I became an atheist very slowly on my own with no role models, just because I kept encountering things about religion that didn't make sense. But years later I learned about a website that exhaustively delves into this question and demonstrates in many different ways why it stands to reason that there is no god (at least not in the way that he is characterized in mainstream Christianity). Go check it out: [whywontgodhealamputees.com]

I think this question ties back to the human construct of "god". "God" is a word that is used to control and give power to a supernatural entity. People interpret different emotional states, senses, even physical forces as "god". Its a voyeuristic construct than looms over conscious beings to create an insecurity that leads to behavioral intervention. It absolves people of their responsibility in their decisions and offers "forgiveness" when they harm other human beings. I was raised in a strict religious group, often referred to as a cult by southern baptists and other christians born many times over, in the state of Utah. I was immersed in religious ideals and pressed to the point of fear when bathing or changing clothing as a child... I held shame for being human as child, as I believe most children do in religious households. There are definitely forces that we as humans cannot explain, there are worlds beyond our understanding and we are a miniature dot on the scope of infinity... whether it be inter-species or inter-personal, an energy is there that we cannot explain... but I believe it is natural and scientific.. it makes no sense why it would be governed by some "godlike" entity. Throughout our human history and currently throughout the earth, the "god" we interpret to answer these questions is very different and is based on our geographical histories. Basic energy theory - high energy theory, string theory, quantum theory and gravity models, and the etcentera all help to define many of the phenomena that we as humans experince as far as physical phenomena... I firmly believe that in our lifetime we will better understand the human "soul" from a physical/energy perspective and there are forces that impress upon us for emotional result, as well as continue from our "soul" prior to and after life... "god" is the theory to help define these phenomena. I "think" it is something else - I also "believe" it is something else, therefore agreeing that I am an atheist - without god. It should not be assumed that an atheist lacks belief - many people try and remove this word from the atheists vocabulary. Atheists are human and no human actually knows anything beyond their experience... and everyone sees the world through a very different perspective and set of eyes. We are fortunate beings to be conscious and critical and to be able to understand the concept of belief... I can say I am a firm believer that there is no "god" as I think it is a product of human imagination and desire for control.

The Judeo Christian god, No. More like the Native American and Pagan beliefs yes. Like a spirit or Karma.

Logic is a great tool for working your way out of religious upbringing. The concept of God, or of any god or supernatural being is constructed by people, as were the concepts of unicorns, fairies, etc. Without being raised by adults who insisted there is such a being as God, I would never have naturally developed the idea of such a being. Science has answers sufficient for my needs on everything I would wish to know about in the universe, and I am perfectly ok with the answer 'we don't know yet' where science is not yet able to provide answers. In the past, where science failed to provide an answer, that's where philosophers would invoke God to fill in the rest of the answers, almost as a place-holder.
Partly it was more politically correct to put God in somewhere in any grand-scale philosophy, and partly those philosophers were raised in a world where they were made to feel uneasy if they explained the universe without fitting God in somewhere. Meanwhile, religion developed out of the power-lust of various men who could dominate and control whole nations through religion. I am sure some of those men also believed, or came to believe what they taught, but that doesn't mean that the church institutions developed out of the honest pursuit of truth and knowledge. In fact, most churches sought, and still seek, to control and limit the public's access to knowledge that might undermine the power of the church.
All this adds up to a very shaky foundation for the existence of God, a concept which seems riddled with power-politics and centuries of oral traditions without reference to objective facts. Starting from scratch, with just what I know and experience, I see no reason to invoke or reinvent a God to make sense of the universe. Gods are great as scapegoats, to take the blame when things are unpleasant, and to 'promise' nice after-death outcomes when things go REALLY wrong, but in the real world, real efforts and real knowledge are a lot more useful than inventing and invoking supernatural entities to solve real problems and make a better future world for ourselves.

Depends on what god. There's a small chance the Deist "Clockwork" God might exist, but as for the Christian god, or any other religion's deity, the chance is 0. Because they have defined themselves in one way or another, they can all be reliably dismantled by observing the many contradictory abilities and natures said deities possess.

