Do you believe in God?

[Exorcet]

First of all I don't care about religion, I follow my own path and my own destiny.

Your "path" is your own religion. You're following a set of beliefs that appeals to you.

Secondly, how do you know that trees or celestial objects don't feel? Are you a tree or a celestial object yourself

We can test the ability to feel in many ways and make inferences based on knowledge when we can't examine something directly. Trees and hydrogen (ie most of space) do not have brains and as a result cannot experience the existing. Being a tree or something else doesn't help because even if I were a sentient tree, that doesn't make all trees sentient. Rather than blindly assume all trees were like me, it would be better to investigate the capabilities of other trees.

Of course I may be wrong and I freely admit that, but without a compelling reason, why change my mind when observations match my understanding?

are you merely a mass of atoms and protons and electrons and whatever other scientific gobble you come up with for describing reality?

Most things that we experience are made of atoms. That doesn't prevent those things from being alive and aware.

Thirdly, it doesn't matter what you want to avoid, or what I want to avoid, you think the universal will or God cares about what you or I want?

If there was a god, then at least there would be a chance that whatever was in charge cared about what I wanted. As nice as that might be, there is no evidence for it. Instead I'm left with what I can accomplish on my own, and an important facet of that is being able to discern what is true from what isn't. I can't count on some mystic force operating behind the scenes, so I need to put effort into maintaining what I enjoy in life. To do the opposite would just increase the chances of failure and disappointment.

 

[UKMikey]

We all go through ** in life do we not?

Not to the extent of children who have cancer and their families who have to deal with their pain and suffering.

Unless of course there's more to a human being than just their physical vessel, maybe the soul or spirit or consciousness or whatever label you wish to give it, maybe that certain "something" that is beyond physical actually gets something out of it all in the end from going through a relatively short period of apparent physical **** and suffering.

It does seem like an incredibly cruel way to teach such a lesson. Especially as the "teaching" isn't applied to everyone in a comparable or equitable way.

 

[Danoff]

Unless of course there's more to a human being than just their physical vessel, maybe the soul or spirit or consciousness or whatever label you wish to give it, maybe that certain "something" that is beyond physical actually gets something out of it all in the end from going through a relatively short period of apparent physical **** and suffering.

Your emotional connections and values are VERY physical. They're not just directly written in your neural pathways, they are constructed in part via your DNA because they confer a natural selection advantage.

You have HUMAN emotions because you have HUMAN DNA. You care because you're human and human beings instinctually care because it confers an advantage. You're social because human DNA includes highly social adaptation, much of which is innately built into your brain structure, and the rest of which is adapted into your brain structure through flexible learning.

 

[Imari]

We all go through ** in life do we not? We could all sit here and moan and complain about it all and say what an A-hole God or whatever you wanna call it is. The truth is as human beings were a merely just small pieces of flesh a bone in an entire universe full of physical matter, a human being going through such is no different from a tree being cut down, or a celestial object smashing into another celestial object. It's all just physical matter interacting with physical matter so what reason is there to even care or give a **?

If you wanna confess that you're a psychopath and you feel nothing when you see other people in pain or struggling, you can just say that. You don't have to beat around the bush.

 

[feral and bad]

You mean the stasis of "heat death" of the universe? I guess. Given trillions of years, the energy in the universe should be more stable and distributed than it is today, and I suppose from that perspective you could take stock of your life - though I think this particular perspective is not very helpful.

I think you probably meant that your view of an event tends to settle out over your lifetime. But of course new events may cast them in a different light. For example, if I throw something away, it might be positive in the short term, neutral in the long term, and then 20 years from now suddenly I realize I needed it and lament having thrown it out. Selling or buying bitcoin, or a car, can do something similar over long timescales.

Again, there is not a single determination of the personal value of a particular action. Your judgment of it varies across time. Your judgement now is valid now, your judgement then was valid then. The rosey retrospective makes it easy to sweep away the pain of having sold bitcoin too low, for example.

But if I really want to dig things up, I wish I had bought a black lotus card when I was 13 and into card games. My rosey retrospection can't seem to let me lament the lost million dollars.

Thank you for your time and effort in trying to enlighten me.
Best Regards.

 

[Ghost Lap]

You have HUMAN emotions because you have HUMAN DNA. You care because you're human and human beings instinctually care because it confers an advantage. You're social because human DNA includes highly social adaptation, much of which is innately built into your brain structure, and the rest of which is adapted into your brain structure through flexible learning.

