"...it would seem there's nothing more important to know than whether or not there's a god..." Not necessarily. What if there is a god (a thinking being that made the universe) but this god not only didn't _intend_ humans, but is _utterly unaware_ that we exist? That would make _no_ difference to your life. I think what you _mean_ is that it's important if a _certain type_ of god exists (one that interferes in human affairs in some fashion). "...this has huge implcations for morality..." I'm not convinced it does. It has huge implications for _obedience to authority,_ potentially, but nothing more. "...with our belief in the existence of a soul, with life after death..." Why? What, exactly, prevents humans from _having_ souls, and even some sort of afterlife, but there not being a god of any sort in charge of that? "...possibility of miracles..." But not whether you should believe they happen. "...the possibility that a claim to revelation is true..." But, again, not whether you should believe any such claim or not.
Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgement as to the existence of gods until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. My position is that *_I have no good reason to acknowledge the existence of any god._* And here is the evidence I must consider when evaluating the claim by theists, and as to why I currently hold to such a position. 1. I personally have never observed a god. 2. I have never encountered a person whom has claimed to have observed a god. 3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity. 4. I have never been presented a valid logical argument which also employed sound premises that lead deductively to a conclusion that a god(s) exists. 5. Of the nearly 50 logical syllogisms I have encountered arguing for the existence of a god(s), I have found all to contain multiple fallacies or unsubstantiated premises. 6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation as to the causation of that phenomenon. 7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered the _vice versa._ 8. I have never experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event. 9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity. 10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have encountered have either been refuted to my satisfaction, or do not present as falsifiable. ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the existence of a god. I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding any acknowledgement until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstatiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._* I welcome any cordial response. Peace.
"...it would seem there's nothing more important to know than whether or not there's a god..."
Not necessarily. What if there is a god (a thinking being that made the universe) but this god not only didn't _intend_ humans, but is _utterly unaware_ that we exist? That would make _no_ difference to your life.
I think what you _mean_ is that it's important if a _certain type_ of god exists (one that interferes in human affairs in some fashion).
"...this has huge implcations for morality..."
I'm not convinced it does. It has huge implications for _obedience to authority,_ potentially, but nothing more.
"...with our belief in the existence of a soul, with life after death..."
Why? What, exactly, prevents humans from _having_ souls, and even some sort of afterlife, but there not being a god of any sort in charge of that?
"...possibility of miracles..."
But not whether you should believe they happen.
"...the possibility that a claim to revelation is true..."
But, again, not whether you should believe any such claim or not.
Hello. I am an atheist. I define atheism as suspending any acknowledgement as to the existence of gods until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. My position is that *_I have no good reason to acknowledge the existence of any god._*
And here is the evidence I must consider when evaluating the claim by theists, and as to why I currently hold to such a position.
1. I personally have never observed a god.
2. I have never encountered a person whom has claimed to have observed a god.
3. I know of no accounts of persons claiming to have observed a god that were willing or able to demonstrate or verify their observation for authenticity, accuracy, or validity.
4. I have never been presented a valid logical argument which also employed sound premises that lead deductively to a conclusion that a god(s) exists.
5. Of the nearly 50 logical syllogisms I have encountered arguing for the existence of a god(s), I have found all to contain multiple fallacies or unsubstantiated premises.
6. I have never observed a phenomenon in which the existence of a god was a necessary antecedent for the known or probable explanation as to the causation of that phenomenon.
7. Several proposed (and generally accepted) explanations for observable phenomena that were previously based on the agency of a god(s), have subsequently been replaced with rational, natural explanations, each substantiated with evidence that excluded the agency of a god(s). I have never encountered the _vice versa._
8. I have never experienced the presence of a god through intercession of angels, divine revelation, the miraculous act of divinity, or any occurrence of a supernatural event.
9. Every phenomenon that I have ever observed appears to have *_emerged_* from necessary and sufficient antecedents over time without exception. In other words, I have never observed a phenomenon (entity, process, object, event, process, substance, system, or being) that was created _ex nihilo_ - that is instantaneously came into existence by the solitary volition of a deity.
10. All claims of a supernatural or divine nature that I have encountered have either been refuted to my satisfaction, or do not present as falsifiable.
ALL of these facts lead me to the only rational conclusion that concurs with the realities I have been presented - and that is the fact that there is *_no good reason_* for me to acknowledge the existence of a god.
I have heard often that atheism is the denial of the Abrahamic god. But denial is the active rejection of a substantiated fact once credible evidence has been presented. Atheism is simply withholding any acknowledgement until sufficient credible evidence is introduced. *_It is natural, rational, and prudent to be skeptical of unsubstatiated claims, especially extraordinary ones._*
I welcome any cordial response. Peace.