Do you believe in God?

[Sam48]

Science could easily make up an answer too, wouldn't make it right.

Religion cannot answer the question, and it has never had anything close to an answer.

It's closer than science. Science hasn't even cracked the surface of how the universe began.

 

[niky]

It's very simple. Science cannot answer the question, where did the universe come from. Religion can.

@Exorcet- there was an ad at the top of the page saying "6 reasons to believe in God". Guess it went away.

Religion gives an answer. Wait... each religion gives one answer... and each answer is different.

So... which answer is right? The giant turtle? The giant tree? The dead and decomposing body of a fallen giant? Yahweh? Allah? Jehovah? Brahma (or his navel, I forget how)? The crow did it? The rat did it? A giant snake?

If you say Religion can answer... you have to specify which religion, which answer, and why it's a better answer than that put forward by any other religion.

 

[Sam48]

Religion gives an answer. Wait... each religion gives one answer... and each answer is different.

So... which answer is right? The giant turtle? The giant tree? The dead and decomposing body of a fallen giant? Yahweh? Allah? Jehovah? Brahma (or his navel, I forget how)? The crow did it? The rat did it? A giant snake?

If you say Religion can answer... you have to specify which religion, which answer, and why it's a better answer than that put forward by any other religion.

Christianity then, and no I don't have to specify why it's a better answer than that put forward by any other religion, I'm just using my religion.

 

[niky]

Christianity then, and no I have to specify why it's a better answer than that put forward by any other religion, I'm just using my religion.

So how did the Universe happen, then, according to Christianity?

Let's be clear on this. Science doesn't care who. It doesn't care if the Universe was created as an illegitimate lovechild of copulating multiverses. It doesn't care if the first quantum function was defined by Allah. It doesn't care if we are all figments of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's imagination.

It only cares how the Universe came to be.

So how does Christianity say the Universe came to be?

In the beginning, there was void and the darkness.

Then God said: let there be light.

Where did the void come from? Where did the darkness come from? Who is God and where did he come from? How did he create the light? Did he shoot photons from his fingertips? Did he touch off the singularity that caused the Big Bang? Did he set off a quantum bomb?

These are questions that Chirstianity refuses to answer. Like the question of the "Holy Trinity"... you've just got to take it on faith. Now sit down and shut up and say ten Hail Marys.

Christianity doesn't delve into the mechanics of building a Universe. It simply says that one day, it was there.

It can't answer the question at all. Not a hundred years or a thousand years worth of theological texts satisfactorily explain where God came from. They just define it as something they can't know and leave it at that.

Edit:

In the end, Science merely describes the mechanistic aspect of the Universe. All it cares is that a bowling ball falls down. It doesn't care whether the bowling ball fell off a ledge due to the wind, was pushed off by someone or dropped by a passing bird. It merely describes how the bowling ball falls and attempts to define the mechanism by which the falling occurs. Religion, on the other hand, asserts that the ball was dropped by the hand of God. As God apparently has no fingerprints nor material representation, Science can neither prove nor disprove this.

Some religious fundamentalists even go so far as to say that the bowling ball buried in that crater in the pavement is there because it was always there... (this is your so-called "Intelligent Design") and that's not an answer that's satisfactory to anyone but the uncurious.

 

[CraftyLandShark]

Sam, you're consistently giving us exactly the same argument for everything. Why are you going to heaven, while everyone who doesn't share your beliefs will wind up slow-roasting for eternity? Because the Bible says so. Why is your God the one true God? Because God says so.

You really honestly don't see why we can't accept that?

 

[Public'sTwin]

You really honestly don't see why we can't accept that?

I can't really discern his age, but if it's to be interpolated based on his arguments, he may very well be too young to.

 

[Famine]

Wow. Lots of activity since last night.

I believe in 1, and only 1, God.

That's swell, but it doesn't answer the question posed, nor does it answer how one can use logic to determine the correct religion as you asserted.