I'd say that we care not for any reason that relates to our human selves, it all comes from the heart/soul. I'd argue that there's far more to a human than merely what science can yet reveal, what kind of intelligence is behind all of evolution that makes us "care because it confers an advantage". What advantage are we talking about here and to what end is this advantage supposed to lead to. What kind of an advantage does one attain when they for example risk their own lives to save a complete stranger from certain death. Where does that kind of an impulse or motivation come from based on the typical Darwinian theories of human evolution and SELF-PRESERVATION.

Does throwing yourself onto a train track in order to save a complete stranger who is moments away from certain death offer any kind of survival advantage to the self? What about fireman who knowingly throw themselves into situations of likely demise in the hopes of saving a few complete strangers, explain this to me using all of your science and arrogant ways of thinking.

 

[Exorcet]

What kind of an advantage does one attain when they for example risk their own lives to save a complete stranger from certain death.

You make allies that are willing to help you.

Where does that kind of an impulse or motivation come from based on the typical Darwinian theories of human evolution and SELF-PRESERVATION.

It was explained already.

Does throwing yourself onto a train track in order to save a complete stranger who is moments away from certain death offer any kind of survival advantage to the self?

Yes, as I explained above.

What about fireman who knowingly throw themselves into situations of likely demise in the hopes of saving a few complete strangers, explain this to me using all of your science

Income from having a job, respect and admiration of the community, the feeling of pride that comes from protecting other people. This is basic stuff.

arrogant ways of thinking.

Truth is arrogance I guess.

 

[Famine]

scientific waffling

scientific gobble

using all of your science

Sheesh.

your ... arrogant ways of thinking

 

[Danoff]

I'd say that we care not for any reason that relates to our human selves, it all comes from the heart/soul. I'd argue that there's far more to a human than merely what science can yet reveal, what kind of intelligence is behind all of evolution that makes us "care because it confers an advantage". What advantage are we talking about here and to what end is this advantage supposed to lead to. What kind of an advantage does one attain when they for example risk their own lives to save a complete stranger from certain death. Where does that kind of an impulse or motivation come from based on the typical Darwinian theories of human evolution and SELF-PRESERVATION.

Does throwing yourself onto a train track in order to save a complete stranger who is moments away from certain death offer any kind of survival advantage to the self? What about fireman who knowingly throw themselves into situations of likely demise in the hopes of saving a few complete strangers, explain this to me using all of your science and arrogant ways of thinking.

Ok. It's not hard. Most of this was laid out quite clearly over 50 years ago.

A lot of what you talk about is present in other animals as well, including birds that risk their lives for their flock, and let's not even get started on ants. What's actually being selected for is not the individual or "self" but the gene. And the gene is present not just in the individual but in other members of the individual's group, including family but also tribe or group members. Self-sacrifice, especially for children, but also for other members of the tribe which presumably carry some of the same genes, is easily explained from the natural selection advantage of propagating those genes. There is no mind at work, just "competition" among self-replicating genetic variants, where the ones that replicate the best are the ones that persist over time and the ones that don't don't. What is the end that it leads to? Persistence. That's all that natural selection tends toward, persistent genes.

Humans in particular are highly social creatures. There are of course other social creatures, many of them are unsurprisingly mammals, but bees and ants have their own variety and birds do as well. Emperor penguins are super social. Sharks and polar bears not so much. Humans are WAY up on the social end of creatures, and that social bonding is deeply rooted in the structure of our brains. The reason you feel so deeply socially connected, and you have these powerful emotions that drive you so profoundly, is because that pro-social motivation is very helpful for propagating the genes that you carry and/or share with others in your tribe. Again, the driving force behind this is persistence. It exists in you because it is good at persisting.

Again, these are not hard questions at this point.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Ok. It's not hard. Most of this was laid out quite clearly over 50 years ago.

A lot of what you talk about is present in other animals as well, including birds that risk their lives for their flock, and let's not even get started on ants. What's actually being selected for is not the individual or "self" but the gene. And the gene is present not just in the individual but in other members of the individual's group, including family but also tribe or group members. Self-sacrifice, especially for children, but also for other members of the tribe which presumably carry some of the same genes, is easily explained from the natural selection advantage of propagating those genes. There is no mind at work, just "competition" among self-replicating genetic variants, where the ones that replicate the best are the ones that persist over time and the ones that don't don't. What is the end that it leads to? Persistence. That's all that natural selection tends toward, persistent genes.

