Do you believe in God?

[Strittan]

👍 times a thousand

... and a thousand more. 👍

 

[Joel]

Which some were.

Point is, Germany was an economic mess. Hitler was a man who vowed to fix it and spoke up. Its not like the Germans had a better choice.

We could say Hitler's order of the extermination of 6 million Jewish people was caused by jealousy. Nothing to do with belief in God.

Straight out of the Ontario grade 10 history books!

 

[Pagey279]

Straight out of the Ontario grade 10 history books!

Its still a valid point

 

[Crispy]

People don't do crazy things in the name of religion. Crazy people do crazy things and use religion as their excuse.

Sure there's some pretty f:censored:d up stuff in the bible, or any other religious literature for that matter. Most common people have the sense not to do it though. My neighbors are Christian, but I don't fear them coming into my house and murdering because "I didn't believe in God, therefore I should be sacrificed!"

I don't try and convince my religious friends they're wrong. They don't try and convince me I'm wrong. Trying to convince one side they're wrong is impossible. Both sides have strong and firm opinions, and nothing will really stop them from thinking otherwise.

 

[Sureboss]

I don't think that all of mankind's goodness comes from religion and specifically christianity. Far from it, I'm a theist so if there's a source to name I would name God.

However, I stand by what I wrote. Christianity is based on the equality of all men and on their equal dignity, granted by God and impossible to be changed by man. Many human societies didn't like this, even within christianity, but there was no way around it ... in a few centuries maybe americans like you will think with horror about the death penalty, and blame it all on the christians, saying that "In God We Trust" was written in dollar bills (like someone a few posts above mentioned the german traditional army's motto, significantly different from the SS's one).

Indeed, to do with honour or loyalty on the SS iirc.

My point was really that there was religious symbols within the German army under Hitler's reign and it was as much a "did you know?" rather than anything else.

Can only echo what others above have said, you can't do anything in the name of atheism. In the same way that just because you're religious, you did x in the name of that religion. Hitler had some well documented speeches involving Christianity, but if you actually read in to it, it's not really stating his belief of Christianity, rather an admiration for how terror was spread by Christianity in it's spread across Europe.

Of course any rational person wouldn't be saying Hitler did anything in the name of religion, he was just a mental. It's like modern terrorism being done in the name of x religion and then some sections of society who just so happen to be a part of that religion get tagged with the same stereotypes, it's just not relevant.

However, to say he did anything in the name of atheism is wrong on the count of you can't do anything in the name of atheism and he wasn't an atheist (nor religious).

Not to be dragging off topic!

 

[SuperShouden]

I agree with you that a simple "yes" or "no" would have been better choices, I for the life of me cannot see how you got "Yes, I'm a Bible thumper who wants to condemn anyone who commits sin" from "Of course, without him nothing would exist!" After all, isn't that exactly what most religious folk believe?

Because all the Christians I know that would actually answer "Of course, without him nothing would exist" are usually ignorant of the real world or being sarcastic. While, I might believe that in my heart, I'm not going to respond to the question "Do you believe in God" with that answer.

And the "No way!" for the third choice is also telling. Essentially, that's how the OP would answer that question. The exclamation point makes it read "No way! There's no "god." Look at this world. How can god exist in this hell hole?"

The first answer almost seems "flowery" to me...or at least it tries. And I know that life sucks more often than not and this world is pretty messed up and I have no idea why. But I still believe in God. Not all Christians are ignorant goody-goodies who think everything's all perfect and pretty.

 

[ronin85]

I absolutely, wholeheartedly do. There is a force behind all things. Religion on the other hand must be approached with caution, try and understand the essence of the teachings. History has shown the dangers of becoming apart of a group( ex. Religious group) and losing some of your individuality.

In my opinion science is a new religion, with it's own high preists and class structure.

"the person you've been waiting for is you"

God bless you all

 

[CodeRedR51]

The problem:

The complete doctrine of atheism:
There is no evidence for God

If atheism could speak, and if you asked if it was right to kill Jews it would answer "there is no evidence of a God"

If you asked if it approved of what you're doing it would answer "there is no evidence of a God"

If you brought made it part of the jury in a court and asked guilty or not guilty, it would answer "there is no evidence of a God"

Atheism is not a religion, a way of life, a philosophy, the theory of evolution, or anything close to those things. It's the lack in belief in God(s). You can't do anything in the name of atheism because it does not imply needing to do anything.

👍

 

[Joel]

Its still a valid point

Definitely a valid point, I don't mean to dismiss not it at all, just commenting because I'd imagine he had the same curriculum in his grade 10 history class as I did since we're both from Ontario.

 

[Touring Mars]

Christianity and nothing else is the ultimate foundation of liberty, conscience, human rights and democracy, along with the very benchmarks of western civilisation.

