Here's why I'm an atheist.
First, you have to define the term "God." The problem with most
theists is that this term is a moving target.
In addition, because there is no evidence either for or against the
existence of God, you cannot use deductive logic (a+b=c; therefore c-b=a). You can only reach a conclusion by inductive reasoning using the balance of evidence (90% of A is also B; C is B, so the chances are 90% that C is also A).
So to begin with, I will assert (and others may shoot this down) that the only RELEVANT definition of God states that he intervenes to circumvent natural laws.
If God circumvents natural laws, then it is impossible to understand natural laws. All scientific findings would have to include the stipulation, "it is also possible that these results are an act of God, a miracle, thereby making our research meaningless."
However, since we have been able to expand our knowledge of natural laws (evidenced by every appliance in your kitchen), the scientific method works in this discovery. And the likely conclusion is that God, at least the intervening kind, does not exist.
Additionally, if God is defined as all loving, all powerful, and all knowing, then it is impossible to explain suffering. Either God is not all loving (he acts sadistically), not all powerful (he cannot prevent suffering), or not all knowing (he created suffering by mistake because he didn't know the consequences of his actions).
If God is less than these and/or does not intervene in our existence, then he is either non-existent or irrelevant. The classic Bertrand Russell argument is that I cannot prove that a china teapot is orbiting the sun between the earth's orbit and Mars. But while I cannot prove this is not true, the evidence against it is compelling.
The evidence against God is equally compelling, and while it is not possible to prove beyond any doubt, it makes enormously more sense to live your life as if there were no God.
It is more compelling to me that humans have invented God (a) to help people deal with the pain and fear associated with death and loss, and (b) to reflect the thoughts of the ruling powers in a particular time. Because humans are always looking for reasons, when none were found, it was the natural inclination to declare the cause to be "God" (or gods). As the faith grew, miracles (coincidences) and laws were ascribed to this Divinity, and an orthodoxy grew up around it.
Now it seems unhelpful to believe in such superstition. The only matters that aid in our ongoing well-being are work, location, health, sustenance, and pure, blind luck.
So that's why I don't believe God exists and why I am therefore an atheist. And you know what? It's okay if you do believe God exists.
2007-02-12 12:52:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by NHBaritone 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
There is no evidence that there is a god. It isn't rational or reasonable to believe in things without any evidence to back it up. You would be stuck with hundreds of thousands of gods and everything else that human imagination could come up with.
Not believing in god, is the same as not believing in Odin, Zeus, Ra, Hera, The Great Spirit, Osiris, The Flying Spaghetti Monster and all the others. I would be no less surprised of evidence of Odin was found than I would be if evidence of your god was.
2007-02-12 20:57:14
·
answer #2
·
answered by Alex 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
When the Baritone speaks, I have nothing left to add to it.
So...
"What he said."
.
2007-02-12 21:00:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Chickyn in a Handbasket 6
·
0⤊
0⤋