Humans in particular are highly social creatures. There are of course other social creatures, many of them are unsurprisingly mammals, but bees and ants have their own variety and birds do as well. Emperor penguins are super social. Sharks and polar bears not so much. Humans are WAY up on the social end of creatures, and that social bonding is deeply rooted in the structure of our brains. The reason you feel so deeply socially connected, and you have these powerful emotions that drive you so profoundly, is because that pro-social motivation is very helpful for propagating the genes that you carry and/or share with others in your tribe. Again, the driving force behind this is persistence. It exists in you because it is good at persisting.

Again, these are not hard questions at this point.

Yep, still doesn't explain anything but then again, if you and your pals on here want to think all of this and then pat each other on the back in this nice little community you got going on here then great. Back to my actual question, say you see a "COMPLETE STRANGER" who has zero relation to you on a biological level yet is in dire need of urgent help, what causes you to help that person in that situation. Oh lemme guess, it's all the genes and propagating them good old genes right?

 

[Famine]

still doesn't explain anything

It does, if you're actually willing to have things explained.

if you and your pals on here want to think all of this and then pat each other on the back in this nice little community you got going on here then great

Heh.

 

[Danoff]

Yep, still doesn't explain anything but then again, if you and your pals on here want to think all of this and then pat each other on the back in this nice little community you got going on here then great. Back to my actual question, say you see a "COMPLETE STRANGER" who has zero relation to you on a biological level yet is in dire need of urgent help, what causes you to help that person in that situation. Oh lemme guess, it's all the genes and propagating them good old genes right?

Yes. And yes it did answer your question. You just didn't like the answer. "That didn't explain anything" is just you coping.

 

[Exorcet]

Back to my actual question, say you see a "COMPLETE STRANGER" who has zero relation to you on a biological level yet is in dire need of urgent help, what causes you to help that person in that situation.

Scroll up.

Though there are problems from the get go here. Zero relation on a biological level? We haven't found aliens yet.

Humans are social we don't have the ability to scan each other's DNA (well not without lab equipment) so obviously evolution could not have pushed us toward using DNA directly as a means to determine who to help. Instead we use queues like visual appearance and tools like empathy.

But if you want to boil this down to something really simple, 1 human vs 1 bear = dead human. 10 humans vs 1 bear = dead bear. We cooperate because it helps us.

 

[UKMikey]

Heh.

Person who demonstrates lack of understanding of empathy and group behaviour in "fellow humans are ganging up on me" shocker.

 

[Daz555]

Is it your view that no one is responsible for their decisions, God is responsible for everything, and that he never gave us the ability to choose?
Thanks.

It's not my view - there likely is no god. However, it is surely the logical conclusion when considering the creation made by an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient deity.

Free will cannot exist in a universe created by such a god. In such a universe everything is "unfolding perfectly and exactly as it should according to the will of a higher power" as you suggested earlier.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Looks like the old hornets nest is getting all buzzed up today 🐝

On a side note I'd also say that this place (as in this world and this physical reality) is totally fake compared to the real thing (commonly referred to as the After Life), how do I know? It's because there's no True Light to really be found out there in this very dark place to be. If you want to find the route of all war and conflict down here, look no further than to the conclusion of where your science points to (that reality all just boils down to materialism and humans are simply just biology and such).

I you wish to find the source any real good or "True Light" (heroic acts such as that of a Fireman who willingly risks their life for the sake of saving the life of complete strangers), then you have to start looking to the only place where True Light is found. If you want True Light then you have to look within yourself and to within your own soul.

 

[Famine]

your science

You know that you're posting this on the internet with a computing device, right?

It's your science too, you just want to pick which bits you accept and fill in the rest with weird, random beliefs.

 

[Danoff]

Looks like the old hornets nest is getting all buzzed up today 🐝

Are you complaining and making fun of people for responding to you on a discussion forum?

On a side note I'd also say that this place (as in this world and this physical reality) is totally fake compared to the real thing (commonly referred to as the After Life), how do I know? It's because there's no True Light to really be found out there in this very dark place to be. If you want to find the route of all war and conflict down here, look no further than to the conclusion of where your science points to (that reality all just boils down to materialism and humans are simply just biology and such).

