User Name:

Password:

FAQ Donate Join

Atheist Experience
Evidence of God's existance + a ? + random rant about religion.

Foremost: I am proving god exists. I am not proving that god is real. I use real/exists in a mathematical/scientifically sense.

To start off, a question a would would like to ask the hosts of the show and to all of you out there, both theists, atheists, everyone.

Do you believe/disbelieve in a god or the concept of a god?

I've got an imaginary friend who I call god. (I'm not crazy or a minority here.)

For argumentative sakes, this statement is true even though I have no evidence and you cannot disprove it. You'll just have to take my word for it. Many gods are omnipotent which means they are everything including figments of people's imaginations . Any Theist who wishes to dispute this is basically saying that part of their holy book is wrong. (Makes the rest of my argument so much easier.) Please be aware this does not follow the illogical fallacy of, "you cannot disprove it so it must be true."

Even though my imaginary friend isn't real he still exists. Take the SQRT(-1) for example. Even though it isn't a real number, it certainly exists even if it only exists in theory.

Therefore god exists even though he might not be real. If god exists only in concept, he still exists.

Now ask yourself, "Do you not believe that a god exists or do you not believe the concepts that people create of god are real? "

Now onward to my main point: Religion is the conceptions people have of god. Many of which are downright stupid, wrong, illogical, whatever.

Even if there is no evidence to support a god is real/exists, there is at least plausibility. Is it not plausible I, or many other people, have an imaginary friend who we call god?

My viewpoint on people of the world: There are 5 levels of which I classify people/things.

At the top we have God, or the God like figure, the perfect person or thing, ultimate truth, whatever. 2nd we have people who know. I put myself in this category. Socrates, Plato, Confucius, and Jesus also fit into this category. These are people who have ascended past their beliefs. These are people who know. 3rd, we have people who believe. Most any Atheist are put into this category. A atheist still believes that a god isn't real. Few theists can put themselves into here. 4th, there is where I categorize all the unintelligent things. Animals, plants, single-celled organisms, about 10 feet of excrement of everything above this. 5th I put the religious people here. These are people who run solely off faith and use not a bit of intelligence to determine what they believe. Even plants know to grow towards the sunlight even if god told them not to.

Sounds insulting, and it is. However, many people will agree to a structure similar to this and anybody can ascend the ladder. It doesn't discriminate. As soon as people start using their brains, they go to level 3. As soon as an atheist realizes they disbelief the conceptions people have of god and get above the level of "I haven't been shown any evidence god exists, therefore I do not believe", then they ascend to level 2. They are no better than Theists who use the argument that they have seen no evidence to not belief in god so they choose so anyway. Level 2 is the most humanly achievable level. It doesn't discriminate. All the truly great people who create intellectual sparks and transcend above personal beliefs go here. The less you believe and the more you know, the better. Even if what you know is wrong, it's better than believing.

Oh by the way, heaven and hell also exist. They may not be streets paved with gold, flowing milk and honey, with virgins everywhere, or a lake of fire and darkness, or even real places. I am sure though, if you walked into a place mentioned above, you might see it as a metaphorical heaven or hell. It's not entirely so abstract whenever someone calls to the show and say you're going to hell. You might be going to their metaphorical hell while at the same time, you end up in your metaphorical heaven.

Nobody's debating that people have concepts of god. The problem is that they have no objective basis.

As long as you admit your God is imaginary, and you don't bug me to worship him etc, you're fine with me, but your shrink might disagree :D

However I am very gnostic when it comes to any God(s) people talk or even just think about, I know 100% they don't exist in reality, I don't care that they're sneaking around in their imagination. However, i am a reasonable person, or i try to be! If their god(s) want(s) to prove me wrong, I am waiting.

So I take you do not believe in an objective god? What's wrong with an immaterial god? Besides, I'd never try to argue that god was real, that would be pretty stupid of me. Especially if I used the Bible or the likes to try and prove it. All I am trying to do with this is prove or provide plausibility that god exists which I think I have done fairly well. (far better than many have on the show I'd imagine.)

If somebody wanted to call a pencil a god they could and it would go almost as far as proving god exists. I think this idea of how to explain god is fairly objective.

However, of the 40+ shows I've seen, a fair amount of argument/justification has been based on the concepts that people give god and whether if those concepts are reasonable. It still sounds like to me you do not believe in the *insert main-stream religion* ideologies of what god is/isn't. I should start counting the number of times creationism has been brought up.

