to believe that beyond all reasonable doubt

[OurBetty]

there is no god?

Well, given that the universe is infinitely large, and as such, no matter now small the probability of something, it will have happened somewhere at some time, I feel we can't totally rule out the possibility of there being a god. So I'm an agnostic rather than an atheist. There's just too much we don't know about the universe to be so sure.

I think it's just as arrogant to be convinced that there is absolutely no god of any kind, as it is to believe that there's a god who actually gives a shit about you and your insignificant life.

I can't prove to you there is a God but I do believe without question that there is. I can't give you any solid reason for it, it's just the faith that I have.

Perhaps you might identify with Deism AnnieLobseder?
A very intresting theory,and just one of the many shades of different beliefs.

That is exactly why I wouldn't call myself an agnostic. People then go on to assume you are still looking for a definite answer and want to try and find one that appeals to you.

Most people who call themselves atheists are actually strong agnostics, but can't call themselves so because other people think being an agnostic means that they haven't made their minds up yet.

Often what people mean when they say they are an atheist is that they are not interested in the supernatural.

Intresting post MillyR.

Ironically when I was a Atheist it was because I did believe in God deep down- but I didnt undestand him/her and actually hated him/her because I thought be life should be better than it was.

So I called myself an atheist as an act of hate. On reflection because it suited me not to have think about such complex issues and I felt I could do whatever I wanted with no reprimand.

I guess also because it was quite the fashionable thing to be an athetist.

I was talking to a good friend who is an atheist and they admitted after a long discussion the thought of anything supernatural atcually terrified them.

My concept of God is something so vast that we can't possibly see or understand it...like one of my mitochondrion arguing that I am, in fact, not there. And yet I think God is aware of me, and I believe in Jesus, so that's a bit of a contradiction I suppose.

Then again I'm an American and everyone knows we're a bunch of gun-toting lunatic Christians who give their kids surnames for first. :o

What does "spiritual" mean? It can cover all manner of woo.

Roseflower: "Wondered how long it would take you to sink to the argument that anyone who doesn't blindly go along with everything in science must be so stupid." Err, well, you can keep wondering then, because AT NO POINT have I said this. I know it's easier to attack what you think people have said rather than what they have, but really, this is playground level debate from you. Go back. Read again.

Rohanda: Your question is confusingly phrased. I'm not sure you know what you re asking yourself. My point is that there is no debate over the age of the Earth - well, maybe over the exact age, but no intelligent educated adult seriously thinks it is 6000 years old, any more than any intelligent educated adult thinks gravity makes things go UP, or that the Sun is made of angels and not of burning gases. That's all I was doing. Drawing comparisons between one scientific fact, towards which all evidence points, and another.

I realise it may sound arrogant to say "X is a fact, and any other idea is wrong." But there are many facts about which you can say this. You can point to there being all the existing evidence pointing towards it, and none against it.

e.g.
The earth is not flat. It is a rough sphere, flattened at the Poles. We KNOW this. At what point do you have to stop saying, "this is a theory for which there is overwhelming evidence", and instead just start saying, "This is right, and any other idea is wrong"?

RF, yes I think that while not true of all atheists, some people who call themselves atheists are afraid of the supernatural.

I consider that a very good reason to be in atheism. If you don't go looking for trouble, it is less likely to come and find you.

Bizarre idea. It's very difficult to be genuinely "afraid" of something you don't think is real. If anyone is "afraid of the supernatural" then the chances are that they are not fully signed-up to atheism yet.

Sorry Unquiet dad, it futile to backtrack. I think it obvious to anyone that by saying;

"You believe in gravity, right? And that the sky is blue? And that the Earth goes round the Sun? And the moon is not made of green cheese? Just thought I'd better check."

Is implying through your patronising,sarcastic tone that you are trying to undermine my intelligence and understanding in anything scientfic.

UD, I don't think it is a case of being fully signed up; it is a case of adopting a term that stops religious people from trying to engage you in anything supernatural.

And in a sense people with a fear of the supernatural are atheists in that they do not believe God to be in any sense benevolent, which means that they do not believe in God in the sense that he is usually defined by believers.

And while defining yourself as an atheist may cause a little bit of offence, saying that the supernatural (including all religions) is a damaging, dangerous thing to dabble with is going to cause a lot more offence.

You might think it's bizarre unquiet dad but that is what that particular person reasons where.

Why are you so close minded to anything other than what you think is right?

" At what point do you have to stop saying, "this is a theory for which there is overwhelming evidence", and instead just start saying, "This is right, and any other idea is wrong"? "

That's an interesting point, UQD, and I would suspect the answer is:anytime it isn't to do with God.

In all honesty.

