituality" here) "commands" such things of its "adherents". What I have discovered in my own spiritual life, finally, despite the chains of my upbringing is quite something different altogether.


You ASSUME people have no evidence. Perhaps YOU have no evidence. I have PLENTY of objective evidence that has not only proven that there is much more to this world than meets the eye (see a couple of my other recent posts), but that has also finally proven to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that we do NOT just cease to exist when we die. It has to do with reincarnation, and it is so compelling, it is even rocking the worlds of a couple Christians in my life (but in a good way, since they are now postulating that perhaps you get multiple lives to decide if you're saved, not something I agree with, but if that is how they want to interpret the evidence, that's perfectly fine with me).

Would my evidence be convincing to you? Probably not entirely, but the more I research it (in very concrete ways by the way, including consulting certain experts who don't believe in reincarnation at all), the more I think it would have been a nice show on "In Search Of", if you had any exposure to that show from long ago. You need to know me and some highly personal things about me to truly get all of it. But it was plenty to convince me personally , incredibly convincing in an OBJECTIVE way (no, not just memories, I actually have no memories whatsoever, like some report - I'm talking about something much more CONCRETE than that, something that can be researched in an objective, real-world way and doesn't just involve me either - it involves about 15 individuals so far, the list keeps growing). I just "happened" to stumble upon this a few months ago, and it is rocking my world too, but in a wonderful way. Everything makes sense now.

But even so, my scientific mind continues its questioning. There actually ARE some explanations that could be used to justify some of what I can only call "supernatural" phenomenon associated with God. And who exactly IS God anyway, is there a limit to who God is? How super-powerful and intelligent does God need to be to be considered God? Would a super-powerful, intelligent alien race suffice for example? At what point does someone or something transcend the ordinary and become what we know as "God" or a "deity"? And can God continue to evolve too? I believe the latter is actually true. And if so, does that make God not "God"? Perhaps that's where we should all start: How do you define "God"? What makes a deity a "deity"? I think that's a much more difficult question than meets the eye. And how do you explain the LOVE?

Oh, as far as a non-God-like explanation. I have observed things that transcend space and time, but I can't completely rule out we aren't all part of some super race's computer simulation, or maybe we're all on a Holodeck, like on "Star Trek" or if you are a real Trekkie, in the old episode "Shore Leave". And maybe one day, we'll finish our game and get on with our mission. One cannot rule ANYTHING out when you start witnessing "supernatural" things. And what does "supernatural" mean anyway? Who says we do understand what "nature" is? Personally I believe "supernatural" is just "natural" misunderstood, governed by laws we don't understand. Or are we so pompous as to believe we understand all the "natural" laws yet? How many scientists throughout our history have fallen into THAT trap?

Peace and Love,
BridgeBuilder

__________________
To build a bridge, it is not enough just to have an understanding of both sides of the river, although that is a challenge indeed. Only with the guidance of Love can one master the chasm in between.

Senjor Wences is actually supporting my point. Everything get's all muddled when we go with generalities.

Okay, let's define where I'm standing. The God of the bible does not exist. It's a re-hash of a Babalonian mythos, which got re-hashed as a greek mythos, which was completely copied into a roman mythos, which took the sun god and made it the son of god. If one studies ancient mythology, all the legends/stories are exactly the same.

The god of the bible is really an angry father/king. Actually a mad angry king. Doing random things, messing with people for no reason, and ruling by fear and deceptipon. In the bible, this is actually the 'enemy' character. I was taught this in the last few years, by those that worship the book, very loudly, and with great fervor. Until I was 39 years old, I never gave it much thought. Strictly speaking, you could call me an atheist, as I never believed in the god of the bible.

I still don't believe in the god of the bible, does that make me an atheist? According tothe book worshipers I am, or a heetic,or it doesnt' matter becasue I'm going to 'burn in hell'. Therein lies the decpetion: Either it's thereway or hell. This automatically assumes they are right, and I'm obviously wrong, and there can be no other path? What a very human thing to say and do.

And why is the book the ultimate source of divine knowledge? Well, becasue it says so. Ummm, excuse me? Yes, the book, which has some 50+ english variations, says it is the word of god. Really? And this book has never been edited or changed by a church? Noooooo, humas never do that now do they? Even when you can document the changes from 1000+ year old versions?

So again, it seems like I'm a pretty strong atheist. I find myself angry at times with churches that feel there view is right as a matter of course and the rest of the planet is wrong, and it's up to them to change it! Then the anger goes away. It's really there anger, and I'm jsut reflecting it.

So what the heaven am I? Well, it goes like this. I'm fully aware of what people would call past lives. This implies that I and others are re-incarnating. Which implies that what truly makes up ME is not rotting in the ground. This of course begs the question why are we here? is it pennance? Is ti a test? It is how we show we are 'worthy'?

No. Everyone on Earth is here because they chose to be. Volunteered to be. Asked to come here, stood in line for the opportunity. Ponder that a moment. Leave 'god' out of it, since it requires a non-christioan view of the world and that's hard to do in the United states.

If you are here by choice, then what are you really like? If you have the ability to incarnate on Earth, what other abilities do you have? And why can't you remember any of this? Where's the proof?

So I'll give the answer that no one believes. It's not about the answer, it's about coming to the answer on your own, the path, the journey of discovery, that's why we are here. The answer is we are all Source. Stop, throw away every definition that a religion ever came up for god. And the kicker is, if this is true, then we are responsible for everything that happens in our lives. And this pisses people off so much, it's rejected out of hand. They get downright angry over things that happen in their lives.

And yet, if it's true, then one realizes that the things that happen to us are transient. We won't be missing a limb through eternity. We won't have a specific condition for eternity, just this time around. Why? Becasue we wanted to experience life in all it's diversity. We come in as male and female, rich and poor, soldier and peasent, cleric and shepard.

So where's the proof. Well, funny thing proof, just becasue you have it, doesnt' meen anyone will believe it. Okay: Prove to me the speed of light at Tau Ceti is the same as here on Earth. Science accepts this as incontrovertible proof, a constant fo the universe. yet, if you measeure the speed of light on earth, andin porbit it's different. I assert teh speed of light is only constant over a limited space of galazy size or less, and not a universal constant. Thsi means every calculation on the size/age fo the universe is based upon a false assumption. Where's my proof? The equations of string theory only have distance and time (speed fo light is distance/time) when you take the derivatives down to 3-dimensional. In 4-dimensions time and distnace are variables, and in 5-D and above they are complex functions and cease to exist as discrete itmes. Therefore, the speed of anythign is only constant in 3D, and only as complex derivatives of higher equations defining the space. I really got the answer from another source, but this proof is derived by self.

So what am I, atheist or theist? I think the question is irrelavent, as the question of anything divine is external. The whole concept of 'god being out there...and we are unworthy' is merely a way for some small group to control the masses. Take that away and the masses will find another opiate. until, at some point, they start to turn inward and look in a different direction. At which point, things will start to change rather quickly. Looked around lately?

__________________
I am what I have always have been and will be, I just remember better at times. Thank you for helping me remember, I will return the favor!