The Existence of God

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 1, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: Vandy

...

As for 6-7, I tend to take the agnostic view, but I still lean very strongly towards an atheist explanation.quote>

Interesting.  You are aware, aren't you, that even agnostics and atheist have a supreme "thing" in which the believe even if that "thing" isn't something that can be touched or felt.quote>

{/q]

I would consider myself both atheist and agnostic, and I really do disagree with that statement. Even as an atheist/agnostic myself I wouldn't feel it my place to tell even another atheist or agnostic that they really do believe in some "thing", in spite of what they tell me they believe. They do or they don't as they choose. Everyone is entitled to make that decision for themselves.

Originally posted by: Vandy

Agnostics have a set of core values around which their belief revolves.  I'm sure you're aware that Agnosticism is a concept rather than a religion.  The belief system relates to the existence or non-existence of God.  It is not at all unusual for Agnostics to adopt their own set of moral codes and rituals which leads to a belief system not unlike the attributes of many religions.

quote>

Agnosticism is indeed not a religion itself, but it does not relate directly to the existence or non-existance of any gods, but rather the knowledge of the existence of gods (gnosis = knowledge, theis = belief). As such it is not something somewhere in the middle range of the theism-atheism spectrum, but is a separate, and to a certain extent independent spectrum. So when you cross the two spectrums (and more) along with the infinite positions on each you do indeed get a wide variety of combinations.

Also why would you not expect them to adopt beliefs and a moral/ethical code? Beliefs are not necessarily religious or god-related. Having beliefs does not make a person religious. And not having ethics would mean they would be criminals in society and it is clearly not the case that all atheists and agnostics are criminals. But that doesn't mean they have a god.

Originally posted by: Vandy

... Atheism is the absence of belief in the existence of deities. 

quote>

This is more correct. It is not the same thing as this:

Originally posted by: Vandy

Atheism, on the other hand, is the belief that God / Gods do not exists as well as the rejection of theism.

quote>

Originally posted by: Vandy

Even though there is no one single ideology or set of behaviors on which the Atheist tends to "hand" his or her hat, the mere FACT that there is NO BELIEF in something becomes their god.

quote>

Again I disagree. Unless the definition of god is made so broad it no longer has a useful meaning.

I do appreciate the detail with which you share your point of view and I don't disagree with everything but some things I do disagree with you on.

Originally posted by: Cheese89

For those of you who don't know...

"Secular humanism is a humanist philosophy that upholds reason, ethics, and justice, and specifically rejects the supernatural and the spiritual as the basis of moral reflection and decision-making. Like other types of humanism, secular humanism is a life stance that focuses on the way human beings can lead good, happy and functional lives. It does not refer to a relationship with the divine, or a belief in eternal life, reward, or punishment."

I've got a few problems with the wording of that definition, but I suppose it's impossible to have a definition that satisfies everyone.

quote>

I actually quite like the definition or at least the first part. Its a shame the second part had to be said. But people change it to a way that suits them. Its not like a religion in that way. It is what you want to make of it.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: Cheese89

"Nothing. Couldn't care less. Some people would describe you as apathetic. You should pat them on the back, as they are quite right. Religion isn't really a concern to you, so you prefer mostly to just go along with the flow. While the A-Team and God-Squad are viciously locking horns you just like to sit back quietly, or agree if there is a clear winner. You don't give a whole lot of thought to the meaning of life, as you may or may not have more important things to worry about. It doesn't really matter."

quote>

This is a classic profile of what I would call an "apatheist".

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[jammy 0]

The bible is a collection of stories that were developed over 500 or so years. The bible is not based on truth, yes, it has elements of true events, there was a 'Jesus' but the miracles he performed were not really achieved they were stories that have developed and being hyper-exaggerated until the final bible was developed.

God is not a real thing as we, the universe, the sun, the earth and the life on it has developed over billions of years. Just because the human mind and imagination are so powerful that they have invented many religions over the years does not mean that any religion is true at all, i will say that they are wonderful stories which should be respected but that is all.

I think believing in an all powerful being is a way of avoiding responsibility, kind of saying it doesnt really matter what I do as long as I believe in my god everything will be fine, well isnt it time humans took control of the world they live in instead of relying on mythical beings floating around on big clouds in the infinite sky?

