FORUMS > Spirituality Forum Rules

It seems when I hear arguments from Atheists against the idea of God, it is assumed that God is the Christian description of God or a Creationists idea of how the world came to be... Why is this? Is it assumed that their opponent is Christian or perhaps dependent on the Holy Bible because it is such a popular religion? If so, what is the argument against a God that encompasses the entire perception of our reality simply within it's own imagination?

I think because Christians are the people Atheists are used to arguing with. The United States is still primarily Christian after all. So eventually it is assumed when people say I believe in God, that they believe in the Christian version of God.

Idk what the argument would be against our reality is God's imagination. Probably the same old, you can't prove it, so it doesn't exist.

I usually identify myself as an atheist, because I think that any and all gods are no more real than any other fictional characters, but I can't prove that there is no higher power, and I'm well aware that I could be wrong.

I believe agnostics are actually the most PC of all groups, because they believe that anything is possible, including the possibility of there being no god. It's also safely scientific, because the absense of evidence isn't the same thing as evidence; if I cannot prove that there isn't a god, then therefore maybe there IS a god.

Based on what you've said in other threads, I believe that you have faith in God. If so, nothing I or anyone else says should take that away from you. You just have to come to your own conclusions.

The only thing that we know for sure is that people are real. In that light, I think how we treat one another is far more important than which idealology we subscribe to.

I am an athiest.

I don't believe in god becuase it doesn't make sense to me. Who is to say there isn't a flying turtle?

I think it is time for people to start realizing that an old book that was used to be the science to explain where everything came from, is a bit rediculous. It is suggesting that two siblings had sex with each other, and gay people are bad?

It doesn't make sense.

no.

i dont like the idea of god one bit. hitchens (r.i.p) was the man at reality of religion analogies. being in a divine north korea and all that.

i really dont like the idea of god, cancer, aids, poverty.....

except there is conclusive evidence for all but one so i am, as a reasonable person, forced to acknowledge their existence.

atheism is not about denying god exists, its about examining the evidence available and coming to the conclusion that it is unknowable, and therefore choosing to focus on the life we can prove exists. if evidence that proved the existence of a god, any god, came to light most athiest would then be a believers. even if a god did exist theres a 1 in thousands chance that the christian god is THE god to back.

unknowable hypothesis deserve skeptisism in my opinion, not faith.

there are literally thousands of religions, most resigned to the "mythology" staus now. but alll of them provide conflicting opinions.

anyway in short hopefully not

ps i also think atheism and anti-theism are often confused

It really doesn't matter to me how the piles of shit are labelled....I just hate piles of shit and wish they'd all go away....it's not like if someone relabeled or even removed the christian pile of shit that the others would suddenly become attractive/relevant/truthful again....they're all still piles of shit.

Sure, I don't like the traditional Abrahamic monotheisms (Judaism/Christianity/Islam)
I also don't like New Age bullshit (OMG... crystals... ... Or LDS )
I giggle at the thought of the old, expansive pantheons... though they do make for good storytelling
And although Buddhism has many admirable qualities, when you dig deeper some of it reads like Scientology

No, it's not just because of Christinaity. It's because the idea that there is a God that intervenes in the universe, and a parallel universe where part of you lives/will live after death, is laughable. There is zero empirical evidence.

Or, just look at Dave's post for the tl;dr

I do like fables, though. Go Aesop!

I think too scientifically to "believe" something that has no evidence for its existence other than 100's of 1000's of different texts written 1000's of years ago that have been translated, re-translated, with snippets of each text arranged in specific orders to create different books for different religions.

In other words, Christianity has nothing to do with my lack of belief. It stems from the fact that there are too many religions claiming to be "the one."

It's only logical that if there were truly a god as all religious texts say, he would have revealed himself to us in the beginning, and there would have never been more than one religion.

intensity69 saidNo, it's not just because of Christinaity. It's because the idea that there is a God that intervenes in the universe, and a parallel universe where part of you lives/will live after death, is laughable. There is zero empirical evidence.

You may want to do some research on parallel universes. It has been proven to be a probability by many scientists.

But even that research says nothing about the probability of life after death.

I think that is a really great questions. Even reading some responses, I think it's clear that it is tough to separate the idea of God from Christianity. Thanks for starting this discussion!