Why I'm an atheist

[BADecker]

You actually sound like you are ignorant about the fact that there are thousands of God-religious scientists, just like there are thousands of atheism-religious scientists. Keep it up... talking like that. You are only making a solid point out of the fact that atheism is a religion.

Again, your lack of ability for understanding things is quite sad. Of course there are religious scientists. Believing in god(s) is not at odds with doing science, because beliefs and scientific knowledge are just completely different subjects (that you try to mix). As long as one recognizes that his beliefs are just that, beliefs, you can still also do science, which is not based on belief but on the scientific method of acquiring knowledge. And just to make it clear for you as you seem to have trouble understanding things: all religions are based on beliefs, not on the scientific method.

You see, the problem for you is that you're trying to rationalize your religious beliefs. But you can't rationalize them, there's no logic in beliefs. So instead you start to use fake logic, fallacies, non-sequitur arguments to get to your desired end. That's not how science works, science is about the method of discovering truth, whatever it may be, not trying to bend logic to get to your desired destination/belief.

But it is the scientific method that promotes beliefs in scientists. For example, the scientific method suggests that a proper scientific theory backed by scientific consensus, is essentially fact. Yet all the scientists know that the moment some better info about the theory is found, the theory changes. Often that change completely destroys the scientific theory, or else completely changes it.

The point? Scientists might believe the theory, or they might not. It is their religion, because the theory is not known to be fact, even though the scientific method accepts that it is fact until new info is found. In other words, at least a good portion of science is religion, based on belief in science theory which really is not fact, even though scientists love the consensus that it is fact until proven different to not be fact. Science has embedded religion into science in this.

The fact that nature and the universe is a machine, is a fact that is not scientific theory. It is fact. Machines have makers. The only Maker "big" enough to make machine universe is God.

One of the weakest religions around is atheism. Why? Because the atheist is not a thinker. If he were a thinker, he would know that there are countless numbers of places in the universe where God might exist, but that he the atheist hasn't checked yet. Upon realizing this, he doesn't necessarily stop being a believer in atheism. Rather, he strengthens his stubbornness against logic... unless he stops being an atheist, that is.

[Lambowei]

But it is the scientific method that promotes beliefs in scientists.

No, that's your belief, and it's bullshit.

For example, the scientific method suggests that a proper scientific theory backed by scientific consensus, is essentially fact.

No it doesn't, scientific theories are not backed by consensus but but experiments. How ignorant can you be? Also scientific theories are not considered facts, just good models of reality based on experiments. Experiments can limit or expand the validity of the model, but the model is just a model and it's not considered "fact".

Yet all the scientists know that the moment some better info about the theory is found, the theory changes. Often that change completely destroys the scientific theory, or else completely changes it.

You have no idea of what "scientific theory" means. I suggest you read and try to understand Wikipedia before you say something stupid.

The point? Scientists might believe the theory, or they might not.

The point is, you're full of bullshit arguments and fallacies and you wouldn't be able to make a sound argument or be convinced by one even by luck because as a fanatic you prefer to believe you've found knowledge and you dismiss any real argument. Your bs belongs to the XV century, not the XXI.

 

[BADecker]

But it is the scientific method that promotes beliefs in scientists.

No, that's your belief, and it's bullshit.

But you seem to contradict this and yourself in your next statement.

For example, the scientific method suggests that a proper scientific theory backed by scientific consensus, is essentially fact.

No it doesn't, scientific theories are not backed by consensus but but experiments. How ignorant can you be? Also scientific theories are not considered facts, just good models of reality based on experiments. Experiments can limit or expand the validity of the model, but the model is just a model and it's not considered "fact".

If scientific theories are backed by experiments that show facts, why are the theories not factual? If the scientific theories are simply good models of something, but they are believed by some or many to be factual and true because the experiments are factual and true, how can this whole thing not be something religious?

Having faith that the experiments were done correctly, and that the theory model is accurate, is still a faith thing. But it is the believing in it that makes it like a religion, especially since it is not known to be fact, but is believed in anyway. If scientists don't consider it part of a religion when they believe in it, what do they call it?... since they admit that they believe it and trust that it is true when they know that it might not be?

When we look at the universe, what we are seeing is the evidence of the operation of the universe as being machinery. Our evidence of where machinery comes from is from a builder or maker. So, the universe has a Maker, right? If the universe doesn't have a Maker, why not, since our only evidence of machines and machinery is that machines and machinery have makers?