Literally just explained to you the scientific bases for emotion and connection and you're like just noping off like science says there is no emotion or connection.

 

[Exorcet]

If you want to find the route of all war and conflict down here, look no further than to the conclusion of where your science points to (that reality all just boils down to materialism and humans are simply just biology and such).

Did you miss my earlier post where I mentioned an example of religious belief making people willing to break once close and beneficial friendships?

Blind belief is not a good thing and you're showing us why.

Can you even explain how accepting that the world is physical and nothing more is supposed to lead to conflict? Because the link there is not clear in the slightest.

 

[feral and bad]

I don't believe in any gods.

This is getting hard for me to follow.

First you said "God created everything and also knows the future, yet the blame for sin is placed on humans. Adam and Eve (Especially Eve) specifically. The only reason there was a forbidden to tree for them to eat from was because God wished for this happen."
Then you said: I don't believe in any gods.
If you are going to claim this is not your belief, but you are merely quoting the Bible, then I am going to need the Bible verse(s) where it said that God wished them to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

That fits but I think of it as being more like he creates situations where he knows the outcome already, basically setting things up such that they must fail.

So you believe that the god that you don't believe in is disingenuous

Those are the same when you are also the one that put everything into motion. Adam and Eve can't eat from a tree that doesn't exist. God being all powerful should have the ability to intervene anywhere at any moment. Knowing what will happen while having the ability to stop it with zero effort on your part is the as making something happen.

How do you know that anything that God does requires "zero effort"?

God already knew what would happen with the tree. There was no need for it. You yourself point out some very glaring problems with the story, but I'll get to that in a minute.

As I already said, the need for the tree was so that Adam and Eve could honor God by choosing to obey him.

I'm not proclaiming anything I'm taking it from what is supposed to be a source, The Bible.

You have said on multiple occasions that you get stuff from the Bible, but without a specific references to your claims it is hard to verify.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. God is obviously at fault by being the one that set up the whole situation, but religion tries to deflect the blame on the victims (humans). If humans were told what to do and picked wrongly, it's because they were not equipped to make the correct decision (god made flawed humans).

So they choose to disobey and it was God's fault because He gave them free will?
Apparently you are having problems grasping the concepts of free will and choice.
So, it is your opinion, that if someone gives someone else something and they do something bad with said gift, it is the fault of the giver and not the fault of the person who actually did the bad thing? I'm pretty sure that justification has already been tried and didn't work.

Let's also not ignore that all of humanity was punished for the actions of two people. Completely nonsensical. No one has any responsibility for events that happened when they did not even exist.

You're condoning God's actions in throwing humanity out of Eden because you think it's consistent with free will.

No I am saying that choosing badly has consequences.

What is the difference between the story of Eden and God intervening in something like an attempted murder? Why can't God throw the would be murderer into jail? The most common answer I get is free will, but that would make the events of Eden a violation of free will.

I can't begin to make sense of this. I don't think you can compare (or differentiate) consequences (the story of Eden), and actions (God intervening). Could you try again?

And also attached eternal consequences to the choice, after deciding not to make us smart enough to pick wisely. If God existed, he would lose nothing no matter what we chose, so the willingness to condemn people comes off as less than benevolent.

We are smart enough to choose wisely, most of us neglect to or choose not to use that intelligence at times.
There are consequences for actions, it takes some of us a little longer to realize that.

So create us to choose him. Problem solved.

If we are created perfect there is no need for a lot of things, as well as no opportunity to grow or learn. I think that He already knows that you think you know better than He about how to solve things that you perceive to be problems.

Previously I said:
There is a large amount of text in the Bible about choice, wisdom and discernment.
What would be the point of this if we couldn't choose?

To which you replied:

What is the point in forcing this choice anyway? It makes God sound strangely human, in a bad way. Needy and petty. I don't demand that lesser creatures worship me. It serves no purpose and if they choose not to, well that's their choice to make.

So we do get to choose? I wish you would make up your mind. God is deserving of all good things.
God does have some human attributes, again you should know this. Genesis 1:26: "Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,......."

On the other hand, if you are saying what is the point of forcing us to choose Him, there wouldn't be one. That is why we were given the ability and right to choose.
God is not glorified by automatons, He is glorified by those who recognize what He is and choosing Him based on that.

