Twinstuff Forums: Twinstuff Forums -> Why I Am an Agnostic Atheist

This blog post will actually be a partial rerun of the post I made in the Cornucopia thread, "More Questions for Atheists". I worked for a few hours on that post, so I think it owes me double duty! But I have included some fresh, never-before-aired programming for your viewing pleasure!

Something I didn't share in that thread, but which I will share in the privacy of my blog, is why I didn't talk about my beliefs in greater detail before now and why I now feel it is important to do so.

For most of my life, I did not consider my philosophy to be significantly different from that of most other people so therefore it would be neither interesting nor a surprise. I really did think that most people considered the Biblical god to be mythos pointing toward a greater meaning and actually, I still believe that this is true. Christianity, as I understood it, had room for a great diversity of interpretations (look how many sects there are!), and mine was as valid as the next person's. I would wager quite a large sum that this is actually how many Christians feel, especially moderates. I also believed (wrongly, I have discovered) that most other people would be as tolerant of different interpretations as I am. The discovery that some people feel that only their own personal tinkering with Christian theology is OK but the tinkering of others is not OK was quite a shock to me. I grew up in a smaller world where people kept their religious convictions private, while respecting those of other, equally private, religions. Challenging another's religious beliefs was unheard of in my little world of a very free-thinking family in a largely free-thinking community. Because of this politeness and respect for privacy with which I was raised, I was able to respect most people I met and to assume that most people I met would respect me in return.

Silly me!

With the rise of fundamentalism, the internet and the daily barrage of global communication, I am no longer able to politely ignore beliefs with which I do not agree or which actually offend me. Some fundamentalists will not allow people to ignore them and some actually try to offend, believing that arousing the anger of others (and subsequently imagining themselves to be persecuted) will bring them closer to Christ. And then there is the small, but real, danger that if I ignore fundamentalism, I may one day find myself living in a fundamentalist country! One of the hallmarks of this most recent surge of religiosity is the very public and passionate declaration of a narrow, certain, religious dogma, combined with the assertion that anyone who does not share belief in the absolute correctness of this dogma is 1) a minion of Satan and 2) doomed to an eternity burning in ****. The followers of this theology insist upon challenging the beliefs of others through proselytizing, something which is anathema to me. Some well-organized and powerful groups are working seriously to have these beliefs enshrined (by law!) into our public lives so that everyone will be compelled to worship their god and to abide by their social rules. With this message being pushed so hard in every corner of society, it became impossible to continue to believe anymore that other Christians are tolerant and accepting of different interpretations of the religion. What is more, it became impossible to allow myself to possibly be identified as one of that more extreme group, whose methods and theology are abhorrent to me. The sad truth is that fundamentalism in this country and elsewhere actually confronts us with the ugly underbelly of religion which I had previously managed to convince myself went away with the dark ages. I don't believe in any devils and I don't believe in demons or evil spirits; it is the nature of humanity at this early stage in our moral and intellectual evolution to misapply competitive survival instincts to non-survival situations, and ugly, even "evil" behavior can result.

This is how I see fundamentalism: obsessed with evil, death, and sin, it is a dark product of this primitive core of human nature. If we ignore it, we do so at our peril, and to go along with it and even defend it in order to protect our own dearly-held beliefs would be foolish. Yet, this is the most often-repeated mistake of moderates throughout recent history; self-interest drives us to allow extremists to hide their intentions behind the protection of moderate toleration. Not only do moderates invite wolves into the peaceful pasture with this behavior, but they do not seem to realize (or refuse to accept) that their own dearly-held theology will be suppressed in due course when the wolves they've let into the pasture devour them along with everything else. This is strong imagery, but I am trying to get a point across. Moderates fear that if they criticize fellow "religious" people (fundamentalists) even for extremism, that somehow some imaginary secular power group might take away their own freedom to believe in their own theology. Heated discussions about "holiday trees" and so forth shed light on exactly this fear, and the anger fed by that fear.