At least my hypothesis seems somewhat reasonable. Consider this something to think about. If you had to give up atheism, would you more likely 1)follow my idea of what god is 2)follow any other religion

To clarify what my "religion" is... God is whatever you want him to be. If you want him to be real, then god must be realistic. If you want to call your voice of reason a god, then god is the voice of reason. The deadliest sin is religion. Once you start listening to god without questioning him, then you've taken it too far. If god is your voice of reason, then by god, use him! Also, there is no "believing". Believing makes you gullible. Gullibility is another sin. If you choose to believe, then understand that is exactly what you are doing. Once you start knowing, then you've ascended into that which no one but god has ascended to. Number 1 rule: you must call at least 1 thing, "God". You may have multiple gods if you wish. How much impact your God or Gods have over you is up to you. Just know you might end up in your metaphorical hell if you don't listen to god. There is no official holy book but a book on philosophy would be a great place to start.

At least my idea is great philosophy. If God were your voice of reason, then 95% of the Bible would be true.

If there is anything I can do to make my hypothesis more reasonable or to make my not-religion more appealing, please let me know. :D

Off-topic: What religion am I? Do I count as an atheist? I believe that somebody or something out there will appear before me and I will attribute it to be a god. Basically, God will be something that the adjective "Godly" describes. I do not hold any of the common ideas of what god is/isn't to be truth rather just plausible.

For the record: I do not have an imaginary friend who I call god. This is all hypothetical.

From: Brandon Lameyer (Posted Sep 7, 2011 at 12:55 am) BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: "All I am trying to do with this is prove or provide plausibility that god exists which I think I have done fairly well. (far better than many have on the show I'd imagine.) If somebody wanted to call a pencil a god they could and it would go almost as far as proving god exists. I think this idea of how to explain god is fairly objective."

LINDA SAID: Friedrich Nietzsche "The most common lie is that which one lies to himself; lying to others is relatively an exception." Let's just overlook the fact that there is no reason to believe that an invisible "spirit" or God is watching out for us, if it's not lying to ourselves? What you are talking about is keeping something going that is not reality.

BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: However, of the 40+ shows I've seen, a fair amount of argument/justification has been based on the concepts that people give god and whether if those concepts are reasonable. It still sounds like to me you do not believe in the *insert main-stream religion* ideologies of what god is/isn't. I should start counting the number of times creationism has been brought up."

LINDA SAID: Did they bring up that long ago when primitive people couldn't understand how something happened they made up a story and a God to explain everything, it didn't have to be the truth. This is how people explained things away when they didn't have any method of finding the truth of the matter, or they didn't like what the truth was because it didn't seem very good. What this is really about is, there is no proof that any God/Gods exist, so, let's make God "immaterial". Well, why not ask does God exist at all instead, isn't it because that requires proof to reach a conclusion about the plausibility of the existence of something that cannot be observed or detected in any way? Why just believe it? Why is deciding there has to be something (with no evidence) a better decision than there is nothing? BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: "At least my hypothesis seems somewhat reasonable. Consider this something to think about. If you had to give up atheism, would you more likely 1)follow my idea of what god is 2)follow any other religion To clarify what my "religion" is... God is whatever you want him to be. If you want him to be real, then god must be realistic. If you want to call your voice of reason a god, then god is the voice of reason."

LINDA SAID: You don't make anything your god if you really do have a voice of reason.

BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: "The deadliest sin is religion. Once you start listening to god without questioning him, then you've taken it too far. If god is your voice of reason, then by god, use him!"

LINDA SAID: This is crazy! Use an imaginary sky fairy (or any object) for your voice of reason?

BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: "Also, there is no "believing". Believing makes you gullible. Gullibility is another sin. If you choose to believe, then understand that is exactly what you are doing. Once you start knowing, then you've ascended into that which no one but god has ascended to. Number 1 rule: you must call at least 1 thing, "God". You may have multiple gods if you wish. How much impact your God or Gods have over you is up to you. Just know you might end up in your metaphorical hell if you don't listen to god. There is no official holy book but a book on philosophy would be a great place to start."

LINDA SAID: Why does this sound a lot like Christianity, with rewards, punishment and threats?

BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: "At least my idea is great philosophy. If God were your voice of reason, then 95% of the Bible would be true."

LINDA SAID: Someone who puts making up a god, over looking for truths, probably isn't going to have a very reliable philosophy. Atheists don't believe any gods exist and most atheists I've ever known are pretty honest. Maybe it's the theists who need a philosophy that's not based on lies, because when you start basing what is true on assumptions you wind up with religion.

There's plenty of proof that a religious philosophy never made anyone moral or ethical. We have the capacity to be rational beings who recognize our obligation to find the truth and not just go along-to-get-along. You are not trying to determine what is true really, this is exactly what people have always done to explain why there is no proof of any god/gods. We know, in this day and time, with our technology, evidence of something that actually exists could be found. That's why we need to go into an "immaterial" realm or say that god is something like a pencil, because that's much safer.

