The Possibility of a God? – Part 2
My first post on this subject has been subject to quite a debate over the last few days and can be found here. One particular object of discussion that came up that I would like to address at first is about being an Atheist. Many people are critical of this position, and say it is impossible to be sure there is no God. I consider myself an Atheist, even though, of course, I am not 100 percent sure there is no God. But I am fairly convinced. Being a scientific kind of a guy, I try to consider all scientific evidence relating to this matter, and come to the conclusion that this evidence points to the reality that there is no God. And although I am not 100% sure, I am not 100% sure of anything. Even seeing an object, one must admit there is a millionth of a chance that that object does not in fact exist. No-one can be sure of anything; that is, until we come to faith.Faith is another object of discussion that has arisen as a result of my original post. A popular view among the Theists responding to me has been centred on this elusive concept, although there is little possibility of a logical method of dissolving it. But I will attempt that here. I will loosely define faith as being the belief in something without sufficient proof to be called fact. People have faith in many things, but none raise the kind of debate as religion does. Why? Because not only is the basis of faith in God flimsy to begin with, but also the very belief in God goes against exactly where science and modern thought are going. Of course science has disproved a lot of common beliefs before now, such as the flat Earth, the previous thoughts about physics and the origins of species etc, but none have ever been as sticky as religion.This is because religion is not just another common belief or thought. Religion is and has historically been a big part of people. Challenging religion = challenging people; challenging their very being and their identity. Accepting the thought that God does not exist, there is no life after death and there is no grand meaning to the whole thing, is not something easy to swallow. So I am asking Theists now; is faith enough? What sets your faith apart from the faith of another religion, when there is no evidence to support yours over the other? Consider a parent who has strong faith in his his/her God. If this parent teaches this religion as fact to their child, is this still a matter of faith? Shouldn’t this child come t their own true faith?This all said, a very big reason why people still believe in God has little to do with the people. Very powerful people do not want things to change. No matter how you look at faith and religion, you will see that, historically, whoever is at the helm of religion will wield the power.Religion = PowerFew people would have continued the Christian religion if the powerful institution of the church had not been upheld until now. These people, along with other powerful groups of people (namely the
US government), have a vested interest in religion, as a means of controlling the people.Many more people would have subscribed to
Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection if there were not so many well funded people busy refuting it. And to those that believe that this Theory is not plausible, have a think about why the great majority of the scientific community accept it as fact, while the only sources one can find disputing this theory are highly biased or highly selective. If you think it is not sound, then have a think about why is it taught in schools as the sole (I am assuming) explanation for the origin of species?
And so I have discussed some of the social factors surrounding the existence of God, and I am free to get to the juicy bit. Does God exist? Is it possible to know? Can this question be logically resolved? Well I think it can. So bookmark this page now; I will be back for The Possibility of a God? – Part 3 soon enough.
119 comments so far
Leave a reply
jesterballz,
Why do you and other atheists insist on looking for evidence of a supernatural being? The word supernatural exists for the very reason that there is, by definition, no empirical evidence for its existence. Can’t you just accept that faith and religion are personal matters — you will never comprehend why people believe in God because you don’t. Evidence of His existence is not something that can be observed in nature; it is purely a matter of personal experience.
jesterballz, why must God not exist? Do you have a certain prejudice against people who believe in Him? What are your motives for your anti-religious warmongering?
For the Crown Rights of Jesus Christ,
The Crown Rights Patriot
This:
Scientific Case for God: http://god.rationalreality.com/
Also this: Koran and Self-Reference: http://godel.rationalreality.com/
I would actually disagree with your assessment on this one, particularly that of faith.
What you described as faith is actually belief … I’ll see if I can illustrate the difference
Belief – There’s some indication of what you think might be accurate, there’s some facts to support it. For example, I can justifiably believe that my PC will not spontaneously transform into a puddle of cheese flavoured ooze because it has never done that before, it is not designed to do it and it would break the laws of physics for it to do so.
Faith – Where there is no facts to back up an opinion or stance. There is no evidence at all to justify it what-so-ever. For example, I can have faith that The Mighty Thor will swoop down out of the sky next Tuesday and do the Can-Can for no apparent reason. It’s a bullshit opinion and there’s nothing to justify it.
That rationalreality.com website seems to present the standard ID arguments – which tend to range from the logically unsound to shot down lots of times already.
For example (paraphrasing) – ‘we don’t know what caused the big bang so god must have done it’. The old God of the Gaps approach? Absurdity bordering on intellectual dishonesty.
By your definition of faith, most of science is indeed faith. I think the futility of requiring physical evidence as proof of God is apparent in that God is not a physical being. It has been said by many the atheist that there is no proof of God, but that is only true for yourself. I have mountains of evidence that God exists, but it’s personal, often circumstantial evidence which can’t exactly be tested in the laboratory. And so we arrive at what would seem to be a paradox. A desire for proof implies a desire for truth, but the only real truth is in God himself. I can’t prove God to you, I only know part of his truth. For the same reason, no one else can prove God to you. You can’t prove God to yourself, you’re rather unwilling to. God can’t prove himself to you, for at least some small part of you would have to believe in God in order to ask it of him. All I can do is pray that you will accept the truth he offers you when the time comes that you ask for it.
If there is no higher purpose, if this one life is all we get, then how do we exist? I find it hard to put my faith in chance, I might have an easier time of that if I ever win the lottery. The way I see it, there is no life without purpose. This can actually be seen in our world. A healthy man could live to be a hundred, so what stops most of them from reaching that age? After retirement, most men stand a much greater chance of passing away, and this is not just a product of age. Those who don’t find a reason to keep living deteriorate in health. In the ideal relationship, the old man and his wife find reason to live in each other, but once the old woman is gone, the old man is soon to follow if he has nothing else to live for.
I find some of what you say to ring true. Many parents force-feed religion to their children just as it was force-fed to them. This is the difference between religion and faith. Many people understand and use these terms differently, but this is how I see it. Religion is a set of rules and rituals based off of the word of God, often loosely. The doctrine of the religion is agreed upon by a small circle of elite. Faith is putting trust in the truth. God is truth, and his word is truth. This requires a relationship with God, which isn’t so outlandish since he is after all a living being. Where religion depends on third-party, human interpretation of God’s word, deep faith relies on the source.
You say religion=power, but faith is power as well. Religion’s power is more often than not abused. Bush uses Jesus’ name to pull the evangelists’ votes behind him, but in practice he disrespects them and falls through on his promises to them. Then again, the government seems willing to use any means to reach its ends. There are countless examples of the abuse of religious power to be sure, but it’s not God’s fault that evil is done in his name, he hates that.
I find it interesting and somewhat contradicting that the very institution you show as dishonest in the way it uses religion is the same you use in defense of evolution. I don’t trust the government, so to me it stands to reason that I shouldn’t trust what the government supports in education.
The popularity of a theory, idea, or practice has often been used as justification, and his in turn been just as wrong. No matter how many sound-minded individuals support something doesn’t make it more logically sound. If history is any indication, the minority should often be more considered. The geocentric universe and flat earth theories were both popular ideas at one time. Smoking tobacco was thought to be healthy, and slavery was justified in the same way. I don’t care how many brilliant minds prescribe to the current theories lump-classified as evolution, human error exists even in groups. By their line of thought, we’re not much more than upgraded apes anyway.
In my opinion, what you’ve been getting at isn’t the possibility of God, but the evil selfish nature of humanity.
“By your definition of faith, most of science is indeed faith.”
My definition or jesterballz? Science is based on objective, verifiable evidence which is what makes it reliable. It is in no way based on faith.
“I think the futility of requiring physical evidence as proof of God is apparent in that God is not a physical being.”
There are many things that are not physical which can still be tested. For example, energy can often be without physical shape or form yet can still be easily detected and measured.
“It has been said by many the atheist that there is no proof of God, but that is only true for yourself. I have mountains of evidence that God exists, but it’s personal, often circumstantial evidence which can’t exactly be tested in the laboratory.”
If it can stand up to objective, critical review then it could be counted as evidence. If it can’t, then it is worthless. Sorry.
As it stands, there is no verifiable evidence for any sort of creator being while there is plenty which indicates a much more naturalistic perspective.
“If there is no higher purpose, if this one life is all we get, then how do we exist?”
Who ever said there was any sort of higher purpose. The highest purpose any human animal has is to make sure the next generation comes along and thrives, so they can keep the human species going. The human body is hardwired to be little more than be a breeding machine, biologically and philosophically speaking.
Matt,
I was replying to the OP, however I’ll welcome any discussion.
I didn’t say science is based on faith, i said it is faith by jesterballz’s definition, “I will loosely define faith as being the belief in something without sufficient proof to be called fact.”
In actuality the majority of science is not fact, it is based on fact. It’s really just a technicality, but theories require at least some faith.
phys‧i‧cal
2. of or pertaining to that which is material: the physical universe; the physical sciences.
3. noting or pertaining to the properties of matter and energy other than those peculiar to living matter.
4. pertaining to the physical sciences, esp. physics.
What energy do you speak of? Wind and electricity have physical form and shape. Their molecules and electrons, respectively, are used for these measurements. Even light is a physical energy. God is an energy that human devices cannot detect, though human senses can.
I didn’t offer my personal evidence as evidence for anyone else, my point being that one has to discover and accept evidence of God oneself. You could know for yourself beyond a doubt that God exists and that he loves you, if only you would let him.
What is this evidence of a more naturalistic view anyway? If God doesn’t exist, why do so many people believe in him? Discount all those who follow religion and not God, discount the hypocrites, and discount the televangelists. What is left is a small group of people who feel God’s presence and his love daily. We know that faith in God transcends human wisdom (an oxymoron at best) and science could never explain our experience, though it’s welcome to try. I’m sorry for you that you haven’t experienced the Spirit yourself.
I brought up the point of higher purpose myself. I was probing for jesterballz’s and anyone else’s thoughts about purpose if there is no God. So according to you and your particular school of thought, we are nothing more than animals. If our sole purpose is reproduction, then our unique gifts of reason, art, music, and language are pointless and unnecessary. Procreation in and of itself is no purpose at all.
The Godless are desperate to disprove God. If God doesn’t exist, then sin doesn’t exist and everything is morally acceptable. Some buried part of you knows God exists, and that part of you is afraid of his wrath, so your mind reacts by attacking faith, but that won’t make you feel any better. It saddens me to say that such people will be harshly awoken to their folly when the final day comes. I hope you all take the chance to beg forgiveness before it’s too late.
God is love, but God is also righteous and just.
“What is this evidence of a more naturalistic view anyway?”
Evolutionary Theory (which meshes perfectly with a naturalistic viewpoint) has so much evidence to support it, that would it take several thesis papers to explain it all in detail. A quick list would include such things as fossil records, and DNA and genetic sequencing (plus many more).
“If God doesn’t exist, why do so many people believe in him?”
Because it is comforting to think that their is some almighty sentient being out there looking out for you. Also some people don’t understand how the universe works as well as others and thus like to think of ways to explain it to themselves – thus use a creator being to fill in the gaps (which is basically how all religions start; the egyptians didn’t understand the movement of the sun so developed a religious belief to explain it). But just because it feels good, doesn’t mean that it’s true.
“So according to you and your particular school of thought, we are nothing more than animals.”
Self aware and highly developed animals, yes. Basic biology.
“If our sole purpose is reproduction, then our unique gifts of reason, art, music, and language are pointless and unnecessary.”
Incorrect. All those things listed help to improve our living environment and increase our thinking skills – admirable things to have for continued and improved survival of the species.
“Procreation in and of itself is no purpose at all.”
Of course it does, without it then we (and the rest of the human race) wouldn’t be here. At a rough guess, the dominant species on the planet would be the great apes (unless they stopped procreating as well, in that case all that would probably be left is some form of bacteria).
“The Godless are desperate to disprove God.”
I would reword that to “The atheists are hoping to enlighten the world with intellectual honesty via critical and objective thinking processes.”
“If God doesn’t exist, then sin doesn’t exist and everything is morally acceptable.”
Your statement here is fundamentally flawed. You assume that god is the source of morality when it was certainly present in the human race long before the jewish (let alone christian) faiths were around. Even ape/monkey/dolphin colonies are well aware that certain acts don’t aid in the survival of their respective groups and thus punish/stop any who attempt them. Exactly the same with humans, we base our morality on what is detrimental to the overall health of our society/culture. In short, no god has anything to do with morality (and if you look at parts of the OT, some of the behaviour displayed by god and his followers can certainly be labelled as immoral – such as the massacre of families including women, children and livestock).
To attempt to present Atheists as fundamentally immoral folk is a fallacy of the highest order.
“It saddens me to say that such people will be harshly awoken to their folly when the final day comes.”
If judgement day, as described in the bible, comes along and I’m proven wrong then that’s fine. I’ll admit my mistake and then proceed to do two things;
* Smack god across the back of the head for being an amoral liar that acts like a petulant child.
* Immediately ask for forgiveness; if the bible is spot on, then he’s going to forgive me so it’s all good.
I know I can live with that.
God is a Con-struct
I ask you what sets YOUR FAITH apart from Christians? Your precious evolution is based on nothing but faith. You have never seen a big bang. You believe it. You have never seen a star form. You believe they do on their own. You have never seen hydrogen turn into many different elements. You believe it did. You have never saw an animal give birth to anything other than its own kind. Yet you believe we all came from rocks that were rained on for millions of years. Reading your petulant self important drivel is almost too much to bear.
Evolution is the most pathetic religion of all. You can’t prove it anymore than I can prove Adam was the first man. Of course its based on faith.
There is no logic here, just a sad sack that has obviously never once opened the bible to see what it says and who just makes up his own version of God to easily knock it down.
GOD is not a straw man.
Jesus Christ WILL judge us ALL soon and all knees will bow and all tongues will confess that He is Lord of lords and King of kings.
Cpthilton,
in the interest of finding some common ground,
what exactly is the diference between life coming from “rocks” as you say, or “Dust” like in genesis, God aside?
just curious, seems like the same raw materials to me, no matter how it happened.
“Your precious evolution is based on nothing but faith.”
Actually it’s based on a great deal of objective and testable evidence. Like fossil records, DNA sequencing, genetic mapping, etc.
To say it is based on nothing but faith is an absurdity.
“You have never seen a big bang.”
Thanks to wonderful inventions and work done by scientists, we are able to judge that the various Galaxies in the Universe are moving away from each other. If they are all moving from a central point, then the simplest of logical deductions states that they must have all existed at the same point in the past.
That’s how it started, the detection of doppler shifted radiation and various other experiments have verified the theory time and again. The Big Bang happened and if you understand the subject then you’d realise there’s no real point in trying to disprove it. I suggest reading Stephen Hawking’s best seller ‘A Brief History of Time’ to understand how various cosmic phenomena happened (such as the formation of the Universe, including stars and black holes).
“You have never saw an animal give birth to anything other than its own kind.”
