I Renounce Agnosticism
Offline After long contemplation I've considered all plausible scenarios and not one would make sense with the presence of a god or gods. Unless these questions can be answered I see no way of there being a god.
- What are gods made of? Atoms? Energy?*
- Where are gods? Be specific.*
- How do gods interface with our world?*
- Why do gods interface with our world?*
- Do gods think?
- What does a god look like?
- Does a god live?
- Does a god die?
- If a god dies, how is he omnipotent?
- Are gods omnipotent? If so, most religions are lies.*
- Are there many gods? Or is there one god?
* = Important.
I've done a post with questions like this before, but now I'm expecting answers. I'll add questions when I think of more. And hear me out theists (mainly Christians) humans are not divine.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
- Login to post comments
Err...I think only the sane people are agnostic.
But okay. I don't see how it is possible to be gnostic in regard to existence of a deity of some kind.
The best you can say is that you can't say for sure without a clear definition of what a god is.
Now, if someone defines a god, then you may be able to disprove that god. But a vague notion of something that may exist is not only impossible to prove for a believer, it isn't even a relevant concept. I suppose you could dismiss it with no definition, but it seems to me that with it so undefined it takes up such a wide space that there may be entities somewhere that can somehow fit into the generic categorization.
Although, I am curious about some of the theists here answering these questions. I look forward to coming back to this thread.
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
Yeah it's a bit strange I know, but I've considered all possibilities and a god doesn't seem possible in the least. By the definition of god, a god can not exist.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
Things that exist are eventually detected in a manner providing real evidence. Anything that has been examined ad-nauseam for millennia and has not been evidenced very likely does not exist.
Oh, I wasn't arguing likelihood. I was simply saying that if the space is large enough eventually something will be able to fit into it. By leaving a god undefined it allows you to define it at a later date as something found that does exist and vaguely meets criteria to fit into the category.
This is why I think it is impossible to be gnostic. I could see if by it's undefined nature you could dismiss it out of hand though and claim gnosticism, but in reality it is impossible to know. What if a vague god-like being that has evolved from an earlier era of the galaxy, with great technology terraformed a planet and instilled life? That would meet some people's criteria of a god. We may not be aware of it, but the lack of awareness is why I think it would be wise to be an agnostic atheist.
Basically, there is a lack of knowledge regarding it. I think there will always be a lack of knowledge honestly. If it was otherwise, then theology wouldn't exist anymore.
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
If you have that mentality agnosticism is the only logical explanation.
I'm going by the typical omnipotent god.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
/Devil's advocate (I am an atheist)
- What are gods made of? Atoms? Energy?*
Something not observable within the bounds of human reality.
- Where are gods? Be specific.*
Outside of the realm of observable human reality.
- How do gods interface with our world?*
Outside the realm of observable human reality. Also, some theists would say their idea of god does not interface with us.
- Why do gods interface with our world?*
Presumably because it created existence and so has some sort of motivation to manipulate it or observe it. See above though.
- Do gods think?
Probably not in a way we can define. God is usually defined as something outside of time, and so the traditional thought process does not apply. Since God is omniscient God simply 'knows'.
- What does a god look like?
Most serious theists would argue against anthropomorphizing their deity.
- Does a god live?
See above.
- Does a god die?
Since God exists outside of time, things like death do not apply. This is also the excuse given for a lack of beginning. If something exists outside of linear time, the theory is it breaks the causal chain. Sort of like the wormhole aliens from DS9.
- If a god dies, how is he omnipotent?
*nt*
- Are gods omnipotent? If so, most religions are lies.*
See below.
- Are there many gods? Or is there one god?
Naturally only the theists particular God exists and is omnipotent. Although some might say the different Gods are mans attempt at understanding the same force/being/thing.
Devil's advocate/
That is the problem with these questions, a theist will accept answers that cannot be falsified, and so cannot be debated. I think you *can* make a logical argument about a deistic creator 'thing' that exists outside of linear time and so avoids regression paradox. One of the science people might even say you need to, since time might not exist outside of our universe, if anything exists outside of our universe. But so what? It is just navel gazing.
