timschochet
Footballguy
This is a counterpoint to Otis' thread in which he challenges religious people to explain their faith. That thread has led to a great discussion, without much of some of the usual negativity that often occurs in religious threads. But I think it's only fair that if we should challenge religious people to justify their faith, we should also challenge non-religious people to justify their lack of faith: what makes you an atheist or agnostic?
For me, I became an atheist after reading about Jonas Salk. Salk's polio vaccine was only one of many medical achievements that have occurred since the development of modern science in the last 150 years or so, but it's one that stuck with me. The notion of a knowing God that could allow an insidious disease like polio to last for centuries, and do nothing about it even as millions of people prayed for Him to cure it, or to save them from the Plague (which we now know was cholera) or all of the other diseases which, in the Middle Ages, meant that life was such a crap shoot. The way millions of people still pray today for God to cure their cancer. A God that would allow that kind of suffering for centuries made no sense to me, unless I was to accept the notion of an amoral, uncaring, possibly evil God. Since I can't, I decided then and there to go with the no God option. Since that time, I've learned a lot of stuff that has strengthened my opinion on this (and that's all it is; I can't prove there is no god) but that was the turning point.
For me, I became an atheist after reading about Jonas Salk. Salk's polio vaccine was only one of many medical achievements that have occurred since the development of modern science in the last 150 years or so, but it's one that stuck with me. The notion of a knowing God that could allow an insidious disease like polio to last for centuries, and do nothing about it even as millions of people prayed for Him to cure it, or to save them from the Plague (which we now know was cholera) or all of the other diseases which, in the Middle Ages, meant that life was such a crap shoot. The way millions of people still pray today for God to cure their cancer. A God that would allow that kind of suffering for centuries made no sense to me, unless I was to accept the notion of an amoral, uncaring, possibly evil God. Since I can't, I decided then and there to go with the no God option. Since that time, I've learned a lot of stuff that has strengthened my opinion on this (and that's all it is; I can't prove there is no god) but that was the turning point.
. Its this type of thinking that makes me run the other way,why i cant listen to people who think this way,live in fear of a god of love. Its warped and disgusting . I would never say that there isnt something else after we die no more than i could say there is. I wont know until i die . I wouldnt tell a believer that hes wrong in his beliefs i just wont agree with that person. I think we are here on our own by chance,a result of science not mythical gods . Again though i cant say for sure one way or the other. So in summation i would say i think the Bible is a joke ,a book written by men to control other men. I would say that perhaps we become part of something greater when we die than what we have here while alive but thats just a guess. I hope that there is something better than this because it makes living more worth while . Im what some would call a realist ,i dont believe in UFO`s or big foot or santa clause...if i saw a ufo i would then believe ,i just cant take someone else`s word for it .