You could make up any religion you wanted right now, no matter how crazy it may be or how illogical it may sound and people may strongly believing in your religion, it is when people start to not only believe but are so sure and blinded by it all that they begin to defend and fight off anyone that says their religious beliefs are anything otherwise.

Christianity, along with any other religion that exists is a history of thousands of stories, poems, 'sightings' and i won't deny some factually correct things thrown in there which have being put together for generations after to believe.

Therefore there is no god, never has being and it in my personal opinion believing in one is completely okay but ... there is not one to believe in

This is my opinion, and it is only an opinion

ThankYou

ps: I am a humanist (I believe humans are the most important thing and the world must be improved in anyway that improves the life of humans and only humans)

[Vandy 110]

Hello, Jammy.

Very interesting post and a well-stated point of view.

Nonetheless, I have a question for you.

What if you're wrong?  What if there is a God and what the bible states, in essence, is true?

You see, I happen to believe it is true.  Why, you ask?  Faith.

I'm sure you believe what you've written to be the truth.  Why, I may ask.  You have your own faith.

And that, my friend, is the difference.

Regards,

Gary

[Eastwinn 6]

I personally do not believe in any god. I'm atheist. I've yet to see any evidence at all that convinces my in any way that any sort of god exists, so I'm yet to see any reason at all to believe that a god may exist. It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of lack of faith brought on by scientific thinking. I am sure of all my beliefs.

[powellinthesouth 0]

Originally posted by: The boy formerly known as Evil Muzz

If I saw evidence to prove the existence of God, I would make my decision then. Until then, I believe there is no God as there is no way to prove that He/She exists.quote>

[Patricius Maximus 236]

What if you're wrong?  What if there is a God and what the bible states, in essence, is true?quote>

If we had conclusive proof that the entire Christian mythology is true (which we don't), then, since I believe based on the biblical descriptions that the Christian god is not deserving of worship (since he is often sadistic), then I probably would be a form of Satanist. And I would not live in fear of an afterlife in an adverse position.

You see, I happen to believe it is true.  Why, you ask?  Faith.quote>

Really? I have to ask you something. What if there is not a god and what the Bible says, in essence, is not true? How would you react with this proof? Would you become an atheist, or would you still cling to your disproven faith?

I believe that many books of the Bible do include actual historical events, but many books are entirely fictional, and most of them are partly fictitious. Why do I believe this? Archaeology has uncovered many artifacts that corroborate some Biblical accounts of historical events. Is this faith? No, it is fact.

I also believe that many other accounts are exaggerated or fictitious. For instance, the physical impossibility of that amount of water condensing in the atmosphere to produce Noah's flood, as well as my belief that Genesis has effectively been disproven by scientific evidence and theory (i.e. the gigantic evidence gap between the two).

Is this faith? No, it is an opinion, which I am perfectly willing to modify if the facts contradict it, unlike faith.

I'm sure you believe what you've written to be the truth.  Why, I may ask.  You have your own faith.quote>

It depends on what we write. If I write that the sky on Earth is red, where I know it is blue, I am not writing the truth. If I write what I did above, I believe it to be my opinion, and should not be taken as truth or fact. Again, opinion, not faith.

I personally do not believe in any god. I'm atheist. I've yet to see any evidence at all that convinces my in any way that any sort of god exists, so I'm yet to see any reason at all to believe that a god may exist. It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of lack of faith brought on by scientific thinking. I am sure of all my beliefs.quote>

And a little logic. In the absence of any evidence that something exists, we should not believe that it does exist.

[Eastwinn 6]

Originally posted by: Patricius MaximusAnd a little logic. In the absence of any evidence that something exists, we should not believe that it does exist.quote>

That's the scientific thinking that I mentioned. It's that logic that I think makes a lot of scientists agnostic atheists.

[BlondeTwiggy 43]

I think believing in an all powerful being is a way of avoiding responsibility, kind of saying it doesnt really matter what I do as long as I believe in my god everything will be fine.quote>

Wouldn't the reasoning be that if there were a God, I have some responsibility to Him?

I don't believe that as long as I believe in God, everything will be fine.  Believing in a God gives me responsibility - it doesn't free me from it. 

Merely believing in a God is hardly sufficient anyway.  

