Asklemmy

Gods, plural. But believe is a weird word.

I commune with the ancient gods of my ancestors, whether I believe in them is complicated though. I spent most of my life atheist after the christian church failed to grab me. I learned of my ancestral religion from my great grandmother and my great aunt. Grandma was Catholic on paper but still recognized the old gods. My aunt called herself a druid.

I choose to commune with the old gods because I have to believe in something. I've felt the call of spirit, the gaping void in my heart where spirituality was meant to be, but I do not trust organized religion. I don't trust the churches. I don't trust those who would hold power, enforced by faith, over those who do not know better.

There are definitions of "God" that I feel are hard to prove, but others that are easy. For example, of your definition is "God is the ultimate cause of the universe" then it's pretty trivial that if everything has a cause there must be an end of the chain. Of course, this the could be a computer program running the universe simulation or even just the laws of physics themselves if those are truly causeless. But nonetheless, it's still a somewhat satisfying definition of "God" so I'm comfortable saying I believe in God. Harder definitions include "God is an omnipotent being" (which most of God's traditional attributes can be derived from) and "God is the being described in the Bible/Qu'ran/other religious text" which I feel like are unprovable.

A lot of religious apologists will make arguments in favor of the easier definition and then try to claim that this means their specific view of God is real. Personally I think that's insane. Like "there must be some end of the chain of causality therefore God became a Jewish carpenter in the ancient Roman Empire." Even if you're Christian that should be a bad logical jump.

TLDR; I'm vehemently agnostic.

I believe that if there is a "God" entity, that it is incomprehensible and not worth attempting to understand.

I also don't believe in an anthropocentric "God", in that "God" doesn't inherently value nor not value humans as somehow special nor damned. I also don't believe "God" cares nor doesn't care about humans or existence.

I also don't believe in inherent meaning, nor that there is some form of divine justice. Those are human lenses through which we interpret the world, and are unlikely to apply (at least in the same way as a human) to the supposed viewpoint of an eternal omniscient omnipotent entity that created the universe and will supposedly one day close the door on time and its own existence.

In short, I'm one bleak motherfucker and it doesn't matter if "God" exists or not. Either way, I don't get to survive death. What is eternal about me is inherently not a part of me. It is mortality, true mortality, mortality of the consciousness and the ego and the individual that defines the individual. When that dies, "God” or not, either way there is no individual to somehow surpass death.

Earthseed

No reason. I just do.

I feel like religion is so corrupted by governments, cults, and sleazeballs. Not all of them mind you, that it’s just so difficult for a lot of people to put their faith in any religion. That’s why theirs so many atheists.

We seek tangible proofs, of intangible things, in a tangible world, using intangible consciousness, thoughts, mind and reason, called the "Self" or "I Am", in order to determine if an intangible being could possibly exist. You are your own proof of such things, amongst 8 billion other proofs. We are the intangible being we may or may not believe in. All of us are.

Because it sometimes makes me feel better about there potentially being some purpose to us if we were created intentionally, provides a placeholder explanation for what's out there besides the universe, makes life more fun, and does not harm anyone (I'm not religious).