Why do you believe in God? (1 Viewer)

[Jayrod]

Long story short, I believed at a young age and have seen more since then to support that belief and nothing that would lead me to believe that God doesn't exist.

God has helped on occasion (often not how I expect) and let me suffer when I needed to, but has never left me nor caused me to doubt.

I've "felt" God's presence when in prayer and knew when he spoke to my heart on multiple occasions about a variety of things. I have had very odd things happen when I asked God for answers that gave me an answer. I have never been short of money despite giving 10-12% of all income to the church even when I was severely under-employed.

When I try to follow God, pray and read my Bible regularly, life just works well....even in tragedy (if that makes sense). When I get away from communicating with God, life is a disaster....even when everything should be fine.

By the age of 26 I was fully convinced of God's existence and have never even been able to seriously entertain the idea that He doesn't.

 

[Ilov80s]

What else is there left to believe in?

 

[NCCommish]

Is it common sense not to kill?

More than that, it's in our DNA. Our survival as a species depends on it.

I don't see how a person could study human history for more than a few minutes without realizing that killing others is baked into our nature. If there's one thing we see time and time again, it's humans being really awful to one another.

To those outside the tribe. Humans built cities as well. Cooperation within the tribal unit was essential to survival. Killing competitors for resources was at times as well. Generally when you see humans being really ugly to each other it is because they are attacking the "other" in their midst.

By the way I am talking macro violence not micro.

I'm not sure to what degree that's even true. Most murders, robberies, rapes, etc. are committed against one's proverbial neighbors.

Of course "macro" violence is other-against-other because they tend to involve different nation-states. But there's all kinds of violence within individual societies. Every time you read about a case of spousal abuse, incest, etc., you can't write it off as targeted toward "the other," and these things occur in every society known to human history. And that's even if you just restrict yourself to real violence. If you take Jesus seriously, you're showing your violent nature every time you flip some guy off because he's camped out in the left-hand lane.

In other words, I'm firmly in the camp that humans are #######s. Folks who say that they've searched the depths of their own soul and are actually good people are just self-deluded #######s.

We form societies. That is cooperation and in general we follow the rules of those societies. Within those societies there are certainly violent people who do sick evil things. But in the macro picture cooperation is necessary for our species to survive.

I've said many times I hate people. People suck. But there is no denying the reality that we are able to, within those societies, keep from killing each other long enough to get things done.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

Because he has an awesome beard...and he hung around a bunch of dudes for 6 hours even though they hated him

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Is it common sense not to kill?

More than that, it's in our DNA. Our survival as a species depends on it.

I don't see how a person could study human history for more than a few minutes without realizing that killing others is baked into our nature. If there's one thing we see time and time again, it's humans being really awful to one another.

To those outside the tribe. Humans built cities as well. Cooperation within the tribal unit was essential to survival. Killing competitors for resources was at times as well. Generally when you see humans being really ugly to each other it is because they are attacking the "other" in their midst.

By the way I am talking macro violence not micro.

I'm not sure to what degree that's even true. Most murders, robberies, rapes, etc. are committed against one's proverbial neighbors.

Of course "macro" violence is other-against-other because they tend to involve different nation-states. But there's all kinds of violence within individual societies. Every time you read about a case of spousal abuse, incest, etc., you can't write it off as targeted toward "the other," and these things occur in every society known to human history. And that's even if you just restrict yourself to real violence. If you take Jesus seriously, you're showing your violent nature every time you flip some guy off because he's camped out in the left-hand lane.

In other words, I'm firmly in the camp that humans are #######s. Folks who say that they've searched the depths of their own soul and are actually good people are just self-deluded #######s.

We form societies. That is cooperation and in general we follow the rules of those societies. Within those societies there are certainly violent people who do sick evil things. But in the macro picture cooperation is necessary for our species to survive.

I've said many times I hate people. People suck. But there is no denying the reality that we are able to, within those societies, keep from killing each other long enough to get things done.

I think we agree here.

 

[tonydead]

Is it common sense not to kill?

More than that, it's in our DNA. Our survival as a species depends on it.

I don't see how a person could study human history for more than a few minutes without realizing that killing others is baked into our nature. If there's one thing we see time and time again, it's humans being really awful to one another.

Really? What percentage of the world's population (or any other subset) would you say are killers?

 

[rockaction]

Yes we've discussed this before, but I thought I'd try to approach this a different way. Whenever somebody learns I'm an atheist, the inevitable question comes up, "why don't you believe in God?" I think the question should be reversed for theists to answer.