You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. James 2:19quote>

[Vandy 110]

Originally posted by: BlondeTwiggy

I think believing in an all powerful being is a way of avoiding responsibility, kind of saying it doesnt really matter what I do as long as I believe in my god everything will be fine.quote>

Wouldn't the reasoning be that if there were a God, I have some responsibility to Him?

I don't believe that as long as I believe in God, everything will be fine.  Believing in a God gives me responsibility - it doesn't free me from it. 

Merely believing in a God is hardly sufficient anyway.  

You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. James 2:19quote>

quote>

ATTA GIRL, LUTHER!!

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

And a little logic. In the absence of any evidence that something exists, we should not believe that it does exist.quote>

It comes down to what you consider 'evidence', and where you look for it. I've had my faith vindicated more times than I can count, on a personal level. Results count. And all the rationalization by others in an attempt to explain it away amounts to nothing.

[Vandy 110]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

And a little logic. In the absence of any evidence that something exists, we should not believe that it does exist.quote>

It comes down to what you consider 'evidence', and where you look for it. I've had my faith vindicated more times than I can count, on a personal level. Results count. And all the rationalization by others in an attempt to explain it away amounts to nothing.

quote>

(At the expense of repaeting myself...)  ATTA BOY, LUTHER!!

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

It comes down to what you consider 'evidence', and where you look for it. quote>

Well, one can choose to ingore the scientific evidence and put all the emphasis on the circumstansial evidence, so yes, this is a true statement.

I've had my faith vindicated more times than I can count, on a personal level. Results count. And all the rationalization by others in an attempt to explain it away amounts to nothing.quote>

!

Who exactly is doing the rationalizing here? The people using down-to-earth logic and reasoning, or the people automatically attributing everything to a divine entity?

I am curious, though, what you consider a vindication of your faith.

[Herdervriend 46]

Yes. There is an god. What else would be the use of this life and who/what created us all then?

But, I am not religious. Why, because I will not sacrifice my freedom, kill other people, just because a stupid book tells me to do that.

No. God created us to life our life. Only the 10 commitments are important. The rest is a guidance line, nothing more.

Also, this can be racism, but I will not join the extremist world to kill everyone

It's just easy, we can get a 100 years, if we die, then we will see what happen, why bring so much commotion about it now.

We can see this beautiful world now. Yes we destroy it, but that is called: EVOLUTION!

 Tone down the caps and the profanity - Moderator

[Eastwinn 6]

Why does our life have to have use or meaning? Why does someone else have to have created us? Why can't we be simply an act of circumstance?

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: Duke87

I am curious, though, what you consider a vindication of your faith.

quote>

While I have been pretty candid about myself as various conversations warrant, there are some things that I don't feel the need to discuss publicly. Going into past situations where my life or others' were in imminent danger just to have it dismissed by others who have no understanding of the word 'faith' doesn't appeal to me.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

Going into past situations where my life or others' were in imminent danger just to have it dismissed by others who have no understanding of the word 'faith' doesn't appeal to me.quote>

Well, you're right about one thing. I was ready to put your explanations through a meat girnder of logic, so smart move on your part to not share them.

As for not understanding faith... oh, I understand it all right, I just have a diferent understanding of it than you do.

Originally posted by: Herdervriend

God created us to life our life. Only the 10 commitments are important.quote>

I am so tempted to make a demotivational poster out of this quote.

We can see this beautiful world now. Yes we destroy it, but that is called: EVOLUTION!quote>

You know what this reminds me of?

The world is changing. Therefore, it's only natural that evolution take its course. Now line up to be exterminated!

...sorry, random thought. I doubt too many people here catch the reference.

[Sam 163]

Originally posted by: Duke87

We can see this beautiful world now. Yes we destroy it, but that is called: EVOLUTION!quote>

You know what this reminds me of?

The world is changing. Therefore, it's only natural that evolution take its course. Now line up to be exterminated!

...sorry, random thought. I doubt too many people here catch the reference.

quote>

Sounds like the Daleks.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: Duke87

Well, you're right about one thing. I was ready to put your explanations through a meat girnder of logic, so smart move on your part to not share them.quote>

There you go again... claiming logic , but only your view of it. There is nothing illogical about belief in God. I know that just galls you, but we've had this discussion before. You've never been able to prove it to be illogical.

