I have never felt akin to Atheists nor believers

[Joe Nation]

Maybe you feel the same way, maybe not. I feel that neither group can really ever know that a God exists or doesn't exist but both groups seem absolutely certain that their ideology is the correct one. How could either really know?

I have always felt that the personification of some supernatural diety is nothing more than a self-serving view propagated by religious systems seeking power over their "flocks" for the sole purpose of building their own empires of dominance. Conversely, the non-believers gather around the idea of A-theism in what can only be described as an opposition to all the belief systems they reject.

I simply do not what to believe in fairytales or define my beliefs as the opposite of those fairytales. I don't find either side an ideology that I can get behind.

My question would have to be; What would a world that never had a concept of a diety or a concept of an opposition to the idea of a diety look like?

[Basso8vb]

1. Atheism is not a religion.

[walkingman]

2. This is the AI answer and I tend to agree with it.

If we focused on the natural world I think the entire planet would clearly be better off.

A world without the concept of a deity would likely be one where people focus intensely on the natural world, seeking explanations for phenomena through science and empirical observation, with ethics and morality primarily derived from societal norms and personal values, rather than divine pronouncements; essentially, a world where the idea of a "higher power" or supernatural being is completely absent from cultural understanding and daily life.

[Think. Again.]

3. You're an Agnostic.

I like to call myself an Apathetic Agnostic, I don't know and I don't care.

[Blues Heron]

4. It's hard to prove a negative, but the likelihood of a diety seems very low, like infinitesimally low.

More likely, it’s just mass and energy constantly in flux, and somehow through eons, single celled organisms got woke, and here we are to contemplate it all.

[Beartracks]

5. "single celled organisms got woke"

==============

[av8rdave]

6. I don't completely dismiss the idea of a diety, but...

I also keep in mind that deities are what the human race cling to when faced with phenomena they can’t understand or explain. The original storytellers of the Christian Bible were trying to figure out where the sun goes at night and where rain comes from. The first, primitive scientific explanations of these things were considered heresy, until the evidence became so overwhelming that even the zealots couldn’t deny it. That cycle continued throughout recorded history and to this day. Lather, rinse, repeat:

Our position in the solar system
The stars as other suns
The creation and age of the Earth
The origins of our species
Evolution
Heterosexuality being one area on a larger spectrum

Also, humans have worshipped countless deities throughout known history. Are we certain that ours is the real one? If you believe in eternal reward and punishment, your odds are better buying a lottery ticket.

Again, a divine being is within the realm of possibility. Do we have sound reason to believe in one, or are we still just grasping to understand the yet inexplicable?

[CrispyQ]

7. I think it's natural that we ask where we come from. How it all started.

What boggles my mind, though, is how many people can accept that everything needs a creator except the creator. I have lots of other issues with religion too, but that one tops the list.

[Americanme]

8. I am an atheist

I do not believe any invisible, eternal, all-knowing beings with magical powers exist. I have no problem with other people believing they do exist, but I think those beliefs should not mix with government or public education. There are plenty of churches, temples, mosques, covens, etc. in most cities. If you want your kids to have religious instruction, pick one and take them. And government is for all of the people, not just those in whatever religion is currently in the majority.

[Stargazer99]

15. Being religious I absolutely agree with this post

[Cartoonist]

9. I dismiss deities like unicorns.

I can't for one second say I'm just not sure.

[HAB911]

10. It is correct neither can prove their position.

Personally, I had to make a choice in order to move on with my life. I chose atheism as the rational path.

[Buzz cook]

22. Depends on what god

Some like Thor or a charioteer that drives the sun across the sky then walks it back through the underworld, are pretty easy to disprove.
Most gods with a direct and necessary role in nature are pretty easy to disprove because we now know how lots of thing in nature work. So rain gods need not reply.
Then there is a question of how a god is described. Yahweh can't be omnipotent cause there are logical contradictions, can he make a rock too heavy for him to lift or make a married bachelor? So he got down graded to maximally-logically-consistent-potent.
Then there is the question of how we know a god.
Direct revelation would be great, but doesn't seem to happen now. Inner revelation, the internal witness is problematic because if a god dwelt in us then there could be no doubt, yet even the most fervent believer has doubts.
So the vast majority of people get their knowledge of gods indirectly, either from church writing or a person telling them. The problems here should be obvious. I don't know any holy book without contradictions or some really problematic things in it. Given the number of grifters out there, how do you tell the holy ones from Jim Jones?

So yes you can disprove gods.

[Nigrum Cattus]

11. It's called agnostic -

https://allriot.com/blog/in-the-beginning-man-created-god?srsltid=AfmBOoroGdJvTMsbUKPALKs8WCEOua-Fux2OK1YsuKhqq-hXkLkm-zqQ
Link to another view
The original belief was Pagan. Pagans don't need a god, they have earth.
Paganism was and is still fought tooth & nail by the catholic (roman) church.
Religion will be the bane of the 21st century

[no_hypocrisy]

12. The world might have embraced a community of non-religious people

who stress humanity, empathy, rationality, logic, and social justice.

Such as Humanists and The Ethical Culture Society.

I'd have included Unitarians but they still lean on the God idea.

[A HERETIC I AM]

13. I am an Atheist

But I tend to use the strict, literal definition of the word;

A = Without

Theos = God.

I am without a god or gods because I have no need for them.

Now having said that, if Jesus Christ were to appear before me out of thin air and be in a solid human form, I would believe he existed, but I still would have no need for him. Of course that is as likely as the existence of Bertrand Russel's Teapot, which is exactly the same way I view the likelihood of the existence of any other mythical figures, be they Leprechauns, Unicorns, Fairies, Zeus, Apollo, Thor or Sasquatch.