Seriously ?
This is not the place for you.
The human species has been coerced by greed.
When war & death are deemed necessary because of alleged violations of civil rights or oil or pharmaceutical interests or mineral resources and no religious interests put a stop to it... they're part of the problem.
It's a clear connection between business, religion and war.
Your just part of the problem if you want to present religious beliefs as anything but despicable.

I'm sure there have been plenty that have said the same thing in the preceding 410 comments...but here goes.

Because there is no good evidence of the existence of a god, I am an atheist. I do not believe a god exists.
Because I don't claim to "know" if there is any diety or not, I'm agnostic. Therefore, I'm an agnostic atheist.
I never claimed that "no diety exists" because that would require evidence showing such, which is impossible.
I'm currently convinced that there are no supernatural gods, etc. but I'm certainly not going to claim that I KNOW that there are none.

Personally I feel that the majority of the population is actually agnostic atheist, even though very few will admit to it. I feel that if someone actually believed in whatever god they claim to, there would be NO question about following the rules of that religion.
If I actually was a christian, not an agnostic atheist claiming to be a christian, there is NO WAY I would be doing anything to jeopardize my immortal soul for the blink of an eye that this life on earth would then be.
I would also be scared to death of messing up. I'd go out of my way to make sure to do everything right and by the rules.
But that's not how religious people are for the most part. In fact, I don't know if I've ever met anyone , no matter how religious they claim to be, that hasn't done plenty in their life to warrant eternal hellfire and damnation. So to those people I say that they don't actually believe, but aren't sure, so they're agnostic atheist.

On the other hand, (I'll probably piss some people off here) I think that anyone that claims that they KNOW there are no supernatural entities of any kind, well I think they're idiots. That's just something you can't know. It defies all logic to claim that you KNOW something that by definition can make itself unknowable.

Then there's the gnostic theists, those that claim that they KNOW god exists. They are either 1. liars, or 2. delusional, in my opinion of course. If you claim that you KNOW there is a god, and don't even entertain the possibility that you could be mistaken, well....

So basically, I feel that anyone that is honest and of sound mind is in fact agnostic, although they are surely leaning towards the theistic or atheistic side in varying degrees.

I am an atheist because when I make a decision I consult the facts. The fact is the theists can't support their claims, making gods a non-issue.

It isn't a 50/50 chance things exists just because SOMEONE claims it does.
If a man tells me the flying spaghetti monster is real, based on no evidence at all, I have no reason to believe what he says is true. It makes no sense to me to be "agnostic" about the possibility that there is a flying spaghetti monster. No more than being "agnostic" about healing chrystals, alchemy, flat earth or the theory that reading makes the womb shrink on women.

Its all so silly until the believers use their conviction to enact real world change and effects. You can mock the religious as much as you want until they have a bomb or a gun. Or they elect one of their own to a position of power. Then the veracity of their God has no meaning in the face of their real power to enact the change they want. So the question of God or not is pointless, the real question is what is the real world effect of their conviction given form through action.

From the perspective of the believer that realizes that theism doesn't make sense, agnosticism makes sense. If I've been told that there is a god, it makes sense that I should disprove it.

But if I take a more rational stance that starts from nothing and someone makes a claim that there is a god, that is a claim that needs evidence. A book cannot prove that something exists just because it says so. If that were true there are fairies, unicorns, Harry Potter and Middle Earth is a place. Empirical evidence is needed.

An atheist does not have to deny that no gods could ever exist. They can simply say that they are certain that no god exists because there is no proof. Zero. Nada. Zip. And they are confident there never will be any proof.

There is no evidence either way, so therefore ideas of gods are simply made up. They keep making up more all the time and I've seen great changes in my lifetime. They have reason to fear because the Internet is going to lead to the death of god. Apologists know this and they are making up false sites. OK, there is still no evidence.

I keep finding this post popping up- You aren't making any sense to me at all.

