Question for atheists - a survey, if you will.?

Question

I know you reject organized religion and the literature they've produced - and their concept of God - which is easy to do, but could it be possible that something divine (for lack of a better term) is running the show? Something so unimaginable that nobody has ever been able to conceptualize, let alone measure it yet? Or is it simply known natural laws at work, period.

Obviously there are no right or wrong answers here. Just curious about what you think. Thanks.

Answer 1

It is said, a difference that doesn't make a difference is effectively no difference. If God's ordering and operation of the universe is so consistent and subtle that we simply cannot tell whether God exists or not, then belief in God is obviously not important.

Answer 2

I think it's an excellent question. I'm not atheist, but rather agnostic. My belief has always been that if there is a God, all powerful, all knowing, etc. that humans would not be able to comprehend, on this plane of reality, this "being", for lack of better word. I don't know how to explain it, just that I don't think the human mind can comprehend such a things as God is described as. Imagine, maybe, but truly comprehend, I'm no so certain. The joy of being agnostic is that I can readily admit that I don't have the answers and I don't have to make absolute statements. Anyway, your question is nice because it seems unbiased and very well stated.

Answer 3

I'm not technically an atheist, I'm more of an agnostic, but I'll answer this anyway.

Yes, it is possible that there is a higher power. But, by observing the environment I live in, the evidence suggests that the religious concepts of God are all wrong. And if the "real" god is nothing like the gods that religions devise, then god does not exist, strictly speaking. It's like saying you'll give me a dollar, then giving me a pinecone and telling me it's a dollar. You might believe it's a dollar, but according to the commonly accepted definition of a dollar, the pinecone doesn't qualify.

Answer 4

I see nothing that cannot be explained by natural laws or seems to be explainable by natural laws although at our current level of understanding we may lack the explanation.

The closest thing to a singular event outside of nature would be the big bang. I will admit that at this point in time the belief that the big bang is explainable by natural laws is a stretch but I would argue that positing a creator who initiated the big bang is a bigger stretch.

For me, the divine is just part of the stubble of needless beliefs shaved off by Occam's razor.

Answer 5

sure its possible, do I believe it, not so much. I believe in science, I believe that millions of years ago some tiny life form crawled out of the sludge in Africa, and evolution has brought us to where we are today. God and heaven are crutches, people are so scared that there is no afterlife that they cling to these things. My question is, why does there need to be an afterlife?? Why is that so important? I believe that all living things, animals and people have a soul, and that when someone dies that soul gets recycled. Sort of similar to the Buddhist concept of rebirth or the hindu concept of reincarnation. After all, Energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only be transformed
from one form to another.

Answer 6

Anything could happen. No one actually KNOWS.

But we really shouldn't make leaps in judgment, rather basing our beliefs on the evidence at hand.

However, any Creator would have had to have come into existence without the aid of a Creator, so a Creator is certainly not necessary, nor could one have created ALL the laws and whatnot, since some would have to be in place for him to come into existence.

Answer 7

The basic assumption of all logical argument is "false until proven true". You are trying to infer that "maybe a 'god' exists"; that is a specious argument. Either it does exist, or it doesn't - there is NO maybe as you are trying to suggest.

In a court of law, do we say, "maybe he's guilty"? NO. We say someone is _innocent_ until proven guilty; we say the assumption - guilt - is UNPROVEN and assumed to be false until it is demonstrated to be true through evidence. It does not matter whether we think the person might be guilty, we don't assume; if you disagree, Richard Jewell would like to talk to you, preferably in a dark alley.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Jewell
What happened to Jewell is the legal equivalent of agnosticism. If you think what happened to him was unfair, then drop the "maybe" about the "god" myth; if you think what happened to Jewell _was_ fair, then rational argument is beyond you.

The same rule applies to religious myths: "god" fables DO NOT get special treatment. They are all false until proven true, the same as any other premise.

Unless a religion is able to prove through scientifically testable means that their "god" exists or demonstrates one of their claims of the supernatural without fakery, their fables are false. (This is why I always ask christians to raise decapitated bodies from the dead. They claim they can do it, so I want to see it.)

The "god" myth is not "certain". It is not "probable". It is not "hopefully". It is not "maybe".

It is FALSE until proven true, no ifs, ands, or theistic buttheads.

If there is no evidence, then there is no "god". Period.


.

Answer 8

While I don't deny "the spirit," I just cannot believe there's anything out there running the show. Certainly not the whole show. I'd sooner believe in gods than A god.

Answer 9

Sure there could be but the likely hood of that is less than you being hit by a plane falling out of the sky. Which is almost non-existent if you were wondering.

Answer 10

Sure it is conceivable; but it certainly isn't an all-loving, all-powerful entity like Christians believe in. The two are mutually exclusive given today's world, even on a reading of the Bible.