But to argue for a deity that interferes (or even cares) in the material world you need to say it interacts with the material world in a material way, in which case there should be traces and we can demand evidence, or it operates in such a way that reality warps to its whim, or perhaps the way reality works simply *is* its whim, in which case it is not falsifiable so you are back to square one because nothing 'unnatural' ever happens. The latter God breaks the concept of free will as well.
A personal God simply makes no sense to me, unless it made itself openly known. I cannot see any justification for claiming one exists...the absurd thing is that most are based on ancient civilizations where the standard of evidence was very low. On the other hand, people today still claim miraculous deeds and people still eat it up so maybe we have not really advanced that far. I don't know how to convince people to look at it objectively when the accept non-falsifiable claims and ancient, non-verified miracle claims as proof of their culturally accepted magical security blanket.
(Wow, I wrote that whole thing and only got one spell check find! I'm a geniius.)
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
All this stuff falls into the theist's "We weren't meant to know" basket.
And hey - congratulations on your descent into the finally tier of hell, OP.
Do you feel uplifted?
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
This was one of my biggest questions here; I said be specific because saying "beyond what we can see" doesn't cut it for me. All that means to me is that; the more we know, the further out god goes. We see Earth? Well God's in space. We see space? Well god's in deep space. We see deep space? Well god's in fourth dimensional hyperspace. Such a devious fellow, why is he afraid of the poparazzi?
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
- What are gods made of? Atoms? Energy?*
= I'd have to go with energy, given form
- Where are gods? Be specific.*
= Through the Eye of Terror, into the Heart of Chaos... aka Immaterium/Warp... im sorry, i'm not big on stellar coordinates... >.<
- How do gods interface with our world?*
= By bending mortals to their will, and sending their servants to the material universe
- Why do gods interface with our world?*
=To generate sustenance, in ever increasing volumes, in order to gain more power
- Do gods think?
=Yes... they may be a little mindless at times, but they do think
- What does a god look like?
=Khorne, looks like a giant, with a wolfs head, clad in bronze armor, covered in blood stains... and he has dis big axe!
=Slaanesh, looks... uh... like a 1 titted hermafrodite-shemale thing, most likely wearing assless chaps, a gimp mask, and a barbed whip
=Nurgle, imagine the biggest shit you ever took, times that by x1000000, color it green... draw a face on it, and give it deer antlers
=Tzeentch, honestly, i couldnt tell you... he changes his form every second >.< stupid Lord of Change!
- Does a god live?
=Yes
- Does a god die?
=Yes
- If a god dies, how is he omnipotent?
=They never claimed to be
- Are gods omnipotent? If so, most religions are lies.*
=These gods are not omnipotent, thus are true!
- Are there many gods? Or is there one god?
=Many Gods!
Does the fact that i can answer these questions, mean that my religion is more likely to be true, then that of a christian? i'd like to think so ^_^
What Would Kharn Do?
And by being outside of our reality, we cannot fathom the answer. And when you point out that means they cannot theorize *anything* about their deity they will claim that certain aspects were divinely inspired and we are back to square one on falsification again.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
Why can't we figure it out? Why can't god just show himself instead of letting his lil minions discriminate us, if he wants us to believe in him so bad he should get off of his ass and show himself instead of playing these petty mind games. If he's incapable then he's not omnipotent, and if he's not omnipotent then we shouldn't worship him. I want to play a game of poker with the fellow and hear his story before I'll worship him.
God is a bloody coward.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei
One answer I have heard is that the truth is 'written in the heart' and does not need to be told. These people will say atheism is impossible, and is simply rebellion. Which is a fairly sad debate position, but nice and comforting for people willing to believe that reality is defined by ancient texts.
I have heard other explanations but they are not coming to mind at the moment. Something about free will? Maybe a theist can pop in and help.
Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.
It is a little odd that God doesn't want to make his existence undeniable by some really clear demonstration.
He seemed to have no such problem back in OT times.
He seems to have got progressively more reticent as time goes on.
Couldn't have anything to do with older stories having had more time to get progressively elaborated and drift further from reality with re-telling.... nah, wouldn't happen...
