peace|dewde

I also remember it took me a little time, even after I became an apostate, to fully efface that feeling of being “dirty” or “guilty”. But I’d never have achieved that without losing the idiotic notion that someone out there actually gives a damn about me playing with myself.

You are probably correct…if I were born elsewhere I may have different beliefs but were I born elsewhere…to another family…surrounded by different people I wouldn’t have the quest for knowledge I have. I don’t believe because “that’s how I was raised” I believe because I have researched, talked to people, read and seen. There are a lot of people who just go with what their parents taught them…I’m not one of those people…

I’m not really shaken by the fact that were I anyone but who I am now I may believe differently because I have always been encouraged by people to seek out the truth…that is what I am always striving to do…and it is also why I am so respectful of all views because I hope everyone else does the same.

To my knowledge no one living today has proof of any theory…because none of us were here…I find it much harder to believe a star exploded and here we are our bodies are to complex for me to buy that and the we evolved still leaves the question where did the first thing to evolve come from. No matter what your belief…by the way where do you believe we come from, I’ve never asked….there is always the where did (fill in the blank) come from…yes even in my religion the question is posed where did God come from and no I do not have an answer for that…none of us do….

Let’s address these,
a) Not believing in god in not a belief. That’s the way a believer would look at it. Imagine someone on this Earth that was never indoctrinated, never told god stories and knows nothing of the bible (these people do exist), now ask them about god. They will not have a belief that god does not exist, they will lack any belief of its existence. When you become an atheist you return to the state of being that you would have had all along without your childhood indoctrination.

I do not have a belief that god does not exist. I lack any belief what so ever of its existence.

I’ll go along with the rest of your post, sometimes I act black and white about things that aren’t, my flaw. Your last paragraph right on.

Agree that agnosticism can lead to confusion when discussed colloquially, particularly among people who can’t cope with shades of gray. In such conversations, I tell people I’m an atheist - it’s just easier.

If you’re going to talk about this seriously, you can’t assume things are black and white without saying so first. If your point was that people who claim to be agnostic to cover their arse while they try not to think, I’d be in agreement with you. But, it wasn’t - you’re painting anyone who accepts that their belief has uncertainty associated with it as being mealy mouthed and indecisive, which isn’t fair.

What I’m trying to argue, basically, is that:
a) believing that god does NOT exist is a belief (not a non-belief)
b) agnosticism is the coherent and legitimate position that occupies the space between being 100% certain that god exists and 100% certain that god does not. You even accept this above (for people at the god exists end), but don’t extend it to the god doesn’t exist end.
c) agnostics that lean towards the atheistic end are pragmatically the same as atheists.

I accept your point that people who are floating about in the middle and use the word agnostic to make it sound like they’ve got a point are disingenuous and to some extent cowardly.

I also accept that getting into epistemic details like this makes things complicated, and is thus unsuitable for use in general conversation. However, this was a written post on the subject that makes claims that this undercuts, so I thought it was worth addressing.

I don’t think there’s any substantive difference in our positions regarding the existence of God, the flying spaghetti monster, Great Cthulhu, or even Puedam. Rather, I think we just have different temperaments when it comes to philosophy.

Regarding the claim that someone is agnostic about the Christian god and not the rest: I think there’s probably a subtle distinction worth noting between things that one has considered (and assigned a truth value to), and things that one has simply never contemplated. So, you can be agnostic about the Christian God and undefined about the rest. But, to be agnostic about the Christian God and certain in your non-belief in the rest is inconsistent and makes claims of special knowledge.

Now that you are an atheist, and you have complete privacy in this matter, you announce it on the interwebs.

Oh, the irony.

peace|dewde

Sorry man.

peace|dewde

Curious.

peace|dewde
dewde.com

There’s no proof of God, so it can’t be proof. Then do you believe in Puedam? Puedam is a made up God (by me) only a few weeks ago. What do I have to do to get you to believe in Puedam? That would help explain how you believe in something that has not been proven but is unprovable?

You must find it a little disturbing to know (for a fact) that if you were born in a different part of the world, you would not believe what you believe now, you believe something completely different. And you would believe that just as must as whatever you currently believe.

Let that last sentence sink in.

My belief does not stem from any false patterns in my life. It does not stem from an emotional high at camp or some random coincidence interpreted as answered prayer…I promise you there is much more to it.

People see patterns where there aren’t any. People see (and hear) what they want. People do this with members of the opposite sex, in business, with their children and friends. And with their superstitions in what ever form that comes in.

Data shows that most people have very poor judgement of the facts around them. People put emotions into subjects rather then the actual data represented.

