Most atheists I know would say “I don’t believe there is god” vs. saying “I believe there is no god”. Small but important difference. One implies lack of belief and other belief in non existence.

I would say, “there is no god” just like I would say, “Santa isn’t real.” Of course we don’t know 100% for sure, but we don’t really know anything 100% for sure.

Most atheists I know would say “I don’t believe there is god” vs. saying “I believe there is no god”. Small but important difference. One implies lack of belief and other belief in non existence.

I don’t know how familiar you are with Ricky Gervais in America

I’ve watched the British version of The Office. To be honest, I didn’t really find it (or Gervais) very funny, and that’s speaking as one who typically appreciates British humor.

but you make a good point hoverfrog

Perhaps an adult expressing his thoughts at 8 years old as an adult and maybe “backfilling” its level of importance.

Probably so.

I doubt he felt very cut off from “truth, science, and nature” by his religion at 8-years old.

Perhaps an adult expressing his thoughts at 8 years old as an adult and maybe “backfilling” its level of importance.

I remember at 9 trying to reconcile how God could only be the god of the Jews for thousands of years then decide to be God for everyone after Christ was born. At the time, I might have expressed it as unfair or cheating that God ignored all those other people for so long. As an adult I credit that relevation as opening my eyes that adults (or my religion) didn’t have all the answers, and over the years I’ve given it more philosophical importance then my 9-year-old brain could have handled.

What I’m trying to say is that what is written may actually have a very different emphasis from what was said. Although the meaning is still important.

Apparently the religion he was raised in didn’t allow him to appreciate “truth, science, nature” the way that yours does.

At 8-years old? In a family where apparently neither the mom nor the older brother actually believed? I could be reading it wrong, but somehow I doubt he felt very cut off from “truth, science, and nature” by his religion at 8-years old.

And sure, some types of religion do discourage people from appreciating these things, but what does this have to do with atheism? As many here have pointed out, atheism is nothing more than a lack of belief in God. But a lack of belief in God isn’t necessary to regain an appreciation for “truth, science, and nature”. Gervais’ atheism is therefore incidental to all of that.

It may come as a shock to Gervais, but Christians get to share in those gifts too. Sorry, but atheists don’t have any exclusive ownership of truth, science, or nature.

He’s just expressing his own reactions to deconversion, Mike C. Apparently the religion he was raised in didn’t allow him to appreciate “truth, science, nature” the way that yours does.

The fundamentalism that I was raised with, and followed for 30 years, required me to despise and mistrust science and to view nature and truth in very proscribed, narrow means that didn’t allow me to fully appreciate them either.