I would hope that they wouldn’t as it would break all the known laws of nature. You’re not quite up their with evolutionary theory, are you?
“You can’t prove it anymore than I can prove Adam was the first man.”
Again, there’s so much evidence available to support evolution and a naturalistic viewpoint, it would take numerous thesis papers to detail it all. Thankfully, various websites have summarised the basics in an easily understandable format.
http://www.talkorigins.org is highly regarded.
“There is no logic here, just a sad sack that has obviously never once opened the bible to see what it says and who just makes up his own version of God to easily knock it down.”
I don’t know about the author of the OP but I’ve read the bible cover to cover on more than one occasion. There’s no objective evidence in it to support the existence of any sort of creator being.
Hey Matt (and anyone else), I think you’d be interested in this:
http://junaman.wordpress.com/for-christians/
Don’t know if you’ve seen it yet. It has some flaws, but raises some good points.
Also, have a read of “Which is Stronger: Godfluence or Manfluence?
http://stuhasic.wordpress.com/2006/11/04/which-is-stronger-manfluence-or-godfluence
I am an atheist.
I have no problem with people believing in whatever they believe in as long as their belief does not harm others.
Unfortunately, I see at least two major harmful results of most religious belief:
1) Creates a lack of logical thinking and freedom of thinking (kids are taught by their parents that their religion is truth before they have the opportunity to come to their own conclusions). It is no coincidence that most believers of whatever religion were born into that religion (the percentage is probably around 99%). To me, that says it all.
2) It threatens our very existence. If ever we do actually blow ourselves up, my guess is that it will have been a conflict over or caused by religious belief. (And it will not be atheists versus the religious….it will be religion versus religion). Certainly, religious belief is behind much of the violence today and in the history of humankind.
i was brought up as an atheist. so, growing up, i always envied people who had faith, that is, until i started going to the church. the bible didn’t bother me as much as the fact that if i had committed a “sin”, all i had to do was pray for forgiveness. that simple? so, if i killed someone in cold blood and prayed afterwards, i would once again be a good person? as far as i’m concerned, that’s not faith; it’s delusion.
What is the point of this all? :s
Is this discussion serving us something good or beneficial? You say God does not exist. Ok, if i agree. What next? will this make me a better human? I don’t think so. Will this make me want to desire more? Yes. I will not have to feel bad after i curse some random guy on a street. I will not have to feel bad when i bully some old guy or people weaker than me. Because, no body is going to kill me for that. At most i will get arrested and the probability is very low. They are a lot of people who don’t do bad things because they have faith, that they will be punished for bad deeds. You wanna screw them up? Cause there are many a mad people who bottle up their madness and the religion is the cork. You wanna pull out the cork?
-
My point is this, supposedly if every one believes God does not exist. A killer will still be a killer, a thief will still be a thief. But a good guy(religious), will most certainly change his point of view. Since he did all the good things, curbed his desires many times(when others didn’t) and when you prove to him (not that you have done so) that there is no place after this life to go. What will he think? He will most probably say, what the fudge!. Why should he do good things and a killer goes on killing when both are going to end in dust. Why should he give charity and a thief keeps on stealing when both are going to end in dust.
And i have a question for those good people who do not follow a religion. What do they hold on to by doing good. Good things such as giving charity? Some people might do it for fame but some really do it to help poor people. Why do they? What do they get from it? Someone up here(or maybe the previous version of this post) said, we all live in harmony for our future generations. Something like this. Now, one works hard to get something out of it. I work hard in my college to get good grades. Will i work hard when my instructor tells me you are still going to get a F? Or you will never get an A no matter how much you work for it? No, i will not work hard! Because i know it will not matter(except that i believe/hope he is just lying). Point is, man works to get results. We live in harmony for our future generation? what good will the future generation do for us when we are already dead? We should live in harmony for ourselves, That is the most suitable reason. But by “we” if u say all humans. It is quite impossible to live in complete harmony. Because, Whenever a rule to “bring harmony” is made. There are always transgressors. Be it a rule of religion or of any government. And those who are the transgressors don’t care a dime. THAT is why they transgress. They can, however sometimes, be sorry for it later, but the MOMENT they are transgressing, they just don’t care. To them, whatever the way they live is right. They will amongst themselves consider the others foolish and dumb and hold on the their “rules”. You can not change them. Unless they change themselves. And even if u kill them all, yet they can not be killed. Because they spawn from within the goodly ones.
-
Now if you say, people following a faith do kill as well(or maybe even more). Let me tell you one thing, those who do ill, are NOT justified in religion. Just because there is no HUMAN strong enough to bring these bad people down, they keep doing those things. And when a ruler does not follow rules, people subordinate to him do not as well, otherwise, he will have them beheaded or replaced by others who follow him and not the rules. And this has been happening in the past and has defamed religion (in terms of bloodshed).
A religion who has no tolerance for other religion or some one without a religion, is not something one should follow (And if i am not mistaken all religions are tolerant. yes? i presumed it for others, but i know my religion is). Because if they are not tolerant, then, a corrupt ruler will have the opportunity to kill others because they believe in something different. The good things – be good to each other, be fair, be just, don’t steal, don’t back bite, be tolerant etc – are all the teachings of religion.
-
This means, that there are both good people who follow religion, and good people who don’t follow any particular religion. And bad people, can not be used to prove that a religion is wrong or right. (unless their religion contains something wrong). Osama & bush. Both are killers of innocent people who had nothing to do with anything.
Believing in God or not Believing has nothing to do with technology and science in terms that, religion does not prohibit studying deeper in to the creation and the world around us. In fact my religion, tells me to look into the creation and observe, so that I might see signs of God.
That being established.
1.People who believe in God.
believing in God, will help them in becoming good humans as they will follow their religion expecting a return after this life.
2.People who do not believe in God.
May not be that good as the other believing people.Logically the selfish level should rise, since they do not expect anything after this life.
(I Do Not Know the statistics, i am using only logic & human nature which wants to get something out of everything)
Both these people die.
If God exists. All believers go to heaven(after atonement for their misdoings). The disbelievers go to hell.
If God does not exist. Both these people remain in the same state. That is of non existence.
-
Risk Factor? which is commonly used a lot these days. Believing in God, in terms you follow the scripture. Will help u to be a good human(which you COULD have been otherwise too) but gives you the satisfaction that you will end up well after this life. Even if you don’t get a return of being good, you will not be dissatisfied because you are non existent! This should not be the reason of believing. I just mentioned it because it seemed worthwhile.
-
About Proof of God:
Suppose tomorrow, If God exists, he speaks, A voice comes from the sky. I am your lord. Follow me. All people on the earth hear it. He comes down into physical form that we can interpret. And shows us things we can not define by our existing science. PROOF!!! PROOF!! we have proof. GOD EXISTS. Now when all the people on earth who saw this proof die, the new gen can only believe in their ancestors. Some will. Some wont. They will demand proof for themselves. So, if God had to give proof to each one of us. What is the concept of believing then? Having a proof means knowing not believing. And to believe God gives signs.
Necessity of a Superior Being:
.)
Now no man can make a rule on another man. They can both agree and make a rule for both of them. But as i mentioned when in a big community you make a rule, there are always transgressors. A transgressor might say, all you men!, WHO are you to make a rule on me? i don’t follow it. I demand freedom from these rules. what will you say to that? If u look from his perspective, you might find he is saying right. You are equal to him. You have no right to subdue him under your rule. No one can impose a rule on its own kind, except by force which is incorrect. For every man to accept a rule of living life, There is a necessity of a superior being(you can call it God) who is aware of everything regarding humans and the system they live in, and with that knowledge that being, can make one rule book, which would be just and unbiased. This can act as a yardstick. A human can not make a rule book for another for he will always be biased(less or more). Now this time who transgress, the others can say, look, he is transgressing. But this time his view is not biased. Because the writer of that book was not a human, but a superior entity who knew the nature of humans and its system and he was unbiased. You can always question, “what makes you think he is unbiased?”. (and i may tell you reasons(my reasons) for that, and then more questions will follow. But this post is getting long as it is
But in brief, That is where you have to believe.
You’re reason for this belief is the rule book itself. You read it(Positively and not with the intent to proving it wrong).Or maybe you have to derive it from your own experiences. If you don’t, no sweat. It will not change a fact (and that fact will not be a fact until time comes). That is why there is tolerance in religion.
I am a Muslim btw, and these are few verses from the scripture(Quran), I believe in.
). I have just said some things. If any one is displeased, I had no such intention.(because in such matters as faith, people tend to get displeased, even myself).
Say, “O you disbelievers”
“I do not worship what you worship”
“Nor do you worship what i worship”
“Nor will I ever worship what you worship”
“Nor will you ever worship what i worship”
“To you is your religion, and to me is my religion”
-
Disbelievers – believers = non Americans – Americans.
This is no insult or anything.
My religion demands that i tell others what i have read in the scripture. It says i can not make them believe. My job is to just tell. If they want to learn. They can ask for more. If they choose not to its their choice to make.
-
By proving anything on you, i will not win anything. By proving anything on me, you will not win anything. Whoever is right. After death We will find out(But if you are right we might never find out
Have a nice time! =D
Religion and other nefarious God activities are predominately designed so the evil among us can pass themselves off as “good” and blend in with the rest of us . so God and religion is for evil people with evil agenda. Those of us who are decent normal people don’t need to hide behind a religious facade. We stand on our own independent and free. So go back and hide under a rock your evil is not desired of or required of here.
Hello I wanted to make a couple of points.
1. There are branches of science that do not hold to big bang theory. It was thought that the universe was expanding & accelerating at an increasing rate, then there was the theory that it was slowing down & might, some far distant time, collapse within itself. There are now theorys that the universe is at a constant & has allways been here. It raises some very interesting questions.
2. You do not need to ascribe to any religion to have a spiritual experience. In fact the practices & beleifs of religion are very likely to lead to spiritual stagnation. As mentioned somewhere above religion could well end up being responsible for the demise of us all, not very spiritual is it? Some extremist evangelical groups actually see the war & conflicts in the middle east, they have helped create & sustain, as a coming of the prophecy of armaggedon. That is insanity of the highest order. And to think that some of the most powerfull men on this planet holds these extreme evangelical views fills me with dred. Any christian should be seriously concered with the responsibility & concequence of alligning themselves to this religion, in light of the destruction being carried out as a result of some of these beleifs.
To the writer of the original post, out of interest have you ever tried, meditation or an alternative spiritual practice?
“Hundred” :a fear of Germans
sew a needle pulling thread
god an anagram of dog
tea a drink with jam and bread
Your karmas run over my dogma
What did the dyslexic gnostic do –
Lie awake in bed wondering if he was a Dog
It was’nt the cross that carried him off, it was the coffin they carried him off in.
Hello sqeky, I liked your post, very calm. I am openminded to the teachings of all religions, & beleive a golden thread runs through them all. The cultures that created these religions were different, but the teachings they are based on are very similar in essence. I myself have faith in a creator, but I subscribe to no particular religion. I have a personel understanding of spitituality that is quite unique, but explains for me life & gives me a framework of how to live in this world. I would like to point out that to have a differing view of the main religions or to hold a view of no God, does not mean that a man will more likely be “bad”. On the contary, many athiets are well meaning “good” people. It is a good thing to do good deeds for no reward, for a number of reasons. For a start, to be humanitarian makes for a more pleasant life. When you are genuinly generous & loving, people respond well & are loving in return. Certain laws do seem to govern life as well. Like attracts Like, for example. I also think that we all have powerfull higher selves, & combined with our consciousness, we do create alot of the situations & experiences in our lives. We can literally create for ourselves on a personel level & globally heaven or hell on earth. I would go as far to say that this process is the same in the afterlife & that through beleif, powerfull spiritual/psychic constructs have been created within other realms. To explain, all the energy beleiving that upon death a christian will “go to heaven” has more than likely created this reality in a spiritual realm, & upon death a person with these convictions will gravitate to this place or something similar. There would most likely be egotistical beings poseing as religious saviors in these places. I’m sure it is the same for all the religions & many souls reside for long periods of time in this delusional state. I had this idea myself, but it has been clarified through reading the ideas of others & thinking, it is not an uncommon viewpoint. What comes after? Maybe our true selves are like Gods & we eventually go to a level where we create on a level of worlds & galaxies. Who knows? But I’m sure we’re not going to burn or flap about in a city made of jewels that desends out of the sky! Peace
You have no other options. Whats the problem with accepting that God did it? Do you not even consider it a possibility?
The above post addressed to Matt.
Hi,
You define yourself as an athestist but then say you cant be 100% sure there isnt a god.
Your definition of a thesist is someone who is 100% sure there is a god.
I could therefore define you as a agnostist because u are 99% sure there isnt a God and 1% unsure. Ie you are neither sure or unsure.
I think your not comparing like for like. You can only really compare people who are 100% sure there isnt a God to people who are 100% sure there is a God AND both these cases require faith. No argument.
However you go on to say that you cant be sure that if you see something its there, so your require some faith in your life, like wise somebobdy maybe 99% sure God exists and 1% unsure there also require faith.
In the end all you are saying is that everybody has faith in something, before going on to rail against people who have faith ie everyone including you.
wow, these things that you guys are talking about really blow me away. But i just want to encourage you that there is a God, and there is a reason for your life.
Just search, and you shall find. Search with an open mind and an open heart and God will answer you. It is only then will you be truly be able to answer these questions. Because without searching you will never know what you could have found….
In the bible in Jeremiah 29 verse 11-14 it says…..
“For i know the plans i have for you declares the Lord, Plans not to harm you, plans to give you a hope and a future.” and
“You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you, declares the Lord”
Whats the worst thing that could happen if you look into this? You could waste abit of time, but then truly know that God isn’t real, or maybe, just maybe it could change your life forever. If you dont search you will never know!
Roger, you can be a agnostic, and still be a theist. Same with being a agnostic, and still being a atheist. Agnostice means your UNSURE. So if your a theist and say “I belive in a god, but I may also belive there isn’t a god since theres no proof other then my faith and others faith” then your a agnostic theist. Also if your a atheist thinking “I don’t belive in any god, but I can’t be sure because we can’t prove or disprove god so there could be a god” then your a agnostic atheist. People don’t understand agnostic isn’t orginally a religion or a state of belief, but a branch off of a state of belief, I just like to instead of calling them agnostic atheists/atheists I break atheists and theists into 2 parts, a weak and strong atheist/theists.
Now, heres what I love about the big bang theory, and the oscillating part of it. It state if conditions are right, the big bang will blow out, then crush in on itself again, and then repeat, over and over and over forever, no begining, no end. Of course they could be a begining for when this universe started it’s oscillating phase, but the energy would always of exists. Fine? Then religious people make a fool of themselfs by saying “Thats crazy How can energy just EXIST to cause the big bang?” Well then i’ll reply “How can god just EXIST to do anything?” Of course they’ll say hes outside of time, which is funny.