There is no secular power waiting in the wings to remove religious rights; this is an overwhelmingly Christian country and even the secularist Founding Fathers pushed for religious freedom for all. What could happen instead, however, is that moderates may protect fundamentalist extremists long enough to allow this movement to infiltrate the offices of government all over the land, and then they (moderates) as well as non-religious people could lose their freedom to think and worship as they please. Make no mistake: fundamentalists believe with all their might that theirs is the only way to salvation and they will try to impose that belief system onto others, believing they are doing it for our own good. Even moderates sometimes fall into this coercive thinking; thinking back to the "public prayer" thread last December, I am reminded of this fact. Many moderates, who happily participate in public prayer themselves, were unsympathetic to the objections of the non-religious to something which they think is a harmless, even "good for everyone" thing. Some people seemed to be completely unable to see that being forced to participate in what seems "good" to religious people is coercion to others and an assault on their freedom. And because they couldn't seem to see the larger threat to their own freedoms inherent in this type of coercion, they sided with the fundamentalists in saying that the non-religious had no right to object and should just bow their heads and sit respectfully in silence. Using little steps like this, fundamentalists can use moderate ambivalence and protection to chip away at public freedom from religion. Freedom of religion will be the next thing to fall.

I've had to reconsider the plan that I could join other moderate Christians in trying to ameliorate the damage that these fundamentalists are causing to the religion (and IMO, to society). I do think we believe essentially the same thing about an overarching positive force for good, but discussions like the above-mentioned thread on public prayer forced me to accept that joining forces is probably not possible. I believed that what I think of as the transcendentally human potential for good, most other moderate Christians call God; just two different ways of interpreting the Christian mythos which reaches toward a greater, universal good - or so I thought. It turns out that No, actually, when faced with a choice, most moderates will link hands with fundamentalists and claim to believe literally in a Biblical being called God, even as they deny literal belief in the Bible/New Testament, itself. I have to admit, this has really puzzled me, because it is apparent to me that most moderates follow some sort of self-created theology like I do. Indeed, I believe that most moderates who consider themselves religious believers in the Biblical god, actually do not believe in that god at all, but in a far more just, universal and all-loving creation of their own imaginations which fits with their own personal theology. Even if they acknowledge that Biblical scripture describes a cruel, capricious and vengeful god figure, they deny that this is the nature of the God that they worship. “My God, “ they declare, “is a loving and forgiving god!”. Just as I ignored the disconnect between my theology and actual Christian theology, so these moderates ignore the same disconnect between their beliefs and actual Biblical and New Testament dogma.

The truth about the Bible and New Testament is that it is not about a loving, forgiving and tolerant God. Anyone who wishes to know the truth about the Bible can gain an education about this unpopular fact through unbiased, independent Bible/New Testament study (not church-led group study). Yes, the Biblical god does punish the innocent, torture the righteous and cause horrible suffering to the good as well as to the wicked. Yes, New Testament theology does say that billions of innocents who do not know about Jesus of Nazareth will spend eternity in **** for something they could not control. Yes, even good people who give up every comfort their whole lives to help the sick, feed the hungry and comfort the poor will go to ****. The Bible does, undeniably, say it's so. Moderate Christians have been giving "God" a gradual makeover for most of the last century, and while they insist that their God is still the Biblical god, the Bible and the New Testament do not support this assertion.

The Biblical and New Testament god is just one part of the mythos of ancient people who were oppressed, struggling to survive, yearning for freedom from pain and suffering, and with no way out of their misery except to visualize a second life where all their pains would be relieved and (significantly) where all their enemies would be punished. They established a theology which would exclude their enemies from the eternal bliss they needed to visualize to get through each day, by inventing a god who favored them above all peoples and, in their writings, setting out exclusionary conditions for entry into this second life of bliss (conditions which, of course, only they would be able to meet); essentially - membership in the "elite" club. This is the theology of a people whose lives were so miserable and stressful that, in order to survive the reality of their actual lives, psychologically, they had to imagine a "do-over" afterlife where all their hopes could be realized, especially the punishment of others.