BRANDON LAMEYER SAID: "If there is anything I can do to make my hypothesis more reasonable or to make my not-religion more appealing, please let me know. :D Off-topic: What religion am I? Do I count as an atheist? I believe that somebody or something out there will appear before me and I will attribute it to be a god. Basically, God will be something that the adjective "Godly" describes. I do not hold any of the common ideas of what god is/isn't to be truth rather just plausible. For the record: I do not have an imaginary friend who I call god. This is all hypothetical."

LINDA SAID: I think your un-religion-religion will go over about as well as the un-cola. Also, I think there are already movements a lot like what you are espousing. I have read a lot about various movements that supposedly essentially do not think the Scriptures got things right and believe that God is communicating directly through modern-day prophets and apostles. They believe that God is giving new revelation today which undermines the authority of Scripture, personal experience plays a greater role for determining "truth" than does doctrine. Proponents of these movements believe that their movement will bring forth end-time apostles and prophets to do greater miracles than were performed by Old Testament prophets or New Testament apostles. Maybe like turning a pencil into God?

Atheism is not about making anything your god (no matter how much of a maverick or weird) that god is.

Bertrand Russell: "It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true."

LINDA SAID: That's the part I think you are missing out on.

Please don't read this as me telling you your wrong, but if there is no "god" or higher being of any sort, then how are we all here? Im starting at the creation of all outer space. If no higher being was there to make an ENDLESS space expanding at the speed of light, then how? if you answer gasses that were the alpha of everything we know and have yet to find out, then how did these inanimate gasses come to be. under your science, nothing comes from nothing. now suppose this planet was somehow created without any "god" to oversee it, how are we alive? you might say evolution. how did our lowest form of evolution come to be? if you say it just happened, nothing just happens. Again im just looking for answers and dont tell me how naive you think i am for thinking there is a possibility of a god.

Read a book...Second thought, read alot of them, just stay away from the Bible. Seems like you have NO idea what you are talking about. Just a fine example of every other creationist and their gross misinterpretation of the Big Bang Theory, Theory of Evolution, and Abiogenesis.

Firstly, your presupposition that anything in this universe was "created" is false. I suggest you read up on the Laws of Conservation of Energy. Secondly, there is no theory of Origin of the Species because there is no evidence on which to base the theory. Abiogenesis is something you can study on Wiki or Talkorigins.org, and it will explain the studies that have been conducted to suggest how life can come from inorganic matter. Thirdly, and lastly, NOTHING does not just happen. Science NEVER says that, and to make this claim demonstrates how willfully ignorant you truly are.

There IS a cause for us being here, our earth being formed, our solar system arraging itself the way it did, and for the universe being here. However, to put it simply, the cause doesn't have to be explained by God. There are plenty of natural explanations for things existing the way they do. The problems starts when people start labeling the cause "God" without any justification. Just because Science cannot explain the reason why the universe is here or how life started on Earth does not justify the belief a God did it, nor does it mean Science will never know the answer.

2000 years ago, people still believed the Earth was flat (and some still do today). 1000 years ago, religion was so widespread and was responsible for enslaving and murdering (not to mention technology and human innovation hit an all time low) so many people we have thought it appropriate to label that timeframe as the "Dark Ages". 600 years ago, no society with a written history knew America existed. 300 years ago no civilization had electricity. 100 years ago the airplane was a fairly new invention. ONLY 60 years ago the color TV was invented. Imagine what we will know 60, 100, 300, 600, 1000, 2000 years from now.

To say we could never know the answer to a question within reality is not only absurd, it is an insult to Human ingenuity and the thousands of years of progress made thus far. You (and I say this to all believers) are profane in your ignorance, and should be ashamed of what your belief has done to stifle that progress.

Religion, ALL religion, is there for only one purpose, to control the masses, the ignorant, and the gullible (I'm sure there is more that fall into this category, but you get the picture). You, my friend, are one of the ignorant many who follow without question and have no appreciation for their natural existence. We didn't get this far by filling in the gaps of "I don't knows" with "Goddidits". We got this far because we wanted answers to those questions, whether "Goddidit" answered the question at the time or not. If we did not question the gaps in knowledge, we would still be explaining lightining with the abhorrently absurd claim that "Goddidit"!

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup

blip.tv ustream.tv

ACA members! It's time to renew your ACA membership. You can do so online if you log in and then click here or check your e-mail for alternate instructions. Thanks for supporting the ACA.

The after-the-show meetup after the Atheist Experience TV Show has moved to El Arroyo, 1624 W 5th St.