Very sane people can believe rather insane ideas because of the false patterns they see in their lives.

As you said, more after sleep. Unless the insomnia kicks in. :)

Happy Sleeps :)

Have a wonderful rest of the night!!! I need some serious sleep.

Happy Dreams
Ginger

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

P.S. God and and the devil are not real so anyone who hears voices is just hearing themselves think. Or they’re insane.

1. When the bible was written it was not written from a scientific standpoint but from God. I wasn’t there but the perception of the people in that day and time was probably that the bat was a bird and God wanted to be clear so He included it in the winged things category…birds.

2. Upon researching your view that the Bible teaches the world is flat I have found that if you really read all surrounding text carefully the Bible was actually eluding to the fact that the world is spherical 500 years before the argument ever began. Again my interpretation…

3.I don’t actually read where the bible states the earth is the center of the solar system…let me research this one a little more.

4. I’m not sure how to respond to that one…God created the moon and the stars…I don’t believe he ever gives a source for the light…it’s from God and we dont know what he used to make it glow.

5.You are correct, the bible does condone slavery…I will not argue with you there. How exactly does that make the bible wrong? It’s merely a fact. After Jesus came we moved toward a more peaceful, more loving existance.

6. Adam did not die a literal death…it was a spiritual death, a death of his community with God. The bible uses a lot of non-literal wording. While there are places in the bible where God literally struck people dead for their sins…it speaks more of a spiritual death.

7 - 10. I have never read of a unicorn in the bible…you will have to point that out to me. The mistranslation you speak of regarding the virgin Mary you will also have to show me. What the bible addresses as far as going to heaven…you must believe in your heart that Jesus IS. If you don’t believe in God, then no, you don’t go to heaven but then again you probably don’t believe in hell either so no worries for you there. The only way to indefinitely get yourself out of heaven is blasphemy toward the spirit…

That’s all for now….perhaps more later. Have a wonderful day Rob Jones :)

I enjoy doing this and it’s a release for me.

Your assertion that the religious people need to “stop praying for bread” seems intellectually dishonest to me. While many people pray when in dire need, it is exceedingly rare to see someone subvert their survival mechanisms by deciding pray instead of act - when there is a clear and reasonable course of action. Religion in general seems to be pretty successful (in that most seem to prefer some religion to none) and I think any religion that advised people to “pray food onto their table” at the expense of hunting and farming would have selected its self for extinction long ago.

My point was that a persons world-view is usually not something that they can be talked into our out of easily. Everyone has an internal list of values and an emotional sense of which of those values are most important.

I am sure you have met people who place a very high value on security and stability. Other people are willing to tolerate increased risks to enjoy other aspects of life. Some people accumulate material possessions to feel worthy or safe, other people are content to live modestly or in squalor as long as heavy demands are not placed on them.

It is my belief that in all of these hypothetical but very realistic examples, people have made emotional decisions that certain things are more important than other things.

The collective or the individual. Prior restraint vs. accountability. Progressive taxation or flat tax. A persons view on these dichotomies is going to depend on their world-view.

Is there a rational argument to “prove” which tax structure is more “fair”? The rich should pay more because they have more - that sounds fair in one sense but how about the idea that everyone should contribute equally - isn’t that fair in another sense? there is no single right answer.

I think a large number of people view religion in a similar way - it is not objectively knowable in the way that the answer to a math problem is knowable.

Because of this uncertainly and the unprovable nature of god (or godlessness), many people “play it safe” and even if they are not certain about god, they take comfort in the idea of god and perhaps think that even if there is no god, it would be nice if there was.

All of these mental shortcuts and beliefs that may exist for the purpose of self comfort all work against you and the logical or rational case against god. Simply put, most people will not be talked out of it unless they already wanted to leave and were just afraid of the possibility that god might be stalking them in their apostasy and messing up their life with traffic tickets and tax audits. You might get those people.

I just can’t imagine why it would be worth your time.

People are far too emotional to ever only hold “right” and “proven” ideas. That you are fixated on religion as a particularly significant wrong idea is again, curious.

That same discussion with a religious person is different in the fact that their answers are based on a lie, make believe, fairy tales and miracles. Could you as an adult have a serious conversation with another adult that still believes in Santa Claus? Remember, reindeer are as real to them as the three wise men.

You can’t do it, you could not talk to them without thinking they’re crazy. But you could talk to a democrat and just think they are wrong. Whether it be your experiences vs theirs or stubbornness.

Your argument doesn’t hold up. A better outcome would be to remove peoples religion so they stop praying for food and wellness. And it would keep a few of them from trying to kill me because their bible says I need to die for being an infidel.