Stopping a murder is not lying and I'd hope it's not sinning. It would also be consistent with actions that God has supposedly taken in the past.

Again a reference to a murder and stopping it. I am still going to need more information.
Why would you be concerned about sin? If you don't believe in gods, there is no downside to sin or reason to hope something isn't a sin.

The Bible is supposed to be the word of God, so what it contains is pretty foundational.

Belief is not required to study religion, and even if it was I was an absolutely convinced believer and received religious education in and out of school

Ah, we finally get to the issue. Something bad happened in your life ( a murder, an attempted murder?). You are angry with God and you cannot resolve things that have happened with the way you think they should have happened given a loving God.

Here are the glaring problems I mentioned earlier. Yes, a god as described by Christianity could have made us perfect. There was a deliberate choice not to, and as a result all imperfection stems directly from God. If being perfect makes choosing God inevitable then that would give God what he wanted and would leave us with total free will while preventing any form of mistakes on our part. It's the only reasonable option for a perfect being to take if that being must create something else to interact with.

There is a part of a thread somewhere on this board dealing with human beings, God, and learning.
I don't think you can have "total free will" and not be able to choose whatever you want. Choices are always going to have consequences, good or bad.

Unfortunately though, the need to interact with some other being already doesn't make sense for a god. This god being three people would have already had company in the first place, so the question of "why" looms pretty large.

Maybe God doesn't need, but He wants. I could never describe God, His motives or His feelings. I do know that when I create or accomplish something, I feel something.
Maybe He likes rewarding those who do good. I can only guess and guess badly.

God has a history of delegation, even before the creation. If you had religious instruction you should know this.
John 1:1-3 NIV
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was with God in the beginning.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Just a WAG, but maybe he likes things like him, who like him.

It very obvious is not. Does your PC electrocute you when there is a problem, or does it simply display a warning screen? Pain does not have to hurt, it only has to alert us of a problem. The latter bis is also only necessary if there are problems, which as I explained would have to be the fault of a god in the first place.

Pain does not have to hurt? As I explained earlier, it is an incremental warning system.
People do not always choose to deal with problems they are alerted to, hence the
need for increases. I am given to understand that it is a relatively common thing
for people to wait and see if things get worse before dealing with them.

It's not necessary even if we're imperfect. Imperfection explains how it can exist though, and imperfection rules out gods like those of the Abrahamic religions.

Why do human designed warning systems avoid the use of pain?

Because they generally are not embedded in humans?
Because they are not likely to die if their computer crashes?
Because a TV that shocks you because it has determined that it is going on the fritz would probably not sell well?
I imagine a multitude of good reasons.

God: "I could give them perfect bodies to avoid the need for a warning system, but no, I don't think I will. I could also make their warning system work in such a way that it doesn't completely overwhelm their nervous system to the point where it can create additional problems or false alarms, but no, I don't think I will."

Computer:"Hey the command you asked me to execute caused me to run out of memory. By the way I'm not going to stab you as a result because that won't fix the issue in any way."

The flawed beings seemed to have a better system than the perfect one in this case.

I will need an example of a human designed system that works better across more circumstances than the nervous system in humans.

We do live in an imperfect world, but we can't take the blame for things we did not do. According to The Bible we started off imperfect. You agree to this much as you said that if we were perfect, we would choose God. How can we be blamed for our own existence when we had no control over this?

According to the Bible, God knew us before we were born. Do you remember before you were born? How do you know you didn't choose to come to Earth and live a physical existence, to be imperfect?
Jeremiah 1:5 (NIV)“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,....”

No, according to the Bible man started off without sin, made 2 bad choices, one by Eve, one by Adam. As long as man was sinless, he could live in the Garden of Eden. Becoming sinful led to his eviction. The Garden was, as I understand it, a place without sin. That is why God could go there. If there was sin there, God could not go, because his character does not allow him to be exposed to sin.

What is the take away from Job? All I see is a random list of stuff that the write claims to be the result of God.

First of all, the Bible is all stuff that someone wrote down. The claim is that it is divinely inspired. None of us were there. My personal revelation is that it is the divinely inspired Word of God documented as best as possible and translated as best as possible with the information available. Are there errors? Absolutely, this is provable.

Job 38:1-2 (GOD'S WORD® Translation)
Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm.
"Who is this that belittles my advice with words that do not show any knowledge [about it]?