My question is not meant to be a challenge. I am genuinely interested to learn why people believe as they do. Though I may ask follow up questions, I have no intention of denigrating anyone else's beliefs.

Don't worry, tim. A slew of atheists saw the signal and rushed here ASAP to denigrate any and all who dared to try to give an honest answer to an honest question. Some of them didn't even wait for actual answers to the question, but that's just a testament how logical, reasonable, scientific, and efficient they are.

I'm agnostic, but tim has done this before. Just a few months ago, actually. And when I gave a similar response to the one you did, he got all fake offended that someone would impugn his motive, just like this time.

 

[mon]

I'm reading a book now where the author thinks a fourth way. He's not an atheist, believer, or agnostic. He says he both believes in God and doesn't believe simultaneously. Why I'm an Atheist Who Believes in God He believes the only truth is that which leads to beauty. Very interesting so far.

Here's a quote I just read from the book:"Don't delude yourself; you may describe yourself to others by claiming a label of atheist, Jew, evangelical, gay or straight but you know you are really lots more complicated than that, a gene-driven primate and something more. Want to be sure you have THE TRUTH about yourself and want to be consistent to that truth? Then prepare to go mad. Or prepare to turn off your brain and cling to some form or other of fundamentalism, be that religious or secular.

You will always be more than one person. You will always embody contradiction. You -- like some sort of quantum mechanicals physics experiment -- will always be in two places at once."

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Is it common sense not to kill?

More than that, it's in our DNA. Our survival as a species depends on it.

I don't see how a person could study human history for more than a few minutes without realizing that killing others is baked into our nature. If there's one thing we see time and time again, it's humans being really awful to one another.

Really? What percentage of the world's population (or any other subset) would you say are killers?

Not sure, but more than you think.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

By the way, I agree with NCC that people are also quite capable of altruism and general (sometimes great) acts of human kindness. But anybody who thinks that people are basically good to one another is living in a different world than me. Hell, anyone who's considered the problem of evil or read random bits of Dostoevesky has a better handle on the human condition.

 

[Ilov80s]

I believe in god because to not believe in god is to believe in chance. I wouldn't give my kid the name Chance yet alone turn the keys to universe over to it.

 

[timschochet]

By the way, I agree with NCC that people are also quite capable of altruism and general (sometimes great) acts of human kindness. But anybody who thinks that people are basically good to one another is living in a different world than me. Hell, anyone who's considered the problem of evil or read random bits of Dostoevesky has a better handle on the human condition.

I don't necessarily equate altruism with human kindness. But that point aside, I pretty much see things the opposite that you do, (and NC does) and it surprises me because I know that you are a religious person. I believe that most human beings are basically good, and that they are capable of evil. But its the good that is the general rule, and its the evil that isn't. I also believe that much of the evil that happens in the world is because of stupidity and bad luck, rather than by deliberate human intent.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

By the way, I agree with NCC that people are also quite capable of altruism and general (sometimes great) acts of human kindness. But anybody who thinks that people are basically good to one another is living in a different world than me. Hell, anyone who's considered the problem of evil or read random bits of Dostoevesky has a better handle on the human condition.

I don't necessarily equate altruism with human kindness. But that point aside, I pretty much see things the opposite that you do, (and NC does) and it surprises me because I know that you are a religious person. I believe that most human beings are basically good, and that they are capable of evil. But its the good that is the general rule, and its the evil that isn't. I also believe that much of the evil that happens in the world is because of stupidity and bad luck, rather than by deliberate human intent.

I can't speak to other religions, but Christianity takes a really dim view of humanity. Think about a woman lustfully? You're no better than an adulterer. Have a spiteful thought about some guy in passing? You're a murderer. Haven't given away everything you own? You don't deserve heaven. There's a great reason why the author of Amazing Grace used the word "wretch" to describe himself. He may have been a perfectly a-okay guy in the normal sense of that word (I don't know), but the fact of the matter is that none of us is really good in any objective sense. I'm extremely aware of that, and it's an area where Christianity really resonates with what I think I know about life.

 

[timschochet]

By the way, I agree with NCC that people are also quite capable of altruism and general (sometimes great) acts of human kindness. But anybody who thinks that people are basically good to one another is living in a different world than me. Hell, anyone who's considered the problem of evil or read random bits of Dostoevesky has a better handle on the human condition.

I don't necessarily equate altruism with human kindness. But that point aside, I pretty much see things the opposite that you do, (and NC does) and it surprises me because I know that you are a religious person. I believe that most human beings are basically good, and that they are capable of evil. But its the good that is the general rule, and its the evil that isn't. I also believe that much of the evil that happens in the world is because of stupidity and bad luck, rather than by deliberate human intent.