I mean, if experiments using the levers and leverages of the universe produce machines, why would the universe which operates using these same levers and leverages not be a machine of machines? Things that are not known to be true, but rather are known to only be good models, are called scientific theories (at least much of the time). Scientists trust the experimentation/theory process. So, how can there be any doubt that machine builders using machinery of the universe to build their machines, point to the evidence or fact that the machinery of the universe must have been built?

You contradict your whole theoretical process by accepting the fact of machine makers, but not accepting that there is or might be a Maker of the universe machine.

Yet all the scientists know that the moment some better info about the theory is found, the theory changes. Often that change completely destroys the scientific theory, or else completely changes it.

You have no idea of what "scientific theory" means. I suggest you read and try to understand Wikipedia before you say something stupid.

The point? Scientists might believe the theory, or they might not.

The point is, you're full of bullshit arguments and fallacies and you wouldn't be able to make a sound argument or be convinced by one even by luck because as a fanatic you prefer to believe you've found knowledge and you dismiss any real argument. Your bs belongs to the XV century, not the XXI.

 

I'm beginning to understand that no matter what science theory is or might be, and no matter how logical it is to believe that God might exist, you simply don't WANT to believe that God exists, or even in the possibility of the existence of God. This makes atheism more of a religion than ever... at least in your case and for you. Not only that, but it makes a good big chunk of science a religion for you... simply because you won't accept the scientific logic of the possibility that God exists.

[Lambowei]

But you seem to contradict this and yourself in your next statement.

No, I don't, you just seem unable to understand me.

If scientific theories are backed by experiments that show facts, why are the theories not factual? If the scientific theories are simply good models of something, but they are believed by some or many to be factual and true because the experiments are factual and true, how can this whole thing not be something religious?

Because, as the good old Richard Feynmann said: “Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain.”

There's no absolute statement in science, you have varying degrees of certainty instead. You have models of reality, and experiments that try to limit the validity of those models. As there's no absolute certain statement, you cannot say something is "factual", when you speak in proper scientific terms.

Having faith that the experiments were done correctly, and that the theory model is accurate, is still a faith thing.

There's no faith involved, if you have any doubt you go and re-do the experiment. Most of current physics theories can be checked in a university laboratory, and they actually are checked in the laboratories when you study at uni. I've done it, I know that the current scientific theories are good because I've actually tested them.

When we look at the universe, what we are seeing is the evidence of the operation of the universe as being machinery. Our evidence of where machinery comes from is from a builder or maker. So, the universe has a Maker, right? If the universe doesn't have a Maker, why not, since our only evidence of machines and machinery is that machines and machinery have makers?

This paragraph is totally nonsensical and full of non-sequitur arguments. I'm sorry, but you've FAILED at logic. Just go and recognise yours is a belief. There's nothing wrong with having a religion/belief like you do, just don't try to pass it as science, that's lying. Stop lying to yourself, stop lying to others.

I'm beginning to understand that no matter what science theory is or might be, and no matter how logical it is to believe that God might exist, you simply don't WANT to believe that God exists, or even in the possibility of the existence of God. This makes atheism more of a religion than ever... at least in your case and for you. Not only that, but it makes a good big chunk of science a religion for you... simply because you won't accept the scientific logic of the possibility that God exists.

I don't want to believe, and I don't believe in anything. I don't believe in science (no need, it's not based on beliefs), I don't believe in god. It's good that you're somewhat recognizing in this paragraph that your belief in god is just that: a belief.

simply because you won't accept the scientific logic of the possibility that God exists.

You say the word "scientifically speaking" but you don't know what it means. I'll tell you what science can tell you about god: nothing. Science only concerns itself about statements that are falsifiable (see, Karl Popper). At the moment there's no possible observation/scientific experiment that can check whether god exists or not, thus science cannot tell you anything at all about the subject (either way).

Thus, the positions on god for both religious people and atheists are just not scientific positions. However that doesn't necessarily mean that atheism is about beliefs: my atheism is closer to agnosticism than to "normal" atheism. In all regards you'll be closer to understand my position if you believe me to be agnostic, as I'm a kind of atheist that is also agnostic (because they're actually compatible). I don't disregard the possibility that god (or unicorns) exist, I just observe that there's no falsifiable argument for its existence, and thus I assume, for my day to day, that god doesn't exist, but it's a working assumption rather than a belief. I just assume that nothing exists in principle (like superman, unicorns or god), until there's a hint of a falsifiable statement.