Christianity (among other things) may have played a role in the acceptance of these virtues (in some parts of the world anyway), but it is certainly not the "ultimate foundation" of them. Our ability to reason, to communicate, to educate ourselves and others, to form alliances and build communities, as well as our basic instinct to survive, all played a part in shaping how we as a species interact with each other, and ultimately how we came to recognise the value of these virtues in the first instance. Christianity, nor any other religion or single belief system, cannot claim to have founded any of those things, nor is there much evidence that Christianity was the first religion or philosophy to extol the virtues of liberty etc. As Exorcet alluded to, democracy, justice and liberty have their foundations long before Christianity ever existed, in Ancient Greece for example.

The entire western civilization system of values is based, wether you like it or not, in the foundations of christianism. And these foundations, set when the barbaric peoples of Europe were still far from reaching them, molded what Europe is today. I'm talking about the basic equality and dignity of men, that christians consider above and beyond man itself (because it's equality and dignity before God, not before human societies and powers that be, have been or will be).

Christianity is but one example of a philosophy/belief system that merely embodied these values - but it certainly doesn't hold any claim to have created or invented them, nor does it hold any claim today to be the only champion of these values. If Christianity disappeared altogether, these virtues would remain, just as I am pretty certain that they would have emerged without Christianity ever coming into existence.

 

[Encyclopedia]

I absolutely, wholeheartedly do. There is a force behind all things. Religion on the other hand must be approached with caution, try and understand the essence of the teachings. History has shown the dangers of becoming apart of a group( ex. Religious group) and losing some of your individuality.

In my opinion science is a new religion, with it's own high preists and class structure.

"the person you've been waiting for is you"

God bless you all

It's not though. That's like me saying that in my opinion religion is a food dish, which is obviously wrong.

You can't make up your own definitions of words. Science and religion are very, very different from eachother.

 

[Liquid]

I do not. And never have. I do not believe in anything such as souls, raptures or the afterlife.

However that doesn't mean I don't have beliefs or opinions on morality, philosophy or politics. I believe every person has the right to shape their own destiny. If you choose to believe in a higher power, that is entirely up to you and I have got no problem with that. I know religious and (more) non-religious people and have never had a confrontation over religious beliefs, or a lack of.

 

[huskeR32]

In my opinion science is a new religion, with it's own high preists and class structure.

It's not though. That's like me saying that in my opinion religion is a food dish, which is obviously wrong.

You can't make up your own definitions of words. Science and religion are very, very different from eachother.

Beat me to it. Comparing science to a religion shows a gross misunderstanding of what science is.

Religion is about believing without evidence. Science is based completely on evidence.

 

[Dapper]

It's not though. That's like me saying that in my opinion religion is a food dish, which is obviously wrong.

You can't make up your own definitions of words. Science and religion are very, very different from eachother.

I disagree and so does Al.
http://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/science_cosmicreligion.htm

 

[Danhawn]

let me ask you this, who in this forum saw the first president of the united states with there own eyes? does that make him not real? how can you not believe in our only god and his son jesus christ.

 

[Strittan]

let me ask you this, who in this forum saw the first president of the united states with there own eyes? does that make him not real?

The first president of USA was not an invisible man who was claimed to have created the earth in 7 days and make a virgin pregnant without actually doing "it", was he?

how can you not believe in our only god and his son jesus christ.

Because I don't feel the need to, and because there is no evidence for their existence.

EDIT: And what Crispy said below.

 

[Crispy]

how can you not believe in our only god and his son jesus christ.

There are so many "gods", how can there only be one real one?

Because, they are all fake.

 

[dylansan]

let me ask you this, who in this forum saw the first president of the united states with there own eyes? does that make him not real? how can you not believe in our only god and his son jesus christ.

There is actually evidence for the existence of George Washington.

 

[Sureboss]

The first president of USA was not an invisible man who was claimed to have created the earth in 7 days and make a virgin pregnant without actually doing "it", was he?

Wouldn't bet against a future president of the USA doing that though

 

[HP]

let me ask you this, who in this forum saw the first president of the united states with there own eyes? does that make him not real? how can you not believe in our only god and his son jesus christ.

Because he's a fictional character invented to help people come to grips with their own mortality...

Of course now that we know better there are still believers who are terrified of this being "it", they want everlasting life playing harps and floating on fluffy clouds instead of nothing so they cling on to the hope, sans evidence, that an invisible sky fairy will scoop up their souls and cradle them forevermore after they have spend decades apologizing for things they apparently had the free will to do in the first place...

So yeah, that's why I don't believe in Jesus or god or sekkz crazed demons who will smite my derrière if I'm bad before I die...