Roseflower - thanks for the idea but I'm Jewish and quite happily so. Luckily, healthy debate about (and with) god is a fundamental part of our culture, and faith is optional.

AnneLobesederoh sorry, didn't realise you were Jewish. I thought your ideas in first post tied up with Deism (not my belief but quite an intresting take on things)

yes, UD I can see how you can be confused. My point is that you don't 'have' to debate this crap with anyone. You can shuffle off and do something else and we all would be no poorer for it.

Rohanda - but belief in a God/ religion has caused much suffering in the world nad continues to do so - it is only be arguing against it that we can hope to prevent it from causing further suffering.

Belief in a God is irrational/illogical/emotional and totally unneccessary. Religions developed when we didn't understand the world we lived in and (coupled with the need to control people's actions) the concept of a God filled the holes in our knowledge.

I find it really sad that belief in a God has become such a cultural norm and we're so indoctrinated that many folk don't even question it.

I'm always amazed by the people who think if they can't see, hear, touch, taste or smell something thn it doesn't exist!
If there is a god then it is something way beyond human understanding.
No one can prove there is or there isn't. Scientists are divided, some scientists have a deep religious faith and some don't.
It is faith -nothing whatever to do with evidence or proof.

"Rohanda - but belief in a God/ religion has caused much suffering in the world nad continues to do so - it is only be arguing against it that we can hope to prevent it from causing further suffering."

this is wildly delusional. religion has ofen been put forward as reasons for war, where as real issues are power and control ( and most latterly oil).

the rest of your post is delusional with bells on it.

MillyR - see what you mean. In my experience the term 'atheist' doesn't stop religious people from trying. It just makes them try harder (some of them). They see it as a challenge.

Roseflower - I am not "closed-minded", I just like evidence. Otherwise I'd believe in dragons, fairies, leprechauns, David Icke's lizards... do you see?

Once again. I am not backtracking. I am not saying what you claim I said. I am saying that we can agree, can we not, on those things I mention? Because there is overwhelming evidence that they are true, to the point where we have to say "these are facts"? But at some point we diverge.

We could, in theory, compile a list, starting with stuff everyone agrees with (100% evidence) and moving down to things with less and less and less evidence. Somewhere in the middle might be something which is genuinely hotly debated at the moment where the evidence is inconclusive and still being tested, like, I don't know, the effects of certain drugs on AIDS symptoms. At the bottom would be all the supernatural stuff and the conspiracy theories (the Moon landings didn't happen, etc.) for which there is zero evidence.

I think it is also impossible to count the number of lives religion has saved .

Ah, yes. My mother, a solid C of E churchgoer, uses the "religion does a lot of good" argument. She points out that it was only "church people" who helped her out during her recent illness. Maybe, but she knows a skewed sample of people.

I tend to respond with the idea that these "good" people would be doing their good works anyway, even if their deity didn't exist in their minds. Otherwise, what would be the point? They're surely doing it to help their fellow humans, because that's just the kind of people they are? Just as many secular people do? Just like secular organisations like MSF do? If they're just doing it to gain brownie points with God, then that's wrong.

Religion is an idea. Ideas are used to justify wars. Many ideas other than religion are involved in warfare. Communism and neo-liberalism being the obvious ones. Religion can do good and can bad.

Religion has been essential to the devlopment of human culture and modern society.

However, stone tools were also essential. But what would you in 2011 use to cut down a tree? A stone axe or a chainsaw?

Religion is to reason what stone axes are to chainsaws.

UD, yes, but I think the benefit to people who claim that they are atheists is that religious people then try and discuss the issue by talking about the kind of stuff mentioned on this thread. That is fairly impersonal and easy to deal with

If someone was honest and said that they have a fear of the supernatural because they have seen people close to them develop mental health problems as a result of alleged supernatural experiences, there can be some very disturbing responses to that from religious people. For people who have had unwanted supernatural experiences themselves, there is also the potential for unwanted interventions from religious people, or just having their situation brushed under the carpet.

That isn't to say that the church doesn't have sensible structures and protocols in place for dealing with such issues, but as with many issues, the followers of a church often diverge quite a lot from the actual teachings and structures of their church.

So it is safer for many people to say that they are atheists, rather like people who are widowed may allow strangers to assume that they are divorced.

Why is clinging on to reality seen as being closed minded only when its in reaction to religion?

If I go around telling everyone I believe the sky is pink and the squirrels are telling me about the end of the world, you'll call me a whackadoodle, have me locked up and fed nice little pills.

YET

If you tell me the world was created by an omnipotent being only 6000 years ago and the dinosaur bones and prehistoric cave drawings are planted by your god...I'm supposed to say jolly good, all opinions equal here?

Er, no. Don't think so. But then most religious people quite rightly distance themselves from creationists.