I'm sorry if all this is very difficult for you to understand, but reality is way more complex, and simple, and beautiful than what religious fanatics expect.

 

[josephsonand]

Well that's just false because god doesn't exist. I'm more in harmony than you, and that's because I don't believe in bullshit.

The categorical denial of God (or whatever) is also faith (only in the opposite sense).
I'm not trying to offend anyone, it's your choice how you live.
We all strive for the truth - and this is the most important thing. And I don’t think that anyone will argue that love and kindness are bad and that this does not exist. I don't try to believe in love, I just love the people around me, love this world. This is communication with God. Love, kindness and other good things that we know are all in the aggregate I call God. Therefore, I see no reason to argue. We all strive for this (depending on the measure of our understanding of the world).

Hmm, looks like you are ignorant and you convinced yourself that you are not.

If you think that anything unknown is God, you are religious, LOL.  Aka, a dishonest imbecile.

If you have conversations with God, you have lost your mind.

http://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/03/ten-reasons-humans-created-religion

Most importantly, we all strive for goodness and humanity. All these terms are God for me. And I don't see any disagreement between us.
It is not so important how you perceive it. Unfortunately, most people don't understand what religion is (even being in any religion). For example, I never belonged to any religion. But as far as I understand, the root of most religions and spiritual teachings is Love (and other terms). Therefore, I think that we all should not draw premature conclusions. Because initially the religions tried to tell people about the spiritual path (about good, about humanity, about compassion, etc.). If you understand what all religions and spiritual teachings are based on, then you can understand that all of this unites us all (and it doesn’t matter what you believe or don't believe).

[BADecker]

But you seem to contradict this and yourself in your next statement.

No, I don't, you just seem unable to understand me.

If scientific theories are backed by experiments that show facts, why are the theories not factual? If the scientific theories are simply good models of something, but they are believed by some or many to be factual and true because the experiments are factual and true, how can this whole thing not be something religious?

Because, as the good old Richard Feynmann said: “Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty -- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain.”

There's no absolute statement in science, you have varying degrees of certainty instead. You have models of reality, and experiments that try to limit the validity of those models. As there's no absolute certain statement, you cannot say something is "factual", when you speak in proper scientific terms.

Having faith that the experiments were done correctly, and that the theory model is accurate, is still a faith thing.

There's no faith involved, if you have any doubt you go and re-do the experiment. Most of current physics theories can be checked in a university laboratory, and they actually are checked in the laboratories when you study at uni. I've done it, I know that the current scientific theories are good because I've actually tested them.

When we look at the universe, what we are seeing is the evidence of the operation of the universe as being machinery. Our evidence of where machinery comes from is from a builder or maker. So, the universe has a Maker, right? If the universe doesn't have a Maker, why not, since our only evidence of machines and machinery is that machines and machinery have makers?

This paragraph is totally nonsensical and full of non-sequitur arguments. I'm sorry, but you've FAILED at logic. Just go and recognise yours is a belief. There's nothing wrong with having a religion/belief like you do, just don't try to pass it as science, that's lying. Stop lying to yourself, stop lying to others.

I'm beginning to understand that no matter what science theory is or might be, and no matter how logical it is to believe that God might exist, you simply don't WANT to believe that God exists, or even in the possibility of the existence of God. This makes atheism more of a religion than ever... at least in your case and for you. Not only that, but it makes a good big chunk of science a religion for you... simply because you won't accept the scientific logic of the possibility that God exists.

I don't want to believe, and I don't believe in anything. I don't believe in science (no need, it's not based on beliefs), I don't believe in god. It's good that you're somewhat recognizing in this paragraph that your belief in god is just that: a belief.

simply because you won't accept the scientific logic of the possibility that God exists.

You say the word "scientifically speaking" but you don't know what it means. I'll tell you what science can tell you about god: nothing. Science only concerns itself about statements that are falsifiable (see, Karl Popper). At the moment there's no possible observation/scientific experiment that can check whether god exists or not, thus science cannot tell you anything at all about the subject (either way).

Thus, the positions on god for both religious people and atheists are just not scientific positions. However that doesn't necessarily mean that atheism is about beliefs: my atheism is closer to agnosticism than to "normal" atheism. In all regards you'll be closer to understand my position if you believe me to be agnostic, as I'm a kind of atheist that is also agnostic (because they're actually compatible). I don't disregard the possibility that god (or unicorns) exist, I just observe that there's no falsifiable argument for its existence, and thus I assume, for my day to day, that god doesn't exist, but it's a working assumption rather than a belief. I just assume that nothing exists in principle (like superman, unicorns or god), until there's a hint of a falsifiable statement.

