I was born an atheist to parents who allowed me to explore my world and make my own decisions. I’ve never strayed from my “beliefs”. I similarly allowed my kids to attend religious gatherings with their friends and they’ve made their own beliefs.
Rebel against what?
Can you give me an example that doesn’t apply to a single individual’s beliefs? Maybe something equivalent to Flat Earthers? I just don’t see how disbelief in a supreme supernatural being doesn’t apply to other supernatural beings. I don’t see the logic behind it. My “rebellion” guess was the only path I saw.
It might not even be the blackness.
Isaac Asimov used to tell a story about a conversation he had with Astounding editor John W. Campbell.
Campbell asked him what he saw when he closed his eyes.
“Nothing,” Asimov answered.
“Really?” replied Campbell. “Don’t you see blackness and occasional flashes of light?”
Asimov shrugged “That’s nothing.”
“So what do you see with your ear?” asked Campbell.
Maybe when we die we don’t even get the blackness. Just an eternity of Ear-Vision.
Why are you ruling out a single individual’s belief?
That’s pretty much how animism works.
While some animist cultures add what we would consider to be “gods” to their belief structure, like Coyote in North American native religions, such gods are not essential to the fundamental belief system.
Similarly, Buddhism doesn’t rely on the presence of a god, but does support a belief in reincarnation, which would require some kind of spirit that is capable of surviving physical death.
Now, this is not my “belief”, but I do enjoy mulling this theory.
If you’re old enough to remember cassette tapes, you’ll remember that sometimes you can get “print through”, where the magnetic particles on one stretch of tape can magnetize another spot on the next layer, so you can end up with a pre- or post-echo of the recording.
My theory, such as it is, is that ghosts are just “post-echos” imprinted in the “fabric of space time”. That’s why a lot of classic ghosts always do the same thing, like walk down the hall and turn into a closed room. You’re just seeing an imprint of one thing that happened one day. The “ghost” isn’t dead. And the walker definitely doesn’t know they are going to be a ghost one day, doom’d for a certain term to walk the night. They were just living their life.
So in this theory, ghosts aren’t the afterlife, they’re just a unknown natural phenomenon.
Modern ghosts that can interact with a small set of people that can see them (like Ghost Whisperer or the current show Ghosts), should they actually exist, might not be the Christian afterlife, either. They might just be the next stage of “life”. And the scary thing: it might be terrible! You are still conscious, able to interact with other so-called ghosts and the rare ghost whisperer, but you can’t do anything. No phone, no lights, no motor car, not a single luxury. You can’t travel, you can’t watch TV, there’s no need to eat or eliminate. You just exist, and you can only interact with the ghosts in your own area. And it’s inescapable! And imagine it is even worse for people that died in submarines in wartime. Now that’s a horror movie!
Why?
I don’t understand why an afterlife would require a God.
(I don’t believe in either of them; but I can easily imagine either one existing without the other.)
Why would you guess that?
People rebel against things that they believe do exist. How could somebody even rebel against something that doesn’t exist?
Why would God be the main basis of an afterlife? Life exists without the existence of God. Why would an afterlife require one?
Some atheists had a religious upbringing. Lots of atheists didn’t.
I can easily believe in the existence of human beings without believing that one of them, or one of anything, must be supreme and in control of all the others, let alone of all of existence. Why couldn’t I believe in the existence of ghosts, or of spirits inherent in particular places, or whatever, without believing that something must be supreme and in control of them?
– For one thing: “supernatural” isn’t all one inseparable lump, which everybody must either believe or disbelieve as an entirety. It’s a very broad term including a whole lot of different ideas, and also a whole lot of different ideas as to how, if at all, the various things thought by our society to come under the word are related to each other.
For another: there are people who believe in various things thought to be supernatural, but who don’t think that they are supernatural; they just think that science hasn’t figured out how to perceive them properly yet, but will eventually be able to do so.