Christians today continue this competition for exclusive status, (dividing and sub-dividing into antagonistic sects) and many don't take kindly to those whom they regard as excluded laying any claim at all to the ythos and traditions of Christianity or (more properly) the mythos and traditions of all humanity which have been co-opted by Christianity. There is far more complexity contained in the mythos of the Bible: including many positive and inspiring things: but, regarding the literal belief in the Biblical being called God - if full "belief" is claimed - those positive aspects of the God mythos cannot be taken alone and the unpleasant traits of the Biblical god simply discarded. The fundamentalists insist on it, and perhaps they are right about that. However, since fundamentalists also discard the parts of the Bible which do not fit their own theology, they cannot claim a more pure or literal belief in it, either.

Moderate Christians try to ignore these awkward facts about the Biblical god they want to both believe in and make over. We want our religious traditions, but we reject the cruel foundations upon which primitive people in crisis built those traditions. So, we cobble together a gentler, kinder theology of our own, reinventing Christianity and creating a new god mythos. “My God” wouldn’t punish good people for not knowing or accepting Him; “My God” wouldn’t punish innocent people along with the wicked.

“My God” may not do those things, but the Biblical god would. “My God” is a just, transcendental, universal figure, but it is not the narrowly-conceived god of ancient Christianity nor of the Bible. Modern, moderate Christians are evolving their own mythos centered around a new God. How cool is that!

And so, I am atheist; I do not believe literally in any gods, including the Biblical god. I believe in the newly-conceived concept of "God", which is, to me, just another way of describing the wonderful, the transcendental, the amazing potential for moral growth within all of us, not a literal Being. As Jesus himself is believed to have said, "the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:21), and I believe that, symbolically and literally.

I think that evolving a new, more universal and justice-oriented mythos is perfectly normal and a wonderful stride forward for humanity, so I admit I am surprised by the vehemence of some moderates' insistence that they do, in fact, believe in the Biblical god. Clearly, they do not, but just as clearly they are adamant about insisting that they do. I can respect that people choose to structure their beliefs as they see fit, but I have to admit, I do wonder - Why? Why profess belief in a universal, just and loving God, and then limit Him to the confines of an ancient and primitive god of retribution?

I think the religion and spirituality thread opened a tiny window onto the answer to that.

I started the religion and spirituality thread to enable people to talk about their own beliefs and to show others that the diversity of thinking among people, even among those who think they share the same religion, is varied and wonderful. A few , who seem to be aware of the disconnect yet try to work with it themselves while still managing to respect and tolerate others’ diverse beliefs, were kind and respectful and helped to move the discussion forward. Many people simply read the thread tolerantly and with interest in the beliefs of others. A couple of others showed how people who consider themselves tolerant and open-minded can transform into religious bigots. ☹

I think that some moderates experience an uncomfortable ambivalence about their own relationships with God, their churches and a greater philosophy. When I posted openly about my disconnect between personal theology and literal belief in the Biblical god, it seemed to strike a nerve. I think the thread got people thinking about their own awareness of their own disconnect with professed belief and actual Christian dogma. After all, many people sit in church praising a god they do not fully believe in and belong to congregations whose social policies they secretly or even publicly do not follow. When I posted that I participated in religion, joyfully and enthusiastically without any literal belief in a being called God, and while openly recognising the social shortcomings of the church, but remaining optimistic about its potential to change for the better, my post brought out some interesting reactions in a few people!

So, the tiny window that opened there has convinced me that many moderates claim a belief in the Biblical god because they somehow believe that if they do not express that belief, then they might lose the right to participate in the religions which they love and which is so much a part of their cultural heritage. The swiftness of some to reject others' rights to the same participation based upon disbelief in a literal Biblical god seems to bear this hypothesis out. If nothing else, it confirmed my belief that we are very much a still-evolving species, and the reaction of most humans is still to compete with and try to subdue those who frighten or threaten them.

