Athiests, If you we were told you could believe in God WITHOUT the organized religion, would it make a diff?

I am a christian and trust me, I've been to many fanatical churches that only preached fire, hell, and brimstone, and even being a christian, I was turned off to my faith.

I'm just curious if you were just to look at God and not what people have made Him out to be, as just this angry, punishing being, if it would change your view of Him?

Update:

It looks like the majority of you need proof that God does exist. What kind of proof would it have to be? I honestly think that God could suddenly appear in the sky and say "it's me, God" and people would still choose not to believe. It all comes down to a matter of wanting to or not I guess. Could you prove to me your name for instance? Sure you could show me a birth certificate. Well, why is it any less that I can show you the Bible as proof. The Bible by the way is also a great history book. Nothing in it has ever been shown to be innacurate.

I do respect all of your honest answers (some of you aho aren't just trying to be mean) I also want to say I'm not trying to push anything on you. It's just cool to hear where you're coming from.

29 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    There are some atheists who basically broke off from religion because of the flim-flam, child abuse and absurdities that abound in organized religions.

    There are others who are intellectual atheists, who disbelieve because there is no good reason to believe in God in a traditional sense with or without being encapsulated in an organized system like Islam or Christianity.

    The first type I mentioned might become what you might call "spiritual without being religious" while the second type will be unaffected.

    Atheists are usually defined in two classes philosophically.

    Implicit or passive : No belief in God. God's existence is improbable and no good reason to believe.

    Explicit or active: No belief in God because God not only does not exist but God's existence is logically impossible.

    Agnostics, if you want to be technical, are a implicit or passive type of atheist. Although the term non-theist covers those who lack a belief in God or possess any religious type beliefs.

    Then there people like me, more a heathen.

    I don't say God does not exist.

    Nor do I say that God's existence is impossible depending on the definition.

    Some human like figure sitting on a throne in the clouds somewhere in heaven chucking sinners into hell and giving the righteous or the "saved" a free pass to Heaven is a type of God, both repugnant and ridiculous.

    However, a pantheistic notion that God essentially is Nature or the Mind or Logic that is quite evident in Natural phenomenon. Once God is stripped of supernaturalism and superstition, the pantheistic type of God is all that is logically tenable. It is essentially the underlying core of Native American spirituality and Vedanta or Upanishadic Hinduism.

    This is the God of Spinoza.

    In the film V for Vendetta, V says "God is in the rain".

    Nice pantheistic notion here.

    But I could define God as Swiss Cheese and therefore everybody would believe in God. And everybody would believe in the Pantheistic God since everybody believes in Nature, only most scientists see no reason to deify Nature.

    But what is deification? It is the organized practice of stupid ritual worship.

    One might see the God or the Tao in Nature but feel no desire or need to grovel esp. since there is no "Fear Factor" in Nature as God, nor does one pray, or expect miracles.

    The Pantheistic God is useless from a clerical point of view. Useless to use as a tool to keep the masses sated and under control.

    The Pantheistic God is too Democratic for most people who prefer the Monarch or Dictator type of God.

    Yet mystical Judaism and Theravada Buddhism are essentially systems that reject the traditional type of God and move towards a pantheistic type.

    When the Divine Spark is in you, in me, in everthing animate or inanimate, vegetable, animal and mineral, the Sun, Moon and stars, then there is no reason to be dogmatic or oppress anybody.

    But oppression is in vogue right now and religion is and always has been the oldest con-game of all time. Certain enterprising fellows pretend to have contact with God or the gods and give some "revelation" with rules and rituals and laws and if influential or convincing enough like Muhammed or Joseph Smith you create yet another retarded religion to enslave the masses.....but they are not slaves of God but the fellow who passed off his own ideas as God's.

    I see Nature as Source.

    Nature made me [ultimate cause] and my parents are the proximate cause.

    When I die. I return to Nature, the Source whence I came.

    What then? I'm totally agnostic about that.

    Don't worry about it. I, a part of the continuum die, but Nature lives on and is Eternal.

    Contrary to the Big Bang theory--which gives Nature and Time itself a beginning--- which I and other persons in the scientific community are ripping to shreds--Nature always is, was and will be.

    There never will be a time when Nature [raw energy and the Tao, the Mind, the logic in the system, the Logos] is not.

    Besides, our particular Universe is nothing but an infinitessimally TINY fragment of a much larger continuum a multiverse or even a pan(i)verse infinite in extent made up of multiverses.

    The expansion of a Universe or a contractile phase is like breathing. The Hindus call it the "heartbeat of Brahman". Rather poetic, but it makes a good point.

    People say you never see God. Walk out your door and look at the sky, the trees, the fields of corn, the children playing on a playground, the birds flying overhead. What is that if NOT God?

