Why do atheists who claim that there is no God hang out in the "Religion and Spirituality" section? Does this mean thay you (atheists) believe that God exists but attept to deny the fact? If there really was no God you wouldn't care if anybody belived in him. The tooth fairy does not exist and nobody seriously goes around and tells poeple that she does exist because she does not. If you put so much effort in denying God that means the He is real. If He was not real you would not have to deny Him. All of your "logic" is illogical because you deny that there is a God even though you know He does exist. \n\nCheck out a former atheist's story http://www.leestrobel.com/LS_bio.htm\n\nAlso read this book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/1890626546/002-0374625-1895241
214700
They hang out in the "Religion & Spirituality" section just in case there is a GOD.  Then they can get a clue how to be blessed.  Why else would someone spend so much time, energy and profanity in our section, when they could get acceptance in the "Mythology" section or in the "Science" section?  "Me thinketh that they protesteth too much."
36289
>>>>No one denies that there is intelligent life outside of\n>>>> earth, so I want to hear about undeniable evidence of\n>>>> contact w/ this planet.\n\nYou do realise this is what is called the fallacy of the undistributed middle? It doens't work that way. \n\nI don't that life exists elsewhere in the universe, nor do I deny that God exists, nor do I deny that reincarnation occurs, nor do I deny the existence of fairies.\n\nThat doesn't mean that I claim to have evidence for any of those things. On the contrary I am firmly convinced that evidence for those things does not exist.\n\nBut absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. So I won't deny those things exist until such time as I have eviddnce that they don't exist. I will instead keep an open mind while operating on the assumption that they dont; exist.\n\nThat's how science works. It doesn't just accept without evidence, nor does it deny without evidence.
649777
You are correct. There is no god. Mythology has nothing to do with the real world and god, like all pixies, ghosts, leprechauns and other such things, are imaginary.\nNothing more.
640935
What is the point in being a God if you cant draw circular triangles. What kind of a God z dat. God can create rectangular s holes against the cylindirical     c ocks ....        if she likes...\n\n Like square pegs in round holes exactly    ...s,hit away...,\n\n get lost body\n\ndumbass \n\nGod damn you\n\nYou arent a true atheist\nWhat is going on here I really cant understand  Am I a believer? Where is my wine bottle then?
253955
The atheist believes there is no god. ("God does not exist." / "There is no God.")\nThe agnostic believes that one cannot prove whether God exists or does not exist. ("We can't know if God exists or not.")\n\nThe dictionary says this about agnosticism   \n         1. One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.\n         2. One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.\n   2. One who is doubtful or noncommittal about something.\n\nI followed definition 1. I guess uncertainty falls under definition 2.\n\nSUMMARY:\nATHEIST -- "THERE IS NO GOD."\nAGNOSTIC -- 2 KINDS: \nA. "WE CAN'T KNOW IF GOD EXISTS OR NOT." (THIS IS MORE DEFINITE. THERE IS CERTAINTY. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW.)\nB. "I'M NOT SURE IF GOD EXISTS. I'M NOT SURE IF GOD DOESN'T EXIST." (THIS IS REALLY UNCERTAIN.)
224075
Wow, good question!\n\nFirstly, your question is concerned with the idea that God believes in Himself. If He believes in Himself then He still has one believer. But then anyone of us could believe that we are God, which is why I would prefer to use the definition of God as our creator.\n\nSince you are asking 'can there be a God if...' can we first start with the assumption that there is a God, and he does have believers? If you can accept this idea, then it should be quite easy to accept that He doesn't just cease when people stop believing. He still created us, even if the creations reject him.\n\nOf course it depends what you mean by 'be'! If we don't talk about, or know about, God, then what would be the point in there 'being' a God. If he has no point, then is his existance still relevant?\n\nI've asked more questions than I have answered, but I hope this gives you something to chew on!
517047
Us atheists have very different ideas about those things, so no one atheist can speak for us all. I can tell you what I personally believe though.\n\nLike many theists believe god has always existed, I believe the universe has always existed, in one form or another, without having been created by any god. I believe the universe has always been and will always be changing. Maybe it keeps expanding and contracting and expanding again etc. I can only guess, because I believe this stuff is beyond human comprehension and that mankind will never fully figure out the history of the universe.\n\nI don't believe that something can be made from nothing (neither the universe nor god), I believe it was always there and it makes sense to me to assume that it was the universe that always existed, because I know that it exists, while I have never gotten any sign that any god exists elsewhere than in people's imagination.
670133
Whoever wrote that knows nothing about atheism. \n\nI have lifelong experience with atheism; I have read extensively on the subject and know many other atheists personally, and not once have I ever heard anyone claim that they thought themselves into existence.  It's foolish, and it's also out of character for realists, as atheists tend to be.\n\nI have also never encountered an atheist who "worships himself as a god."  \n\nThe writer also drastically misunderstands Descartes.  "I think, therefore I am" is intended as a statement of philosophical proof, not as a description of how one came to be.  It means "the observable fact that I think is proof that I exist," not "I created myself by thinking."\n\nThe writer clearly pulled this mess of supposition and imaginings out of thin air.  I doubt she's knowingly met a single atheist in her life.  I'm hard-pressed to imagine how that answer could be made any less correct and less informed than it is.