I can't speak to other religions, but Christianity takes a really dim view of humanity. Think about a woman lustfully? You're no better than an adulterer. Have a spiteful thought about some guy in passing? You're a murderer. Haven't given away everything you own? You don't deserve heaven. There's a great reason why the author of Amazing Grace used the word "wretch" to describe himself. He may have been a perfectly a-okay guy in the normal sense of that word (I don't know), but the fact of the matter is that none of us is really good in any objective sense. I'm extremely aware of that, and it's an area where Christianity really resonates with what I think I know about life.

That's interesting. I'm not doubting you, but I have known many Christians, and have been to religious services, and they focus primarily on the goodness of life and of people. I'm aware of fire of brimstone but I haven't seen much of it personally. I should add that almost all of the Jewish services I have attended have also focused on the good, and let's face it, Jews have much more reason to believe that people are evil than Christians do.

 

[Bonzai]

By the way, I agree with NCC that people are also quite capable of altruism and general (sometimes great) acts of human kindness. But anybody who thinks that people are basically good to one another is living in a different world than me. Hell, anyone who's considered the problem of evil or read random bits of Dostoevesky has a better handle on the human condition.

I don't necessarily equate altruism with human kindness. But that point aside, I pretty much see things the opposite that you do, (and NC does) and it surprises me because I know that you are a religious person. I believe that most human beings are basically good, and that they are capable of evil. But its the good that is the general rule, and its the evil that isn't. I also believe that much of the evil that happens in the world is because of stupidity and bad luck, rather than by deliberate human intent.

I can't speak to other religions, but Christianity takes a really dim view of humanity. Think about a woman lustfully? You're no better than an adulterer. Have a spiteful thought about some guy in passing? You're a murderer. Haven't given away everything you own? You don't deserve heaven. There's a great reason why the author of Amazing Grace used the word "wretch" to describe himself. He may have been a perfectly a-okay guy in the normal sense of that word (I don't know), but the fact of the matter is that none of us is really good in any objective sense. I'm extremely aware of that, and it's an area where Christianity really resonates with what I think I know about life.

We're not bad in any objective sense either. Lighten up, francis.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

By the way, I agree with NCC that people are also quite capable of altruism and general (sometimes great) acts of human kindness. But anybody who thinks that people are basically good to one another is living in a different world than me. Hell, anyone who's considered the problem of evil or read random bits of Dostoevesky has a better handle on the human condition.

I don't necessarily equate altruism with human kindness. But that point aside, I pretty much see things the opposite that you do, (and NC does) and it surprises me because I know that you are a religious person. I believe that most human beings are basically good, and that they are capable of evil. But its the good that is the general rule, and its the evil that isn't. I also believe that much of the evil that happens in the world is because of stupidity and bad luck, rather than by deliberate human intent.

I can't speak to other religions, but Christianity takes a really dim view of humanity. Think about a woman lustfully? You're no better than an adulterer. Have a spiteful thought about some guy in passing? You're a murderer. Haven't given away everything you own? You don't deserve heaven. There's a great reason why the author of Amazing Grace used the word "wretch" to describe himself. He may have been a perfectly a-okay guy in the normal sense of that word (I don't know), but the fact of the matter is that none of us is really good in any objective sense. I'm extremely aware of that, and it's an area where Christianity really resonates with what I think I know about life.

That's interesting. I'm not doubting you, but I have known many Christians, and have been to religious services, and they focus primarily on the goodness of life and of people. I'm aware of fire of brimstone but I haven't seen much of it personally. I should add that almost all of the Jewish services I have attended have also focused on the good, and let's face it, Jews have much more reason to believe that people are evil than Christians do.

I don't mean this as fire and brimstone. More of a clear-eyed appreciation of what grace means.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

I admire your desire to be a good moral person, but why can't you have failth? Is it because you see no proof that there is a god?

Proof? How about a single shred of evidence?

How do we know there's no evidence?

 

[Ilov80s]

I admire your desire to be a good moral person, but why can't you have failth? Is it because you see no proof that there is a god?

Proof? How about a single shred of evidence?

How do we know there's no evidence?

If there was evidence it would erode the need for faith.

 

[timschochet]

Yeah, that is one area in which I fundamentally disagree with Richard Dawkins. Dawkins asserts that the existence of God can be proven or disproven scientifically- at least in theory. He believes that at some point humankind could potentially develop enough evidence one way or the other to come up with a definitive answer (and we all know what his answer is.)