There is more evidence for ghosts than God (or gods). I’ve seen photographs of ghosts (not very good ones, I’ll grant). I have never seen a photograph of God (i’ve seen photographs of images of gods on slices of toast).
I’ve also heard recordings of ghosts making noises. and seen other evidence such as footprints or objects being moved by ghostly forces.
Like gods, ghosts have many, many historical and/or cultural stories/legends about them.
I’m not saying the evidence is particular compelling to me (or should be to you) - but there is arguably more evidence for the current existence of ghosts than gods.
It just isn’t very good.
Why can’t the afterlife just be a normal, natural extension of this life, without involving a deity at all? Same thing with ghosts or heaven. They don’t necessarily involve theism.
Coming back to this: I didn’t “choose” not to believe in God, any more than I choose to believe in the existence of the chair that I’m sitting in, or in the fact that I can’t be here and in California at the same time; or than I chose to believe that my mother died.
I firmly believe James Earl Ray did not act alone.
Because consciousness requires a brain in meatspace. Invisible people lack the meatware to support consciousness.
And so I don’t believe in ghosts. But that has nothing to do with God.
To expound upon this somewhat, since the subject of atheism and god has come up:
I believe that the development of human intelligence is a mere output of evolution, the same way that other species developed claws or exceptional senses.
What I mean is that our brains adapted language, which gave proto-humans a hunting (and, by extension, mating) advantage. Those language skills led to writing, which allowed for the recording and transmission of knowledge, which leads to civilization, the Internet, and profound statements like these comments.
But it’s no more significant than, for example, a cat’s jumping ability, sharp claws, and excellent eyesight in low light - the brain that led people to be able to talk, so they could function as teams when they sought prey, is just a biological enhancement by our species that propagated due its positive correlation with being able to eat and make babies that survived.
All the other stuff - “God’s chosen species”, the “meaning of life”, and whatnot - is just the simple brain deluding itself into imagining its own importance. I recall George Carlin mocking the sanctity of life - we think human life is special because we’re alive! It’s not. We’re just another link in the food chain (and not even the first one; Covid seems to have proven that, hasn’t it?)
Well ‘God’ knows current events have certainly cast doubt on my belief that anyone but myself is actually sentient.
All Canadians are given an “Internet Debate Handbook” upon graduation from high school which is why all Canadians on the internet seem to debate the exact same way with the exact sane points.
I’ve no joke seen almost a dozen different Canadians make the argument “The United States is like a melting pot which everyone assimilates, but Canada is more like a mixed salad, which every ingredient is together but still remains unique.”
Why are you answering a question with another question?
I get the feeling that there is a basic misapprehension under which you are laboring - most religious people in the world aren’t Christian, and a little under half are religious but not of the Judeo/Christian tradition.
You talk as if the options are (a) Christian; or (b) non-religious. There are dozens and dozens of religions with all kinds of weird and wonderful beliefs. It is not a situation where the only options are to believe in the Judeo-Christian style deity and its accompanying religions traditions, or believe in nothing.
Also…i could be wrong…bear with me…I don’t think EITHER Christianity or Judaism says ‘you die and are ascended to heaven immeditaly if you are a good man/believe in the divinity of Jesus’
Christianity says you sit in the cold, dark ground until Judgement Day…doesn’t it? I mean… to expound on that…right now that means Heaven consists of Jesus, two guys who God took without dying, and one of the thieves who died with Jesus. There’s only four guys up there! We can take em!
I guess I don’t know Jewish after-life theories. A quick scan didn’t ring any bells. Maybe someone can help me out.
Well, I have as much reason to believe in Hindu gods as I do the Christian or Muslim god: none at all. Those religions combined cover well over half the planet. Is it your assertion that atheists believe in non-Christian gods?
Are you sure you’re not equating paganism with atheism? I’m sure there are gods you would prefer to exist over the Christian god, but do you actually think they do?