 

[Encyclopedia]

I disagree and so does Al.
http://www.endlesssearch.co.uk/science_cosmicreligion.htm

I think you've missunderstood completely, or I've failed to express myself properly.
What I meant was that religion and science work completely different, and although it's obvious that a scientist's personal "drive" could be religiously motivated, deist in Einstein's case, it still has absolutely nothing to do with the scientific process. And if it does, it is not science.

Hence the two thing are fundamentally different.

 

[Strittan]

I don't know how accurate this is, but I thought it was worth sharing...

Sociologist Phil Zuckerman analyzed previous social science research on secularity and non-belief, and concluded that societal well-being is positively correlated with irreligion. His findings relating specifically to atheism include:

• Compared to religious people, "atheists and secular people" are less nationalistic, prejudiced, antisemitic, racist, dogmatic, ethnocentric, close-minded, and authoritarian.
• In the US, in states with the highest percentages of atheists, the murder rate is lower than average. In the most religious US states, the murder rate is higher than average.

I believe it is true, because I can definitely relate to it.

I have recently come to realize that national pride is quite pathetic actually (for your information, it was George Carlin that made me realize this). I mean, how can one be proud about something one can not do anything about? I was born a swede, it's not something I've accomplished. Now, am I happy to be a swede? Hell yes. Proud? No, I simply don't think I have the right to be.

Same goes with race. There's nothing you can do about it, and it doesn't matter because there is only one race anyway. The human race.

 

[Zoom!Zoom!]

I don't know how accurate this is, but I thought it was worth sharing...

I believe it is true, because I can definitely relate to it.

I took a little time to read some of the paper itself and some of it just proves that secular people are more secular. So a secular person would be less likely to see abortion as something as bad as murder. It's a no brainer like people who shacking up together has a less divorce rate than those who get married.

 

[TankAss95]

Here is two quotes I found worth sharing, the first from a theist and the other an agnostic:

"Since everything that began to exist has a cause of it's existence, and since the universe began to exist, we conclude , therefore, that the universe has a cause of existence. We ought to ponder long and hard over this truly remarkable conclusion, for it means that transcending the entire universe there exists a cause which brought the universe into being ex nihilo... This conclusion ought to stagger us, ought to fill us with a sense of awe and wonder at the knowledge that our whole universe was caused to exist by something beyond it and greater than it." - William Lane Craig ('The Kalam Cosmological Argument', Barns and Noble, p.149.)

"This is an exceedingly strange development, unexpected by all but the theologians... We scientists did not expect to find evidence for an abrupt beginning because we have had until recently such extraordinary success in tracing the chain of cause and effect back ward in time... At this moment it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the mystery of creation. For the scientist who has lived by faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." - Robert Jastrow (New York Times, 25 June 1978.)

I for one can't comprehend another answer to the 'why everything instead of nothing?' other than a monotheistic God, if you guys can then well done. Infinite regress has to stop somewhere, I find the unique, personal, spiritual, externally self existent, transcendent, immanent, omniscient, immutable, holy God, which is presented in The Bible the only answer.

 

[Recon]

Here is two quotes I found worth sharing, the first from a theist and the other an agnostic:

"Since everything that began to exist has a cause of it's existence, and since the universe began to exist, we conclude , therefore, that the universe has a cause of existence. We ought to ponder long and hard over this truly remarkable conclusion, for it means that transcending the entire universe there exists a cause which brought the universe into being ex nihilo... This conclusion ought to stagger us, ought to fill us with a sense of awe and wonder at the knowledge that our whole universe was caused to exist by something beyond it and greater than it." - William Lane Craig ('The Kalam Cosmological Argument', Barns and Noble, p.149.)

"This is an exceedingly strange development, unexpected by all but the theologians... We scientists did not expect to find evidence for an abrupt beginning because we have had until recently such extraordinary success in tracing the chain of cause and effect back ward in time... At this moment it seems as though science will never be able to raise the curtain on the mystery of creation. For the scientist who has lived by faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." - Robert Jastrow (New York Times, 25 June 1978.)

I for one can't comprehend another answer to the 'why everything instead of nothing?' other than a monotheistic God, if you guys can then well done. Infinite regress has to stop somewhere, I find the unique, personal, spiritual, externally self existent, transcendent, immanent, omniscient, immutable, holy God, which is presented in The Bible the only answer.

1. If its cause and effect then the universe was caused by quantum fluctuations in multiverse. (Since I choose to believe in it just like you believe in god)

2.It does seem miraculous, it truly does. How things can be created in an explosion at the blink of an eye. But do you really think it was because of a deity? That it was set into motion by something of a higher power? Do you completely dismiss that it was maybe something natural? That everything else in this universe is completely natural but that event? Maybe there is a multiverse or a higher dimension in which our universe is natural. It only makes sense; more sense than a deity.