I'm sorry if all this is very difficult for you to understand, but reality is way more complex, and simple, and beautiful than what religious fanatics expect.

 

Basically you are trying to do three things:

1. That the only known fact in a scientific theory is the fact that it is a scientific theory. In your thinking, it is this one fact alone that takes scientific theories out of the category of religion. The point that scientific theories when believed in as factual doesn't make them a religion, is about as silly as anyone can get.

2. That scientific theories that are believed in when it is not known that they are factual, are not some form of religious faith... even though there is belief rather than factual knowledge;

3. That when you are talking about the existence of God, suddenly scientific facts and theory don't apply. You intentionally ignore that God made science... the things that are measured scientifically.

As long as you are unwilling to even accept the possibility of the existence of God, when it is the whole principle of the machine universe that points to God, you have an illogical religion going for yourself.

The only way you can simply ignore science findings when they apply to God is to do it. That's all. Standard unbeliever, and an unfair-to-science one at that.

[actmyname]

Life has no meaning without an afterlife

An afterlife has no meaning without life.

If the course of this eternal afterlife is determined by the events within one's life, then surely one's life is more important than the afterlife.

[BADecker]

Life has no meaning without an afterlife

An afterlife has no meaning without life.

If the course of this eternal afterlife is determined by the events within one's life, then surely one's life is more important than the afterlife.

No afterlife without the recognition that God exists... and then faith in Him and His salvation.

[andulolika]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

[BADecker]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

No, please no. Don't do that. We'd have to get rid of science theory. Or is such your goal?

[andulolika]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

No, please no. Don't do that. We'd have to get rid of science theory. Or is such your goal?

I mainly mean christianity and islam, i consider the rest mostly irrelevant.
These two are strong sects that endured for too long.
Science is the way to go .

Religion is religion and i'd guess it tends to work togheter, most specialy in these times where atheism isn't a offence that can get you executed, atleast perhaps excluding islam.

[actmyname]

No afterlife without the recognition that God exists... and then faith in Him and His salvation.

Just a curious question to you: which God are you referring to? Statistically, I'm assuming the Abrahamic variant but since there are countless paths and sects thereof it's difficult to get a grasp on the exact "God" people refer to.

[Lambowei]

Basically you are trying to do three things:

1. That the only known fact in a scientific theory is the fact that it is a scientific theory. In your thinking, it is this one fact alone that takes scientific theories out of the category of religion. The point that scientific theories when believed in as factual doesn't make them a religion, is about as silly as anyone can get.

2. That scientific theories that are believed in when it is not known that they are factual, are not some form of religious faith... even though there is belief rather than factual knowledge;

3. That when you are talking about the existence of God, suddenly scientific facts and theory don't apply. You intentionally ignore that God made science... the things that are measured scientifically.

As long as you are unwilling to even accept the possibility of the existence of God, when it is the whole principle of the machine universe that points to God, you have an illogical religion going for yourself.

The only way you can simply ignore science findings when they apply to God is to do it. That's all. Standard unbeliever, and an unfair-to-science one at that.

This is what you're doing:

1. You put words into my mouth that I haven't said.

2. You ignore my arguments, and instead of addressing them you only go to the conclusion,that then you twist to build a straw-man fallacy.

3. You are unable to see your blind spots. You build arguments and logic using non-sequitur fallacies.

I refuse to argue with you anymore, it's impossible. You're either too stupid to understand anything or make a real argument, or too blinded to your religious zealotry, or both. Either way, I pity you as you will never ever be able to understand any part of reality at any moment in your whole life. You may believe in god, but god definitely didn't give you a brain, sorry.

[josephsonand]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

Why should we focus on the destruction of something, if we can focus on the creation of something beautiful? For example, we can start with ourselves, with our own irrational actions and thoughts, with our own lives, we can establish relationships with people around, etc. After all, society cannot be progressive when it focuses on the destruction and denial of something.
Science is good, good relations and mutual assistance are good. Let's look at the world in a positive way. Without paying attention to fanatics from religions or science, we can actually build a constructive society.

