Posted on 11/27/2005 6:32:15 AM PST by machman
Morning Edition, November 21, 2005 ·
I believe that there is no God. I'm beyond Atheism. Atheism is not believing in God. Not believing in God is easy -- you can't prove a negative, so there's no work to do. You can't prove that there isn't an elephant inside the trunk of my car. You sure? How about now? Maybe he was just hiding before. Check again. Did I mention that my personal heartfelt definition of the word "elephant" includes mystery, order, goodness, love and a spare tire?
So, anyone with a love for truth outside of herself has to start with no belief in God and then look for evidence of God. She needs to search for some objective evidence of a supernatural power. All the people I write e-mails to often are still stuck at this searching stage. The Atheism part is easy.
But, this "This I Believe" thing seems to demand something more personal, some leap of faith that helps one see life's big picture, some rules to live by. So, I'm saying, "This I believe: I believe there is no God."
Having taken that step, it informs every moment of my life. I'm not greedy. I have love, blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards, and that has to be enough. It has to be enough, but it's everything in the world and everything in the world is plenty for me. It seems just rude to beg the invisible for more. Just the love of my family that raised me and the family I'm raising now is enough that I don't need heaven. I won the huge genetic lottery and I get joy every day.
Believing there's no God means I can't really be forgiven except by kindness and faulty memories. That's good; it makes me want to be more thoughtful. I have to try to treat people right the first time around.
Believing there's no God stops me from being solipsistic. I can read ideas from all different people from all different cultures. Without God, we can agree on reality, and I can keep learning where I'm wrong. We can all keep adjusting, so we can really communicate. I don't travel in circles where people say, "I have faith, I believe this in my heart and nothing you can say or do can shake my faith." That's just a long-winded religious way to say, "shut up," or another two words that the FCC likes less. But all obscenity is less insulting than, "How I was brought up and my imaginary friend means more to me than anything you can ever say or do." So, believing there is no God lets me be proven wrong and that's always fun. It means I'm learning something.
Believing there is no God means the suffering I've seen in my family, and indeed all the suffering in the world, isn't caused by an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent force that isn't bothered to help or is just testing us, but rather something we all may be able to help others with in the future. No God means the possibility of less suffering in the future.
Believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, beauty, sex, Jell-o and all the other things I can prove and that make this life the best life I will ever have.
In YOUR world ... In mine, the athletes generally credit themselves. Occasionally, they might remember that they have a teammate or two. But they seldom recall that their gifts -- ephemeral as they are -- come from somewhere else.
And on a very routine basis I see people in disasters or accidents that live crediting God for their survival, far more than people simply stating they were lucky.
There must be a lot of disasters in your world that they become "very routine." Back here in reality, they're uncommon enough that I can't discern any clear pattern, but I'd have to say I don't recall any outpouring of gratitude to the Almighty from the survivors.
I think back to 9/11 and I remember many survivors crediting the heroism of the firefighters, police, co-workers, complete strangers. But few praised God for saving them. On the other hand, I did hear a lot of "How could a loving God let this happen" rhetoric.
I'll have to visit your world sometime. It sounds like a profound, spiritual place.
It won't matter to some that God believes in them.
It is an amazing fact that there are some who will one day look Jesus Christ right in the face and STILL deny His authority over them.
They would rather face an eternity without hope than place ANYONE above themselves.
It's sad, really....
How about this essay from the same series? Surprised?
I bet he goes to the doctor. Or takes his loved ones there.
"If Penn Jillette were a fish he would smugly deny the existence of water. If he were blind, he would fiercely deny the existence of the color blue (and red, yellow, green and all colors between). If he were deaf, he would proudly announce that music has no content apart from dull coarse physical vibrations. A dull, asensate, spiritually inept man is no authority on even the smallest of things, let alone the extistence of God."
I'm pretty sure he's an authority on magic. There's no reason to assume that idiocy in one thing means idiocy in all. You simply disagree with him on religion. Do you hate Bertrand Russell? What about Jefferson? You probably disagree with both of their religious views, yet you agree with much in the way of their politics. The same is true of Jillette, who is a solidly libertarian skeptic.
Bingo. Many of those who fancy themselves 'atheists' actually use that term as an excuse to carry out a temper tantrum against a bad experience in some church ( a repeat of your point 1 ) or as a label to live the illusion that he/she is the end all be all ( sort of a twisted solipsism - something you could add as point 3 ).
The real atheists ( very few )I know could care less about all this.
False 'tri-lemma'...nice try, Hume.
This clown vs God.... My money's on God.
Comphrehension. You must have missed that gene in the evolutionary chain.
Actually, his greatest ire was held for those who either:
A. Took on the outward signs of believing in God but inwardly were serving themselves
B. Those who sought to profit from others in the name of God ( the incident of the money changers outside the Temple in Jerusalem )
Acutally, it wasn't unbelievers primarily, but those regarded as sinners, and often, those were people who knew this but weren't happy about it. By eating meals with them, or going to their houses, he gave them hope ( even the least could be redeemed ) , changing them for the good.
Great I am glad for your change of life!
I agree and I'm getting tired of paying it. the left really believes we like paying for this !#$%.
Do a search on Google News for "miracle."
Also see:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37137
(Actually surprisingly non-stupid for a WingNutDaily article.)
"We've all heard it and winced at it before. The quarterback has just thrown for 300 yards and three touchdowns against the most ferocious defense in the league in leading his team to victory. No sooner does the ubiquitous sideline reporter stick the microphone into his face and begin asking a stunningly trite question when the quarterback segues into a mini-testimony of his religious faith.
"First, Ahmad, I've got to thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ ..."
http://www.poppolitics.com/articles/2001-03-09-sport.shtml
http://archives.thedaily.washington.edu/1999/051899/S3.Godinsport.html
http://apse.dallasnews.com/dec2002/15zimanek.html
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/zillgitt/2005-02-05-zillgitt-owens_x.htm
...and I must have missed the spelling part in fourth grade.
Comprehension. There. I have evolved a bit more.
I agree your definition is better than mine. Sinners would have been a better choice of words. But I still think Jesus had compassion for all - just got angry at some.
Do you believe only because you think it is the winning side?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.