We humans are insignificant in comparison to our universe, but our knowledge will grow and evolve, no thanks to a god


Btw, the first quote in your sig is acting as if a man that doesn't worship god is inferior to one that does. And the second line continues that notion.

 

[Owen.C93]

You have to ask the question even if the universe was given a little kickstart from some higher power and then left alone since then, it could quite possibly be the most insignificant thing in the history of the universe. In a way.

It actually changes nothing and as such is a rather useless opinion to have.

 

[TankAss95]

1. If its cause and effect then the universe was caused by quantum fluctuations in multiverse. (Since I choose to believe in it just like you believe in god)

2.It does seem miraculous, it truly does. How things can be created in an explosion at the blink of an eye. But do you really think it was because of a deity? That it was set into motion by something of a higher power? Do you completely dismiss that it was maybe something natural? That everything else in this universe is completely natural but that event? Maybe there is a multiverse or a higher dimension in which our universe is natural. It only makes sense; more sense than a deity.

We humans are insignificant in comparison to our universe, but our knowledge will grow and evolve, no thanks to a god

1. Still doesn't answer the question. Even if there is a multiverse, there still is a watch that needs a watchmaker.

2. I suppose I must think differently compared to others. A brief overview of the stability needed for both our and the universe's existence (as we know it) is absolutely stunning. I've tried that before though, and it seems that the improbability of such perfect conditions is not accepted by the atheist in this argument. I'm attempting a different approach. We both have different hypothesis. I believe that a greater power made the material world - supernatural if you like. You think that the universe can be explained through natural processes.
I'm going to attempt to explain this 'infinite regress' I was talking about. Firstly, what caused the big bang? Then what caused that? Then what caused that? And so on for infinity. Think of it like dividing a piece of paper in half. I cut it in 1/2, then 1/4, then 1/8, and so on. There must be a point where the peice of paper cannot be divised any more.
So when we put a nail on this infinite regress, we ask what it is and why is it in existence (or how). My explanation is God. A non-material, omnipresent being that lies outside the realms of time. I can see no other explanation. We both have limited knowledge, along with everyone else in this discussion. Could one use their limited store of knowledge to exclude the possibility of a deity?

On your last note: I am not here to stand up for the religions of the world, but rather to stick up for my own personal beliefs. I agree that we are insignificant in the universe, but obviously I disagree with that last statement. I would like to say that my belief in God has encouraged me to study the beauty of the universe which he has made. Many scientists have strived for understanding purely because they were Christian and wanted to understand and marvel the work God has made. This has no evidence for the existence of a God, but it shows that a belief in a deity does not always slow down the progress of scientists.

Quite simpily, the way I see it is: God is perfect, and therefore exists.

Obviously you can discard that statement in an argument, but after some deep thinking (which I will continue to do), it makes sense to me.

 

[Strittan]

Firstly, what caused the big bang? Then what caused that? Then what caused that?

We don't know. Is it really that hard to understand that we can't know everything? It's pretty funny how guys like you thinks that just because there is no complete explaination for everything, God has to be solution.

Since you believe God created everything. What created God? Then what created that? Then what created that? And so on for infinity.

Quite simpily, the way I see it is: God is perfect, and therefore exists.

Obviously you can discard that statement in an argument, but after some deep thinking (which I will continue to do), it makes sense to me.

You've obviously given up trying to understand and instead chosen to stick with the fairy tail.

 

[TankAss95]

We don't know. Is it really that hard to understand that we can't know everything? It's pretty funny how guys like you thinks that just because there is no complete explaination for everything, God has to be solution.

Since you believe God created everything. What created God? Then what created that? Then what created that? And so on for infinity.

You've obviously given up trying to understand and instead chosen to stick with the fairy tail.

Didn't you say a while back that science has no limits? It seems that you are saying the exact opposite now.

I said that I can't comprehend the origin of the universe through pure natural causes.

The who created God question is in itself a fallacy, as it fails to acknowledge the very definition of the Christian God.

Trying to understand what? You have just said that we can't know everything, yet expect me to understand everything? If you can tell me the origin of the universe then be my guest.

 

[Strittan]

Didn't you say a while back that science has no limits? It seems that you are saying the exact opposite now.

I have never said that.

The who created God question is in itself a fallacy, as it fails to acknowledge the very definition of the Christian God.

So what are you saying? That God suddenly just popped out of nowhere?

Trying to understand what?

As much as possible. That's all we can do.

You have just said that we can't know everything, yet expect me to understand everything? If you can tell me the origin of the universe then be my guest.

No, I don't expect anything from you. Have I ever said I do?