My religious views have since fallen into a system of doubt and disbelief, shunning the traditional conceptualization of a god. If anyone were to ask me today what my religious beliefs are, I should say to the mass populous I am an atheist, as I do not believe in any humanly conceived notion of a god, but to the educated and reasoning people of the world, I should say I am an agnostic. I will not rule out, in the end, the existence of a god. As of right now, no "proof" offered to me for the existence of a god figure has been a sufficient amount of empirical evidence to say conclusively "God exists." Adding to that, however, from a purely philosophical argument, I should also say that I see insufficient evidence to claim "God does not exist."
If one is to claim that the God of Christianity exists, with what evidence can one cast down the gods of the other religions of the world? If one has evidence to refute Allah, Shiva, or any other god, why should that evidence not be turned on the god of the questioners religion? When people speak of the classical gods, they now laugh at the pantheon of incestual, bickering gods of Homer. Zeus cannot possibly exist in the mind of the common Christian today. Christians are atheists in respect to the Homeric, classical gods. But if Zeus cannot possibly exist, and is therefore an invalid theory, why is the Christian concept of God any more valid? Following this mode of thought is how I come to say that I am an atheist in relation to the god of Christianity.
How do you envision the god that may or may not exist? Contrast it with the traditional conceptualization, if you like.
ReplyDelete