[andulolika]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

Why should we focus on the destruction of something, if we can focus on the creation of something beautiful? For example, we can start with ourselves, with our own irrational actions and thoughts, with our own lives, we can establish relationships with people around, etc. After all, society cannot be progressive when it focuses on the destruction and denial of something.
Science is good, good relations and mutual assistance are good. Let's look at the world in a positive way. Without paying attention to fanatics from religions or science, we can actually build a constructive society.

Denial of something? Your belief is just the same as my belief.
I believe working togheter is a must for humanity. I don't think mass brainwashing and control does any good.
Id rather kill myself than wasting any hours each sunday.
And im not up for making a point since it is known arguing with believers is just as pointless as arguing with shitheads on this forum.
Everyone is free to believe in whatever they want of course but no religion allows freedom and that is known, might have to ignore it when so many atheists around that they cannot oppress.

[sirazimuth]

I refuse to argue with you anymore, it's impossible. You're either too stupid to understand anything or make a real argument, or too blinded to your religious zealotry, or both. Either way, I pity you as you will never ever be able to understand any part of reality at any moment in your whole life. You may believe in god, but god definitely didn't give you a brain, sorry.

Couldn’t of said that better myself.
I see you got sucked down the BADecker lunacy rabbit hole.
Yeah, don’t bother arguing with him. I used to years ago. It’s like talking to a brick wall.

[BADecker]

Basically you are trying to do three things:

1. That the only known fact in a scientific theory is the fact that it is a scientific theory. In your thinking, it is this one fact alone that takes scientific theories out of the category of religion. The point that scientific theories when believed in as factual doesn't make them a religion, is about as silly as anyone can get.

2. That scientific theories that are believed in when it is not known that they are factual, are not some form of religious faith... even though there is belief rather than factual knowledge;

3. That when you are talking about the existence of God, suddenly scientific facts and theory don't apply. You intentionally ignore that God made science... the things that are measured scientifically.

As long as you are unwilling to even accept the possibility of the existence of God, when it is the whole principle of the machine universe that points to God, you have an illogical religion going for yourself.

The only way you can simply ignore science findings when they apply to God is to do it. That's all. Standard unbeliever, and an unfair-to-science one at that.

This is what you're doing:

1. You put words into my mouth that I haven't said.

2. You ignore my arguments, and instead of addressing them you only go to the conclusion,that then you twist to build a straw-man fallacy.

3. You are unable to see your blind spots. You build arguments and logic using non-sequitur fallacies.

I refuse to argue with you anymore, it's impossible. You're either too stupid to understand anything or make a real argument, or too blinded to your religious zealotry, or both. Either way, I pity you as you will never ever be able to understand any part of reality at any moment in your whole life. You may believe in god, but god definitely didn't give you a brain, sorry.

I understand your position. We might have argued a little many posts back. But you don't need to tell us that you refuse to argue. You stopped arguing long ago. If you have been arguing at all with your last few posts, you have been arguing with yourself through self-contradictions.

A person has to know that God exists before he can believe in Him. So, you are right when you say that I believe in God.

[BADecker]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

Why should we focus on the destruction of something, if we can focus on the creation of something beautiful? For example, we can start with ourselves, with our own irrational actions and thoughts, with our own lives, we can establish relationships with people around, etc. After all, society cannot be progressive when it focuses on the destruction and denial of something.
Science is good, good relations and mutual assistance are good. Let's look at the world in a positive way. Without paying attention to fanatics from religions or science, we can actually build a constructive society.

Denial of something? Your belief is just the same as my belief.
I believe working togheter is a must for humanity. I don't think mass brainwashing and control does any good.
Id rather kill myself than wasting any hours each sunday.
And im not up for making a point since it is known arguing with believers is just as pointless as arguing with shitheads on this forum.
Everyone is free to believe in whatever they want of course but no religion allows freedom and that is known, might have to ignore it when so many atheists around that they cannot oppress.

All people are given by God. The beginning of their first 9 months of life is when they know God solely. As they progress through the 9 months, they gradually learn to be distracted a little as their brains and senses form. Then, after they are born, they are thrown into a world of such distractions, that by the time they are an adult, most people don't remember God at all.

Yet it is God that holds each and every person. Thank Him that He is patient with you for the 7, 8, or more decades that you live... hoping that you will lose the distractions, and return to Him before it is to late for you.

If you honor Him by returning to Him, the Guy you knew all so well in the womb, He will give you great treasure in the next life.