But I think that the concept of God is beyond human reason, and thus those that attempt to either prove or disprove His existence, (based on human reason) must always fail by defintion. God is based on faith alone. Which is why my question was "Why do you believe in God?" rather than something like "How would you prove that God exists"? etc.

Now that being said, there are aspects of most religions that ARE subject to reason and evidence: for instance, either Noah's Ark actually happened, or it's a myth. Either Moses parted the Red Sea, or that's just a story. Either Jesus was resurrected, or He wasn't. Either Muhammad jumped from Jerusalem to Paradise, or he didn't. And so on.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Now that being said, there are aspects of most religions that ARE subject to reason and evidence: for instance, either Noah's Ark actually happened, or it's a myth. Either Moses parted the Red Sea, or that's just a story. Either Jesus was resurrected, or He wasn't. Either Muhammad jumped from Jerusalem to Paradise, or he didn't. And so on.

And God exists, or he doesn't. It's a real question with a real answer just like all those other ones.

 

[timschochet]

Now that being said, there are aspects of most religions that ARE subject to reason and evidence: for instance, either Noah's Ark actually happened, or it's a myth. Either Moses parted the Red Sea, or that's just a story. Either Jesus was resurrected, or He wasn't. Either Muhammad jumped from Jerusalem to Paradise, or he didn't. And so on.

And God exists, or he doesn't. It's a real question with a real answer just like all those other ones.

Not in the same sense. What I just listed are all claimed to be actual historical events.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

To play devils advocate(couldn't resist) would it be reasonable to think that if God exists, and he wants us to be faith based, couldn't he have created us in a way that would prevent us from ever truly knowing if he exists.

To answer the op. I never have had a gold answer to this. I used to say that was in my DNA just as if saying I'm of German/Italian decent, it'd say because I do or because I want to, or because I was raised with going to church bible school, etc. and even though I don't practice I still believe and see no reason to disprove the idea. On a personal side I could point to thing that happened or simply that I'm still alive(fear of God is a real fear for wanting to end my existence in a way other than he intends, which is reason enough for me to not try and disprove his existence)

 

[Ilov80s]

Now that being said, there are aspects of most religions that ARE subject to reason and evidence: for instance, either Noah's Ark actually happened, or it's a myth. Either Moses parted the Red Sea, or that's just a story. Either Jesus was resurrected, or He wasn't. Either Muhammad jumped from Jerusalem to Paradise, or he didn't. And so on.

And God exists, or he doesn't. It's a real question with a real answer just like all those other ones.

Not in the same sense. What I just listed are all claimed to be actual historical events.

Your holes are deep...and this is coming from someone that agrees with you in a larger sense on this issue.

 

[drummer]

"I see and hear him everyday"

Sincerely,

Rush fan

 

[Maelstrom]

I certainly agree that avoiding eternal punishment is no reason to follow. I admire your desire to be a good moral person, but why can't you have failth? Is it because you see no proof that there is a god?

Faith in what though? Not being snippy, that is a serious question. I'd have to believe in at least one of the holy writings, that they are at least partially correct, in order to believe in god, in my mind. At least, that would give me some semblence of a reason to. As far as testimony goes, I feel that many people can both believe and even give testimony without it having to be from God, even if they believe it is. Which is why I say deism is attractive, because it is one way that I could reconcile a belief in God with the world I see, as well as my belief having read many of the holy writings that they are works of men, not god.

But I honestly do agree with something you said earlier, that it isn't about proof. That's why I keep engaging in these conversations, and don't close the door. I need something but it doesn't have to be necessarily physical or scientifically provable evidence. But I need something to base a belief on, and I have not found that something to date. (FWIW, I was raised in a very religous household, reading the bible daily in many cases, loads of prayer, so it's not a lack of knowledge or trying.)

Common Sense tells you to love your neighbors as yourself? To turn the other cheek? To let people steal from you? To love your enemies?

Yes, I believe morals and common sense both could easily have arisen from the same evolutionary process that humans did. When people live in a group, having a set of rules or principles that may seem counter-productive to the self can help ensure longer life and great chance to pass on those rules (morals) to offspring.

 

[drummer]

Pretty sure we did this recently. At length.

Yeah this is what I had in mind. Not exact, but awful close. http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=705888

It'd be creepy if he remembered a thread you posted, huh?

YOU NEED TO GET OVER ME.

 

[Ilov80s]

I certainly agree that avoiding eternal punishment is no reason to follow. I admire your desire to be a good moral person, but why can't you have failth? Is it because you see no proof that there is a god?