I won't quote the rest, but in laymans terms, as I understand it. YOU DO NOT HAVE A CLUE.
The reality: The universe is a closed system. All living things require energy to remain alive. Energy in theory cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. So, for something to remain alive, something else has to give up energy.

What one person says is slavery of a dairy cow, another person says is the manufacturing process of dairy products.

What men say is death, another says is fertilizer for flowers,tree and grass.

The system, within its' design parameters is, as far as we know, working exactly as intended.

We do not know the purpose of the system. We do not know why. Hence, God basically told Job, "YOU DO NOT HAVE A CLUE."

There have been reams of paper and years of time pondering the question WHY?. That does not change the fact that we do not know why. We don't know a lot about a lot of things.


If you would like a rather tongue in cheek version of why earth and its' people exist, you might try "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy", a four book trilogy.

Parents aren't perfect beings. This makes a difference doesn't it? Nonetheless, people that choose to become parents are do have some control over how and when to bring children into the world and they are responsible for the results that stem from that. Choosing to have a child while taking drugs that could impact the child's development is not a smart decision, and the harmful effects on the child would be the fault of the parent. If the parent happened to be all powerful as well, then there is simply no excuse for anything.

This contradicts your earlier position. Here you say parents have some control and choice. Earlier you said everything that happens is under God's control. So who is in control, parents or God?
Here you say that a parent would be at fault for a bad decision, earlier you said everything was God's fault.

We don't have the luxury of being able to know our children before their birth. We can't predict who they will be and even if they will be happy. We can try to push things in a favorable direction, but there is never a guarantee of success. On the other hand a god as described by Christianity sees all possibilities and can bring any of them into being with no effort. There is no justification for choosing a world that is less than perfect.

You can't define perfect. You say there is no justification for something that doesn't meet your definition of perfect, but if it fits someone else's definition, they would say you are wrong. You can only define perfect for you. To someone in PETA, a perfect world might be no dairy cows in slavery. To someone else it might be a cold glass of milk out of the refrigerator on a warm day. You can't know whether there is a justification for choosing (creating?) a world that is less(or different) than your definition of perfect. To the best of my knowledge you weren't there when this took place. You can only say that you are not happy with it.


It appears that something bad has happened to you, that you are angry about it, and are choosing to act out as a display of defiance.
The multiple references to murder, attempted murder and the failure of God to intercede when you feel He should have are the basis for this conclusion.
I understand that you are angry or feel disenfranchised. I won't tell you that you were being tested. I won't try and minimize what has happened to you by telling you the things that have happened to me (unless you ask). If you want me to, I will pray for you. If you want me to, I will listen to you. I don't know what I can do to help, but I can try. The down side of the great gift of free will is that people get to choose. A lot of them choose badly, often. I have chosen badly way too often. The good news is that God is just. He may not be just in the time frame that we want, but He is just.

Revelation 7:17 (NIV) For the Lamb at the center of the throne will be their shepherd; 'he will lead them to springs of living water.' 'And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.'
Revelation 21:4 (NIV) He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.

There is a lot here and I am imperfect. Please forgive any typographical or grammatic errors.
Best Regards.

 

[UKMikey]

Earlier you said everything that happens is under God's control.

I don't agree. Saying "Santa wears a red suit and loves milk and cookies" isn't the same as saying "I believe in Father Christmas". To me it's implied in @Exorcet's statement that he is discussing people's belief in the Almighty rather than affirming His existence.

 

[HenrySwanson]

This standpoint still presupposes that there is something, understood or not, that must link multiple events together when no link between them is required for them to occur.

From your perspective a sequence of events occurring may seem so low probability that they couldn't have just occurred naturally and independently - yet the sequence of events that had to occur even within your own lifetime for you to even be observing those specific events, let alone the chain of events that had to occur for you to even exist in the first place, are more ridiculously unlikely than the thing you're focusing on, if you were to try and tie them together.

For the coincidental events, sure.

But then there are the experiences that don't seem plausible in a universe governed only by chance. Rationally speaking, it could be due to drugs (as @Imari suggested) or a psychiatric condition.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Consciousness is fundamental, I'll just leave that here.

Consciousness comes before anything else. When you ask the question of what is real, if you truly dig deep enough right to the core of it you'll always find yourself reverting back to the only thing that you know is truly real, that being your own self or self existence (consciousness).