Me? Belive in a god? No. Me belive in a higher power which started the universe off? Yes. Does it think? Can it act on it’s own? No, and somewhat act on it’s own. I think somewhere in another plane of existance some force of energy, not a god, the energy that always existed gathers together, jumps into another plane of exists, which is ours, and then compacts into a hot ball, and starts the big bang off. Of course thats the brane world theory dumbed down, good book. Also goes along with string theory.
Now all morals of humans derive from 1 source. “You scratch my back, and i’ll scratch yours” All morals derive from that simply. Of course you may say thats stupid, but it’s said right in the bible “Do onto others, that you would have them do unto you” Basiclly, if you don’t hurt me, I won’t hurt you.
Do I think jesus existed? Yes. Was he the song of god? No.(even though in the bible he isn’t the son of god anyway, he was god in the form of a man) I think jesus was the first con man. How? Simple, just like faith healers do now, they higher people to come in, say there sick, he touchs them, there healed. How’d he walk on water? Even though we don’t know if it’s true or not, lets say it is? Did he do it? No, was it a illusion? I think so. Just like people like chriss angel, it’s all a trick, as he puts it, no magic involed.
Religion came about by people not understanding how things worked. A man would ask “How did that ball of fire get in the sky?” “how does the wind blow?” “why does work?” and of course, back then the only answer then could think of was something did it. Which is true, but the answer they came up with “god/gods” was the wrong part. They wanted to then please the god/gods, and religion was born.
Now we know evolution isn’t a theory, it is however treated as a theory because of the ammount of people who try to disprove it, and donot want to treat it as fact, because of their false beliefs. The simple fact is, we have enough evidence to say evolution is real, we even found the missing link last year to human evolution, and still the stuborn religious nuts still think it had to be god.
Oh, btw to the person who kept up with “real blah blah blah wouldn’t be a bad person” If you take the REAL bible to it’s REAL meaning instead of suger coating it, and making a fake bible(new testiment) you can justify anything, and it’s even encourged. Please read the real bible if you wanna know what I mean. It’s called the “old testiment”
Oh crap, i’m a idiot, I put rogers name in for the name. Anyway heres another thing I never got about god.
God is outside time correct? If he/she suddenly just got bored decided to make the universe,(doesn’t state in the bible this is the only universe he ever created in all time but we are to assume it is) What would of made him bored? Or mabye not bored, but something just like “hey I wanna make a confused lot of retards in a universe type thing”
That of course makes no sense because if you are outside of time, and existed forever, you wouldn’t feel anything, or think, or get bored, because if you did, he would try to destroy himself, or create a infinite number of universes.
Also, would heaven even be a good place? Think of it, everythings perfect? Ok, after million years, still having fun, what about a billion years? Getting bored yet? No? Ok after a google(1×10^100) years would you be bored? No? After a googleplex(1×10^10000)? If of course you answered yes to any of them, then just take the number, times it by a unmeasurable number(Infinite) and you get how long your gunna be there. In bordom and sadness wanting to become nothingness…
Also think of it this way, if you live for infinity in heaven, then ANYTHING you can imagine is going to happen, and I don’t care who you are, your gunna do alot of sick shit. I know you’ll say no, but 1 day, you’ll be like “wonder what it would be to have sex with and you’ll do it. Sad thing is after doing it, you may hate it, but then after so many years later, your gunna do it again, no matter what, because when your in a state of infinity you cannot not do everything, forever. So since even 1 act in infinity, would in itself come out to be infinity, have fun have sex with your grandfather, for infinity.
Good point! If God is infinite we have all probably had this conversation in an infinite number of universes, on an infite number of worlds an infinite number of times! I’m getting very bored.
Oh a good site I found is http://www.asktheatheist.com/
This guy will answer alot of questions.
Let me first start of by saying this: Very few of us know what we are talking about. ‘What am i talking about?’, you might ask? In most major post-secondary institutions, Theology isn’t even offered as a degree of study until a student hits the graduate level. Why? Cause its complicated. very very complicated.
Now, i’ve taken some undergraduate religion courses, and i’ve looked quite hard at the entire situation. I’ve spoken to PhD’s in the field, and asked some fairly hard hitting questions. Here are my results:
1) Creationism is a metaphor. We weren’t made out of “God-playdough” and then thrown down to earth and sprinkled with “God-dust” until we came to life. People who believe this are ignorant, but don’t hate them for it. Chances are, they just haven’t heard the alternative without someone reprimanding it afterwards.
2) Science and God are two completely different things. One does not disprove the other. Lets think about this a minute: According to those who believe, God is a metaphysical being who, in theory, doesn’t exist on the physical plane but on a spiritual one. He is the author of our existence, and is responsible for all things. Science is a academic field created by man to explain the world around him.
Now, listen closely, cause here’s the kicker: What if God doesn’t actually control the universe like we all control our computers at our desks? What if the world, by design, runs on a set of rules that we can very much document and learn from, but once in a while, divine intervention results in an “exception” to these rules? Most texts about God tend to outline his love of responsibility, so maybe he developed the world through natural means (remember, he’s most likely not a physical being), which can include evolution/big bang/etc, and from there left it in our hands to do what we will with it. I don’t think God really cares about our physical existence as much as people think he does. He cares about our souls, and about our emotions. He wants us to be happy, not comfortable.
3) Some People are good. Some people are bad. Some people pretend to be good, so that they can take advantage of others. Example? The “Christian” republicans. Most people are starting to realize that a lot of christians are full of shit, and its true. But they’re not real christians either. Real Christians will never tell you what they believe; they’ll show you. They’ll treat you like a brother, and will show true sacrifice and compassion. This is what Jesus taught, and this is how you gain entry into God’s circle. Its just about relationships, and having somebody to always trust, always love, and always depend on, regardless of what is happening in our world. Its empowering.
A lot of people ask what the point of it all is. God, and all that jazz. Personally, i have my views. I think God created us to provide himself with the one thing you cannot force into existence: an independant relationship with another soul, not forced by his hand, but of a free will. A community if you will. As elementary as it sounds, maybe God is just lonely and wants everyone to come to his party. I know I ‘m going.
I was just reading your first article about God and I love how that whenever a person of little or no faith brings up the article of God not existing a person has to point it out in that manor. Living in Georgia I experience a lot of what we call “the bible belt”. I travel to church every now and then with friends just because they will drive me nuts until I attend with them. I dont know if its just my luck but whenever I attend church with them the Priest/Pastor brings up the subject of “non-believers” and how they have no direction in life without God. To me Religion has only lasted so long because of “faith”. All it takes is for enough people to fully believe something for it to eventually be known as “fact”. With religion you dont even need scientific studies for something to be fact, all you need is a group of people to write a large book about it and create an amazing but extremely unlikely story, set up organizations of people to spread the word about it.
My only point is that I, me, myself believe that God is not real. I’m tired of trying to be proven otherwise…thank you for your time
I think god exist because we cannot tell how this world was created unless u believe in god and unless u do u will feel an emptyness that a believer doesn’t get.u will have no fear of doing evil and there will be no justice on earth (for example killing people would be normal for u because u will belive in the principle of jungle “the strong kill the weak”).I belive there is a purpose why we we were created.There is a higher power that controls everything in this world (and that is god).
I’m a muslim and there were a lot of evidences about the judgment day that our prophet told us about and from them I knew that this religion (islam) is the right one.some of the evidences happened about 60 years and some happened about 400 years and some 1 century ago,the main 10 evidences are still to come ,but some are just about to happen.If u see how prophet mohammed was living in the desert eating nothing but dates.and how he in the desert could make an empire that overcame The Roman empire and the persian Empire
with nothing but an army of believers. He told us about somethings that happened in the future and are still happening u would say that is a real miracle he lived in the desert and have never seen the sea and yet told us about somethings even a silorman wouldn’t know,he knew (by he power of god) what will happen to his believers and told them how they will die and where. things u can never imagine how would have known there are a lot
of scientist that became muslims from just reading
some of the holy quraan.
An atheist (I have only read a few of the posts and so I do not account for redundancy) would require evidence of a supreme being to belive in it. But, what if those supreme beings exist outside of science’s ability to observe it?
Here is another point. Life has been evolving for over 4 billion years. That is a long time, and we should not be surprised intelligent life came out of it. However, the exact time between the spontaneous formation of amino acids, proteins, carbohydrates, nucleic acids, and so on, is unclear, in addition to membranes. We are certain that those two steps were not performed overnight, but the probability, even over billions of years, of certain molecules combining in such a manner to even vaguely represent life is extremely small, and the fact that we habit a solar system capable of sustaining these things, even in the universe, is destardly small, over any amount of time. Coincidence or divine creation? On one hand, how did life develop like that, and how did we end up in such a hospitable solar system in the prime of a star’s life? However, the universe is so large this has to have happened.
Many people, atheists, religious, whatever, think that atheists beleive more or less in probability and coincidence, and religion believes in stuff zapping in out of no where. This is not the case.
In more heated debates, Atheists beleive the formation of life just happened, and or refuse to belive in a god until that god makes its prescense plain. In all probability of course.
Religion does not neccessarily believe that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Religion for the greater and more modern part does in fact believe that the earth is spherical and revolves around the sun. Likewise, many do acknowledge evolution, and as such the bible has been reinterpreted, and yes, if you read the bible, it can be interpreted many ways, the greatest aspect of the bible. Where religion parts from Atheism, is that religious, Christians in the spotlight, belive that evolution WAS a result of god. In other words, god has guided evolution, and made his prescense as discreet as possible. You look from binary fission to meiosis, even in billions of years how did that develop almost so perfectly as it is? And yet, how did monkeys and tigers, which lived in more or less the same environments, become so different in the last billion years, humans to house cats.
An atheist in the sense has the mind of a scientist; sceptism. However, god is described as being supernatural, unobservable. So how can we observe him? He is the creator, he can do what he pleases.
However, god’s prescense in our DNA is just as present as billions of years of evolution and change.
What it comes down to, is this: What you cannot observe is not what does not exist. We didn’t believe in cells for the longest time.
my stand? I tried not to biased, but I would think it is a hell of a coincidence that life in this planet was given a planet situated at the right distance from the right sun in the right solar system in the right region of space in the right galaxy. In addition, life developed in the right conditions and did not die out, and so much change has occured and life in the form of pre prokaryotic life somehow evolved into eukaryotic life, and those cells one day clumped together and became specialized, and after some billions of years, became us. Take all those coincidences, those chances of those events occuring, and multiply them. Then multiply taht number by the number of similar occurences that can occur elsewhere in the universe. Even in so many years with so many chances to occur, that number is bastardly small, and so that is a HUGE coincidence.
to my final stance, I think yes, Something, somewhere, some time ago has guided life.
This argument has spun from the interesting to the ridiculous and I thought I’d chip in my bit. It’s interesting to see how the ‘atheists’ who have commented have done so in a calm, considered fashion, it’s been the religious people defending their faith that have resulted to insults, name-calling and condescending feelings of sorrow for all the beautiful things aethists are missing from their life. Matt, in particular, deserves some sort of award for keeping his cool.
I find it amazing that what is effectively a brainwashing procedure has had such as massive and unbreakable impact on the human psyche, one that is resistant to reason, evidence or suggestion of anything that contradicts their faith. It’s almost like theists are scared to consider the fact that for most of their life they may well have been living a lie. I could rattle on for hours about this, but consider the following short points.
Theists seem keen on claiming that religion gives us morals and in some extreme cases people claim the world would be rife with rape, pillage, murder, violence and other atrocities without faith to teach us what is right and what is wrong. Consider this then:
http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm
Results here provided by the Federal Bureau of prisons, albeit in 1997, show that of all incarcerated across America, only 0.2% are atheist, the rest claim allegiance to one religion or another. I’d like to preempt any arguments suggesting people ‘find’ God when they go to prison because this just underlines an irrational adoption of faith in a questionable entity based on fear, and should not form a basis of true faith.
Secondly, for the theists among you, consider the following well-used yet relevant argument. If good people go to heaven and bad people go to hell (forgive me generalizing here, but for the sake of argument…), how happy would you really be in your paradise if one of your friends, family or loved ones were deemed unworthy to enter heaven and were sent to hell? Would you be happy knowing that someone you loved was being tortured for eternity?
In specific response to Hesus, although I have plenty to say about his overused argument about how scientists can’t prove there is a god so that somehow justifies over 5 billion people the world over believing in him in one form or another, I’ll leave that one and focus on the other one.
You bring up issues surrounding an unlikely set of coincidences that sees our planet harboring the right conditions for life. Do you know how big the universe is? There are around 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in our universe from what we can currently tell. FROM WHAT WE CAN CURRENTLY TELL! So that’s a minimum, of STARS, not even planets. That’s a lot. Is it not entirely conceivable that not just one but many fit the specific list of conditions to support life, given that the odds are so large for them not to?
hi, i would just like to point out a few things… Namely that science isnt as ‘great’ as some people here think it is. Science can NEVER be regarded as fact or truth [in the strictest sense of the word]due to the very nature of science and scientific methods empolyed in science. For example, if i drop my pen, the laws of physics state that objects released in the air shall fall towards the earth due to the force of gravity acting upon it. gravity in a sense ’causes’ the pen to fall towards the earth. But the question is… is gravity actually causing the pen to fall? bizarre as this may sound but there are some people who propose that causality exists NOT within the objects or within the external world, rather causation exists wihthin the realm of the human mind. Science therefore assumes that causation exists when presenting scientific theories, therefore if the whole idea of causation can be refuted [which it can]then the WHOLE foundation of science is left in tatters.
Further problems arise too with the problem of induction, for example, if i let my pen go, it falls to the ground. and if i repeat this experiment again for 1000 times, the pen may fall to the ground yet again, but whats to guarantee that it will fall the n+1 time? we assume that the future will represent the past, but this reasoning is illogical, therefore to declare that it is scientific fact that gravity is acting upon the pen causing it to fall because not truth in any sense of the word because there is absoulutely no gurantee that the pen will fall the next time you drop it. …
science then can never be regarded as truth or fact, even if it can be verified objectively!! it is the mere idea that using empirical verification that science flawed !. references: David Hume, The Problem Of Induction, read up about it .. educate yourselves..
Arguing about religion = endless and pointless.
@pslester
Spin. Spin. Spin.
You guys love spinning the argument away from rational explanations and focus on the ignorant ones. Fair enough, its an easy way to play the game.
First, your responses to Hesus don’t actually prove anything, as his latest argument is very much still valid after your rebuttal. The chance is still ridiculously small, even considering how many stars and galaxies we are aware of (keep in mind, the universe has been expanding all this time, meaning it was smaller in the past). Even the most staunch athiest must admit to the almighty power of numbers and science. The chances are ludicrous, but i guess they are there to an extent, and thats what you got.
In reference to your earlier comments, I agree with you that religion is broken and in many ways, evil. We can get by without religion, but I would say that I cannot get by without God. Thats my personal opinion. I’m not gonna argue tho that many christians are ignorant and useless. its true.