Faith in what though? Not being snippy, that is a serious question. I'd have to believe in at least one of the holy writings, that they are at least partially correct, in order to believe in god, in my mind. At least, that would give me some semblence of a reason to. As far as testimony goes, I feel that many people can both believe and even give testimony without it having to be from God, even if they believe it is.

But I honestly do agree with something you said earlier, that it isn't about proof. That's why I keep engaging in these conversations, and don't close the door. I need something but it doesn't have to be necessarily physical or scientifically provable evidence. But I need something to base a belief on, and I have not found that something to date. (FWIW, I was raised in a very religous household, reading the bible daily in many cases, so it's not a lack of knowledge.)

Common Sense tells you to love your neighbors as yourself? To turn the other cheek? To let people steal from you? To love your enemies?

Yes, I believe morals and common sense both could easily have arisen from the same evolutionary process that humans did. When people live in a group, having a set of rules or principles that may seem counter-productive to the self can help ensure longer life and great chance to pass on those rules (morals) to offspring.

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

 

[Maelstrom]

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

Sure, I get that. But I also can scientificly explain the beauty of the world around me as well, without the need for a god having designed it. Maybe if I find that thing that I can't explain without God. And I don't count things that are just mysterious or unexplained for now, I mean something for which there is no other explaination. I can come back to the creation of the universe itself, but even that I find partially explainable.

I don't consider myself an athiest though. Not in the sense of rejecting the possibility of a god. I do actively seek to know both in external sources and internally. But I also don't actively believe in a god at this point in time.

 

[Ilov80s]

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

Sure, I get that. But I also can scientificly explain the beauty of the world around me as well, without the need for a god having designed it. Maybe if I find that thing that I can't explain without God. And I don't count things that are just mysterious or unexplained for now, I mean something for which there is no other explaination. I can come back to the creation of the universe itself, but even that I find partially explainable.

I don't consider myself an athiest though. Not in the sense of rejecting the possibility of a god. I do actively seek to know both in external sources and internally. But I also don't actively believe in a god at this point in time.

Go ahead, explain it. I'm not devout in anything and am open to your reasoning.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Because the story of Jesus makes sense to me. If he was not who he claimed to be, the son of God, then he was either a liar or insane.

I have never understood this claim.

I am a son of God. There, I said it and I mean it...am I a liar or insane or....

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Because the story of Jesus makes sense to me. If he was not who he claimed to be, the son of God, then he was either a liar or insane.

I have never understood this claim.

I am a son of God. There, I said it and I mean it...am I a liar or insane or....

Shut up, dude.

I am the son of God.

 

[cstu]

I'm not sure to what degree that's even true. Most murders, robberies, rapes, etc. are committed against one's proverbial neighbors.

Of course "macro" violence is other-against-other because they tend to involve different nation-states. But there's all kinds of violence within individual societies. Every time you read about a case of spousal abuse, incest, etc., you can't write it off as targeted toward "the other," and these things occur in every society known to human history. And that's even if you just restrict yourself to real violence. If you take Jesus seriously, you're showing your violent nature every time you flip some guy off because he's camped out in the left-hand lane.

In other words, I'm firmly in the camp that humans are #######s. Folks who say that they've searched the depths of their own soul and are actually good people are just self-deluded #######s.

We're still a weak species mentally.

I've met too many good people to think they are conning themselves that they are good. The evil that men do is out of weakness, not strength.

I'm not sure we'll ever get to the point where all people are good but I've studied a lot of history and trend line is going up. That's difficult to see through all the bad news we're bombarded with but as a species we're less violent than at any time in our existence.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/22/world-less-violent-stats_n_1026723.html

- The number of people killed in battle – calculated per 100,000 population – has dropped by 1,000-fold over the centuries as civilizations evolved. Before there were organized countries, battles killed on average more than 500 out of every 100,000 people. In 19th century France, it was 70. In the 20th century with two world wars and a few genocides, it was 60. Now battlefield deaths are down to three-tenths of a person per 100,000.

- There were fewer than 20 democracies in 1946. Now there are close to 100. Meanwhile, the number of authoritarian countries has dropped from a high of almost 90 in 1976 to about 25 now.

Pinker says one of the main reasons for the drop in violence is that we are smarter. IQ tests show that the average teenager is smarter with each generation. The tests are constantly adjusted to keep average at 100, and a teenager who now would score a 100 would have scored a 118 in 1950 and a 130 in 1910. So this year's average kid would have been a near-genius a century ago. And that increase in intelligence translates into a kinder, gentler world, Pinker says.

