Here is what I've been thinking:

We only know what we have observed. For example, we wouldn't know 2+2=4 unless at one point someone took two seperate piles of apples, 2 in each pile, and shoved them together to see there was now a pile of 4 apples.

This is what originally turned me off to religion. It is unobserved and can easily be created by a good mind. Also, the fact that religion comforts so many people made it feel somewhat empty to me. Most people will believe anything that comforts them. And since the creation of the ego (the individual) we have thought ourselves seperate from the whole, and with that thought we created the soul, as becoming one with the whole (as observed in death, aka the end of our individuality outside the minds of others) makes us very uncomfortable as self proclaimed 'individuals'.

Here's my problem though. Everything I've observed also shows me that in order for something to exist, energy must be spent in its creation. Be it a house, or a novel. Thought, and physical energy are always used. This applies to everything I have ever seen.

But, in order for there to have been a beginning (as everything I've seen has had) energy must have been used for it's creation. But, if nothing was before it, what cerated the initial energy? And if its "god", then what initial energy created god?

It seems to me that either the universe is infinite and has always been (which in itself is very god like, to have no beginning or end) or something that has always been has created it. I think the second is less likely, but that could be because I have not observed something outside of the universe. I also have never observed something with no beginning or end. One or the other exists though, whether I have observed it or not. And I think it just as likely that the universe was the initial infinity (does this make the universe god, having no beginning or end?) rather than god, because I have seen the universe, and I have not seen god.

To be an atheist is to claim to know the unobserved just as much as believing in a being outside of the laws of the universe. The atheist is just a touch more logical, but barely. They both put an answer on the unanswerable. So I'm trying to figure out why I keep bothering giving myself titles like 'atheist' or 'agnostic' or 'christian' and don't just call myself 'existant and accept it'.

Even if something did not make us, we exist. We know this because we can observe our own existance, just as we can observe yeast rising. Something existing without creation in itself is miraculous and defies all the observations we can make here. That means (to me) that there is just as likely to be an entity outside of this universe, and an entity outside of the entity outside of this universe. If infinity is the one truth (numbers can go infinitely lower or higher.) that seems like the higher power microscope we use the more new things we will see for infinity, and if we could look outside (we can't anymore then a person in a room can see the whole house) it too would continue for infinity.

I see the benefits of atheism as this: they accept only the now and what they see. This is in my opinion the wisest thing we can do since we may never know what is beyond this, but atheists seem to think they know what is beyond this and I'm beginning to fail to see how thats any different then a religious person thinking they know whats going on.

I accept death for what it is, the destruction of my conciousness, but even in death, our atoms stay alive and may serve new purposes. This is not immortality of the self, since the self will die, but the parts that made up the self will not, which points to a circular existance.

If there's no beginning there can never be an end. ((thanks alice in wonderland)) So if there's no end, there's no end to the possibilities.

Someone show me how my thought pattern is unsound, I'm making myself uncomfortable.

"You, are becoming Gods. There's a new master of creation, and it's you! You've unravelled DNA and at the same time you're cultivating bacteria strong enough to kill every living thing. D'you think you are ready for that much power? You lot? Cheeky bastards. You're running around science like kids with guns, creating a new world, while the one you've got is stinking. Go on, hands up, hands up anyone who thinks you've got it right. Yeah, there's always one. I can see you. If you want the position of god then take the responsibility."
ADaisyChain Reviewed by ADaisyChain on . My qualms with atheism. Here is what I've been thinking: We only know what we have observed. For example, we wouldn't know 2+2=4 unless at one point someone took two seperate piles of apples, 2 in each pile, and shoved them together to see there was now a pile of 4 apples. This is what originally turned me off to religion. It is unobserved and can easily be created by a good mind. Also, the fact that religion comforts so many people made it feel somewhat empty to me. Most people will believe anything that Rating: 5