    Don't miss the forest for the trees, miss the BIG picture by focusing on details something the scientists are really good at.

    Then there were fellows like Lao Tzu who cared nothing for minutiae, trivia or unimportant details and was concerned with the Schema, the Big Picture, Totality and Totality is a Unity only that and nothing more.

    Matter itself is a logical fiction, an appearance only. What is really out there is nothing but energy pulsing and flowing. An atom is essentially energy in a fixed state as opposed to a free state or chaotic state.

    Few realize that when you slap your hand on a table, you never touched the table at all. It is impossible to touch it, mostly because it is nothing but locked or "frozen" energy.

    The negative charge in the electrons at the surface repel the negative charge of the electrons in your hand, but nowhere did you actually touch it.

    So what did you touch? Nothing. Nothing at all.

    So what did you feel? Pressure sensors in your hand sent a single to your brain saying basically "Met an opposing force".

    What do you weigh? Really now, tell the truth.

    Zero. You don't weigh Anything at all and never have.

    The fattest human on Earth weighs exactly the same as the human skeletons in freak shows.

    The Physical Universes of which ours is just one of many, is in fact, nothing more, nothing less than a really kick *** virtual reality. So perfect that it fool's us into thinking it's real, when it is no more real than a dream!

    Quantum Mechanics is slowly proving ideas that were anticipated by Lao Tzu or the Buddha over 2000 years ago.

  • KC
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    No, because I already knew this. I've already been there. First to go was organized religion, which at a young age I recognized as wrong; then I still believed in a deity for many years while growing up, altering bit by bit my understanding of what this was exactly, and finally my studying of varying religions led me to believe that gods, including the modern ones, are merely symbols. They are metaphors for something our human mind cannot comprehend.

    I think the Tao is a much better description than any deity could be.

    The tao that can be told

    is not the eternal Tao

    The name that can be named

    is not the eternal Name.

    The unnamable is the eternally real.

    Naming is the origin

    of all particular things.

    --Tao Te Ching

  • 1 decade ago

    To say that the Bible does not contain inaccuracies is not strictly speaking a truism, and how can we 'trust' anyone who distorts the truth? Athiests tend to be athiests because they are not prepared to believe contradtions, after all which contradition does one believe. Let us take Abraham as one example of totally true Bible evidence. Abraham had one wife and one concubine. Abraham was believed to have been a Sumerian and a Chaldean. His son Esau was an Edomite, his other son, Isaac, and Father of Jacob was an Aramean. Ismael his other son by his Egyptian wife Haga was an Ishmaelite. His nephew was a Moabite and an Amonite, Abrahams brother was a Hurrian. His wife was a Sumerian, and his concubine was an Egyptian, his sons were married to Canaanites, Hittites and Hurrians.

    So in one small nuclear family, we have Sumerians, Edomites, Arameans, Ismaelites, Moabites, Amonites, Hurrians, Egyptians, Canaanites, Hittites and Chaldeans not to mention the pharaoh. How does one explain such inconsistencies in just one small family unit?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    No, it wouldn't.

    There are plenty of people that believe in a god without practicing a religion.

    I don't believe in god because the very concept makes no sense to me. There's no evidence that can be produced to convince me that god exists. Nobody who believes can even seem to come up with an adequate definition of god for me. Though I already reject religion, it's inconsequential to the fact that I don't believe.

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    NO! Logic is my reason for seeing that no gods exist. I saw errors in the Bible at age 7 and announced to Dad that I was an atheist at age 11. Later, I studied major world religions, so it is not only your deity that I reject.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Being a Christian doesn't require an organized religion. But going to a church is essential in growing in Christ. I'd recommend a small community church where you would make a lot of great friends.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Because I have no religion that's threatening me with damnation, I'm not afraid to say that I see no reason to believe in any gods, regardless of the religion.

    Obviously though, organized religion, and the threat that it espouses... is the ONLY reason many people DO "believe" in a god.

  • 1 decade ago

    Dear?, athEists DO NOT BELIEVE IN ANY GODS!!!

    Now, is that plain enough for you, or do I have to yell louder?

    Religions are dangerous! They give good men the excuse, to do bad things!!

    There are no gods!

    There is no such thing as ''sin''!

    There is no heaven!

    And, there is no hell!

    I suggest you get a hobby, and leave the atheists to worry about what is good or bad for us, ourselves!!

    Source(s): free thinker
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    God is fictional charactor like Harry Potter from man written out dated tribel books.

  • 1 decade ago

    i dont think so, lady. the only why i would believe is if i had some concrete proof of his/her/its existence. so have your good buddy god stop by my paid and have a pow wow with me, will have some tea and cake, talk about why isnt he helping the poor and hunger and maybe even play some video games.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.