 

[Todd Andrews]

Because the story of Jesus makes sense to me. If he was not who he claimed to be, the son of God, then he was either a liar or insane.

I have never understood this claim.

I am a son of God. There, I said it and I mean it...am I a liar or insane or....

Shut up, dude.

I am the son of God.

You are a liar or insane.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Because the story of Jesus makes sense to me. If he was not who he claimed to be, the son of God, then he was either a liar or insane.

I have never understood this claim.

I am a son of God. There, I said it and I mean it...am I a liar or insane or....

Shut up, dude.

I am the son of God.

You are a liar or insane.

Enjoy hell, blasphemer.

 

[Maelstrom]

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

Sure, I get that. But I also can scientificly explain the beauty of the world around me as well, without the need for a god having designed it. Maybe if I find that thing that I can't explain without God. And I don't count things that are just mysterious or unexplained for now, I mean something for which there is no other explaination. I can come back to the creation of the universe itself, but even that I find partially explainable.

I don't consider myself an athiest though. Not in the sense of rejecting the possibility of a god. I do actively seek to know both in external sources and internally. But I also don't actively believe in a god at this point in time.

Go ahead, explain it. I'm not devout in anything and am open to your reasoning.

I'm just saying I can explain it enough to satisy me, I don't claim it would convince others, although it is (as far as I know as a non-scientist) scientifically based (what we see as beauty is what is attractive, attractive things tend to last longer, therefore evolution will tend to produce attractive things as they will have more opportunities to reproduce).

Don't get me wrong, when I see a beautiful setting, sunset, flower, whatever, I am in awe of nature. Almost to the point of reverence. But it's never crossed that tipping point to where I had faith a god created it for me to enjoy.

 

[Mister CIA]

Is it just me or is a belief in God totally meaningless without some sort of MAN-ufactured religious belief bolted on?

 

[tonydead]

Is it common sense not to kill?

More than that, it's in our DNA. Our survival as a species depends on it.

I don't see how a person could study human history for more than a few minutes without realizing that killing others is baked into our nature. If there's one thing we see time and time again, it's humans being really awful to one another.

Really? What percentage of the world's population (or any other subset) would you say are killers?

Not sure, but more than you think.

No not really. The worlds population has been increasing exponentially since the black death. The low low percentage of humans that can be labeled killers are not a threat to our species at all.

 

[Ilov80s]

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

Sure, I get that. But I also can scientificly explain the beauty of the world around me as well, without the need for a god having designed it. Maybe if I find that thing that I can't explain without God. And I don't count things that are just mysterious or unexplained for now, I mean something for which there is no other explaination. I can come back to the creation of the universe itself, but even that I find partially explainable.

I don't consider myself an athiest though. Not in the sense of rejecting the possibility of a god. I do actively seek to know both in external sources and internally. But I also don't actively believe in a god at this point in time.

Go ahead, explain it. I'm not devout in anything and am open to your reasoning.

I'm just saying I can explain it enough to satisy me, I don't claim it would convince others, although it is (as far as I know as a non-scientist) scientifically based (what we see as beauty is what is attractive, attractive things tend to last longer, therefore evolution will tend to produce attractive things as they will have more opportunities to reproduce).

Don't get me wrong, when I see a beautiful setting, sunset, flower, whatever, I am in awe of nature. Almost to the point of reverence. But it's never crossed that tipping point to where I had faith a god created it for me to enjoy.

Then you believe it is all by chance? The sunsets, flowers, planet, atom and humanity. All by chance?

 

[matuski]

I believe in god because to not believe in god is to believe in chance. I wouldn't give my kid the name Chance yet alone turn the keys to universe over to it.

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

Sure, I get that. But I also can scientificly explain the beauty of the world around me as well, without the need for a god having designed it. Maybe if I find that thing that I can't explain without God. And I don't count things that are just mysterious or unexplained for now, I mean something for which there is no other explaination. I can come back to the creation of the universe itself, but even that I find partially explainable.

I don't consider myself an athiest though. Not in the sense of rejecting the possibility of a god. I do actively seek to know both in external sources and internally. But I also don't actively believe in a god at this point in time.

Go ahead, explain it. I'm not devout in anything and am open to your reasoning.

I'm just saying I can explain it enough to satisy me, I don't claim it would convince others, although it is (as far as I know as a non-scientist) scientifically based (what we see as beauty is what is attractive, attractive things tend to last longer, therefore evolution will tend to produce attractive things as they will have more opportunities to reproduce).