 

[Famine]

When you ask the question of what is real, if you truly dig deep enough right to the core of it you'll always find yourself reverting back to the only thing that you know is truly real, that being your own self or self existence (consciousness).

Uh-huh. Back to solipsism again. Cool.

Only...

I'd also say that this place (as in this world and this physical reality) is totally fake compared to the real thing (commonly referred to as the After Life), how do I know? It's because there's no True Light to really be found out there in this very dark place to be.

If your own consciousness - or Capitalised Because It's Important True Light - is the only thing that's real and can only be found inside yourself, how is it that the (also Capitalised Because It's Important) "After Life" is a real thing when you - where the inside of you is - only exist within "this world and this physical reality", which is apparently "totally fake"?

Seems... pretty self-exclusionary.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Sad face.

#KeepFightingMichael.

 

[Exorcet]

This is getting hard for me to follow.

Then let's step back a bit. I don't believe in gods, but other people do. I was explaining some of the problems with commonly held beliefs, specifically the belief in an omnipotent and benevolent god. Such a god stands in direct contradiction to the world we live in.

First you said "God created everything and also knows the future, yet the blame for sin is placed on humans. Adam and Eve (Especially Eve) specifically. The only reason there was a forbidden to tree for them to eat from was because God wished for this happen."
Then you said: I don't believe in any gods.
If you are going to claim this is not your belief, but you are merely quoting the Bible, then I am going to need the Bible verse(s) where it said that God wished them to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

I was pointing out the problems with The Bible. When I say something like "God created..." that is not my belief, it is one of The Bibles/Christianity's/religion's assumptions or statements. We can discuss this type of god instead if that is more relevant to you.

The argument I am making is that nothing can happen or exist that contradicts the will of an all powerful being. That is part of the definition of such a being. If that being did not want something to happen, it could not happen. Since there is pain and suffering in this world, any all powerful entity that exist must condone it.

Taking this back to the Bible specifically, the existence of the tree must have been condoned by God even though he knew Adam and Eve would choose incorrectly and even though he knew he could set up the same situation with no tree and everyone would be better off (according to the Christian viewpoint at least). Alternatively, God could have made Adam and Eve intelligent enough to realize that the tree should not be eaten from and that the serpent is a liar.

The Bible claims that God created Eden, humans, the tree, and the serpent.

Genesis chapter 2 KJV (King James Version)

Genesis chapter 2 KJV (King James Version)

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

Genesis chapter 3 KJV (King James Version)

Genesis chapter 3 KJV (King James Version)

www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

This is the equivalent of putting a child in a room with gasoline and matches. Ignoring the outcome, the reason for going through with this in the first place is extremely weak. You say that God wanted humans to choose to obey him, but why should they in the first place? Why also should God be upset with them exercising free will not obeying? You go on to say that people are intelligent enough to choose God but this doesn't seem so since they don't. In any case, if sufficient wisdom means choosing God, which was a claim you made, then that means that God willingly withheld some amount of reasoning from people.

So they choose to disobey and it was God's fault because He gave them free will?
Apparently you are having problems grasping the concepts of free will and choice.
So, it is your opinion, that if someone gives someone else something and they do something bad with said gift, it is the fault of the giver and not the fault of the person who actually did the bad thing? I'm pretty sure that justification has already been tried and didn't work.

No I am saying that choosing badly has consequences.

Again I am evaluating the idea that there is an all powerful and all good god.

Humans did not have a say in being limited in intelligence or knowledge and had no control over the world they were placed in. God is directly responsible for those things. These are all factors in the story of Eden and they could have been eliminated if God chose to do things differently. God also knew the outcome ahead of time, so he could have decided to go with Eden as it unfolds in the Bible, or he could have decided to do something else where humans couldn't fail. God must have willingly chosen the situation where humans would fail.

If we are created perfect there is no need for a lot of things, as well as no opportunity to grow or learn.

If we're created perfect there is no need to grow or learn. We wouldn't be missing anything. Does a god lose anything from being unable to learn or grow?

Ah, we finally get to the issue. Something bad happened in your life ( a murder, an attempted murder?). You are angry with God and you cannot resolve things that have happened with the way you think they should have happened given a loving God.

No, my turn away from religion was not the result of a single event and didn't happen all at once. God was also the very last thing to go.

God has a history of delegation, even before the creation. If you had religious instruction you should know this.
John 1:1-3 NIV
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was with God in the beginning.
Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

Just a WAG, but maybe he likes things like him, who like him.