However, its shown in your “well-used yet relevant argument” that you do not have a deep understanding of the subject. News break people: ‘Hell’ was invented by the Catholic church in the 9th century by combining John’s accounts in revelations (truthfully, more about nero’s grip on the political world than the end of times, although we may see similarities over time) and a healthy fear of God in order to keep church coffers brimming with coin. In short: Hell, as we know it, doesn’t exist and never has.
Jesus never speaks of Hell directly, but does speak of a place like what we conceive is hell. This “place”, called ‘Shaol’, which in jewish tradition apparently means ‘holding place’, is the resting place for souls waiting for the final judgement. While in Shaol, a soul is completely isolated and completely alone. Jesus taught that to not follow him would lead you to ‘Shaol’, meaning, emptiness. Hell is dying and turning to dust, like the athiests claim. Alternatively, God wants us to join him, and to live in communion with him and his followers (Christians) once we die, which is coined as ‘Heaven’.
The point is this: If I go to ‘Heaven’, and loved ones of mine do not, I may be sad or angry, or I may not. Here’s why its a stupid argument: You assume that the afterlife will have ramifications on us from both the past and future. Thats not a very good assumption. Time is something that controls us only because we are mortal. Perhaps, upon receiving everlasting life, we will not be so concerned with the past or future, but instead revel in the present of every moment.
I would really hate the fact that if i were born in india and raised under hinduism… then die to find out i were on the wrong boat… MAN that’d suck.
Hi,
I’ve read some of these posts, since there are so many, and I’m interested why theists and atheists don’t believe the same thing, in fact they have to, in the end.
So you believe in God?
Then this God created the universe?
So this God existed before the universe and regardless of the whole religious “all knowing/powerful/good” argument, it must have been singular?
O.K. it may have existed in a previous universe, before a big crunch and consequent big bang, but then it isn’t God is it?
So it must have been “all there is” and hence singular.
Therefore it cannot have existed.
How can we define existence? By reference to something else to prove that it exists? I’m not speaking of reality or personal experience, but existence. And before you give me grief about the simplicity of existentialist arguments and the limits of humanist philosophies,consider that all we have is this physical context which provides the context for all of our respective philosophical and religious belief systems.
Yes, all this could have been the prodigy of the creator, but regardless, even if this was created it is still all we have.
So if the atheist (like me) does not believe in God,then by necessity, he must believe in non-god, or the complete absence of God. Otherwise, he isnt sure and must be agnostic.
Yet for the theist to believe in a God that is singular and existed before the universe, he must also believe in nothing. Since if God exists now it isnt singular and hence not God. Consequently, all religious texts must surely be human interpretations and written by men, in an attempt to build a perfect society? There’s certainly nothing wrong with that, and it shares the same qualities as many humanist writings, with the exception that it is singularly verifiable.
To the previous poster, who wrote that without religion, people have no answering power and hence will sink to the lowest common demoninator (sure I’m paraphrasing, for which I apologise, but it sounds a fair interpretation), I must ask if he thinks humanity will remain in this perpetual state of immaturity and will never evolve into a state of personal responsibility? That is, grow up and act for the greater good, without an external “big stick?” I must confess that at times I share his opinion, but I certainly hope we are capable of more.
Anywho, I hope these questions made some sense and are answerable.
*was
excuse my poor grammar.
god is dog backwards therefore god is a dog’s bottom ,you know it makes sense.
hi folks, just trying to give my peice in this conversation. I know ill prolly get flamed for my poor grammer(such as using prolly) and/or for my beliefs, but i like to cause trouble.
So on to my rant
to take a quote,”Further problems arise too with the problem of induction, for example, if i let my pen go, it falls to the ground. and if i repeat this experiment again for 1000 times, the pen may fall to the ground yet again, but whats to guarantee that it will fall the n+1 time? we assume that the future will represent the past, but this reasoning is illogical, therefore to declare that it is scientific fact that gravity is acting upon the pen causing it to fall because not truth in any sense of the word because there is absoulutely no gurantee that the pen will fall the next time you drop it. …
science then can never be regarded as truth or fact, even if it can be verified objectively!! it is the mere idea that using empirical verification that science flawed !”
before you start accusing people of being wrong, understand what they base “fact” off of. In a science community something becomes “law” or true if it can be tested and that test reproduced repeatedly. So in the above quote, the experiment of dropping a pencil and seeing it hit the floor is testing gravity. Therefore by testing it N amount of times and comming to the same result, it makes gravity a law(fact) of science. The main problem science types have with religion is taht it cannot be tested or that test be able to be reproduced by everyone, so it is not law(fact)
now on to religion.
Many of you who reply to this are jewish or of a christian/catholic belief. If you truly would look at your history, your religions have been created as a source of control. The romans believed in many gods, but they saw that if only 1 god existed then they could control their people much easier(dont believe me, ask someone who is proficient in roman history). Ever wonder why the vatican is in rome?
On the subject of jesus for those of you who wish to discuss it. Many believe he performed miracles, my father, who is a devote christian, shared with me his thoughts on jesus, which are the best ive have ever heard, he told me”jesus wasnt a “miracle man”, he wasnt some magical person, he was intelligent. He healed people with knowledge of herbal remedies. He transformed water into wine by using grapes. All of his miralces were just things we do today but were magnificent in his time.” and for those of you who say jesus never existed, there is historical recordings of him, just whether or not he is special is not proven.
I have merly a qutoe my bother once told me that pretty much somes up creation,”biological organisms wernt created by some greter being, some amino acid chains formed and decided that they liked doing that and so continued doing it”
if any of you are wopndering my standing on this subject, im not a believer or a disbeliever in “god”. I am a man of science, i beleive in energy and i believe that when you die, your energy has to go somewhere, which would most likely be returning to the earth from which it came.
so let some more heated discussion begin
tryin to enlighten
how about this: your post was too long so i didnt read it. so i could flame you about your long winded post. I skipped to the last paragraph that did nothing for me ,but the last line was inspirational. so how about this to “heat” up the discussion “the devil made me do it” “god is really a stem cell” there are how’s that?
Lets Rock!
I would like to comment on two things.
1. If your not 100% sure there is no God then your not an atheist your an agnostic.
agnostic
1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2 : a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something
The first def given sounds a lot like your frame of mind. I don’t believe that your an atheist given the fact that your not 100% sure about anything. Most atheists will tell you that they are 100% sure there is no God.
atheist
one who believes that there is no deity.
Both def’s were provided by Webster’s Dictionary.
2.
A) Your words: ” I try to consider all scientific evidence relating to this matter, and come to the conclusion that this evidence”
You can’t possibly consider any evidence of any sort due to your claim “I am not 100% sure of anything.” If your not 100% sure of anything then how does your evidence present itself in favor of there being no God? How can any evidence exist in your eye’s?
B)If your not 100% sure of anything then how do you apply scientific principals in deducing fact from fiction? In other words how do you reason with no firm ground to stand on, if the very rules your using logical deduction are not 100% absolute?
c)Lastly, obviously there are absolutes by which we are governed, to claim otherwise is ridiculous and with out merit. If one states “there is no absolutes and that nothing can be known for sure” that statement in itself is an absolute self-defeating statement. If there are absolutes or rules by which we are governed then I think that it’s safe to say that an absolute being created them. Thus, a god or God exists.
linkbolt
Does God Exist?
This is one of the best explanations of why God allows pain and suffering that I have seen. It’s an explanation other people will understand.
A man went to a barbershop to have his hair cut and his beard trimmed. As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation. They talked about so many things and various subjects. When they eventually touched on the subject of god, the barber said: “I don’t believe that God exists.” “Why do you say that?” asked the customer. “Well, you just have to go out in the street to realize that God doesn’t exist. Tell me, if God exists, would there be so many sick people? Would there be abandoned children? If God existed, there would be neither suffering nor pain. I can’t imagine a loving a God who would allow all of these things.
” The customer thought for a moment, but didn’t respond because he didn’t want
to start an argument. The barber finished his job and the customer left the shop. Just after he left the barbershop, he saw a man in the street with long, stringy, dirty hair and an untrimmed beard. He looked dirty and unkempt.
The customer turned back and entered the barber shop again and he said to the barber:
“You know what? Barbers do not exist.”
“How can you say that?” asked the surprised barber.
“I am here, and I am a barber. And I just worked on you!” “No!” the customer exclaimed.
“Barbers don’t exist because if they did, there would be no people with dirty long hair and untrimmed beards, like that man outside.”
“Ah, but barbers DO exist! What happens is, people do not come to me.”
“Exactly!” – affirmed the customer.
“That’s the point! God, too, DOES exist!
What happens, is, people don’t go to Him and do not look for Him.
That’s why there’s so much pain and suffering in the world.”
Atheist: Someone who absolutely does NOT believe in God.
Agnostic: Someone who doesn’t know.
–
Agnostic Atheist: Someone who doesn’t know, but is leaning towards no god.
Agnostic Theist: Someone who doesn’t know, but is leaning towards a god existing.
Thanks.
DemonSamurai~
Wasn’t needed I said it back in my early post… Although I gave myself the wrong name. People don’t understand Agnostic is a term to describe the next word.
OH MY SUPERNATURAL METAPHYSICAL ASS!!! I am 100% sure and have complete faith in my belief that at least half of you are pitifully brain-washed, delusional, or ignorant. Now…with that fact out of the way, a few questions.
–crownrightspatriot
“Can’t you just accept that faith and religion are personal matters — you will never comprehend why people believe in God because you don’t. Evidence of His existence is not something that can be observed in nature; it is purely a matter of personal experience.”
1. So, are you saying that existence of god is purely in ones own mind?…like the voices in Jeffery Dahmers’ mind?, or is it something like a childs belief/faith in a non-existent Santa Claus? Do any of you remember how that was? How easily you believed? Didn’t even require a 2000 year old book of contradictory rhetoric, did it? Just had to want to believe and accept Chris Kringle as your personal toy fairy complete with flying reindeer.
–”jesterballz, why must God not exist? Do you have a certain prejudice against people who believe in Him? What are your motives for your anti-religious warmongering?
2. Why would anyone have prejudice against people who, due to blind faith in ancient ideas, consider themselves morally superior and think the rest of the world should be forced to live within the confines of their self-righteous beliefs or be exiled/imprisoned or exterminated?
O.K.,that covers brain-washed and delusional. Now more of those afflictions along with an abundance of ignorance all in one post.
–(NinjaProof_Shell
–”By your definition of faith, most of science is indeed faith.”
3.Are you serious? – *Faith is commonly known as a belief, trust or confidence not based on Logic or Reason, but based on a transpersonal relationship with God, a higher power, elements of nature and/or a perception of the human race as a whole, the object of faith typically transcends what can be proven scientifically and sometimes exceeds what can be objectively defined.
–(NinjaProof_Shell
–”I think the futility of requiring physical evidence as proof of God is apparent in that God is not a physical being. It has been said by many the atheist that there is no proof of God, but that is only true for yourself. I have mountains of evidence that God exists, but it’s personal, often circumstantial evidence which can’t exactly be tested in the laboratory. And so we arrive at what would seem to be a paradox. A desire for proof implies a desire for truth, but the only real truth is in God himself.”)
–4a.You have no evidence, personal or circumstantial, of the existence of god (Evidence is accumulated through observations of phenomena that occur in the natural world, or which are created as experiments in a laboratory. Scientific evidence usually goes towards proving or disproving a hypothesis.)You have blind*faith.
—4b.A desire for proof does not imply a desire for truth. Truth is a philosophical idea with no single definition. It can be subjective, relative, objective. A desire for proof implies a desire for facts that support an assertion.
If God is a personal experience – and the only real truth is in God itself – then that supports the idea that there are no absolute truths. VIOLA!
–Hogey( I wont even bother pasting your comments)
RE: Theology being so difficult and some of us not knowing what we are talking about. The #1 most ignorant comments I have ever heard!
1. Who does know? Nobody. We all are just as qualified as the Theology Professor or Preacher/Pastor/Priest/Rabbi or the Pope, even Moses himself, who I’m sure was much less educated than anyone here. The writers of the bible certainly did not have a clue about the chemistry and physics of the universe.
Oh well, I could go on and on, but i just recieved a phone call from my uncle (its his birthday) he woke up this morning to find my aunt dead in the bed beside him. I hope she is with her god.
Peace
SC
“Only the Sith deal in Absolutes”-Obi wan Episode III. Are christians really a cult of warrior priests devoted to the dark side of the force, & george lucas is attempting to educate us all to the real motives of christianity in the star wars films.
Fear leads to anger.
Anger leads to hate.
Hatred leads to power.
Power leads to victory.
Let your anger flow through you.
Your hate will make you strong.
True power is only achieved through
testing the limits of one’s anger,
passing through unscathed.
Rage channeled through anger is unstoppable.
The dark side of the Force
offers unimaginable power.
The dark side is stronger than the light.
The weak deserve their fate.
–tenets of Sith philosophy
Danner are you really not saying in your “God is a barber argument, that it’s people’s individual fault that they suffer?” Common get real! The only way this could be true is if we are God’s, literally, & we choose suffering (by creating ourselves from some higher existance) to learn & gain experience. Could be true I suppose.
By the way I just dropped my pen & it landed on the ceiling, & when I got up I tripped over & saw myself land on the wall, above the sofa, as I was leaving the room to make a cup of tea. What does it all mean, has science gone mad?
”
Atheist: Someone who absolutely does NOT believe in God.
Agnostic: Someone who doesn’t know.
–
Agnostic Atheist: Someone who doesn’t know, but is leaning towards no god.
Agnostic Theist: Someone who doesn’t know, but is leaning towards a god existing.
Thanks.”
So, were making up our own definitions now?
Maybe, you can show me your definition in a dictionary?
Furthermore only one part of my argument was addressed this leads me to believe that you have no rebuttal for the rest of it or at least never considered it.
I state this to whomever.
I expect that some here will be very immature about there approach to the proposed argument. I have chosen to not present ignorant arguments that hold no real merit. In other words I presented a sound argument however it appears that some are unable to do so. There are more people interested in being ignorantly funny with opinions of the heart rather that sound logical argument. In other words there reasoning is based upon the way that they feel rather that rationalizing there ideology of God.
To the Author of the article:
I would expect more from the Author of this argument. It truly appears that your not really looking for answers or to discuss your argument rather just to whine and complain. I don’t think that does much good maybe for the weaker minded soul’s here however I am challanging your argument and you have yet to “step up”.
linkbolt
The mystery of the human heart will forever be an unknowable & eternal mystery.
Regardless of how advanced we become.
By it’s nature beleif in or ideas pertaining to God cannot be rationalized.
If I beleive that I’m incarnating in 2,500 different lives on earth at the same time & all of them are attached by “psychic” threads to a “god like” being existing in a higher realm outside of of the 3rd density. & at some point I’ll awaken to this fact & rise to a higher vibration. Then who can Provide anything other than personal conviction that this is true or not true.