Don't get me wrong, when I see a beautiful setting, sunset, flower, whatever, I am in awe of nature. Almost to the point of reverence. But it's never crossed that tipping point to where I had faith a god created it for me to enjoy.

Then you believe it is all by chance? The sunsets, flowers, planet, atom and humanity. All by chance?

Obviously there was a chance this could all be.. it is, so the chance (possibility, probability) existed and exists.

All you need is a length of time on the order of billions of years and your "chance" becomes inevitable.

Your argument has a major flaw in that as amazing and unlikely as you make these things out to be, the sunsets flowers planet atom humanity PLUS an invisible god becomes even more unlikely. You are adding in a supernatural power while trying to make some argument on complexity.....

 

[matuski]

All of you taking your belief on faith, how did you come to choose your god over any other god? What makes you sure you are praying to the right one?

 

[cstu]

Because the story of Jesus makes sense to me. If he was not who he claimed to be, the son of God, then he was either a liar or insane.

I have never understood this claim.

I am a son of God. There, I said it and I mean it...am I a liar or insane or....

Shut up, dude.

I am the son of God.

I'm reading a book now where the author thinks a fourth way. He's not an atheist, believer, or agnostic. He says he both believes in God and doesn't believe simultaneously. Why I'm an Atheist Who Believes in God He believes the only truth is that which leads to beauty. Very interesting so far.

Here's a quote I just read from the book:"Don't delude yourself; you may describe yourself to others by claiming a label of atheist, Jew, evangelical, gay or straight but you know you are really lots more complicated than that, a gene-driven primate and something more. Want to be sure you have THE TRUTH about yourself and want to be consistent to that truth? Then prepare to go mad. Or prepare to turn off your brain and cling to some form or other of fundamentalism, be that religious or secular.

You will always be more than one person. You will always embody contradiction. You -- like some sort of quantum mechanicals physics experiment -- will always be in two places at once."

Done.

 

[matuski]

I admire your desire to be a good moral person, but why can't you have failth? Is it because you see no proof that there is a god?

Proof? How about a single shred of evidence?

How do we know there's no evidence?

Who or what else do you assume exists with the same lack of evidence?

 

[Ilov80s]

I believe in god because to not believe in god is to believe in chance. I wouldn't give my kid the name Chance yet alone turn the keys to universe over to it.

As someone raised Catholic and now in no religion, I think your problem is that for faith you are turning to the experiences and writings of others. For me, whatever god that does exist is within myself and in the beauty of the physical world as we perceive it with our senses.

Sure, I get that. But I also can scientificly explain the beauty of the world around me as well, without the need for a god having designed it. Maybe if I find that thing that I can't explain without God. And I don't count things that are just mysterious or unexplained for now, I mean something for which there is no other explaination. I can come back to the creation of the universe itself, but even that I find partially explainable.

I don't consider myself an athiest though. Not in the sense of rejecting the possibility of a god. I do actively seek to know both in external sources and internally. But I also don't actively believe in a god at this point in time.

Go ahead, explain it. I'm not devout in anything and am open to your reasoning.

I'm just saying I can explain it enough to satisy me, I don't claim it would convince others, although it is (as far as I know as a non-scientist) scientifically based (what we see as beauty is what is attractive, attractive things tend to last longer, therefore evolution will tend to produce attractive things as they will have more opportunities to reproduce).

Don't get me wrong, when I see a beautiful setting, sunset, flower, whatever, I am in awe of nature. Almost to the point of reverence. But it's never crossed that tipping point to where I had faith a god created it for me to enjoy.

Then you believe it is all by chance? The sunsets, flowers, planet, atom and humanity. All by chance?

Obviously there was a chance this could all be.. it is, so the chance (possibility, probability) existed and exists.

All you need is a length of time on the order of billions of years and your "chance" becomes inevitable.

Your argument has a major flaw in that as amazing and unlikely as you make these things out to be, the sunsets flowers planet atom humanity PLUS an invisible god becomes even more unlikely. You are adding in a supernatural power while trying to make some argument on complexity.....

I agree to the idea that with the possibility of chance over endless time, anything is possible. What about over beginningless time? Over endless time of playing the lotto, we will all win the lotto even though each time it is statistically almost impossible that we do. However, without a beginning to the lotto, we can never win.

 

[Mister CIA]

Because the story of Jesus makes sense to me. If he was not who he claimed to be, the son of God, then he was either a liar or insane.

I have never understood this claim.

I am a son of God. There, I said it and I mean it...am I a liar or insane or....