I use the label “agnostic atheist” because it’s the only label I know of which other people will recognize as shorthand for the main things about my philosophy which seem to matter to other people; that I disbelieve in the existence of any literal gods, but I am no absolutist: I believe that many things are possible, and I try to leave room for them. The problem with that label is that many people interpret “atheist” to mean “anti-religion”. While it may be true that some atheists are anti-religion, I am not one of them. I happen to find religion both fascinating and wonderful, in a purely cultural and anthropological sense. To me the evolution of humanity is fantastic to study and the rising of religion - like the discovery of fire, the development of tools, the evolution of language and social orders- is amazing and endlessly interesting to me. Religion is the most interesting of all because it is the tip of the arrow pointing beyond the limitations of our still-primitive brains and imaginations, to the future potential of humanity.

Here’s the question and answer essay:


I was just wondering what it's like to be an Athiest.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I think it's wonderful! I believe that everyone on the planet is actually atheist, as a matter of fact, and that I am not really very different from modern theists. What I mean by that statement is that most modern theists do not believe in any of the ancient gods, such as Zeus, Jupiter, Odin or Freya, so in that sense they are undeniably atheist. I agree with modern theists that the ancient gods and goddesses never literally existed, and I also believe that the Biblical God likewise never really existed. So what it's like for me to be an atheist is very much what it is like for a theist, except that I disbelieve in one more god than they do.

I do however, believe that the mythos surrounding all of these gods does point to a vital aspect of being human; I think it is reasonable to call it spirituality. I very much value the Bible and the Christian New Testament and all ancient/sacred books, including those which pre-date the Bible and those that came after it (such as the Qur'an and the Book of Mormon) as well as books which were excluded from the sacred canon by men (such as the Gnostic gospels), the dead sea scrolls and any other ancient texts which have been or are yet to be discovered. I think they all point to something beyond literal understanding which is transcendentally human, and reaching toward it, whether through religion, philosophy, science or something else, is very important to all of us. Most of these books were written for a variety of purposes, primarily to share history and culture with future generations, but (somewhat unfortunately, but typically human) also to cement various peoples' claims to superiority and entitlement. I believe that contained in these books there is a mixture of high-minded philosophy, rich cultural stories of deep human significance, obvious attempts to explain the natural world and finally, rather base attempts to enshrine political, social and territorial goals into some sort of permanent record, and to justify the actions which people took to achieve these goals.

It is all fantastic and wonderful to me, and it's pretty much been my lifelong avocation to study religion, holy texts, and scholarly books discussing religion and its importance to human beings. It may sound corny, but being an agnostic atheist is one of the greatest joys of my life. I feel extraordinarily privileged to enjoy the intellectual and spiritual freedom of being an interested and enthusiastic student of religion.


From a Christian POV, it's just unimaginable to me.

I can't really help with that. It took me a long time to understand that other people don't see religion as I see it, but I don't think their POV is unimaginable to me. It's just that, to me, modern theists seem to settle for such a small part of the entire amazing picture and I prefer the huge potential of a subject I can hardly contain in my thoughts all at once (well, I cannot, because the subject is too vast and splendid -thanks Cathy, excellent word!); I know many people who speak of their belief in God in this manner, and I totally get what they are saying. For me, there is no conflict with this, because I consider the use of God as the word to try to describe the indescribable to be perfectly valid and historically traditional. I'm all for that. Where our thinking diverges is where I think of God as a mythical concept that points toward universal truth, my theist friends think of God as a literal Being. I respect that most people prefer things that way and I totally understand their feelings. It isn't unimaginable to me that they would feel or think like this, it is just not the way I feel or think.

Do you absolutely believe there is no God/Higher Power?