I reject the primary root of Christianity; That humans are born "sinners" or somehow flawed and as a result, we need to be "saved" from this flaw. I say bullshit. We aren't born flawed, we are born human.

So I don't buy the idea of The Fall From Grace and as such I don't need a redeemer.

I like to think I have a scientifically leaning mind, and therefore I can not rule out the possible existence of some sort of life form or entity that can do what we would think of as "God-Like" things, and if one appeared before me I would be amazed, but that still wouldn't make me any less of an Atheist. As Arthur C. Clarke said, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” .

I'm an Atheist. I don't have any gods because I don't need them.

[progressoid]

14. I would love to have Bertrand Russel's teapot

Oh, you mean the one in the allegory.....

.....never mind.....

[Farmer-Rick]

16. I am atheist

It only means priests, pastors, bibles, holy books and religious people worldwide and through time have failed.

They have failed to provide real, verifiable evidence for the existence of any gods.

If my neighbor says she believes gnomes visit her at night, I would say provide me with real verifiable evidence of this. Until the evidence is provided, I don't believe in her visiting gnomes.

Until evidence is provided of gods, of any kind, I remain unbelieving. I do Not believe there are No gods. As I can't definitively prove my neighbor did Not see visiting gnomes, so I can't definitively prove there are no gods.

Give me good reproducible solid evidence and I will believe there are gods or gnomes. I may not worship those gods or gnomes of your's or my neighbors' but with solid evidence I will believe they exist.

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. I'm not sure what you mean by "an opposition to all the belief systems they reject"

so I'm not sure how you see atheists. You obviously see it as more than the rejection of a personification of some supernatural deity, since that's your own position.

What do you see as the "opposite" of a supernatural deity, but which you also reject?

I'm not sure what your final question is useful for. We do have a world in which many people have the concept of deities. Imagining a world that has never had that involves going back 50,000 years or more, when we basically know nothing about the "culture" they had. This is good for imaginative fiction, but not much help to anyone for what we should think in the real world we live in.

[Joe Nation]

18. What I mean by that....

Is the fact that you can't define atheism if there is no belief in a diety by someone. Atheism as a concept only exists because there is a belief in a diety in the first place. I do not like the dependent nature of the relationship where atheism is just a reaction to a set of mythical beliefs. I believe that this dynamic keeps atheism as subordinate alternative to the belief systems that simply tell a better fictional story.

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. I can't see why that's "subordinate", though

Nor, for that matter, what is "better" about the fiction. Yes, you can't define atheism without someone believing in a deity; but since some people do believe in deities, that's not a problem. We happen to not have words defined as "not believing in ghosts", or "not believing in horoscopes", but that's perhaps because those beliefs are not such an organising system.

Are you just saying you wish atheism was a bit more powerful?

[Iggo]

20. I have seen no compelling evidence for the existence of a god or gods.

So I don’t believe in any.

It’s really that simple.

[state of stupid]

21. you are most likely agnostic

Whether you hard agnostic or soft agnostic is hard to tell. I am an agnostic that is
neither hard nor soft. If you examine what that means you can form your path on
what you believe. My position is that the proof of God is not knowable because I
cannot prove it one way or the other so I take a neutral position. I like so many had
my religious experience at a very young age determined after less than a year and
three different churches that it was not for me. They did prove to me miracles did
indeed happen. All those darling angelic perfect examples of Godly child did that.
I went to school with a lot of them and I just could not grasp how they could get
away with all the things they did that my father would have seen thru instantly and
gone into his kid you got some serious issues mode and give me a long grueling
come to Jesus discussion. When I decided to get the hell away it was my belief that
maybe some were what I call a faithful follower and the rest pharisees. My father and
mother both believed but not once did they go to church, preach scripture, tell me
about the 10 commandments, pray or anything else. As far as the pharisees you
can read the book and see what Jesus thought about them. I will simply paraphrase
the cherry on top when spoke his mind to them. You are like your father the Devil
who was a murderer from the beginning and has no truth in him for he is a liar
and the father of them. That is not something a believer wants on their resume or
yelp review. How did I get to agnostic is a long story. I was looking for a station to
listen to on the radio and hit a station with a preacher having rant and he said something
that caught my attention, so I listened to hear what he was saying. Basically, he was ranting
about preachers telling people what the bible said. Twenty preachers taking one verse
and explaining it 20 different ways and none being correct in what they were saying.
Then saying do not trust anyone who tells you what it means, not even him. He said my job
is not to tell you what means but to show you how to study it and form your own conclusions.
So I did what suggested and that is how I decided I was an agnostic. What I did as far
as the bible was if it sounded like a man using God to justify what he was saying I
threw it away. If I could use what I read and apply that to the practical side not the
spiritual side then keep it and use it in the practical sense.
Example: You shall know the truth and the truth will set you free. Practical sense:
The more truth I know the freer I am, but be warned just because you do not like the
the truth you either accept it or get run over by it. So is it Godly wisdom, common sense,
or just Joe the drunk, living in his cardboard box, behind Lou's diner. I will take truth and
wisdom wherever I find it and use for the path in life I choose to take as an agnostic. If this
helps you on your journey glad I could help, if not throw it away sorry I could not help, if
you are not sure put on a shelf and think about it and sooner or later you will make a
choice on it. Your right to choose not my right to dictate. I think I have ranted long enough.
So, until next time I wish you well.