My only basis then is the fact that where all alive.

Not a sound basis - check the Creation vs. Evolution thread.

Beyond that, I'd probably resort to the parallel lines theory.

Which was solidly debunked without much effort.

No, I'm going to heaven because I believe in God, and the reality he created around me.

Whoah. That's one of the most narcissistic things I've ever seen.

So you believe everything in the universe was purely by chance. All the way down to the atoms that hold you together.

I find that extremely hard to believe.

Luckily palatability is not the arbiter of truth. Nor is belief. Lots of things are hard to believe, but are still true. Lots of things are easy to believe, but are still false.

The universe is an inevitable result of that which preceded it. Everything in the universe is an inevitable result of the universe. Lady Luck was elsewhere at the time.

It's very simple. Science cannot answer they question, where did the universe come from. Religion can.

It's closer than science. Science hasn't even cracked the surface of how the universe began.

If you accept that any answer is an answer, then anyone can answer the question. The important part is that the answer ought to be true and, as yet, no-one has come up with that answer.

Though by observing the evidence - the universe - science has made a pretty good fist of it. Religion's answer (and I'm not being specific to Christianity's myriad sects here) comes from a time when we could only observe the universe by looking upwards at night, and when people thought the Sun was pushed through the sky by a dung beetle.

 

[Public'sTwin]

Whoah. That's one of the most narcissistic things I've ever seen.

I think his use of "me" may very well have been conflated synonymously (and lazily) with "us", however incorrect it may be to speak on the behalf of others.

Indeed, in the greatest likelyhood reality was created around us, but ultimately one can only speak for their own subjective reality.

 

[homeforsummer]

Religion is the answer to science, but science can't explain religion.

How is religion the answer to science?

And of course science can't explain religion, no more than science can explain voodoo, magic, ghosts or anything else that has no tangible evidence.

 

[Duke]

@Duke
@Exorcet

If you pray to God (no name, no nothing, just God) you basically cover all of them. (except roman gods and indian and pagan gods)

...which would be likely to piss off Jehovah, among others, enough that he would damn you for considering the possibility of other gods. The Old Testament shows him to be extremely bitter, petty, and jealous.

Not a good bet.

When I say "by chance", all I'm saying is that it wasn't created by a "higher power" so to speak.

But that's setting up a false dichotomy that doesn't exist.

Creationists (including IDers) love to say "a tornado flying through a junkyard can't ever make a 747". But that's because they completely misunderstand the nature of natural selection and the way it works.

The odds of Creation being the right explanation are infinitesimally small.

The odds of natural selection / evolution making this same precise world again are also infinitesimally small. That's where the whole Creationist 747 idea comes in. Creationists/IDers think that the way things are is the only possible way things can be. This failure of concept is part of their problem in understanding. The root cause, IMHO, is simple refusal.

But the odds that natural selection would result in some form of diversified, changing life are 1:1. This another argument against the popular creationist "hemoglobin" argument, or other "irreducible complexity" arguments.

Don't blame me, I'm just quoting the Bible.

And we're just challenging you to analyze your assumptions and a priori beliefs even a little bit.

Would intelligent design be a better word in describing how the universe came to be?

No, not really. Why would it be?

 

[Danoff]

I said perhaps the universe simply always has been.

Danoff- Nope. Not sure what makes you think that

There is some evidence that the big bang was actually a big bounce. That the ball of matter was collapsing and bounced off of singularity to explode into the universe. The collapse could quite possibly have been the result of a contracting universe - which is something that our universe might eventually start doing.

So the big bang may have been the beginning of our universe, but it may have been the end of another one. This expansion contraction cycle may have been going on for eternity and may continue to go on for eternity. Therefore, it is quite possible that the universe always has and always will be.