As for not understanding faith... oh, I understand it all right, I just have a diferent understanding of it than you do.

quote>

How can you understand something you don't share? It's like claiming you understand what it's like to be black, or blind. Or Australian. You don't, though you may think you do.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: sam

Sounds like the Daleks.quote>

Not even close.

Originally posted by: manticorefan

There is nothing illogical about belief in God.

You've never been able to prove it to be illogical.quote>

Try this:

What exactly makes your god special? If belief in the Judeochristian god is logical, than so is belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Xenu, or whatever other supreme deity someone thinks up. Quod est absurdum.

Simple. Done.

And, I may add, you've never been able to prove it to be logical, either.

How can you understand something you don't share?quote>

I don't have ovaries, but I understand what they are.

t's like claiming you understand what it's like to be black, or blind. Or Australian. You don't, though you may think you do.quote>

Ah.

Okay, I see the problem here. You said "understand what faith is" but meant "understand what it's like to have faith". The two are not the same. I obviously cannot claim the latter, although I can claim the former.

The problem with religion is that it has a tendency to consume one's mind and cloud one's judgment to be unconditionally in favor if it. For this reason, an outsider may not know what it's like to be part of it, but by virtue of not being part of it, they are more clearly capable of seeing it for what it really is. In the same way that someone who's schizophrenic won't be able to understand what schizophrenia is because their having it interferes with their ability to comprehend it.

...which, if you think about it, brings up an interesting point. Why is it that someone who claims they've seen UFOs and that aliens have abducted them and are out to get us is a raving lunatic and gets institutionalized, while someone who claim's they've seen god and that he's answered prayers and demands that we all worship him is just religious and has their claims respected? What fundamental difference is there really between those two belifes besides that one is mainstream while the other is not?

I suppose sanity is subjective that way.

Cue barrage of bricks from angry believers in 3...2...1...

[BlondeTwiggy 43]

What exactly makes your god special?quote>

What other religion's god has claimed to have come to earth and to have risen from the dead?

12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.  (I Corinthians 15:12-14)quote>

Cue barrage of bricks from angry believers in 3...2...1...quote>

44 But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.  (Matthew 5:44-45)quote>

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

I would add that no other religious persuasion (including those that exist only to mock those of faith) have the offer of forgiveness. Not Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, not the animists of Africa, not Scientology, nor the occult like Wicca and Theosophy. The entire Bible leads to one point, forgiveness and redemption. The power to forgive sin rests with Christ alone, not even with those who claim to be His vicar and sit in a Porta-Potti claiming the power to forgive if you just chant some meaningless words we now associate with long passes in the final moments of a football game.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: BlondeTwiggy

What other religion's god has claimed to have come to earth and to have risen from the dead? quote>

Originally posted by: manticorefan

I would add that no other religious persuasion (including those that exist only to mock those of faith) have the offer of forgiveness. Not Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, not the animists of Africa, not Scientology, nor the occult like Wicca and Theosophy. The entire Bible leads to one point, forgiveness and redemption. The power to forgive sin rests with Christ alone, not even with those who claim to be His vicar and sit in a Porta-Potti claiming the power to forgive if you just chant some meaningless words we now associate with long passes in the final moments of a football game.

quote>

Even if that makes it unique among mainstream religions, that's not to say someone couldn't easily make up a different religion that also has those ideas. And what exactly makes their new religion any less valid then yours? Christianity may be old and widely accepted, but consensus does not equal validity. Remember that it was for a long time common consensus that the Earth didn't move and everything revolved around it. Then this upstart little dude by the name of Copernicus suggested that the earth and other planets revolved around the sun and everyone thought he was mad. Except, he was right.

If I say that Jesus Christ didn't die for our sins but Julius Caeser did, you'd probably think me mad, right? Well, can you prove that you're right and I'm wrong? No, you can't. It can't be proven, there's only faith. Given that, what exactly makes my faith in Caeser less valid than your faith in Christ? Caeser may not have a holy book, but anyone could make one if they wanted. And having a holy book is not necessary, anyway. Many religions don't have one.

Lacking any real proof and only having "faith", no one religion can objectively be considered more valid than any other.