There are secular groups that do the same thing churches do. Religion pretends to be this thing that is trying to help you while convincing you you’re going to hell if you don’t give your life to God. It’s the bait and switch. Want a clean bottle of water? Give your life to Jesus.

I don’t know what perspective you’re coming from but if you’re expecting me to have all the answers I don’t.

I just hope you’re not another theology student. Theology students make me weary

There is so much conversation and arguing and fighting about politics because of the election. How many people are ever actually persuaded? Of course the undecided are because they are generally not partisan. Perhaps they are the agnostics of the political world? Still, I think that their undecided state is, in its self, an ideology - perhaps based on “whats in it for me” or something less lofty than the hard right and left wings.

I am a right leaning libertarian (small L). To me, personal liberty is paramount. This is not a popular value system in America. The libertarian crowd tends to be highly attuned to offers of pragmatic progress - usually in exchange for liberty (Virtually all gun control measures are predicated on that idea - that promise).

I am not here to convert anyone to my belief system - mostly because my belief system is that everyone has a right to their (wrong headed if different from me) belief system.

That said, no amount of arguing will persuade me to become a democrat. No amount of arguing will persuade me to vote for Obama because in my mind, it is settled that respecting personal liberty is not a priority for him.

These beliefs are very similar to religious beliefs. Some kind of world altering, paradigm shifting even must occur in an individual for them to cross over to another belief system.

I could be wrong about this and I am open to persuasion, but I have a high level of certainty that you cannot talk people out of their principled positions.

It is a futile quest and frankly, I think you are on it for what it does for you, not what it might do for some strangers.

If you want to help the human race, there are many, many, many opportunities to do so on a very practical level.

So I will ask you this - which would be a better outcome from a given level of effort (from a person, organization or community):

1. To feed, clothe and heal a population of 10,000 people.
2. To convince that same population to discard their religion and more forward in atheism.

I am curious - where are the atheist groups that are backing humanitarian charity work? Perhaps they exist, but from what I have seen, most of the work is being done by the religious and most of the religious appear to be Christians.

Perhaps they are just atoning for the crusades?

Now that I know what it’s like to be free I will try every way I can to help free someone, whether it be subtle, in you face or a questionnaire. I’m aware that it may never serve any purpose but as long as I know I tried I will be satisfied.

Becoming an atheist didn’t just make me right about one more thing, it made me right about everything I ever learned from religion that was total crap. And I’m still learning new stuff almost every day. I can almost absorb the podcasts faster than they can make them.

I’m dumbfounded when a believer asks me to do things that I have already done in my 36 years as a believer, as if I did them wrong or never did them. Yes, I talked to God, nobody was home.

I think believers belittle the previous faith that atheists had more than other atheists do.

David, You started your comment out with “I honestly do not understand”. Do you understand now? Even if you don’t, I can’t explain it any better. Though that wouldn’t keep me from trying.

First, as to the “evils” of religion. I think it is well established that the religious, irreligious and every race and tribe that has ever walked the earth has, when given the opportunity, abused other humans.

There are so many silly things that people believe in. So many religious, political, economic, scientific and philosophical systems that are both dangerous and wrong.

I would think that becoming an atheist would be a terribly liberating experience.

There is so very much foolishness in the world and you have crossed a line that has allowed you to add yet one more belief system and (all of its subsets) to the dustbin.

By being so hung up on the bible and the religions that adhere to it, you seem to be ascribing them a sort of favored position.

Again, in a godless world, what is the difference between a religious person and an atheist - beyond simply being “right” about one more thing?

People generally go through their life just fine believing that getting too cold caused you to catch a cold or that putting butter on a burn will help it heal better or that *they* have to genetics to withstand the ravages of a fast-food diet.

The 20th century is rife with examples of atheists trying to rid the world of what they saw as evil - to that end, hundreds of millions of people met their untimely end.

The hands of atheism are not clean - because they are the hands of men.

Were you commenting on the post or the comment before yours?

If you think biblical literalism is what’s required then it’s your responsibility to kill me. And don’t try and separate the Old Testament from the New Testament. The New Testament is just as messed up.

It’s the muslim that are the most faithful, they believe the literal words of their bible which is why they’re willing to kill themselves for it. Americans would never kill themselves for their god.

And why if god is real do you have fewer infant deaths in the least religious places on Earth? I’ll tell you why, Science.

I’ve already been religious, I know what it’s like, I prayed to the imaginary god, 36 years of it, I’ve been there, it’s religious people that are behind me. I’ve moved forward, yes forward.

Biblical literalism is key to Christian faith

It is in no way, the key to the Christian faith is the Apostle’s creed, pure and simple:

I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.

