Why I left Atheism?

[SilverKnight]

I wish i could believe, but its just not logical. I even stood in a supposed haunted house and said "Hey ghost, come at me you pieces of shit", and they didn't. If i did believe in something, it would never be the man made religions of this world. They're far too bizarre to take seriously.

Sometimes when you seek them they will not come at all, they know you're expecting them, your spirit energy (which in theory is the electromagnetic field emitted by your soul/ spirit energy, remember soul is energy) will push these spirits as far away as possible avoiding them from interacting with your physical and spiritual bodies, at least as less as possible.

To put it in simpler ways, imagine an autonomous military drone on patrol which in this scenario is on the lowest combat or defensive mode possible, that drone will be at a greater risk from getting hit or near hit then a drone which is on the highest alert mode possible. The same happens with us in the physical world when it comes to dealing with the spiritual/ ghosts.

Bottom point: When you least expect them is when it happens.

Atheism and agnosticism are more mutually inclusive than exclusive.

The term 'agnostic' is somewhat weak, the definition of agnosticism being the position that one does not know whether any deity or any other religious or metaphysical claim is true or not, therefore adopting a neutral religious position.

Agnosticism, by virtue of not believing in aforementioned deities and claims, is atheistic, just that it portrays itself not to be. Herein lies the misconception that atheism is some sort of cohesive world view shared by a collective, sort of like a religion, which also non-theists often fall for. The only criteria for atheism is lack of faith, not to believe that god does not exist. There is not any evidence compelling enough to goad faith which attracts people to disbelief.

In short, agnosticism is an ill-defined term; and agnosticism and atheism cannot be completely extricated and any dichotomization would be false. In addition, there is a general misconception and misunderstanding surrounding those terms.

Agnosticism is also very hard for me to comprehend very complicated though process in which a person is undecided weather there's a god/s or not.

[el22]

Which is why some are agnostic atheists and some claim to be gnostic atheists.

Suggested reading to those that are interested in the subject:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negativ...sitive_atheism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implici...plicit_atheism

I think this is just wordplay.
It takes nothing to believe in God (a few rituals) but the reward is huge: an eternity of happiness in heaven. Not believing however reserves you an eternity of suffering in hell.
So why should someone not believe? - Because they feel confident that they risk nothing. There really is no space for "agnostic".

[Don Arb]

Even religious people if they are totally in delusion deep inside are atheist or agnostic (not believing in personal God) their believe in religion is wager in reality, they are usually cowards.

[Hàkon]

The fact that the conclusions of researchers do not necessarily make individuals less convinced of the opposite view is nothing new; you disregard that feelings, thoughts, sensations and events in the environment not only are experienced as they are, but are also attributed a meaning based on the frames of reference (values, subconscious beliefs etc.) that the individual has.

(This is basic cognitive psychology. Additionally, keep in mind that you were religious and raised in such a home.)


Different types of thought errors (cognitive bias) tend to bring individuals to rather note things that are in line with what they are convinced to have experienced and/ or know, while conflicting information (explanations) does not influence the interpretation processes.

The supernatural experience is the result of a process of interpretation that is often characterized by an inner conviction.

Spoiler!

(An interesting perspective on this was raised on the Brain Science Podcast when the book "On Being Certain: Believing You Are Right Even When You're Not" was discussed.)

That is to say; I believe you trust what you think you experienced, but that is not reality.

[Blackout]

You should check out my posts in the 'weired & Paranormal' section.

I used to regularly visit abandoned houses and forests, late at night. I would go on my own, and just carry a torch along with a 'sheathed' kitchen knife (for defence).

[YOUTUBE]cVhmXAtVyj4[/YOUTUBE]

This video in my opinion is the most accurate. The reason i believe it, is because I have seen exactly the same things myself. Seeing those things, only cemented my belief in such creatures.

[Hàkon]

Might be of interest to you.

[SilverKnight]

Might be of interest to you.

Great interesting article Hàkon, but this are the kinds of things I would've believed before I left Atheism and witnessed/ heard the paranormal events that occurred to us. At the end it concludes that people who seen and/ or heard paranormal usually believe in the paranormal before it happens to them. In my case I was completely a non-believer in this stuff so much I even went on "YouTube wars" with other religious/ non-religious believers in the paranormal...