Now, back to the matter of belief being logical. See, here's the problem. I have yet to see any justification for that which does not ultimately boil down to "I have faith that it's true". And blind faith is no basis for logicality. So, right there, the argument is shaky.

But if we then take that assumption that "it's true because I have faith that it is" and run with it... well, watch what happens: You have faith that your god is the only god, and thus it is true. A Hindu has faith that there are many gods, none of which are your god, and thus it is true. You have faith that Jesus is the son of god, and thus it is true. A Jew has faith that there can be no "son of god" messiah figure before the apocalypse, and thus it's true. So, there is both only one god and many gods. And Jesus is both the son of god and not the son of god. And we could come up with many more examples. See how this becomes absurd?

So, just because you believe it's true does not mean it is. And if "it's true because I believe it is" is the only justification for it's logicality, then it is thus illogical.

...there's still the fallback point that "god transcends logic", but, well, that just brungs us to a total impasse.

And it still doesn't make belief in god logical, it just means that it can be logically absurd yet true.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[content_writer 0]

Originally posted by: jammy

God is not a real thing as we, the universe, the sun, the earth and the life on it has developed over billions of years.quote>

Originally posted by: Eastwinn

I personally do not believe in any god. I'm atheist. I've yet to see any evidence at all that convinces my in any way that any sort of god exists, so I'm yet to see any reason at all to believe that a god may exist. It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of lack of faith brought on by scientific thinking. I am sure of all my beliefs.quote>

Radio waves have been around since the universe began.  They surround you, travel great distances and can pass through buildings.  They can't be seen, touched, tasted, smelled or heard.  If the device called the radio (or the early experiments that preceded it) hadn't been invented, how would you be able to prove or disprove that radio waves exist?  Faith is nothing more than the ability to discern God, much like a radio (device) is able to tune in a specific frequency and play music.

Originally posted by: Patricius Maximus

I also believe that many other accounts are exaggerated or fictitious. For instance, the physical impossibility of that amount of water condensing in the atmosphere to produce Noah's flood, as well as my belief that Genesis has effectively been disproven by scientific evidence and theory (i.e. the gigantic evidence gap between the two).quote>

Contrary to popular belief, the flood wasn't exclusively the result of "a lot of rain" pouring from the sky.  If you read the whole account, it says that in one day "all the springs of the great deep [ie: water that's underground] burst forth..."  If you take into account all the current underground, surface, atmospheric water, add what's locked in the form of snow and ice (mountain tops, as well as the polar regions), and even the water contained in us, then there is certainly enough water to cover the whole earth.

[JanYpe 17]

Originally posted by: Duke87

If I say that Jesus Christ didn't die for our sins but Julius Caeser did, you'd probably think me mad, right? Well, can you prove that you're right and I'm wrong? No, you can't. It can't be proven, there's only faith. Given that, what exactly makes my faith in Caeser less valid than your faith in Christ? Caeser may not have a holy book, but anyone could make one if they wanted. And having a holy book is not necessary, anyway. Many religions don't have one.

Lacking any real proof and only having "faith", no one religion can objectively be considered more valid than any other.

quote>

Have you read Carotta's book about this? It's a fun little theory.

[fukuda 351]

Contrary to popular belief, the flood wasn't exclusively the result of "a lot of rain" pouring from the sky. If you read the whole account, it says that in one day "all the springs of the great deep [ie: water that's underground] burst forth..." If you take into account all the current underground, surface, atmospheric water, add what's locked in the form of snow and ice (mountain tops, as well as the polar regions), and even the water contained in us, then there is certainly enough water to cover the whole earth.

quote>

No. Water does have volume. It can accumulate underground in very porous rocks, but there aren't big enough amounts of porous rock underground for such a volume of water, and if water was forced out of these amounts of porous rocks underground entire continents would have collapsed under the weight of the upper layers of rock... Do you realize the sheer volume of water that is needed to cover the whole earth?

Not to say that there is no geologic evidence of such an amount of water covering the earth (huge sediment layers and erosion) which renders such a discussion quite useless. You only start wondering about the causes of something when you have evidence of the existence of that something, not the other way round...

97% of the water the earth contains is already covering the earth in the oceans, only a 30% of that 3% is groundwater. There isn't enough water in the earth to cover it completely.. and no water leaves or enters the planet by magic