Shut up, dude.

I am the son of God.

Right On Brother.

 

[Ilov80s]

Over endless time, we will all win the lotto. Over beginningless time, none of us will win. If existence is both beginningless and endless, that means existence has always been. Isn't that god? The alpha and omega. Something that has always been and always will be? If existence is endless but with a clear beginning, doesn't that imply a creation?

 

[timschochet]

Over endless time, we will all win the lotto. Over beginningless time, none of us will win. If existence is both beginningless and endless, that means existence has always been. Isn't that god? The alpha and omega. Something that has always been and always will be? If existence is endless but with a clear beginning, doesn't that imply a creation?

Spinoza?

 

[datonn]

We are an insignificant species on an insignificant planet on the outer edge of an insignificant galaxy. Our hubris demands we be more than that. The universe doesn't care.

NCCommish: your response is precisely why I DO believe in a Creator. Do I believe in a white haired, white skinned grandpa sitting up in some cloud...watching all our lives intently, giving us a little assist or nudge when we need it, or hearing our prayers? No. But I do believe in panspermia. That Earth was "seeded" with life. Could have been by dumb-luck, could have been by design (I believe the latter). And that other life has given our planet, our species, a "nudge" from time to time. And probably within the next few hundred years, we'll be doing the same thing. Seeding some other planet/moon, either in our own solar system or another solar system, with life. "Creating" life on said worlds. The question is: will be we "God" to that world? Will people refer to "pillars of fire from the sky" or "angels" to describe what they were seeing...when our technology (thousands of years from now) will be thousands of years ahead of their own?

I'll agree with you. Humans aren't unique/special in the universe (multiverse?). Just one of probably millions/billions of intelligent species out there. Earth isn't unique either, in the big scheme of things. Nor is the Milky Way. But that leads me to suspect that the seeds of life found their way to Earth and evolved from other forms of life, not originating from Earth. And if life got here from "parts unknown," then to me, that introduces at least the potential for said seeds of life to be put here on purpose. Via a "Creator." Whether you call that Creator "God" or "Bob" or "Nyuck-Nyuck" doesn't much matter to me.

 

[tonydead]

Over endless time, we will all win the lotto. Over beginningless time, none of us will win. If existence is both beginningless and endless, that means existence has always been. Isn't that god? The alpha and omega. Something that has always been and always will be? If existence is endless but with a clear beginning, doesn't that imply a creation?

Spinoza?

Darhmakirti.

Matuski never said endless time so I'm not sure what introducing another concept does for his argument.

 

[tonydead]

We are an insignificant species on an insignificant planet on the outer edge of an insignificant galaxy. Our hubris demands we be more than that. The universe doesn't care.

NCCommish: your response is precisely why I DO believe in a Creator. Do I believe in a white haired, white skinned grandpa sitting up in some cloud...watching all our lives intently, giving us a little assist or nudge when we need it, or hearing our prayers? No. But I do believe in panspermia. That Earth was "seeded" with life. Could have been by dumb-luck, could have been by design (I believe the latter). And that other life has given our planet, our species, a "nudge" from time to time. And probably within the next few hundred years, we'll be doing the same thing. Seeding some other planet/moon, either in our own solar system or another solar system, with life. "Creating" life on said worlds. The question is: will be we "God" to that world? Will people refer to "pillars of fire from the sky" or "angels" to describe what they were seeing...when our technology (thousands of years from now) will be thousands of years ahead of their own?I'll agree with you. Humans aren't unique/special in the universe (multiverse?). Just one of probably millions/billions of intelligent species out there. Earth isn't unique either, in the big scheme of things. Nor is the Milky Way. But that leads me to suspect that the seeds of life found their way to Earth and evolved from other forms of life, not originating from Earth. And if life got here from "parts unknown," then to me, that introduces at least the potential for said seeds of life to be put here on purpose. Via a "Creator." Whether you call that Creator "God" or "Bob" or "Nyuck-Nyuck" doesn't much matter to me.

Who seeded the very first seeds?

 

[Ilov80s]

Over endless time, we will all win the lotto. Over beginningless time, none of us will win. If existence is both beginningless and endless, that means existence has always been. Isn't that god? The alpha and omega. Something that has always been and always will be? If existence is endless but with a clear beginning, doesn't that imply a creation?

Spinoza?

Darhmakirti. Matuski never said endless time so I'm not sure what introducing another concept does for his argument.

Just drunk spitballing, but those both look like cool reads. I will check them out, thanks. I I guess I did add endless to his argument where he said billions of years. My b.