I would think that science and hardship would be the cause, or at least a reason. If someone lives a good life only to get fucked over, then they might stop believing. Science has reasons for a lot of things, and it's a lot more...reasonable/believable/logical I guess.

by Anonymous 14 years ago

It's a song lyric. And some Christians are brought all the closer to God by hardship. Just read the book of Job.

by Anonymous 14 years ago

Oh, it's a song lyric? And yeah, some people et closer to God as well.

by Anonymous 14 years ago

it was a quote that was used in a song. i'm not entirely sure of it's origin/source

by Anonymous 14 years ago

I hate that thought, that "my life is hard and God's not fixing everything for me so He must not exist". Shit happens to everyone, that's what life is.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

ive definely been brought closer to God through all the crazy stuff. you just have to trust that he has a reason for it, even if you cant feel him with you. after all, the teacher doesnt talk during the test. (:

by Anonymous 14 years ago

I really like that last part. I'm going to write that on all of my school supplies.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

A person being a dumbass makes you deny the existence of any god? This makes zero sense to me, I'm afraid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not 'a person being a dumbass'. It's people who call themselves Christians, who may even attend church and be involved in church activities, who conform to the worldly standards that makes up the system of nonbelievers. They talk like them, they act like them, they don't guard themselves against the evil that is in this world. A lot of people see that kind of hypocrisy and decide that God is also a hypocrite or that there is no point to being a Christian when you could just as easily not be a Christian and live the same kind of life. It's all about the hypocrisy.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Um, I'm pretty sure the main cause is science.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Not necessarily, plenty of religious people know science just as well,

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You make it sound like a disease

by Anonymous 12 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwMTKUSYZKU Here's the song I refer to.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The cause of my disbelief is the principles of the religion itself, not the people who practice it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm an atheist, and I have my own reasons for not believing. Those are that when I see a newborn child, I do not see sin that can be erased by dumping water on its head. I don't think it needs to beg a god for forgiveness when it has done nothing. I don't think that a person should spend their life looking for forgiveness of a god that seems to have many flaws himself. Those are my beliefs, I will not challenge anyone else's, but those are mine.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What flaws does God have?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm from a religious family, and from when I used to be a Christian and read the Bible, I found that God erased problems rather than solving them. Like when he was displeased with the humanity he created and flooded the world, killing every human but Noah. Don't you think he could've worked with humans, rather than killing them? Killing the humans he claimed to love?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

About that bit right there, about the flood, one, how do you propose He could've worked with them (not hating on you, just curious), and two, we say there's a point where people can't get back up, where they sink way too freaking low. And God told Noah to try and warn the people, like, "If you don't stop such-and-such, God is gonna flood the world on yo asses biatchhhhhhh" (except in a better way) and he did, and it didn't work. Also, God is God. If you think He has flaws, you have the wrong perception.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Why couldn't god just tell the people himself, the lazyass.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

-.- Possibly because God doesn't appear to people who are undeserving of being appeared to. But that's just a guess. Look, I don't know if the Christians hold this part of the Torah, but when God gave the Ten Commandments, He started off telling them instead of Moses. And the entire Jewish nation died from hearing His voice. God talking directly to someone isn't something to be taken lightly. Although I probably shouldn't be wasting my time to try to reason with you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I thought god was supposed to be all forgiving? Doesn't sound like it if he decides to kill everyone off for not acting properly when he can't even give them a warning first.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Where the heck did forgiveness and not acting properly come in? And the Jewish nation WANTED God to say it to them, they asked. I think the idea was for Moses to start off.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