Now... I'm sure you're wondering where the singularity came from, or the matter or energy or whatever came from that started this process. But I would tell you that the process simply never started - it has always been going. You would ask me why the process goes, and I would ask you why God exists. Your explanation (God) and mine (expanding-contracting universe) both refuse to answer the fundamental question of why we are here at all. Both rely on the same "it has always been" argument. Both rely on something which has no beginning and no end. And that is why the expansion-contraction concept will never be sufficient for me. It is also, incidentally, one of many reasons why the God concept should not be sufficient for you.

 

[DK]

I believe the universe is just one of many (maybe even an infinite number of) universes. Who knows, maybe a universe is spawned through something getting sucked into a black hole. Far-fetched, right? Well, there are many explanations for the creation of the universe. To answer the main question asked by the thread's title, I do believe in God. But to get back to my main point, I do have a theory on the creation of the universe. 13.7 billion years ago, in some other universe, a large object was sucked into a black hole. The object was large enough for the universe it spawned to not collapse in on itself. The size of the object I'll never know, but it could range from an electron to a whole galaxy. I'll never know which universe could've been the original. The ancients always attributed unexplainable phenomena to a higher power, i.e. God(s). People will always unexplained phenomena to the god(s) of their respective religions. Some people will even attribute already explained phenomena to their god(s).

 

[Sam48]

No, not really. Why would it be?

Because it would stop the argument over which religion is the correct one.

 

[Joey D]

Because it would stop the argument over which religion is the correct one.

There is no correct religion, unless you know something millions of other people don't.

 

[CarBastard]

There is no correct religion, unless you know something millions of other people don't.

True. Unless Jesus appears in front of me and all non believers and gives us a beating until we believe in him, forgive me if I still think if catholicism lacks evidences to be considered an objective, universally true, and irrefutable fact. The same goes for all other religions.

 

[Sam48]

There is no correct religion, unless you know something millions of other people don't.

What are guys talking about? The only reason I'm now using the words "intelligent design", is so that we won't have to argue over which religion is the correct one. I'm not quite sure what you where talking about though?

 

[Tired Tyres]

Because it would stop the argument over which religion is the correct one.

They are talking about that.

If God was such a superior being to Man then Man would not be able to fully understand the nature of God. Thus all religions must be wrong.

 

[Dotini]

He would seem to be asserting, "All religion is false."

 

[Sam48]

They are talking about that.

If God was such a superior being to Man then Man would not be able to fully understand the nature of God. Thus all religions must be wrong.

???? Maybe some of you should read a few pages back. There was an argument addressed toward me asking why aren't other religions the correct one, and how do we know your god is the correct one. (that sort of thing)

So what I'm going to do is no longer using the word "God", but instead using the words "intelligent design", as to avoid any more controversy over which religion is the correct one.

 

[Famine]

???? Maybe some of you should read a few pages back. There was an argument addressed toward me asking why aren't other religions the correct one, and how do we know your god is the correct one. (that sort of thing)

So what I'm going to do is no longer using the word "God", but instead using the words "intelligent design", as to avoid any more controversy over which religion is the correct one.

Why would that help? All you're doing then is saying that any religion without a deity-oriented universal creation myth is incorrect...

 

[Sam48]

Why would that help? All you're doing then is saying that any religion without a deity-oriented universal creation myth is incorrect...

So your saying intelligent design could refer to something other than a god. (like aliens planting) Well the name of the thread is, "Do you believe in God" (singular), So could we just stick with the christian god? Because honestly, I don't know which religion is the correct one.

 

[Famine]

So your saying intelligent design could refer to something other than a god.

No. I'm saying exactly what I said - that insisting on "Intelligent Design" and eschewing direct deity naming doesn't unify religion at all, as there are religions which do not have a universal creation theory and would not ascribe to your "Intelligent Design" idea.

Well the name of the thread is, "Do you believe in God" (singular), So could we just stick with the christian god?