[josephsonand]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

Why should we focus on the destruction of something, if we can focus on the creation of something beautiful? For example, we can start with ourselves, with our own irrational actions and thoughts, with our own lives, we can establish relationships with people around, etc. After all, society cannot be progressive when it focuses on the destruction and denial of something.
Science is good, good relations and mutual assistance are good. Let's look at the world in a positive way. Without paying attention to fanatics from religions or science, we can actually build a constructive society.

Denial of something? Your belief is just the same as my belief.
I believe working togheter is a must for humanity. I don't think mass brainwashing and control does any good.
Id rather kill myself than wasting any hours each sunday.
And im not up for making a point since it is known arguing with believers is just as pointless as arguing with shitheads on this forum.
Everyone is free to believe in whatever they want of course but no religion allows freedom and that is known, might have to ignore it when so many atheists around that they cannot oppress.

And I totally agree with you on that!
You just need to understand that initially in religions there is nothing fanatical and irrational. Brainwashing is the work of people who don’t understand what faith is. When people gather on Sundays, this also makes no sense if it is not sincere. After all, in addition to fanatics or ignorant people, there are reasonable people who also have some kind of religion. And there is nothing wrong with that when it is for the benefit of all people around the world. I do not consider it rational to demonize religion. The fact that people misunderstand and impose on others does not mean that something is wrong with religion, maybe you should think about the literacy of the people who surround us.

Here is what I want to convey: I am not religious, but I believe that almost all religions are originally good (based on rationality, compassion, conscience and love), but most religious people misunderstand these religions, and atheists demonize religions because of this (and I understand that).
Let's just look at the root of what is happening. Let's see the good in everything and let's do good things ourselves and be an example to other people. It all starts with ourselves.

There is no need to be religious in the sense in which many people understand this word. Just let's do good things ourselves, help each other, etc. (And do not demonize religions, because they are talking just about the best that is on Earth - about love, that we are all one, about good. And do not succumb to the credentials of those people who are mistaken and think that we need to believe into some kind of mythical creature in heaven that you need to get together on the weekend just because you need to, or something else. Let's be reasonable, we are all on the same side! I really hope that you will understand me)

[josephsonand]

I believe all religion should be erradicated.

Why should we focus on the destruction of something, if we can focus on the creation of something beautiful? For example, we can start with ourselves, with our own irrational actions and thoughts, with our own lives, we can establish relationships with people around, etc. After all, society cannot be progressive when it focuses on the destruction and denial of something.
Science is good, good relations and mutual assistance are good. Let's look at the world in a positive way. Without paying attention to fanatics from religions or science, we can actually build a constructive society.

Denial of something? Your belief is just the same as my belief.
I believe working togheter is a must for humanity. I don't think mass brainwashing and control does any good.
Id rather kill myself than wasting any hours each sunday.
And im not up for making a point since it is known arguing with believers is just as pointless as arguing with shitheads on this forum.
Everyone is free to believe in whatever they want of course but no religion allows freedom and that is known, might have to ignore it when so many atheists around that they cannot oppress.

All people are given by God. The beginning of their first 9 months of life is when they know God solely. As they progress through the 9 months, they gradually learn to be distracted a little as their brains and senses form. Then, after they are born, they are thrown into a world of such distractions, that by the time they are an adult, most people don't remember God at all.

Yet it is God that holds each and every person. Thank Him that He is patient with you for the 7, 8, or more decades that you live... hoping that you will lose the distractions, and return to Him before it is to late for you.

If you honor Him by returning to Him, the Guy you knew all so well in the womb, He will give you great treasure in the next life.

I totally agree with you!
It is also important to understand that God is everywhere and in everything. Many people, unfortunately, do not understand that God is not a “human-like being who looks at us from heaven” in the sense in which people most often understand this. God cannot be described in words, we can only try to do it. God is Love, this is all the best that is in this world. God is in our kind words, in our actions. God is when you act according to conscience. God is when you are in harmony with yourself and with the whole world. God is the most powerful and sincere Love for all that exists. God does not go against science and rationalism. God is not from the material world, but everything in our world contains a part of God (except for negativity).
God is not what many people think. Just remember all the best that is in this world - this is God, that’s what it is. And when we do good things, we speak with God.
And it’s not necessary to call it all - God. He has different names, in many true religions, for example, people call it differently (due to different languages and culture). You can also call it all - Nature, the Universe, the Creator or just Love, etc. These are all the same words.