Check out this site for similar ideas to this:
http://www.trufax.org/
Also I heard a very interesting Atheist argument the other day.
Has science proven that flying elephants do not exist?
Has science proven that the next time I have a bath. When I pull out the plug it is me & not the water that disappears down the plug hole?
Thay havent!
So can I ask, do you beleive in flying elephants & are you in fear of getting sucked down the plughole next time you have a bath?
Also:
Theist: person who has faith in God.
Atheist: person who has no faith in God. (The A stands for No. i.e. No faith.
Therefore I can be an Atheist (no faith in God) but allso agnostic, in that I do not know whether got exists or not.
I love the new arguement here. “You can’t test god’s energy because only the human senses can pick it up”
Ok, let me laugh for about 5 miniutes to get back to answering…
Anyway back to what I was going to say. All human sense can be emulated in alot of ways. That means we can test for god through that. Oh unless your talking about the conscious part of the brain, which we cannot emulate, but we can control. They did studies, when people think of religion, they in 9/10 times use the right side of their brain, which doesn’t use reasoning, it is your imagination, and making stuff up side of your brain, however whenever they ask a atheist about god, it leans towards the left side.
Of course what does that mean now? Religious people take no time to think about it, they dive into the making stuff up, imagination side, looking for answers, when all there going to get back is something they want it to be. Although when a atheist does it, they go to the logicial, rationally side of their brain to get the answers, and ultimatlly get the right answer.
Is the right side of the brain better or less then the left? Of course not, it just controlls most things we want to belive in, imagination, dreams etc.
Now back to the conscious which btw has no senses on itself, it just is the collection of senses coming together to make what you see around you. People don’t seem to understand, that the mind is a crazy tool. Everyone around us is mentally retarded to a point, that point you have to draw for yourself, and when you do, or blindly do, you start to belive in the wrong. I just hope we start treating religious people the way they should be treated.
Guy-1 “Who is this god?”
Guy-2 “He’s here right now, everywhere talks to me and makes me feel whole!”
Guy-1″Send him to the mental hospital.”
Meanwhile in the mental hospital
guy-2 “Jesus please help me get out of here”
guy-1 “He’s getting worse”
23 years lator
guy-2 “OK OK HE DOESN’T EXIST JUST LET ME OUT PLEASE!!!”
And then peace on earth.
Of course don’t take that last part seriously, it was a joke.
To james
What demonstrations do you have that the right part is a stupid half and the left part is a genius you
moron why don’t u take off your right part so u can
be a real athiest.And let me tell u why humans are
in this world it’s because god wants to test them to
see who is good and who is evil. Good to paradise
,Bad to hell that make sense ,doesn’t it?.And there is another point here.Do u know that some people in the hospitals don’t die even if there heart and brain stops? it’s because there soul is still not out,ask doctors about how many phenomenos things happen there everyday, u can see that most doctors believe in god because they see things u can never see in a normal life.
Let me ask u how do u think we are on earth living
and eating and having everything we need:-
1)Good atmospheric pressure so we can niether explode nor die from high pressure.
2)enough O2 to live niether high so a small fire
can fire the hole world nor little so we die.
3)Other plants to eat and to get herbs and other
to hold a fire and other to…….etc.
4)………………..if I complete I won’t stop
tel after 2 days at least.
I can’t believe how stupid u r.
Hello James, your argument makes sense to me.
Consciousness is very powerfull, just try reading some carl Jung, for some persuasive theory.
For a “delusion” in the psychiatric sense to be a delusion, it must be held by only that person. It goes that if someone else beleives the same thing, it ceases to be a delusion.
I do not agree with this, as if everyone beleived bannanas to be blue, this would not make them blue. It would hold that people can be in a mass delusional state if they all beleive the same thing which is not true.
Most psychiatrists are as mad, quite often madder than their patients.
It would also hold that if christianity were true, then practioners of every other major religion & all Athiets would be delusional & partly insane.
Of course this also holds true that if Christians are wrong in what they beleive, then they are all sharing in some mass delusion & in a civillised society the best place for the more extreme of them would be treatment in psychiatric hospital’s, or something similar.
Just a thought.
To Biliever, you wrote -
“And let me tell u why humans are
in this world it’s because god wants to test them to
see who is good and who is evil. Good to paradise
,Bad to hell that make sense ,doesn’t it?.”
No, it makes no rational sense whatsoever. If God is “all powerfull” & “all good” & “His will be done” then you would have no choice in this, it would be up to God who went up & who went down. Why would he create “Good” people to “save” & “bad” people to Damm? he would allready know who was good & who was evil, it would be pre-ordained before you were born. What would be the point?
All I can think of, if this were true, is that he did this for his own amusement, because he was bored.
Rather like a child treading on ants.
If this is the case, would’nt it then follow that God himself is malevolent?
“Also:
Theist: person who has faith in God.
Atheist: person who has no faith in God. (The A stands for No. i.e. No faith.
Therefore I can be an Atheist (no faith in God) but allso agnostic, in that I do not know whether got exists or not. ”
No, if your an agnostic then there is the possibility of you believing in God however if your an atheist then your set in your philosophical stance.
To state that one is an agnostic atheist is a contradiction.
Atheist——-Agnostic——-Theist
The above scale is a very accurate or rather true scale of one’s philosophical position. It would be philosophically impossible to be both at the same time. Your basically stating that you don’t believe in God and then at the same time are stating “there is not enough proof to show that he exists”. This is a dilemma. Why does it matter if there is or isn’t proof for the existence of a god that you don’t believe in? Your agnostic atheist position beggs the question “that some part of you wants to know if there is a God or not”. Being an atheist contradicts the part of yourself that wants to know if God exists. Your atheist position, would never be willing to accept proof or evidences. In the very least it would take an overwhelming amount of evidence that probably could never be satisfied by one who is 100% grounded. Only a an agnostic position which Carry’s the connotation of “uncertainty” can except any evidence that God exists. A person who is an atheist has already determined that there is no God and therefore cannot be an agnostic at the same time. Once your an atheist your on the extreme end of the “scale”. If your an agnostic then your in the middle and a little bit closer to believing in God then an atheist is. To state you hold two philosophical positions at the same time(in this regard) is a huge contradiction.
Last but not least this is an in correct definition.
“”Also:
Theist: person who has faith in God.
Atheist: person who has no faith in God. (The A stands for No. i.e. No faith. Therefore I can be an Atheist (no faith in God) but allso agnostic, in that I do not know whether got exists or not.”
1. This is not the definition of an atheist or theist.
I dare you to find any reputable dictionary that claims otherwise.
2. You can acknowledge that God exists yet have no faith in him. Thus you can believe He exists yet have faith in His person as pertains to his “actions”.
Guess what you can believe in something however have no faith in it. Belief and faith are not identically the same thing. They may be similar however they are not identical.
Mere belief involves no real trust. Believing in something is the not same as having faith in it.
I wonder what you think about the rest of my argument or rather if you would be willing to engage it?
linkbolt
edit* 2. You can acknowledge that God exists yet have no faith in him. Thus you can believe He exists yet have faith in His person as pertains to his “actions”.
The above should have stated “yet have no faith”.
To Marc C:-
He created us and left us the choice wither to be good or bad wither to believe or not wither u want to go to heaven or hell ,he wanted people that worship him on this earth he sent prophets to tell us about him he created us in a natural that knows him example:”If you were in the sea on a boat and a storm came by and you felt it’s the end for wouldn’t you shout ohh god please help me?”,and for the second part:if you have a power or knowledge what is the point in not using it? He created us ,he does whatever he wishs for,nobody can stop him ,he is all mighty all powerfull he is the only one who knows why? we mortals with our small brains can never imagine how powerfull and how much knowledge does he have.
Hello linkbolt. Yes I would like to “engage” in debate with you about your points, but I am not sure exactly what the point’s you are trying to make are. Please expand upon them. If it is about science not having all the answers then please read one of my above posts again “about flying elephants”
Also, I have not catagorically stated what I “Believe” I’m simply joining in the discussion with ideas & observation. I could probably be described as a deist.
As to you saying you cannot be both an agnostic & an atheist, this is simply not true, you can be.
Here are my dictionary definitions:
Agnostic: a person who believes that one can know only about material things & so believes that nothing can be known about the existance of God. – adj of or relating to this view – n agnosticism (Greek – agnostos, not known)
Atheism: the belief that their is no god- n atheist.- adj atheistic or atheistical,- adj atheistically. (Greek a, without + theos, God).
This would logically mean that an Atheist is someone who does not Believe in God. i.e. no faith in God!
Therefore to believe both, that there is no God (Athiest) & that nothing can be known about the existance of God (Agnostic)is a tenable position.
Also Theism: n the belief in the existance of God or a god, esp. One revealed supernaturally to man.-n theist.-adj theistic (Greek theos god + ism).
Not a big leap to take it that it means someone who believes (has faith) in God.
Some more dictionary definitions;
Belief: a principle, idea, etc. accepted as true, without proof. trust or confidence. A persons religious faith. A firm opinion.
faith; trust or confidence. strong belief e.g. in God. A religion. Any set or system of beliefs
Hmmm, yes those two sound pretty similar don’t they? & if were going on dictionary definitions & the english language…..
”If you were in the sea on a boat and a storm came by and you felt it’s the end for wouldn’t you shout ohh god please help me?”
Hello biliever, of course I would! I think most would, not all though. But it would be a God of my understanding I’d be calling to.
You do make a couple of interesting points though.
To Marc C:
That is what we call natural instinct
I remember someone mentioning the part about “existence” Well.. Everyone has heard what came first, the chicken or the egg? Well.. If the egg came first then there would be have to be a rooster to fertilize it, so the best answer would be the chicken because then the egg could of never been laid and a rooster would of had to of been around. What I am trying to say is I go with the best answer, So you can either say I die and go back to the earth and there is nothing, assuming you follow science.. Or you go with religion and believe in something greater.. and I put it this way.. I rather take chances with religion and believe in some heaven then nothing and I am getting the better end of the deal this way, because even if I am wrong.. I tried and it was worth a shot no doubt. I look at the bible like guide lines on how a person should try to live, it doesn’t mean you have to do it, as long as you try, if you had to do it then there would be no forgiving for sins when there was failure from trying. So if you think about it, it is just saying be the best you can be I guess and this is just my personal opinion and a bit of facts.
Oh sorry I almost forgot, Even if it is a lie it makes a lot of people better then they were before. Think about a friend lying for you in front of police if you played a prank on someone by throwing crap all over someones lawn you hated, wouldn’t that lie be for the better? Sure it would be out of greed but because of you it just seems right, Lies protect people and the bible protects people from doing bad things. Why is it so important to disprove god anyway or to prove science as something greater? Even if you disprove god you know people will only become more corrupt without some kind of control, I mentioned above guide lines. The whole thing is it is there for a reason, sure it might be there to control people, but it has a greater cause. I am working both side of the fences if you haven’t noticed. I favor god and believe him/her only because it seems like the better deal, because hey.. if I am wrong.. I will still end up where everyone else would be in the long run then, isn’t that right?
Ok, I stated around 3 times in my statement the right brain wasn’t dumber then the other side. Then you as a religious person puts words in my mouth. I just said, when thinking of religion, people acces the right side, which deals with imgination, and atheists access the left side, which deals with logic. I don’t know I forget, but if your left handed your brain is reversed, making the left your right, and the right your left. Left also deals with motor controls, and is more attached to the oposite side of your body more then the the side it’s on. Doesn’t make sense does it? Guess god wanted to make us more fucked then we are.
I also love the religious point of view, religious people actually belive evolution was RANDOM events which caused everything, when it’s the complete oposite. I love everytime I hear the “Some people can look at the eye, and the ear and laugh when people say they formed themselfs because they are so perfect”
Since humans are so perfect, i’ll post the mistakes on the human body that shouldn’t be their, because were supposed to be perfect. Our eyes only see half what they should, we use 2-19% of our brain, depending if your religious or a atheist(little joke even though it’s not true) our bones are weaker then they should be, we have a tail bone, suggesting we were monkeys, because we were. Our skin takes in more radiation then it should from the sun then it should, making us more capable of catching skin canser. I could go on and on how inperfect we are. Of course, if you do belive in the bible, I like this thing I came up with.
Evolution states little mutations that help the species will be put along to the next generation, because it helped him find a mate better, and therefore bad mutations shouldn’t get through. Since we mutate all the time, and change, that proves evolution right there.
Although, creationism states we cannot evolve, that means no mutations, or DNA changes, so that would mean we should all have similiar DNA, and having a baby with someone with the same DNA or similiar(sister etc) would result 6/10 times in a mental disformaty in the baby, and by now our race should of died out. Or at the most we would of not of changed, there would be no white people(We know from fossel records the first people were africain/asain), tan etc. How do we have these people now? Through mutations and change. So religious people, are we all black right now? Or asain? No? Well the creation theory would be flawed there.
Of course a religious person would simply post “god made our DNA change through generations” which would mean he made us inperfect, and actually disprove him even more and just lean more on evolution, because your trying to grasp so hard onto your beliefs, you try to change your own religion to fit your needs.
Pascal’s wager – If followed to it’s logical conclusion, to beleive in God on this basis is nonsense.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/p/pasc-wag.htm
Ross Avery, please reread all the things we said before. BIBLE DOES NOT MAKE YOU DO GOOD THINGS, AND IS NOT THE SOURCE FOR MORALS.
Also, your saying lieing is alright, which is a sin, your going to hell. Even if you don’t lie, god knows if you belive or not, so just pretending, bye bye your going to hell.
No one is perfect and everyone lies and sins, you don’t have to do them exactly perfectly you just have to try and do your best, that is why people had confession to be forgiven for there sins, besides when a girl ask you if she looks fat in a dress you say no, that is a white lie and god isn’t gonna bite you in the ass about that James. They may or may not of had that intention. The important thing is I try to do the best I can because I am not perfect just like everyone else here. How come no one bothered to answer my questions?
1. Why is it to important to disprove god?
But I also found it funny how I known some criminals in the past who left jail then turned to god then all sudden become better people, it serves it’s purpose and it is for the better, it helps keep certain people in check. Your brain would have to be suffering a huge blow if you didn’t see what it does, even if it is a lie to the people in here. So you can wave your fancy words around or scientific facts. Like it says at the top “I will loosely define faith as being the belief in something without sufficient proof to be called fact” Well I can loosely define that there is no proof to say it doesn’t exist either.
Hello Ross, it is’nt that important to disprove God, as it’s been stated you can’t prove His existance one way or another either. I think what people are trying to get at is why believe something as “unquestionable truth” on the basis that a higher authority (the church, your parents) told you to believe this. Before it was proved that the earth was flat, you would have had a very hard time if you said it was round. Maybe the true nature of reality is radically different than either Athiets or Religious people claim it to be. I question my beleifs & understandings, I try my best to keep an open mind. Have you considered that the viewpoint of Athiesm & All religion is inherantly wrong?