468435
I don't believe that any god is real.\n\nAnd to those who reply that it is a choice:  Sorry, but it isn't.  Either you are convinced or you are not convinced.  You can no sooner choose to believe that a god exists than you can choose to really, deep down, believe that the moon is made of green cheese.  Try it sometime.\n\nAnd to those who reply that they believe because of their feelings:  Sorry, but feeling something does not make it real.  If you really want to believe something is real, you will feel it is real, and that goes for anything.  Emotions don't affect reality.  Things are not true just because you want them to be true.\n\nAnd to those who reply that they believe because of miracles or prayers being answered:  Sorry, but attributing things that happen in your life to a god doesn't make that god real.  When people want something to be real, they will look for evidence or manufacture evidence for it being real.  They may not even realize they are doing this.\n\nAnd yes, belief in a god can be used as a crutch to improve your life.  That doesn't make it anything more than a crutch.
652457
Your assumption is incorrect. Atheism does *not* mean that you know for a fact that there is no God without a possibility of being mistaken. Atheism is simply a belief that there is no God.
356296
The atheists that I have sparred with on YA do not lie. I think atheists are just naturally tied to the physical world that they can confirm with their senses. The living God dwells in eternity which is beyond the physical. He has revealed Himself in scripture, but if you read with the attitude of not caring to find Him, He will not reveal Himself. It is very difficult for the atheist to accept the idea of God, so science is their key to understanding. Unfortunately, like all things physical... it will come to an end. And therein lies the rub. They must come up with a doctrine to explain the hereafter, and that can be quite disquieting.
303978
I pretty much agree with you. An atheist is sure that God does not exist, and an agnostic isn't willing to commit either way. (Sort of like the dyslexic agnostic who developed insomnia. He kept lying awake at night wondering if there really is a Dog...).
24804
god may exist depending on your religeous  beliefs.same goes for the devil.however if your a bit skeptical of these beliefs you may be one of those other people who belive science provides an explanation to everything.
421960
My belief is Atheism. The proof of its truth is obvious. (Above you will find an excellent explanation by 'Michael' which helps to explain 'How' it is obvious.) \n\nAnyone who claims direct knowledge of God or gods, ghosts, spirits or the like is either insane or an outright fool and a liar.  We live in an infinitely changing universe of matter, energy and space - there is nothing supernatural which has been found anywhere within it.  There is no truth to the belief that there is life after death or before birth.  That, by definition, is just nonsense.\n\nUntil I am presented with believable evidence that I am incorrect, I have no choice than to remain solidly atheistic.  It is the only logical course available.\n\n{}{}{} r u randy? {}{}{}\n.
416806
Personally I don't have any sort of spirituality.  There is such a thing as nontheistic religious humanism (see first source link), but if anything, I'd wager that atheists are normally Secular Humanists (see second source link).\n\nBasically to be an atheist, one must be without belief in deities.  There are different kinds of atheism, though: strong atheism, weak atheism, implicit atheism, explicit atheism, ignosticism and apatheism.\n\nStrong atheism: the belief that no deity exists. It is a form of explicit atheism, meaning that it consciously rejects theism.\n\nWeak atheism: the absence of belief in the existence of deities, without the belief in the non-existence of deities.\n\nExplicit atheism: refection of a belief in a god. This deliberate rejection of theism presupposes familiarity with theistic belief.\n\nImplicit atheism: absence of a belief in god without explicitly rejecting or denying theism. This form does not require familiarity with the idea of a god.\n\nIgnosticism: the view that the question of the existence of God is meaningless because it has no verifiable (or testable) consequences and should therefore be ignored. It is often considered synonymous with theological noncognitivism (the argument that religious language, and specifically words like "god", are not cognitively meaningful).\n\nAn apatheist is someone who has little or no interest in deities to point that he or she does not care whether deities exist and, typically, is not interested in deciding whether he or she believes in deities. In other words, an apatheist is someone who lacks belief in gods and lacks interest in gods to the point that he or she doesn't bother to determine whether he or she actually disbelieves in gods.
76165
As I have heard others say, "I would rather live my life as if there is a God, and die to find out there wasn't a God, than to live my life as if there is no God, and find out there was a God."  Proof is all around you--if you look for it, and if you believe, you will see.  God does exist.
554695
I am not an atheist, but I know some people who are. It seems to me that they reject the definition of God that has been given by the standard, traditional religions.  Perhaps a person will decide to proclaim herself to be an atheist because she feels that the modern English term "God" has been so corrupted by the ideas of closed-minded church people that the concept no longer contains any value. And I would just about have to agree with that. If I mention the idea of God as a universal life-force or as the interpersonal spirit of goodness and compassion to one of my atheist friends, they might agree with that, but still the name "God" has a disagreeable connotation to them.\nReligious language is full of metaphor. Some of the most simple, basic terms of religion are such large, sweeping, all-encompassing concepts that it takes many pages of erudition to even explain what we mean when we say the name "God".\nWhen you say "God", you are implying a whole big set of ideas. Atheists are often people who simply cannot agree with some of the ideas that they have heard being attached to that name.