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
Last week a UFO abducted the city of Phoenix. None of them can remember it but me, but the entire city was taken up into space where we met the light-being Kalzor, who told us about the end of days and the world-gorger Eclanos.
I wrote it all down on a blog. It's in a written format, and is an event that is in the past and unverifiable. It must be true then, right? :3
The world gorger eats for your sins....
Theism is why we can't have nice things.
Yeah. I've heard this one before. Apparently, some of these crackpots want to argue that if God gives us enough evidence to establish his existence beyond a reasonable doubt, then we lose our "free will" to not believe. I'm thinking they need to define free will again.
Ironically, other fundamentalists will claim that the entire universe testifies to the existence of God. Some say that the evidence is so overwhelming that atheists actually believe in God (in their hearts)(*cough* exnihilo), but are rebelling because they want to wallow in sin (torture puppies, masturbate, etc.) and be their own "God." In other words, atheists don't exist; people that call themselves atheists are just angry.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Here is why I am a gnostic atheist:
Zero proof for the existence of any god.
Zero need for the existence of any god.
If there were a god, where did he come from? If he is just an advanced alien, then that is what he is, a being with godlike powers, he didn't create everything and still had to evolve in the first place. In some countries on Earth the white invaders were considered gods for a short time because of their strange looks and advanced technology. Naming something a god does not make it one.
All of our religions are totally illogical and their creation stories don't make sense.
If on the infinitesimally small chance there is a god who created everything and is all powerfull etc, he wouldn't give a fig if people believed in him or not and therefore it does not matter whether you believe or not. It will not make one iota of difference.
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
Most of us here can agree that horses exist while unicorns don't (If you don't agree with this, then replace this with an analagous statement with which you do agree. If there is no such statment then I am very sorry for you). Now, why is this the case?
It is not because horses have some existence property that causes them to exist, and that unicorns lack. It is because horses are observed to exist while unicorns are not. Existence is not something intrinsic, it is a contingent quality. Essentially, the statement "X exists but cannot possibly be observed (niether directly nor indirectly)" is a contradiction, because existence in any meaningful sense is contingent on observable effects.
The fact that gods are unnecessary to explain observable effects causes them to not exist in the same way that unicorns' lack of observable effects causes them to not exist.
Questions for Theists:
http://silverskeptic.blogspot.com/2011/03/consistent-standards.html
I'm a bit of a lurker. Every now and then I will come out of my cave with a flurry of activity. Then the Ph.D. program calls and I must fall back to the shadows.
Nothing exists until it's observed, by observing objects we create their existence.
Kinda, but that's a little to postmodern for my liking.
I'd say it's more that creating an observable effect is what causes existence, rather than the other way around (which seems to be the traditional claim). Also, creation of the effect is different from observation of the effect, so things don't suddently pop into existence simply by being observed. The basic idea is that something which does not interact with anything else is no different from nothing, and so we might as well call it nothing.
I'm still having some trouble figuring out exactly how to integrate this idea with violations of local realism (like the EPR experiment). I'll have to give it some more thought.
Questions for Theists:
http://silverskeptic.blogspot.com/2011/03/consistent-standards.html
I'm a bit of a lurker. Every now and then I will come out of my cave with a flurry of activity. Then the Ph.D. program calls and I must fall back to the shadows.
So you were you an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist?
I'm guessing you were an agnostic atheist, and are now just an atheist, why is that? What makes you think that you can know god now?
It's a matter of quantum mechanics, in the quantum world looking for your keys is quite a dilemma. The keys could be next to you, over your head, and anywhere else; even more than one place. In a sense things do pop up out of nowhere by being observed; but everything is being observed. By "observed" I don't mean looking at something, I mean having two instances effect each other in some way. It could be from me looking at a rock or a rock falling on top of that rock, it doesn't matter. Anything that can't be observed doesn't exist; God cannot be observed from what I see, therefor he doesn't exist.
"I do not think it is necessary to believe that the same God who has given us our senses, reason, and intelligence wished us to abandon their use, giving us by some other means the information that we could gain through them." ~Galileo Galilei