Ross Avery
The new testiment doesn’t count, as in it’s been proven to be altered and changed way to much to even be close to the real bible to fit the tastes of people. People wanted to eat meat, they took that out of the bible, made up confession etc. Confession is another thing thats pointless, your telling me, god is everywhere, knows if your sorry or not, and already knows if your going to confese before you even think of doing so. So why go to a preist? It was orignally like that to catch “criminals” in the olden days. The real bible states, no matter what the sin, your going to hell. That bible is of course, the old testiment, you know the book which shows god as a racist ethnic cleanser making his people go into acts of genocide? You know all forgiving all loveable god?
Anyway, it’s important to disprove god for 1 reason. Truth. Isn’t bracing the “cold” truth better then living in a false sense of reality? Of course a insane person would answer no.
There is no proof there is a god, but only proof agaisnt it, sure the proof is small and meaningless, but it still outwieghs the no proof to him existing.
Those people you speak of never left god. 99.2% of the prison population belive in a god or gods. I don’t want to get into the big arguement of if you compare the statistics a atheists is 9 times more likly not to commit a crime then a religious person. Of course those studies mean nothing, it’s just funny. Anyway back to the criminals, they release in the rational part of their mind, they think they had a taste of hell, which is jail and then try to act as a better religious person and worship there god more. Kind of a scaring your kids into beliving theres a god by telling them about hell deal.
It’s not that I care myself about the religious nut jobs, I just hate them trying to convert people into their faith. I was attacked 3 times by saying there was no god near a religious guy. Once by a preist when I was 6, he slapped me. Of course not becuase I said there was no god, I was reading the real bible and asked the preist why gods such a ass. He slapped me, mother told him to stop, he tried again, then told my mother never to bring me to chruch again. Of course I was 6, still being brain washed, but that was around the time I started questioning the faith. It never really made sense to me anyway. The second time was in school, just talking about it and I made a joke because someone said something about “the father, the son, and the holy ghost” so I said “The father rubs the lotion on the sons holy ghost” just as a joke and he flipped out. Another time I was just sitting on a bus with a few friends, which were all atheist and I was talking about the contridictions in the bible. The bus driver pulled over and told me to get out, I refused, because what he was saying was agaisnt the law, refusing service over me not beliving in what he belived in, and when I went to get off with a few friends guy got off to who was sitting a few seats down and tried to attack us all. Never went over to well for him, as it was 4 on 1… But I guess he had god on his side, or atleast thought.
Now you may say, their not real religious people because god doesn’t say you should kill someone if they impose, or say anything wrong about your god. I can’t remember the quote completely but.
“If your sibling, friend, mother, or father tries to lure you away into worshiping other gods, you must stone him, you have to strike the first blow, because he has tried to divirt you from yaohway, your god”
Thats in the old testiment, right from “god”
Ohwell theres my last rant for the night.
Oh, and I live in canada, the peaceful place of tolerance. If I lived in america, I would be dead.
Thank you for the definitions but I only asked for definitions of the terms because as pointed out in my previous paragraph you were making up your own. This was your quote “an atheist is some one who has no faith in God.” Now that you provided the correct definitions of the terms in question I think that we can move on.
“This would logically mean that an Atheist is someone who does not Believe in God. i.e. no faith in God”
Presented in this light yes it makes perfect sense however the way you first presented it by solely stating that (”an atheist is some one who has no faith in God”) are two different things.
Of course an atheist (who doesn’t believe in God) can’t possibly have faith in God.
Your forgetting what I stated earlier:
2. You can acknowledge that God exists yet have no faith in him. Thus you can believe He exists yet have no faith in “His person” as pertains to his “actions”.
“Therefore to believe both, that there is no God (Atheist) & that nothing can be known about the existence of God (Agnostic)is a tenable position”
Ok, my problem with this is that an agnostic knows that just because there is no physical proof of the existence of a higher being does not mean that that the being does not exist. Therefore if one is truly atheist one cannot be atheist & agnostic. If your simply stating that the reason your an atheist is because there is not enough evidence to prove the existence of God then that’s fine. Yet the fact remains that your atheist and not an agnostic atheist! An agnostic does not dismiss God exists where as an atheist does. See the difference? You cannot create a hybrid of the two philosophical stance. Your either one or the other.
Suppose I humor you and accept your stance as truth. I believe it would play out as such
Mike: I am an agnostic atheist
Joe: How is that possible?
Mike: Agnostic: a person who believes that one can know only about material things & so believes that nothing can be known about the existance of God. – adj of or relating to this view – n agnosticism (Greek – agnostos, not known)
Atheism: the belief that their is no god- n atheist.- adj atheistic or atheistical,- adj atheistically. (Greek a, without + theos, God).
Therefore to believe both, that there is no God (Athiest) & that nothing can be known about the existance of God (Agnostic)is a tenable position.
Joe: I think that your forgetting one thing and that is an agnostic does not simply state that “the existence of God or a God cannot be known” rather that if it cannot be known it cannot be disproven either.
I think that the above is a fair script. At any rate here is a bit of history on the word and it’s original meaning and not what you want it to mean.
Word History: An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning “without, not,” as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gnsis, “knowledge,” which was used by early Christian writers to mean “higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things” hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as “Gnostics” a group of his fellow intellectuals“ists,” as he called them who had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a “man without a rag of a label to cover himself with,” Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870.
As far as my stances and what Im arguing for reread my first post. I also hope you realize that I never challenged you to a debate however I requested that you engage all of my argument from my very first post here on the blog. If you have questions just ask, I will be as clear as possible.
linkbolt
Hey -
I’m agnostic. I believe your understanding of faith and God is incomplete. Neither can be governed by reason. Thus, your logic is just that – flawed by the very essence of its existence – human.
@ Ross Avery or James.
As I stated previously some will just whine about what they don’t understand using sweeping generalizations to suit their angry little hearts.
While others will approach the situation with maturity and true logic.
BTW I believe the above to be an attribute of Christian and Atheist alike.
My point if your going to try and disprove God your going to have to do a little more then whining and give up some hard evidence.
I will be the first to admit that there are a great many things Christianity and Science cannot explain however here is the underlying difference Christianity is about Faith. Im not stating that its about faith that lacks reason, however when you get down to it, Faith is at the core. Science is about pure reason or fact however it also does not lack faith. Whats the point? Don’t knock Christianity when it takes just as much faith to believe in scientific theory that is not fact. If your one of those then your a hypocrite. Remember when you can’t prove a theory yet you still believe it to be true then your dipping into the religion pot, bub. I don’t have to prove that God exists it’s your job to prove to me that he doesn’t. Complaining about the bible which you take out of context is a poor argument.
linkbolt
“Hey -
I’m agnostic. I believe your understanding of faith and God is incomplete. Neither can be governed by reason. Thus, your logic is just that – flawed by the very essence of its existence – human.”
I agree it is flawed and by your above def that would also mean that your’s is flawed as well. If your’s is flawed as well then you can’t possibly right correct?
linkbolt
“I believe your understanding of faith and God is incomplete.”
I forgot to mention in the above paragraph. How can “you” state that I don’t have a complete understanding of God when your agnostic and don’t know God if God exists? Sounds like that guy who stated
Matt: hey, you can’t drive!
Tony: What?
Matt: You can’t drive and you don’t understand the first thing about driving.
Tony: What are you talking about you’ve never driven a day in your life. At least Im reading the “Rules of the Road” !
:p
linkbolt
Hello linkbolt, thanks for the reply, I found it educational & very amusing.
I gave you dictionary definitions from the chambers (English) dictionary. Using logic it is perfectly reasonable for someone to be both Athiest & Agnostic. i.e. I have no faith in God, do not believe any evidence exists for his existance, or that anything can be known about him, but that there is a possiblity he exists, either way.
If I were to say flattly that I have no faith in God & I believe totally that he cannot exist, that there is no possibility of him existing. Then this would just simply make me Athiest.
But this is an argument about nothing, the dictionary explanations are there for anyone to see, you seem to have interpreted them differently, but this is your right. On to other things:
I have read & re-read all your posts & all the above posts. I am not stupid. I don’t know what the point is you are trying to make. Hence I asked you to explain.
You wrote
“I don’t have to prove that God exists it’s your job to prove to me that he doesn’t”
Why?
Science (or anyone for that matter) has not proved that flying elephants or invisible sausage men don’t exist! You don’t believe in them do you? There are countless things that science has not proved the existance, or non-existance of. If we all still believed the earth was flat, would you be quoting the same argument?
Just because you beleive something to be true, it does not make it true!
Secondly, there is nothing in what you say that demonstrates why you believe what you do, apart from “the unquestionable truth” of the bible (sarcasm).
I have a strong beleif (faith): same thing (see dictionary definitions) In many things of an other worldly nature. Simply because I do not hold the main tenant of christianity to be true, does not make me wrong.
So as to be clear, most religion is montheistic, & has a beleif in one God, & so christianity does not hold a monopoly on this. The beleif central to christianity is:
To reiterate:
Well, the claim that God exists surely is a more foundational claim, but because the existence of God is the foundational claim of several religions, I don’t think of it as the “central claim of Christianity.” I think that the central claim of Christianity is “Jesus’ crucifixion and death was the atoning sacrifice so that God the Father could forgive all humanity for the sin of Adam.”
The central Christian claim would be about who Jesus Christ is and what he did, I should think.
From this can you prove that he is who he said he was & that the “facts” of the bible are true? The onus is on you to prove this in this discussion, because as stated by an Athiest, no conclusive evidence exists to believe the christian claim. So the logical thing would be to not follow christianity. To prove the main christian tenet, you would have to explain:
1) Why has christ not returned? When he spoke to some of his disciples after the cruxifiction he said “there are some here standing, who will not taste death untill I return”. Each generation of christians, (& there have been many) beleive he will return soon, in their lifetime. So tell me, where is he? will he be another 2,000 or 4,000 or 20,000 years for that matter.
2) Prove that jesus died at the cruxifiction & that he was not just simply in a coma, was revived & then wandered around for a bit. The accounts in the bible after the cruxifiction of the “embalming” herbs used on his body, were actually reviving herbs! it’s true, look it up!
The historical account of his cruxifiction is that on the day, instead of the 24 hours subjects were usually left on the cross for, he was left for only 2 hours (this can be verified with historians). Due to some other event being undertaken. This is why they impaled him with a spear, to try to “finish him off”.
3)Prove he was telling the truth or that the bible is historically acurate in the use of his words. This point is technically impossible seeing as he spoke ancient aramaic, which does’nt translate into english!?
4)Explain why his words are taken literally, when it could be argued he was speaking figurativly, & was just a highly spiritually evolved man, instead of, literally God incarnate & his only son?
5)Explain why the whole bible is not just simply allegorical? & why modern day christians, especially the “born again” & “7th day’ers” take it as literal fact?
There are many other “points”, but I’ll leave you with the above. I say again, the onus is on you to explain why you are “right” & athiets are “wrong”.
Or, I should point out that using your argument, if I belive that God is a potatoe & that he communicates to his believers through different vegetables, then it is up to you to prove that I’m wrong!
There is only one life form in the universe. We are all one.
We are all connected. Try this experiment. Whenever you go,for instance to the post office or any where. Think loving thoughts about all the people there. You will see how well you are treated.
I tried this the first time at the post office and I was amazed at how great I was treated by the employes amd customers.
By the way I am 83 years old and have learned that love will get you everywhere.
For the record I was an agnostic in my younger days.
“Hello linkbolt, thanks for the reply, I found it educational & very amusing.
I gave you dictionary definitions from the chambers (English) dictionary. Using logic it is perfectly reasonable for someone to be both Athiest & Agnostic. i.e. I have no faith in God, do not believe any evidence exists for his existance, or that anything can be known about him, but that there is a possiblity he exists, either way.”
1. “Again an atheist is some one does not believe that He exists” and not one who does not merely have faith in his existence, because there is not enough proof to do so. You seem to be claiming otherwise even though chambers stated otherwise. If you look in your definition that you presented to me you would see there is no claim that “an atheist is some one who does not have faith in God”. If this were the case then that would leave room for a the atheist to still believe that he exists and thus an agnostic is born.
“If I were to say flattly that I have no faith in God & I believe totally that he cannot exist, that there is no possibility of him existing. Then this would just simply make me Athiest.”
Ok, from the moment that you state God has a possibility of existing you’re an agnostic.
1. Agnostic- Im not saying that God does exist and Im not stating that God doesn’t because there is not enough evidence.
2. Atheist- Im saying that God doesn’t exist.
3. Agnostic Atheist –Im stating that God doesn’t exist because there is not enough evidence to say that he does.
One and three sound an awful lot a like wouldn’t you say?
“I have read & re-read all your posts & all the above posts. I am not stupid. I don’t know what the point is you are trying to make. Hence I asked you to explain.”
Friend, I don’t think that your stupid and I respect you however lets not mistake a little sarcasm on my part (which were both guilty of) as me thinking that your stupid. I don’t have conversations with stupid people.
“You wrote
“I don’t have to prove that God exists it’s your job to prove to me that he doesn’t”
Why?”
Why? Because as I stated when I told the other gentleman or gentlewoman. Christianity is about faith and once you leave that realm well…. Read what I stated to whom I addressed it. This question was already addressed.
“Science (or anyone for that matter) has not proved that flying elephants or invisible sausage men don’t exist! You don’t believe in them do you? There are countless things that science has not proved the existance, or non-existance of. If we all still believed the earth was flat, would you be quoting the same argument?”
I understand this and have spoken about this in my paragraph to the “other” person of who’s question you decided to answer.
“Just because you beleive something to be true, it does not make it true!”
I 100% agree with you on this, more than you know.
“Secondly, there is nothing in what you say that demonstrates why you believe what you do, apart from “the unquestionable truth” of the bible (sarcasm).“
Well to be quite honest with you if one was to engage in biblical study and truly look at the bible historically you would see that it is over 90% accurate in its historical merit.
“I have a strong belief (faith): same thing (see dictionary definitions) In many things of an other worldly nature. Simply because I do not hold the main tenant of christianity to be true, does not make me wrong.”
Sorry, but this judgment that your almost claiming that I’ve passed upon you is not so. I don’t know what you believe but if you would like to share Im willing to find out. As far as the terms being the same there really not, well at least for the Christian there not. Your going to have to forgive me for being Christian. I know that you probably view us as republican zealots who are starved money hungry people, which use God as a tool for all of our actions. I would like to tell you that were not all the same and that Im not republican or democrat. I guess that makes me a libertarian? I don’t know for sure however when I vote I pick the guy that fall’s closet in line with Christian issues. Well enough ranting.
Something that I found in Webster’s that explains my point.
BELIEF may or may not imply certitude in the believer . FAITH almost always implies certitude even where there is no evidence or proof .
As I stated mere belief does not necessarily imply faith.