Absolutely not! I don't pretend to be absolutely� sure about anything for which there is inadequate evidence or even no evidence at all. However, as Bertrand Russell famously said in his book of essays, Why I Am Not A Christian, I cannot say for certain either that there is not a teapot orbiting the planets, invisible to the naked eye...but I do think it is reasonable to believe that a teapot in a space orbit is so unlikely that I can call myself "aorbitalteapot". I feel as certain as that about the Biblical God, whom I consider to be exactly like the gods and goddesses which preceded him...human fabrications used to explain natural events, offer the comfort of imagining a higher power watching over them in times of crisis (sort of a parental figure, which is what most of us long for when we are in trouble or afraid so I think this role assigned to God is perfectly natural and its genesis is not difficult to figure out), but perhaps most of all (and least noble of all), a higher authority upon whom ancient peoples were able to justify their own political and social and cultural ambitions. I do not condemn this aspect of it, though; in those days, life was a constant struggle for survival and as humankind began to evolve more complex brains and critical- and creative-thinking ability, it stands to reason that they would begin to use these new skills to augment their physical survival skills. I think it was wonderfully resourceful of ancient peoples, actually.

As for a higher power that may be suggested or pointed toward through the mythos, that I feel is far more likely, though not at all in the way people usually mean by "higher power". I believe that the higher power in our universe is likely within all of us and within all living things. However, it is power we are probably several millennia from understanding or being able to harness for good, because I don't think we've evolved enough yet to overcome our more primitive urges and needs. Nevertheless, my concept of what the true higher power is gives me tremendous hope for humankind. I do believe that this power is there, that we see it evolving before our eyes in the striving of more and more individuals for justice and peace. While we have not yet come anywhere close to realizing our full human potential, we are evolving steadily toward it. This fills me with joyful faith in humanity. My faith is never shaken by terrible events or human evil because I understand that evolution is a gradual process, and at this point in our evolution, cruel behaviour borne of the still-strong, primitive competition for survival, is normal and to be expected, even though I am appalled by it. It will be a long journey, but we will get there.

Do you not participate in religious holidays at all?

I definitely do! I participate in as many religious (and non-religious!) holidays as I possibly can, and with great enthusiasm! I try to honor the mythos and traditions that come with every holiday. I believe that all of the holidays, both religious and secular (and a few which are both! ) belong to everyone, as they grew out of the long traditions and cultural development of all of our ancestors. I celebrate Christmas (Both Santa and the baby Jesus story, Yuletide and Winter Solstice), New Years, Epiphany (the myth of the Three Kings is one of my favorites from way back!), Chinese New Year, Lent (so refreshing for the spirit!), Easter/Spring, Passover, Pentecost, St John's day, Memorial Day/Canada Day (July 1), Independence Day, Halloween, Thanksgiving...and many others!

Do you believe we all have a spirit/soul?

Not in the accepted Christian sense, no. I do believe however in a different sort of life force/spirit/soul. I believe that there is a unique spark of energy which inhabits our bodies while we are alive. It is pure and bright and joyful and a spark of the life source itself.


If so, does it live on after bodily death? If so, where does it go?

Perhaps it becomes one with the universe when we die. It may also leave our bodies and join the life forces in the living things around us. I love to contemplate this when I think about loved ones who have died. I'm aware that much of what I let myself believe on this subject is what I want to believe, which is what I think most people do when contemplating an "afterlife". I have no idea what really happens of course, but if the stories others believe sooth the pain of losing a loved one (or soothes the fear of where we are going ourselves after we die), I have no quibble with any of them. I believe that is one of the purposes of the mythos of afterlife. And a perfectly sensible one it is, given our human fear of death! I marvel at the resourcefulness and creativity of our ancient ancestors! Truly, religion is one of the most wonderful, early creative inventions of humankind. I see it as the earliest sign of the leap in cognitive evolution, as a matter of fact. Wow.



Were you brought up as Athiests or did you decide on your own later in life?

No, I was not brought up atheist, I was brought up a Catholic in a very open-minded, diversity-loving, widely-travelled, book-stuffed household. I attended Jesuit Catholic school right up to university, and even spent a year in a convent boarding-school pre-Novitiate (1000 miles from home) after high school where I eventually made my decision not to join the religious life (which had been my plan for most of childhood and teen years). I loved my schools and church and was always fascinated by religion, mythos and ritual, with the community of the church and with human behaviour.