And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic Church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body; and the life everlasting. AMEN.

As you can see, this leaves open the room for alot of interpretation, even the divinity of Jesus Christ, and still allows one to be labeled “Christian”.

Heck, all the bible says is you have to call upon the Lord for salvation.

I’m sorry you might have had different run ins with various sects, but do not apply your thinking to Xn at it’s core.

By simply asking that question you’re perpetuating the lack of useful dialog. But you’re right, my comment two comments ago was me saying what was on my mind for no reason. Then Robert received a notice that this article had received a new comment and thought he would attempt to label me as partisan against what he had to say. I responded to his comment because I like to set the record straight.

Thanks for your time.

P.S. As much as I try to keep my site, this site, clean and free of useless information (jokes about my articles aside) I apologize to my visitors for those instances when I’m unable to do anything about it. Because If I delete posts, the posters will be offended or think I don’t want to you to see what they had to say. The truth is, I was just trying to keep this site efficient.

How do your most recent comments add to the conversation?

Your last post was you being an ass, you don’t know me, don’t act like you do. What I deleted was not a conversation between to the two of us, you wanted me to prove that man invented God and in doing so you seriously confused me with all your double talk and fantasy beliefs. The fact is that God didn’t invent itself. And then you brought up all of that crap about how do you know stuff is real. You are an absurd theologian that will say or believe whatever you have to so that way you can believe in the one God that you want to believe in. That assessment is based on everything you said through our lengthy private email conversation which I just re-read to make sure.

Based on our conversation through email I don’t think there is a single thing that you could actually prove or convince to a person is true. You simply confuse people to the point that you think you won. As do many other theology students. You don’t have facts so you hypothesize everything.

Christopher, when you deal with me you’re dealing with some who can be painfully honest and open to a real transfer of dialog. I talk with many of my pastor friends on a regular basis and our conversations always end pleasantly. I learn something, they learn something, regardless of whether or not we believe each other.

So to reiterate, I didn’t delete useful dialog that anyone could have learned from between myself and Robert Fischer. I did however, post a full response to Robert after I think I understood what he was asking of me.

Hey Robert, good job of bringing even more useless dialog to the article.

When I tried to call out Rob on the foundation of his analogy — that the Christian God is, at His core, an invention of humanity — he promptly deleted my entire conversation with him. Just so you know the kind of person you’re dealing with.

I worked for a guy for over 6 years that would do that crap and everybody knew he wasn’t confused.

Do you hear me guy I used to work for? No one thought you were confused, that was their cue to leave the room.

Re: xJane. I never even considered myself agnostic even though I must have been when I began to question certain things. As far as I’m concerned I went from believer to atheist in an instant.

Re: Trond Nilsen. Maybe you should have read my other article first.
http://brandnewatheist.com/2008/07/29/im-100-certain-there-is-no-god/

I’m very much Black and White. Your reverse counter arguments only confuse people.

Being agnostic about god is like being agnostic about being able to blow things up with your mind. I might not know how to do it now but to that doesn’t mean I won’t ever be able to.

It amazes me that people are agnostic about one god and not all of them. See how that doesn’t make sense. If you’re going to claim to be agnostic about one god then you must treat all gods ever mentioned throughout history with the same level of probability.

My concern is that you appear to be presenting a black / white concept of belief - either you believe, in which case you’re faithful, or you don’t, in which case you’re an atheist. If you don’t believe but don’t claim to be an atheist, you’re just indecisive or ‘on the path’.

Agnosticism is not simply lily livered atheism. It’s a sane and sound position of non-belief that incorporates the acceptance that it is not possible to prove through reason or empirical observation that God does not exist.

To me, as a student of philosophy, it’s atheism (taken as the belief that there is definitely no God) that requires faith of a sort to defend, as no evidence exists that proves the non-existence of God. Certainly, there’s no evidence for God’s existence, but that fact in itself is not evidence for God’s non-existence.

Agnosticism is simply the most intellectually honest position. That said, in most practical circumstances, its adherents behave the same as atheists. The one exception is that, when confronted with a believer making arguments for God’s existence, the agnostic restricts him/herself to criticizing the believer’s arguments, while the atheist may also criticize the believer’s fundamental belief.

I self identify as an agnostic - I assign a virtually zero probability to the existence of God, but I can’t prove there’s no God-like entity usings its omnipotence to fool me in order to force me to believe only through faith. Of course, that ideas seems preposterous, but I can’t disprove it, and that distinction is, I think, important.