“So as to be clear, most religion is montheistic, & has a beleif in one God, & so christianity does not hold a monopoly on this. The beleif central to christianity is:
To reiterate:
Well, the claim that God exists surely is a more foundational claim, but because the existence of God is the foundational claim of several religions, I don’t think of it as the “central claim of Christianity.” I think that the central claim of Christianity is “Jesus’ crucifixion and death was the atoning sacrifice so that God the Father could forgive all humanity for the sin of Adam.”
The central Christian claim would be about who Jesus Christ is and what he did, I should think.”
Good point however I don’t know to many monotheistic religions maybe Im forgetting some?
Judaisim, Isalm, Christianity. I think Zoroastrianism? Could be wrong?
There maybe others that start out with a “core” God however they have a pantheon of Gods and are polytheistic in nature.
“From this can you prove that he is who he said he was & that the “facts” of the bible are true? The onus is on you to prove this in this discussion, because as stated by an Athiest, no conclusive evidence exists to believe the christian claim. So the logical thing would be to not follow christianity. To prove the main christian tenet, you would have to explain:”
I don’t believe this is correct because as I stated else where there is plenty of historical data that in the very least would give one a good idea that the bible is accurate and therefore true. I truly don’t believe that it matters what proofs are presented because they will always be dismissed. It is not my intention to take part in “this” argument. As stated earlier it’s about faith because when your given certain proof’s you come to a threshold in which you choose to have faith or not.
Also according to the Christian and some scientists there is not enough evidence to disprove it either thus “the agnostic”!
I would like to request that I be able to use biblical quotations and verse’s for the question that you have asked regarding Christ and the like. I think it only fair that I be allowed to use the bible to answer biblical questions don’t you? furthermore I don’t think that I would be giving you fair answers without using the source of your own questions. I await your reply and until then I will not answer those questions. I would also like to point out that your using the bible which you don’t believe to be true to disprove it, yet if I was to use the bible to prove that it’s true I would be wrong because according to you the bible is a lie. I think that is some what of a double standard, don’t you?
Linkbolt
Hello again linkbolt, Thanks for your reply, I ran a search on monotheism & came up with some interesting stuff from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism
The following are quotes from those pages:
Ostensibly monotheistic religions may still include concepts of a plurality of the divine, for example the Christian Trinity, or the veneration of Saints, as well as the belief in “lesser spirits” such as angels or demons.
Christians overwhelmingly assert that monotheism is central to the Christian faith; “I believe in one God” is a key statement in the most widely used Christian creeds. Moreover, some Christian sects, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Oneness Pentecostals, deny the idea of Trinity altogether, while many individual Christians formulate their own opinions on the matter which may or may not follow the doctrine of their tradition. Other small Christian groups have their own unique viewpoint. For example, the Rastafarians, like many Christians, hold that God is both a unity and a trinity, in their case God being Haile Selassie. Some Christian denominations, such as the Roman Catholic Church practice Veneration of Saints, which critics claim is a form of polytheism. However, Roman Catholic teaching regards veneration of saints and prayers to saints as no different from petitioning a living person to pray to God on behalf of the petitioner.
According to Islam the “oneness of God” is the primary teaching of all prophets and messengers of God (including Jesus) sent to humanity for guidance. Furthermore, Islam considers Christianity’s Trinity polytheism and a distortion of Jesus’s original message of oneness of God.
A taxonomy of beliefs about deities:
It is possible to categorize views about deities in a variety of ways. One common procedure is to classify views about the existence of deities. This classification system categorizes view about deities as:
* theism — roughly, the opinion that gods or deities exist
* atheism — roughly, an absence of belief in any gods or deities
* agnosticism — roughly, the opinion that it is not possible to know whether gods or deities exist, or the opinion that one does not know.
* Some classifications group atheism and agnosticism together under the classification of non-theism — absence of clearly identified belief in any deity.
The main subcategories of theism are:
* polytheism — roughly, the opinion that multiple gods or deities exist
* monotheism — roughly, the opinion that only one god exists.
This taxonomy is based on opinions about the existence of god or gods. Other taxonomies are possible. For example, a different taxonomy is based on opinions about the nature or characteristics (rather than the existence) of God or the gods. Examples include:
* pantheism — roughly, the opinion that God and the universe are equivalent[1]
* panentheism — roughly, the opinion that the universe is part of God
* eutheism and dystheismare more recently coined terms of this sort.
Other categories of belief include:
* Animism: The belief that everything is alive; that spirits are in all things, or that all things have souls.
* Monolatry: The belief that there may be more than one deity, but only one should be worshipped.
* Henotheism: The belief that there may be more than one deity, but one is supreme.
* Kathenotheism: The belief that there is more than one deity, but only one deity at a time should be worshipped. Each is supreme in turn.
-END QUOTES-
PLEASE read this for an explanation on the Athiest /Agnostic:
http://www.strange-loops.com/athwhatis.html
Also Google “Atheist Agnostic” – I got 1,550,000 seach results!
Then get back to me on this one.
I’m sorry to say I have no understanding of the American political system, I live in England & have almost no interst in politics, so you lost me with the democrat/republican thing. I’ll look it up though.
I read through all your posts again & the only “answer” that I could find, that I think you are refering to is the post where you talk about “absolutes”. Your words –
“Lastly, obviously there are absolutes by which we are governed”
Really? what brought you to this conclusion? I am of a totally opposite view & regard the belief in ultimate “right” or “wrong” (absolutes) as the source of all true evil in the world. How many countless wars & battles have been fought over the egotistical premise of I’m absolutly Right & you are absolutly Wrong! What are these absolutes? Spiritual Laws & principles maybe, but Absolutes?
I quote from your post:(NB – A) is you quoting someone else)
A) Your words: ” I try to consider all scientific evidence relating to this matter, and come to the conclusion that this evidence”
You can’t possibly consider any evidence of any sort due to your claim “I am not 100% sure of anything.” If your not 100% sure of anything then how does your evidence present itself in favor of there being no God? How can any evidence exist in your eye’s?
There is no “proof” for many things. We generally hold though the ideas of rationality that things that have behaved in a certain way will continue to do so. i.e. The sun will rise tomorrow – Where is the proof it will? But we expect it to, & it does. Of course there is a possiblity it won’t! We cannot be 100% sure! But how can you base a position on this? Science through observation generally hold’s true; observable fact! Everything might start floating off into space! But we have observed that this does not happen & is highly likely not to happen, but can you be 100% sure? Can you be 100% sure of anything? (Iknow what you’ll say to that one!). Can you be 100% sure that the universe is’nt balanced on the back of a giant turtle? You get my point.
On your other points, of course use the bible to support your claim. I never said the bible was a lie! I believe it be be based on fact. My question is to its interpretation, my questions should show that. But remember that because it is written in the bible it does’nt necassarily make it true! I could write a book about the truth of a “potato God” & the Holy vegetables, citing it would’nt support my argument.
Hi all, I think that you are missing a very important point here.And that is the evidences that prove the existence of god.In our belief (I’m a muslim)”The cracks of doom” [signs of the judgement day] are starting to appeare one by one.In the past there were not so many atheists,one of signs of the judgement day is that atheism will spread and people will start to move away from the purpose of thier creation, this one has started to appeared widly.
Another on as our prophet told us is that the people of the arab chersonese “which contain these countries:U.A.E ,Saudi arabia,Qatar,Oman ,Kuwitt and bahrain] will build very high buildings ,As we all know that the highst building in the world is going to be in Dubai in this wep u can see it http://tinypic.com/doqhc8.jpg , How could a man who lived in the desert all his time know that such a thing will happen? it’s a miracle for sure. That is not all if you are interested more there are lots of miracles in the holy Quran that they are still discovering.Also the war (it’s also one of the signs of the judgement day)between the east and the west which our prophet told us,Moses (may peace be apon him)also told jews about it in Torah is getting near.
Hello biliever, that’s some building! I agree east & west is at war, & it could engulf most of the world, lets hope it does’nt though hey.
I consider my self an agnostic but at the end of the day I don’t think it matters two figs whether there is a higher being or not.We should base our morality on doing the right thing for our fellow man not for some promise of the hereafter.
“I consider my self an agnostic but at the end of the day I don’t think it matters two figs whether there is a higher being or not.We should base our morality on doing the right thing for our fellow man not for some promise of the hereafter.” I agree with you however human nature is flawed and there aren’t very many who are willing to help each other out. Mankind’s inclination is to naturally do that which suits himself. Other than a higher being I would truly like to know how man would pull himself from his naturally sinful nature?
linkbolt
Hello link bolt, I posted you a reply but It won’t show, it says “your comment is awaiting moderation” my end (whatever that means?) I cut & pasted it again, but I get the same message. So maybe it will show some time or not I dunno.
“Hello link bolt, I posted you a reply but It won’t show, it says “your comment is awaiting moderation” my end (whatever that means?) I cut & pasted it again, but I get the same message. So maybe it will show some time or not I dunno.”
Was it nice or was it mean? LOL.
linkbolt
It’s long, but interesting, also carying on the pointless discussion on atheism. Hopefully the post will “appear”. I’m off to sleep, but here is an interesting page on the atheist/agnostic view.
http://www.strange-loops.com/athwhatis.html
Also try googleing – atheist agnostic – I got 985,000 results this time, more the last.
Peace…
Hello linkbolt. The post I replied to you doesn’t seem to be showing so I’ll try halving it:
Hello again linkbolt, Thanks for your reply, I ran a search on monotheism & came up with some interesting stuff from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism
The following are quotes from those pages:
Ostensibly monotheistic religions may still include concepts of a plurality of the divine, for example the Christian Trinity, or the veneration of Saints, as well as the belief in “lesser spirits” such as angels or demons.
Christians overwhelmingly assert that monotheism is central to the Christian faith; “I believe in one God” is a key statement in the most widely used Christian creeds. Moreover, some Christian sects, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Oneness Pentecostals, deny the idea of Trinity altogether, while many individual Christians formulate their own opinions on the matter which may or may not follow the doctrine of their tradition. Other small Christian groups have their own unique viewpoint. For example, the Rastafarians, like many Christians, hold that God is both a unity and a trinity, in their case God being Haile Selassie. Some Christian denominations, such as the Roman Catholic Church practice Veneration of Saints, which critics claim is a form of polytheism. However, Roman Catholic teaching regards veneration of saints and prayers to saints as no different from petitioning a living person to pray to God on behalf of the petitioner.
According to Islam the “oneness of God” is the primary teaching of all prophets and messengers of God (including Jesus) sent to humanity for guidance. Furthermore, Islam considers Christianity’s Trinity polytheism and a distortion of Jesus’ original message of oneness of God.
Taxonomy of beliefs about deities:
It is possible to categorize views about deities in a variety of ways. One common procedure is to classify views about the existence of deities. This classification system categorizes view about deities as:
theism — roughly, the opinion that gods or deities exist
atheism — roughly, an absence of belief in any gods or deities
agnosticism — roughly, the opinion that it is not possible to know whether gods or deities exist, or the opinion that one does not know.
Some classifications group atheism and agnosticism together under the classification of non-theism — absence of clearly identified belief in any deity.
The main subcategories of theism are:
Polytheism — roughly, the opinion that multiple gods or deities exist
monotheism — roughly, the opinion that only one god exists.
This taxonomy is based on opinions about the existence of god or gods. Other taxonomies are possible. For example, a different taxonomy is based on opinions about the nature or characteristics (rather than the existence) of God or the gods. Examples include:
Pantheism — roughly, the opinion that God and the universe are equivalent [1]
panentheism — roughly, the opinion that the universe is part of God
eutheism and dystheismare more recently coined terms of this sort.
Other categories of belief include:
Animism: The belief that everything is alive; that spirits are in all things, or that all things have souls.
Monolatry: The belief that there may be more than one deity, but only one should be worshipped.
Henotheism: The belief that there may be more than one deity, but one is supreme.
Kathenotheism: The belief that there is more than one deity, but only one deity at a time should be worshipped. Each is supreme in turn.
-END QUOTES-
PLEASE read this for an explanation on the Atheist /Agnostic:
http://www.strange-loops.com/athwhatis.html
Also Google “Atheist Agnostic” – I got 1,550,000 search results!
Then get back to me on this one.
I’m sorry to say I have no understanding of the American political system; I live in England & have almost no interest in politics, so you lost me with the democrat/republican thing. I’ll look it up though.
I read through all your posts again & the only “answer” that I could find, that I think you are referring to is the post where you talk about “absolutes”.
Your words -
“Lastly, obviously there are absolutes by which we are governed”
Really? What brought you to this conclusion? I am of a totally opposite view & regard the belief in ultimate “right” or “wrong” (absolutes) as the source of all true evil in the world. How many countless wars & battles have been fought over the egotistical premise of I’m absolutely Right & you are absolutely Wrong! What are these absolutes? Spiritual Laws & principles maybe, but Absolutes?
NB – A) is you quoting someone else)
I quote from your post
A) Your words:” I try to consider all scientific evidence relating to this matter, and come to the conclusion that this evidence”
You can’t possibly consider any evidence of any sort due to your claim “I am not 100% sure of anything.” If your not 100% sure of anything then how does your evidence present itself in favor of there being no God? How can any evidence exist in your eyes?
There is no “proof” for many things. We generally hold though the ideas of rationality those things that have behaved in a certain way will continue to do so. I.e. The sun will rise tomorrow – Where is the proof it will? But we expect it to, & it does. Of course there is a possibility it won’t! We cannot be 100% sure! But how can you base a position on this? Science through observation generally hold’s true; observable fact! Everything might start floating off into space! But we have observed that this does not happen & is highly likely not to happen, but can you be 100% sure? Can you be 100% sure of anything? (Know what you’ll say to that one!). Can you be 100% sure that the universe isn’t balanced on the back of a giant turtle? You get my point.
On your other points, of course use the bible to support your claim. I never said the bible was a lie! I believe it be based on fact. My question is to its interpretation, my questions should show that. But remember that because it is written in the bible it doesn’t necessarily make it true! I could write a book about the truth of a “potato God” & the Holy vegetables, citing it wouldn’t support my argument.
OK, that seems to have worked, sort of. Have fun answering the questions!
Thanks for getting back to me. I will try post all that I can tonight 7:24pm Chicago time; however my grandfather passed on and I will not be able to give your post the attention that it deserves. If I say something that doesn’t make sense let me know.
linkbolt
Ok linkbolt, I’m sorry your grandfather passed on. I’m not so concerned about a reply anyway, so no worries if you don’t get a chance to reply. I found a forum on philosophy & I’ve been following discussions on there, you should hear how they go on. Anyway I wish you all the best…
I been watching this discussion for a few days now and I’m amazed at the extremes and sometimes ridicules ends to which people will go to “prove” their point.
Several people have stated that man has some sort of a purpose here on earth. Somebody please explain to me “why” he must have. On what do they base their statements.
