Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2002 20:03:31 -0700
To: Brooks
From: Darwin Bedford <>
Subject: Re: [WEB-20020907.83aa62] Message to Darwin

Hi Brooks,

An agnostic is not "one that doesn't know if there is a God or not", but "one that believes that man cannot ever now whether there is a God or not".  An atheist is one who knows that there is no God.  Both definitions are based on the premise that only one god is possible--not two or more.  These definitions are silly really because they are derived out of monotheism.  I do not, so far, have any convincing evidence that any gods are involved in creation and in my definition of creation their creation would have to be explained as well. So, in summary, I'm not saying that a single god is impossible but rather is there is such a beast then it is the first thing that was created or that was just there.  By the way, I don't think that the universe had a beginning--so one could argue that the universe is god. 

You seem to equate being in "extreme minority" to being "wrong".  This is not the case as many great thinkers have proven this to be false many times over.  Like many atheists, I first believed that I was the only atheist that I knew of, but now I know that there are a great many atheists.

I feel the need to challenge those who do believe in God (and when I do so they are offended) because I feel that much harm is coming to the world from people having many versions of God when their God is just a make-belief character.

Darwin Bedford

At , you wrote:

Date and Time: Saturday, September 7, 2002, 14:50 PST
Source URL:   

  Brooks W*****

  I would like to initially state that I fully respect your right to be an atheist.  Incidentally, I would like to ask you whether you are a true atheist, i.e., one that has a firm and abiding conviction to the effect that there is no God, or an agnosti
c, i.e., one that in actuality doesn't know if there is a God or not.
  I would also initially point out that if you are a true atheist, you belong to an EXTREME minority.  Even the great majority of the great minds of the ages have believed in or at least conceded the possibility of God.  I think, therefore, that you're
vastly outnumbered if you claim that God is impossible.  I suppose that you view yourself as intellectually superior to the great majority of people.  Go ahead and believe that if it makes you feel better about yourself.  That's probably your primary so
for positive self-esteem.  
  I do not care to debate with you on the issue of whether or not there is a God.  On that score, however, I would note that your arguments may be summed up as, "There is no God, because there is no way you can affirmatively prove that there is a God."
 Even conceding that this statement is true (when in actuality, the truth of this statement depends entirely upon your subjective definition of "proof"), why do you assume that believers have the burden of proving that there is a God?  The answer is tha
t you
 know that just as I cannot (by your standard of proof, at least) "prove" that there is a God, neither can you "prove" that there is not a God.
  Aside from addressing the substantive aspects of your belief system, I would like to ask you why you feel the need to offend those who do believe in God.  You do not offend me; I dismiss people like you as insecure individuals who obviously suffer fro
m feelings of inadequacy and inferiority, who perceive that their only chance at being noticed in this world is to be "radical."  You're really no different from the insecure adolescent who makes piercings all over his face and dies his hair green and o
, all to say, "look at me."  What do you hope to accomplish with such inflammatory gestures?  Do you really think you're going to win any converts by being offensive?  I am only 28 years old, yet I consider myself infinitely more mature than you, who by
 the looks of your picture are at least 50 years old. 
  Brooks W****