Non belief is non belief so; not interesting - not a subject for comment - not anything - The clue is in the 'non'

I don't think what you think - for me 'no god' is 'no god' end of don't care if you call me atheist agnostic too late for my dinner I don't have a god - end of.

I believe that no deity exists for the exact same reason that you believe that Santa Claus does not exist.

So... what makes you believe that Santa Claus does not exist?

Name one incident in the known history of the world that a god or "god" intervened in the affairs of humankind and cite your proof!!!

I would say you're asking the wrong question. I don't have a belief that there is no god. I have no belief that there is a god. It's not a belief, but the absence of belief. The difference might be too subtle for some, but it's there.

Just because there is no proof of a god does not mean that their is no proof that we were created! The fact that we exist is actually proof that humanity had a beginning. We may have been created by aliens or another form of species that mated with monkeys. I think that evolution has actually been dis-proven quite well. I also believe the fictional story of creation through Adam believed by many religions has been completely dis-proven. Everything has a beginning, as does the human race! So, what is a higher power? A more advanced civilization from far away? Maybe a spirit like LOVE that regenerates itself through humanity? Atheism does not believe in a god, but everyones definition of god is different. If god is nothing more then the one who controls your life or makes your decisions for you then we become our own gods when we follow ourselves. If god is anything that you worship then their are many gods and we change them in everything and every action we do. I myself prefer to be called an atheist because I reject the idea of anyone making decisions for me except myself, therefore I am guilty of calling myself god because I make my own decisions and admit when I am wrong instead of blaming Satan for tempting me into sins.

There is no need for proof of lack of anything existing. Just proof that it does exist. So far there has been no proof.
I follow that idea in everything. I don't have to make up an answer when there isn't one. I am usually quite alright with accepting that there isn't an answer to a question.
Theists seem to need to make up an answer, otherwise they can't relieve their fear of living without an answer.

I'm an atheist because I reject the claim that a god or gods exist. I reject the idea based upon the absence of evidence to support the claim.

I think for 99% God does not exists. If God of the Bible does exists then then he is not loving but a controller of what I shoud act,speak and think hi s way or it is hell for me. I sensing no love from being controlled.

I do think there is uncontrollable force beyond our understanding.

Spinal cord injury-paralysis

It has been said that if, right this very moment, ALL human knowledge ceased to exist, the Bible (or Koran or any religious text) would not be re-created with the same information. However, eventually, everything we now know about science would eventually be re-created.

I used to think I was an agnostic. My only scenario for existence of a god was that there was a chance the laws of physics had been arbitrarily defined and we would have no way of finding out either way. I had a long conversation with the smartest, most centered philosopher I know about this, and hours later we agreed that if that was my definition, then I must be an atheist. In essence because otherwise the only definition of Atheism would be paradoxical: a firm arbitrary belief in the nonexistence of credible arbitrary beliefs.

I do not quibble between words like agnostic and atheist. We all know there is no evidence of gods. If you quibble between word meaning too much you might end up placing the burden of proof upon yourself. The best example of this is when you declare that there absolutely are no gods. I don't believe in any, but the believer will offer his Buybull and other nonsense as his proof. He might even have you looking at trees and birds. Maybe a sunset.

I do not believe no deity exists.

I accept there is no proof of a deity.

It's a small, but important distinction.

The author of this post states that "atheism is based more on belief." This is a common misconception about what the terms "agnostic" and "atheism" means. Agnosticism comes from the Greek root "gnosis" meaning knowledge and "a" meaning a lack there of. Therefore agnosticism is a lack of knowledge or lack of information to determine the existence of a god where as atheism is a lack of belief in a god. One can be an "agnostic atheist" (or someone who cannot confirm the existence of god due to lack of knowledge or information and also lacks a belief in god, or an "agnostic theist" (or someone who cannot confirm the existence of god due to lack of knowledge or information and also believes in god.) So agnosticism is not the "middle ground" that so many people identify it as.