First and foremost it appears as if the information that you provided me with is more of a rebuttal in response to me proclaiming Monotheism or rather stating that I don’t know how many monotheistic religions exist? I don’t understand how this entirely plays into the agnostic/atheist/theist/agnostic atheist positions that were debating and I believe this to be some what off topic however after where done debating or discussing “agnostic atheism/atheist/theist”, then I will approach this stepping stone with you.
I would also ask that if you are going to post a
“source” that you use one which is reputable and not so easily manipulated. As your probably aware of, Wikipedia’s sources can be made up or rather written (typed) by any “old Joe”. In other words some very unlearned individual’s can claim what they like with no authority in regards to the subject matter. As far as your previous post (the one before this one) I believe the site you provided me with, gave a good definition for your “agnostic atheist” claim and that was “weak atheist”. However upon further inspection the term weak atheist is basically just an agnostic. There truly isn’t a difference between a weak atheist and an agnostic, a very minute difference if any at all. Again more than happy to discuss whether Christianity is truly monotheistic if you would like however we are discussing something else and Im not one who likes to bounce from topic to topic before a mutual understanding is met. Please set the stage for one topic and lets discuss that unless we mutually agree to discuss something of a different nature.
One thing that is a bit off topic that you seem to be presenting me with is the claim that there are 1,550,000 search results for the term agnostic atheist however you never once claim how many are authoritative on the subject matter at hand. You never state if these are all articles or just simple rants and raves about the “word” itself. There are so many variables to take into account that you don’t bother to mention and I feel that the number your using is a bit deceiving. In essence your giving me “quantity” and not “quality”. Let’s not forget that this is the Internet and that many people have blogs, forums, websites where they can rant and rave all they like however this doesn’t necessarily make what is stated true. If I were you I would hold some sort of criteria to the websites and the articles that they publish. Don’t take this the wrong way but I believe that your intelligent enough to deduce this for yourself, so I won’t bother however if your curious by what standards Im working with, Im more than happy to help. Last but not least I could type a word into Google and receive the same count as you did above. Does that mean that there all articles or that in the very least by reputable sources?
“There is no “proof” for many things. We generally hold though the ideas of rationality those things that have behaved in a certain way will continue to do so. I.e. The sun will rise tomorrow – Where is the proof it will? But we expect it to, & it does. Of course there is a possibility it won’t! We cannot be 100% sure! But how can you base a position on this? Science through observation generally hold’s true; observable fact! Everything might start floating off into space! But we have observed that this does not happen & is highly likely not to happen, but can you be 100% sure? Can you be 100% sure of anything? (Know what you’ll say to that one!). Can you be 100% sure that the universe isn’t balanced on the back of a giant turtle? You get my point.”
Your right there are no proofs for many things however there are evidences. For example in the above comment regarding the sun, there is evidence that the sun raises everyday because we see it and expect it to. Which brings us to what we call “faith that the sun is going to rise again” because as you stated we don’t know for sure. Furthermore we know that the sun has been rising since creation. Your right there is certain things that we can’t be sure of such as your “turtle” comment however that does not mean that we can’t be sure of 100% anything to state such is a bold claim. Can you be 100% sure that your question is a question? Did you know that you just proved that absolutes exist by making an absolute statement? Stating “can you be 100% sure about anything” is an absolute statement therefore it is self-defeating. Im not stating that there is no such thing as relativism however everything is not relative. I like chocolate and you might like vanilla and that would be relative. Get my point?
“On your other points, of course use the bible to support your claim. I never said the bible was a lie! I believe it be based on fact. My question is to its interpretation, my questions should show that. But remember that because it is written in the bible it doesn’t necessarily make it true! I could write a book about the truth of a “potato God” & the Holy vegetables, citing it wouldn’t support my argument.”
My point is that you can’t use the bible to disprove the bible if your not going to allow me to use the bible to prove the bible. Do you understand? I can’t defend biblical interpretation without using the bible just as you can’t attack biblical interpretation without using the bible. With that I appreciate that you give me the ok to use the bible.
Ask away in regards to biblical interpretation keep in mind that Im not a scholar. LOL .
If you still want me to answer those questions that you posted in regards to biblical interpretation I will, just let me know.
I also noticed that I’ve answered on two different topics, Absolutism/Relativism and Agnostic/Atheism/Agnostic Atheist/theist. Could we just pick one? I understand you have a lot of points and that you want to tackle “this” from all sides but I think there will be less confusion if we stay on topic.
Well Im done for now. Don’t have the time to type further.
Linkbolt
“Ok linkbolt, I’m sorry your grandfather passed on. I’m not so concerned about a reply anyway, so no worries if you don’t get a chance to reply. I found a forum on philosophy & I’ve been following discussions on there, you should hear how they go on. Anyway I wish you all the best…”
Thank you I appreciate that.Out of respect I found time to post something. Whats the forum if you don’t mind me asking?
linkbolt
Last post from me.
Posts seem to have gone array again.
Hello linkbolt, thanks for reply
I am busy too, you are right in your points & I do go off tangent quite often.
Anyway will post a proper reply soon.
Oh, here is the link to the forum;
http://forums.philosophyforums.com/
Hello linkbolt
This conversation has caused me to look at my beliefs. Please bear in mind that I am also not a theologian! I think it would help to try to write as simply as I can what I do believe & so I can better frame the question in a more understandable way. Sorry if this is going off topic again! I think in a previous post you expressed an interest in what I believe so here it is. I am still interested in continuing our discussion on the other topics.
I will try to make this concise & as brief as possible-
In my use of the word belief, I am taking it to mean that which I consider to be personally true, but something that I don’t think can be proved in a rationalistic sense.
I believe that in the end we stand in judgement on ourselves & no-one else or any other being stands in judgement upon us. My concept of a God is a force that is within & sustaining all things. A divine spark within everything. An energy that pervades all existence & life. I do not necessarily believe that it has a personality or identity in any sense. I would compare it to a calm sea or the air & beyond all duality. I think there are angels, spirits (good & bad), spirit guides, ascended masters & many beings that inhabit higher realms.
My idea’s on who we are would include the notion that existing in a density outside of this one we have very powerful higher selves, God like in their attributes & very powerful. I consider that they may even be the closest thing to a God(s). Spirit guides, angels & spiritual forces may well be an aspect of our individual higher selves helping us. I think that an evolved spiritual position is one of a blending of opposites & neutrality. Neither light nor dark, but a balance. I also think all religion & spiritual systems including shamanism, Wicca, voodoo, witchcraft, astral projection & lucid dreaming have their place in gaining a spiritual understanding.
The main religions speak of & are based on holy men. I do not doubt that any of these men existed & that they were all highly spiritually advanced beings who walked this earth. I think there has been many such beings & that they still are among us, the majority living in anonymity. The celestial realms outside of this world are known to these souls. I think the world has a planetary spirit & nature spirits abound. I believe that there are realities & existences other than the earthly one’s that are in such variety & scope as to be truly astounding.
I do not believe certain things however. Although I think all religion contain an element of truth I do not think that any one is the right one. In Christianity, with which I was brought up, I do not hold that the virgin birth or the resurrection is true. Though I like the idea that Jesus’ could manifest at will & appear in this world to walk with us, if it were true? There are supposed accounts of this happening as with other spiritual figures, (St Germaine, to name one). I do not believe that the only way to God is through Christ, that he stands in judgement (God) or that heaven & hell exist. I do however believe that we can manifest them as a reality on earth or in other realms.
I believe that our true nature is infinite, but that there are levels of existence which in this form are totally beyond any comprehension. It may be in our destiny & the journey of our higher selves lies in literally creating, & being co/creators with God(s) galaxies & worlds.
I lean toward Buddhist philosophy, in that to try to have compassion for all living things & their principle of non-attachment. God I believe is beyond all form. The eternal, unknowable (by the mind), mystery.
I think the message of Christ was altered for the purpose of control. His message was to be like him. Without his other worldly birth & resurrection, he is a normal man. I hold that the missing years of his early life were him training in Buddhism in Tibet. He returned to the Holy lands for his mission & left once more for Tibet after his crucifixion, there are accounts of a Holy teacher arriving & living in Tibet until his death some years later from old age. The man bore the crucifixion marks & is buried at the site of a Holy grave.
Certain aspects of my thought could be called new age, but I do not like the term or all that it stands for. Although I do practise Reiki, crystal healing & chakra healing, as well as meditation & an interest in eastern philosophy, especially certain Buddhist ideas. To me Buddhism is the most humane & non-violent of all the religions & the most advanced. I like the idea of being close with nature, which is something we seem to have lost.
I try to hold a holistic & humanistic view & see everything as an important part of the whole, without which the whole would not be whole. (A standard by which I fall short). I assert that there are certain laws & precepts that govern our lives. An obvious & simple one would be that “like attracts like”
Or as we give we receive. To do as you would be done by in all things or to love your neighbour as yourself (the central Christian teaching).
I can see that there is a point to experiencing the dark side to life & a validity of lifetimes spent doing evil & wrong doing. (I hold a belief that we have thousands of lifetimes). That true spirituality is balance between light & dark (which I think religions point to). Maybe we came from a source & to it we all eventually return. I believe that there are realities & existences beyond our own that are truly incredible & that eventually we shall find them whether it takes a few lifetimes or thousands!
There may be no God, no meaning & no purpose to our lives, & nothingness when we die. I don’t believe this is so. I suppose that this where faith comes in, believing in what you cannot see…..
The idea of an absolute or unquestionable truth(s) I do not subscribe to. I.e. Christ is the only route to heaven & anyone not believing in this goes to hell. What are the grounds for believing in this or any other dogmatic belief, that one religion is ultimately unquestionably “right”. Any of my beliefs I hold open to change, they evolve, and they are on a certain level just “ideas”. Do not all religions hold some truth in themselves? What is the significance of a religious paradigm defining the nameless & the indefinable?
I would think that your answer would come down to this; that it is a matter of faith & that what we choose to believe is different.
I have learnt for myself that what is of paramount importance is to be fully focused in the day to day living & enjoyment of my life. I do believe I’m in this body for a reason, & I gotta make the most of it.
Sorry I wrote a book!
If my ideas seem confused, muddled & out there, well hey I had a misspent youth!
In all other matters I hope you are well, if it is easier I will post an E-Mail address you can contact me on & we can continue the conversation elsewhere, I mind not, either way.
Peace.
hi, sorry but god is just imaginary. grow up idiots… its a fairy story
@ Marc C sorry, I can’t post a rebut in right now because…. well you know I already told you. I should be able to post by late Thursday or early Friday. Thanks for getting back to me and yes if you would like to leave me your email that’s cool. I’ll post back that way as well.
linkbolt
heartofatum@yahoo.co.uk
Ok, no rush, did you check out the philosophy forums?
“Ok, no rush, did you check out the philosophy forums?” Yep, I registered and first place I went was the debate board. “absolute truth”. Was some good stuff.
linkbolt
Ok I’ll see if I can figure out who your posting as!
Hello linkbolt, are you OK & still about on here or the philosopy forum?
Why is that Christians demand that they have an explanation for everything, from everyone. But when it comes to their beliefs they blindly accept what they have been told, without a question to its truth or authenticity?
“Hello linkbolt, are you OK & still about on here or the philosopy forum?”
Sorry, yes I still post there. I’ve been pretty busy lately with work and everything. Im also in the process of moving so I haven’t had the time I’d like to spend discussing God, Religion and Philosophy with you. I usually post on the Religious Philosophy section when I do post which has been a total of about for or five times? At any rate Im a mod on another “Christian” board as well so I tend to stay busy. I have your email address and will post you “there” if not here.
linkbolt
“Why is that Christians demand that they have an explanation for everything, from everyone. But when it comes to their beliefs they blindly accept what they have been told, without a question to its truth or authenticity?”
Christians do not nesscaily demand an explanation for everything only that which is arrived at by reason or proclaimed fact. In other words if the proposed “fact” was arrived at by faith or scientific means. I can’t speak for all occasions nor for all Christians but this is the general situation. If a person proclaims fact yet shows evidences and no proofs then “faith” sprouts itself somewhere in between revealing something other than mere reason. If someone has faith in something that cannot be proved then thats when the above “demand an explanation for everything comes from”. At least that is may take on the matter, as I stated eariler I cannot speak for other Christian, Atheists and Agnostics alike.
linkbolt
“Christians do not necessarily demand an explanation for everything only that which is arrived at by reason or proclaimed fact”
They do not demand an explanation for what they believe, it is neither arrived at by reason or proclaimed fact.
In the case of many Christians today, reason & proclaimed fact are openly disregarded as false.
In fact reason is attacked by many Christians as a perceived attack on that for which they have no reason or proclaimed fact (Christian tenets & belief), but by which they insist is based on reason & is proclaimed fact (their Christian tenets & faith), when in fact it is not.
A couple of quotes that outline the issue for me…
“I never told my religion nor scrutinize that of another. I never attempted to make a convert nor wished to change another’s creed. I have judged of others’ religion by their lives, for it is from our lives and not from our words that our religion must be read. By the same test must the world judge me. ”
Thomas Jefferson (1743 – 1826)
Simple. Keep your god to yourself.
“What if we chose the wrong religion? Each week we just make God madder and madder. ”
Matt Groening (1954 – )
cloudburst:
Simple. Keep your god/s to yourself.
Yeah I kinda agree, but that is not enough. Although your god/s is bottled up inside you, your outward morailty and actions hurt others, and this can be in the name of your god. Example: Hezbollah soldier doesn’t preach to his friends about his supreme bring, but is willing to rocket-attack the infidels in the name of his god.
Or the christian fundamentalist who doesnt preach to his friends, but will do everything in his power to stop a raped woman getting an abortion, or gay couples having equal financial status as heterosexual couples.
What I am saying is that their is rarely such a thing as an entirely personal belief that does not manifest itself outwardly. Therefore it is necessary to question one’s beliefs to see if they are ethically right to the believer. The person who does not make this effort is a lesser moral being; they simply confrom to a doctrine like a sheep.
You ppl which are still in ignorance I ask you to read these pages openminded
http://www.miraclesofthequran.com
http://www.harunyahya.com
http://www.jesuswillreturn.com
When you have read it go to http://www.islamtomorrow.com
I wish u the best
First i am very glad to partcipate this descusion and it seems to me a good idea to say somthing abou faith and beliefe.
Then after,I disagree that bliefes and faith are personal matter but they are giveness from Allah,so every one must believe that there is only one Allah all over the world and Dooms day; and he is the cteator of every thing which remained him.
The evidence of what i am saying is that, there is no one who claiming with Allh the control and management of the world,S
First i am very glad to partcipate this descusion and it seems to me a good idea to say somthing abou faith and beliefe.
Then after,I disagree that bliefes and faith are personal matter but they are giveness from Allah,so every one must believe that there is only one Allah all over the world and Dooms day; and he is the cteator of every thing which remained him.
The evidence of what i am saying is that, there is no one who claiming with Allh the control and management of the world,Sky and earth that is the evidence of the unique power of Allah.