That said, while I self-identify as “atheist”, if I’m completely honest with myself, I don’t know. I have experienced that which cannot be explained. I have not seen any proof for the existence of the divine, nor have I seen any proof for the non-existence of the divine. (I have seen plenty of evidence on both sides.) The only evidence that I can see that humanity is not hardwired to believe in the divine are those few people I meet who were not raised to believe—in their hearts there is no desire to seek for anything other than the known. I would love for the world to reach the point where more people see no need to invent a divine than people who would kill in the name of their divinity.

I agree with your sentiment. It feels like, for some (like my friend), agnosticism is the “gateway” towards atheism while they start questioning religion. I know I was one for a very brief time before coming to realization that I don’t like the whole indecisiveness of being an agnostic. Just my character I suppose.

And for others, like Bill Maher, I think he only claims that he’s agnostic because being one isn’t nearly as bad as being a full blown atheist in the eyes of the religious fundamentalists -he’s having his cake and eating it too.

But in the end, I lump agnostics in to the same boat as my definition of atheists (you can dispute it if you like), anyone rational enough to question theism and believe that humans don’t need some asshole in the sky telling us what to do is fine in my book!

Found you via Twitter (search: Atheist) and I’m digging your blog. I love the premise of this post. =)

I’m following you on Twitter - hope that’s okay. I promise I’m not a stalker.

Stepher

I have a very big problem with the lack of evidence. Why would any logical person believe in anything that can’t be proven? I doesn’t make sense.

Make sure to read some of my posts about the bible, it’s such a bad book. The God Delusion outlines what’s wrong with it very well.

As for evidence, I have no problem with the fact that it is difficult, if not, impossible to PROVE the existence of God scientifically. If God is who He is in the Bible, then He created everything. I am uncertain of the exact quote, but I heard it said that trying to prove God scientifically, is like Hamlet trying to prove that Shakespeare exists. If God created the world, science, even the ability to think scientifically, than why would we think that it is possible to prove Him through our own methods? He is a being outside of anything we know, including time and space. The only way we could know He exists is if He revealed Himself in His own creation. Which, personally, I believe He has in various ways, which for the sake of the length of this response, I will spare you from. I am certain you know all the arguments anyways.

You must understand that I put god in the same category as Santa. There’s isn’t a book or a person or anything that would ever make you or I believe Santa is real. With no evidence of god ever being presented I have no reason in reading every book that theologizes about god’s existence.

Everything that is real has evidence. Even when it starts as a theory. God is not real.

You could also learn a lot from The God Delusion. Even if it doesn’t make you an atheist you will be much better informed about what does and what doesn’t belong to religion.

My answer is the same as there’s only they word it much better than I.

I am new to your blog, I saw you started following me on Twitter so I checked it out. Nice blog! You’re honesty is appreciated. However, I do think you’re argument is missing the point a little bit. I think the issue is a little bit deeper.
Out of complete curiosity, and please do not take offense, but where do you get your opinion of right and wrong anyways? You kept talking about what is right and what is wrong, but if there is no God, than who decides what is right and wrong?
I do not say this out of angst at all, I am just curious to hear your answer.

It’s something fun that we all do around the house, me more than them. But it’s funny when one of them comes to me and says the other is afraid of Q-Tips.

Once those synapse are set it’s difficult to redirect them. I was raised to believe in God and the supernatural, when I learned the truth (god is imaginary) I was able to let go of everything in an instant. I’m sure it doesn’t come as easy for most.

The spiritual world does not exist. The world is governed by the laws of nature. There are lots of mysteries in natural but none of them are spiritual or supernatural.

you may not understand this, but i will quote it anyway .. it is from a letter to the editor in the hindu, a newspaper in chennai, india … “atheism is the summum bonum of a spiritual quest based on truth and reality”

that is a beautiful and profound understanding .. a-theism means without theism … but the magic and mystery of conscious exploration of spiritual realities is a great thing .. it exists, religions just tried to get a belief around such things …

and don’t proseletyze, just keep quient, continue to investigate the nature and substance of your mind, find out where thoughts come from …

all beliefs and rituals are metaphors for something beyond words and beyond mind … there is a great reason behind the truth that he who knows doesn’t speak, and he who speaks doesn’t know ..

you have taken the first step towards enlightenment, lucky …. it does not stop here, keep going…

enjoy, gregory lent

But I have noticed that
During the most troublesome times in my life,
There is only one set of footprints.
I don’t understand why when I needed
You most you would leave me.”

The Lord replied, “My precious, precious child,
I am just a voice in your head,
there never were any footprints but your own,
when you saw the second set you were only hallucinating.
You are afflicted with multiple personality disorder,
for there is no God.”

These are condensed answers so I’m