What I'm saying is why'd he kill everybody before even giving them a warning. If god never shows himself, it's easy to say, "god doesn't appear to people who are undeserving". That's like saying unicorns exist but they only show themselves to me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The people wouldn't have listened. It's obvious that they didn't care for God or His commands if you read Genesis's chapters on the Ark; they would've shrugged such a warning off as an empty threat of a butthurt little kid.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

uhh, would you listen if an almighty god told you he was going to drown you?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If I was completely evil and hated God I wouldn't. Remember: I hypothetically think he's neither almighty nor holy.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

couldn't god just shoot some lightning shit or something? I honestly don't think if there was an almighty god he couldn't get someone to believe him.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Forcing someone to love Him isn't a choice and therefore not true devotion. He would never make someone believe; that would violate free will. If I make you love me there's no difference between your choice and my order, and I'd want you to love me by choice because it would be from your heart and not my command.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I am agnostic. In college or maybe even high school, I hope to take a course on the Bible and try to interpret it. I think that the stories aren't literal, and that the mesage behind them is what is important.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It seems as though you fully believe in the bible, and that Jesus/Christianity is the only way to salvation. If I'm correct, that would mean your use of Pascal's Wager would make no sense in your profile. Pascal's wager only works for the general belief in God. But when you say that not only God exists, but that he's abrahamic, has a "son" named Jesus who was immaculately conceived and a humdred other things claimed in the bible, then the "You should believe in god; you might get saved" does nothing to help you. Chances of there being a god can be 50/50. But when you bring in religion? Well, there are over 750 established religion in the world, and no, they don't include the sects of Christianity. That's about 1 in 750. our chances of being saved after death in the even of a supreme being isn't that much higher than an Atheist.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

similar_to_a_boss.... Anonymity is not really necessary. Pascal's Wager is that (as pertains to a belief in the Christian God) "if you gain, you gain all. If you lose, you lose nothing" (taken from "Pensees" paragraph 418). So there is no 'might' or any sort of ambiguity. A faith in God will lead to being saved. How does the knowledge that to win the wager would be to win eternal paradise in Heaven not help me? And as for the 1/750 (0.13% chance) you closed with--that's just irrelevant to Pascal's Wager completely seeing as the Wager applies to only the Christian faith. However, if you're saying that religious beliefs are just a shot in the dark with a 0.13% chance of believing in the right one, you're making very profound and overarching claims about the nature of religion. If, and I think your claim boils down to this, you're saying that we can't know anything definite about religion, how do we know that what you're saying about religion is definite? For all we know, Christianity is the true religion.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not similar to a boss...... stop blaming stuff on other users... I'm a user that stumbled onto this post when I searched Atheism and Jesus and to see how many posts there are saying Atheists need to follows Jesus. "A faith in God will lead to being saved. How does the knowledge that to win the wager would be to win eternal paradise in Heaven not help me?" Well if you believe that only YOUR god will save people, you believe there is only one true religion, than an all accepting God. So you're win to paridise is not as easy as you falsely make it out to be. "And as for the 1/750 (0.13% chance) you closed with--that's just irrelevant to Pascal's Wager completely seeing as the Wager applies to only the Christian faith" Well great, seeing as there are over 750 religions, than Pascal's Wager is self has a 1/750 chance of being valid. Thanks for letting me know.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"you're saying that we can't know anything definite about religion, how do we know that what you're saying about religion is definite?" Because my claim that being in the right religion is a 1 in 750 chance, is MUCH more practical than your claim that when it comes to Christianity, it has a high 50/50 chance of being the right religion, thus making Pascal's wager practical. For all we know, Islam is the true religion. Or Taoism. Or Buddhism, Judaism, Sikhism, Shinto, Manichaeism, Zoroastrianism, and Bahá'í Faith.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You are just making no sense at all. I just can't follow your argument at all because of how you've written it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It was quite clear actually; while it's true that we don't know what's definite, my claims aren't as far fetched as yours. Especially when you use a Theory/concept, Pascal's Wagers, that only works when a particular religion has a 1 in 2change of being correct. Which itself has a 1 in 750 chance of being correct. Also, most of my comment is just refuting your quotes. It's very simple actually. English is my second language, but while my sentences my not be constructed perfectly, the message is quite clear and you're just bullshitting the "I have no clue what you're saying" rebuttal. Don't play me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Second language makes sense. Was your first language French? And I just don't care anymore. Call it a win for you but neither of us will ever convert the other to our respective ways of thought. Good day.

by Anonymous 12 years ago