It was unexpected, nothing neurological what so ever and even so that my fiancee also saw and heard similar things as me, no it's not a neurological coincidence it's facts that I hold tightly, you can and can't believe it as you wish, but one day you'll eventually see that I was right. Science can't explain everything especially the paranormal, not is such an early stage in human understand of our world and even less the rest of the known/ unknown universe. I extremely doubt the blender we saw functioning by itself for a few second (15-30) maybe due to us angering the spirit or it trying to communicating with us while being unplugged in that home was all 'neurological' ...

Somehow it uses electronic things at its disposal, after all they are energy beings, departed human souls or other forms of spirits. It's nothing religious, it's probably more scientifically explainable then what you guys think.

[Partiasn]

If you ask me Atheism is more a radical political point of view that attempts to back up and support the leftist state.

So in their respect it has nothing to do with Belief or not in any God or gods.

But the FACT is we don't really know what is even a few light years beyond our earth, and we do not know exactly or even approximately what events created the religions of the world.

Personally I have never experienced any supernatural events, but I like to keep an open mind on these things.

But fact is we only know things we can measure through our technology, and that changes with our knowledge.

Carl Sagan can enplane it better than I.

[YOUTUBE]UnURElCzGc0[/YOUTUBE]

[SkyBurn]

If you ask me Atheism is more a radical political point of view that attempts to back up and support the leftist state.

So in their respect it has nothing to do with Belief or not in any God or gods.

But the FACT is we don't really know what is even a few light years beyond our earth, and we do not know exactly or even approximately what events created the religions of the world.

Personally I have never experienced any supernatural events, but I like to keep an open mind on these things.

Atheism is not a political point of view. That you see it as such highlights your own prejudice against the so-called "leftist state"; there are both right wing and left wing atheists. The philosophy is by definition a lack of belief, and it is in every respect about this. So I have idea what you're talking about.

If you want to use facts to argue against atheism, try reading some yourself (I highly recommend Dawkins's "The God Delusion"). Just because we don't know the origins of the world, does not imply that the explanation is religion. Search up "god of the gaps".

If anything, I would argue against your open mind. Susceptibility to religious teachings shuts one out for possible other moral viewpoints, and scientific ones. In my opinion, blindly believing in supernatural events does not display an open mind, but rather, a naive one.

I don't know what your religious affiliation is, but please don't criticise atheists, when there is so much to criticise about any religious movement in general.

[Partiasn]

I don't know what your religious affiliation is, but please don't criticise atheists, when there is so much to criticise about any religious movement in general.

Personalty I don't give a dam much what any one person worships but Atheist and Marxist are in a category all their own in this respect. And if you are judging by filth such a Trotsky, and a few others are dangerous and have often had to be neutralized by force.

Buddhist, Muslims, Pagans, Branches of Christianity get the benefit of the doubt, but Atheist do NOT, that is until they can break themselves from their heritage of supporting and backing leftist social morays.

Atheism is not a political point of view. That you see it as such highlights your own prejudice against the so-called "leftist state"; there are both right wing and left wing atheists.

LOL!
Oh Really!
And just how many of them are rightist.
Fact is most of the crap that Atheist advocate ARE DIRECTLY related to left wing socialism, and you dam well know it.

There is plenty of proof form just the former USSR alone.

Realistically man If I ever decided to adopt socialism, I think National Socialism would be a little more in MY benefit considering I'm not a Jew, a Black, or a Woman. Until that time the “Leftest State” can go F- it's Self.

If you want to use facts to argue against atheism, try reading some yourself (I highly recommend Dawkins's "The God Delusion"). Just because we don't know the origins of the world, does not imply that the explanation is religion. Search up "god of the gaps".

Honestly I think my argument was more incline with their hypocritical BS, that most of us are so accustomed to.
But since you brought it up.

Fact is proving or disproving God or the gods, more or less is imposable until they show up on the door step. Sagan by his own definition is an “Atheist” but at the same time contradicts himself with the fact that he believed in multiple advanced civilizations in the universe.
Or by definition “gods”. Sagan was a brilliant physicist but he does have his bias.

If anything, I would argue against your open mind. Susceptibility to religious teachings shuts one out for possible other moral viewpoints, and scientific ones. In my opinion, blindly believing in supernatural events does not display an open mind, but rather, a naive one.

Atheism is not backed up by science, it is backed up politically. I can see why you would argue against an “Open Mind” much of that was enforced at gun point in the former USSR. Well that is until the Utopia crashed and burned under its own Bull $hit.