That in itself is an issue. God, as presented in the Bible, is sometimes directly analogous to Jehovah and Allah - and in fact the Torah and Qu'ran share many similarities to the Bible. Christian "god" would be more appropriately identified as "Yahweh" (as, ironically, would Jehovah, being a derivation of Yahweh) - the usage of "God" as a name came from an early Common Era use of "elohim" (Hebrew for "god") as Jewish scholars believed "Yahweh" was too holy a name to be spoken by men. It was capitalised, as is the norm for common nouns, and "Elohim" in Hebrew became "God" in English.

So the question "Do you believe in God" isn't so much a direct reference to Christianity as to the entire monotheistic traditions of the Islamo-Judaic-Christian God of Abraham.

Because honestly, I don't know which religion is the correct one.

Four possibilities spring to mind:

1. They all are.
2. One of them is, and the others are derivations of it (the bad news - this would probably be the earliest one, and as far as monotheism is concerned, that's Judaism).
3. One is, but present day religions are all derivations of it and none of those are correct.
4. None of them are.

 

[Joey D]

Honestly I don't have any idea what you are talking about., or what you are trying to get at. Do you mean intelligent designer? Intelligent design would mean something else.

 

[Sam48]

Honestly I don't have any idea what you are talking about., or what you are trying to get at. Do you mean intelligent designer? Intelligent design would mean something else.

Yes, designer. But Famine has a point, you can't call it intelligent design because not all religions go by creationism, and calling him just God, doesn't quite work either. I'm not sure there is a broad enough word to describe every religions god or gods.

@Famine: I'd pick answer number 2, but why does it have to be the earliest one? Why can't it be a modern one, even if it was branched off of a previous religion?

 

[Joey D]

Yes, designer. But Famine has a point, you can't call it intelligent design because not all religions go by creationism, and calling him just God, doesn't quite work either. I'm not sure there is a broad enough word to describe every religions god or gods.

What religion doesn't have a creation myth? In all the religions I've studied, and I've studies a lot of them, I've never come across one that doesn't explain how we got here. Even Scientology has some bizarre explanation to why we are here.

And there is a word, or rather words, supernatural being(s).

 

[Sam48]

What religion doesn't have a creation myth.

Famine seems to know.

 

[CarBastard]

1. They all are.
2. One of them is, and the others are derivations of it (the bad news - this would probably be the earliest one, and as far as monotheism is concerned, that's Judaism).
3. One is, but present day religions are all derivations of it and none of those are correct.
4. None of them are.

Number four for me please .

 

[DK]

Famine seems to know.

There's a reason why he holds a monopoly on the award of Smartest User (or something along those lines) in the GTPlanet awards.

 

[Famine]

@Famine: I'd pick answer number 2, but why does it have to be the earliest one? Why can't it be a modern one, even if it was branched off of a previous religion?

It doesn't have to be, but rather it seems most logical - the one originating nearest the time of the events described (notably the part where God says "Hey, these are my words, write them down, shepherd-dudes") is the one most likely to be accurate. Any written afterwards are derivations with inaccuracies in retelling due to human fallability.

It's worth a note that Islam recognises this and essentially states that people didn't quite write it down right the first time through, so God is having another crack but in his own words this time - the Qu'ran is entirely written in the first person as God.

What religion doesn't have a creation myth? In all the religions I've studied, and I've studies a lot of them, I've never come across one that doesn't explain how we got here. Even Scientology has some bizarre explanation to why we are here.

And there is a word, or rather words, supernatural being(s).

The most mainstream religion that has no creation myth is Buddhism. There is an aspect of cosmology to Buddhism - there's an explanation that the universe is cyclical and the cycles last a very long time - but there's no particular time devoted to why or how. It's very much a religion akin to philosophy.

There are slightly kookier ones - Scientology is a cracking example because although it explains why we are here, it never makes any effort to explain why Xenu or the Thetans are.

 

[Joey D]

I guess I never think of Buddhism as a religion, but I suppose you are right never-the-less.