I actually never believed that the Biblical mythos was literally true nor that the Biblical god was a literal Being (at least not in my conscious memory) so in that sense I appear to have been born atheist. I thought, rather, that everything we discussed and did in church was deeply meaningful ritual and poetry and art which was symbolically pointing us toward a far greater good (which I understood to be the fulfillment of human potential for good- ie as stewards of the earth, as peaceful co-inhabitants of the earth with other people, animals and other living things, as intelligent beings seeking greater understanding of the universe and our place in it). To me, the religion and the Bible and the beautiful Church rituals and glorious music and liturgies were reaching toward so much more than the literal interpretation of them. The truly funny thing is this: I thought that was what everyone else thought, too! I thought I was completely normal in my church and that what I understood to be pointing to the greater meaning of it all, was in fact, what everyone else thought and believed! I grew up believing that everyone else considered the Bible readings and lessons to be simply our best acknowledgement (through centuries of wonderful effort and tradition) of our role as human beings and our duty to continue to strive toward fulfilling our role to the best of our ability. I received all of my sacraments blissfully, joyfully convinced that I was completely in line with the Catholic Church's teachings. LOL

It honestly never really occurred to me until I was away from home and in the pre-novitiate, that other people (other than rare cults, I mean) actually did not have the same view of religion as I did. Of course that realization was the main reason why I did not enter into religious life. I was not conflicted about it or upset; life is full of surprises and adventure and my realization only excited me even more about religion, while saving me from a mistaken turn in my personal pathway.

I love my Church, which I grew up loving and supporting always believing that my beliefs were perfectly in line with everyone else s. To this day, I feel completely at home in the Church because I perceive no conflict between my beliefs and church teaching (spiritually). I just hear a more universal message during the scriptural readings, that is all!


Can you share more about your non-beliefs?


What are non-beliefs? LOL That is a question I am not sure how to answer. How about if I share a few more things I do believe?

I can tell you that I believe very strongly in the power of humankind to grow and learn and to become better people, especially as we develop the cognitive skills to understand our environment better and can learn to manage our resources so that survival is not the main concern of the majority anymore. I believe that once survival for a reasonable lifespan is reliably ensured for most people on the planet, cognitive and spiritual development will increase at a faster pace, allowing humankind to gradually approach its eventual potential. I am not talking about overnight, obviously.

As long as human survival is still precarious for a majority of human beings, the primitive pre-occupation with individual survival - with competing for food, territory and mates, and with controlling other people to ensure reproductive success - and the survival and dominance of the tribe or nationality will continue to be a dominant trait in our species. These are all concerns which are instinctive to all living things and which, to me, are very convincing proof of our evolutionary nature; we share this preoccupation with survival and reproduction, and the fierce competition which has its roots in these, with every living organism on the planet, from the smallest one-celled organism, to the largest animals on earth.

The interesting and amazing thing is how human beings began to develop more complex concerns as tiny pockets of them settled into relative prosperity and began to enjoy freedom from extreme want. Enter: confessional (aka moral) religion. People were still strongly influenced by the still very real concerns about survival, but the small comforts and privations of small pockets of settled humanity allowed people to begin to think about issues other than killing or being killed, starving others or starving themselves, winning land/food/mates or losing them and losing the battle for survival. With the stress of these constant concerns easing slightly, they were able to think about how to make societies better, how to treat their fellow humans better and so forth. That is a huge leap in a very short space of time and with only slightly eased circumstances. Imagine how far we could go if the majority of humankind could enjoy freedom from extreme want for several generations! I have great faith that humankind will reach that happy point, maybe not in my lifetime or my childrens or even grandchildrens, but it is coming.

This is a huge subject and it would take days to type even a brief overview, but the above is a small sampling of what I believe about the development of humanity and religion. There is so much more, so many avenues to explore, but so little time to type!


Hope that answers your questions and that anyone who tried to read it managed to stay awake!


--------------------