The Bible can make claims but that doesn't mean they are true.

According to the Bible, God knew us before we were born. Do you remember before you were born? How do you know you didn't choose to come to Earth and live a physical existence, to be imperfect?
Jeremiah 1:5 (NIV)“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,....”

How do you know that the claim being made is true?

It is possible that my current life is a result of choices made while in a completely different state, but what does that matter if there is no proof supporting it? You can imagine an infinite number of possibilities, some completely at odds with each other. They can be fun to think about but they don't mean very much.

Job 38:1-2 (GOD'S WORD® Translation)
Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm.
"Who is this that belittles my advice with words that do not show any knowledge [about it]?

I won't quote the rest, but in laymans terms, as I understand it. YOU DO NOT HAVE A CLUE.

I think it's completely fair to say that there is more useful knowledge about the word outside of The Bible than within. It should also be pointed out that the being that is portrayed as having a clue shows no signs of existing.

We do not know the purpose of the system.

Is there one to begin with?

There have been reams of paper and years of time pondering the question WHY?. That does not change the fact that we do not know why. We don't know a lot about a lot of things.

Yes.

This contradicts your earlier position. Here you say parents have some control and choice. Earlier you said everything that happens is under God's control. So who is in control, parents or God?
Here you say that a parent would be at fault for a bad decision, earlier you said everything was God's fault.

God doesn't exist, so parents are responsible for their choices.

Believers in an all powerful god believe that god exists and in their view, that god must be responsible for everything that has ever and will ever happen as a result of being all powerful.

In one case I'm discussing reality and in another the contradictions of religion.

You can't define perfect. You say there is no justification for something that doesn't meet your definition of perfect, but if it fits someone else's definition, they would say you are wrong. You can only define perfect for you. To someone in PETA, a perfect world might be no dairy cows in slavery. To someone else it might be a cold glass of milk out of the refrigerator on a warm day. You can't know whether there is a justification for choosing (creating?) a world that is less(or different) than your definition of perfect. To the best of my knowledge you weren't there when this took place. You can only say that you are not happy with it.

So a candidate for a perfect world is one where everyone's definition of perfect is met. That world does not exist so if there is a god, it was unable or unwilling to create that perfect world. Can we agree on that?

By the way there is no contradiction between free cows and milk. Just live in a world where you can get milk without cows. The technology to do this for meat exists already.

It appears that something bad has happened to you, that you are angry about it, and are choosing to act out as a display of defiance.

No, religion did not make sense when examined closely, and contrary to what I was taught it tends to make the world worse, so I abandoned it.

I don't participate in this thread to put anyone down, but I interpret posts made here as a sign that someone is willing to discuss the topic where ever it goes. I genuinely think that religion causes problems and I'd like to see it renounced by all people willingly for the right reasons. That won't make the world perfect but it will ease at least a few problems.

I did not reply to every single point in your last post, but I don't think it was necessary given that there was some misunderstanding. I tried to address this in the opening and cut things to avoid repeating myself too much. Hopefully this will make things more clear.

 

[Imari]

Does throwing yourself onto a train track in order to save a complete stranger who is moments away from certain death offer any kind of survival advantage to the self? What about fireman who knowingly throw themselves into situations of likely demise in the hopes of saving a few complete strangers, explain this to me using all of your science and arrogant ways of thinking.

Firstly, the ****ing irony is off the charts.

Secondly, if you can get away from thinking about the individual for just a moment and start thinking about humans as a group, there's any number of behaviours that seem odd for an individual but make complete sense in a group context.

Firemen make complete sense, because a group with individuals who are willing to risk their own safety for greater returns for the group will do better overall than a group of assholes who stand around watching and thinking "not my problem" every time something goes wrong.

Looks like the old hornets nest is getting all buzzed up today 🐝

On a side note I'd also say that this place (as in this world and this physical reality) is totally fake compared to the real thing (commonly referred to as the After Life), how do I know? It's because there's no True Light to really be found out there in this very dark place to be. If you want to find the route of all war and conflict down here, look no further than to the conclusion of where your science points to (that reality all just boils down to materialism and humans are simply just biology and such).

I you wish to find the source any real good or "True Light" (heroic acts such as that of a Fireman who willingly risks their life for the sake of saving the life of complete strangers), then you have to start looking to the only place where True Light is found. If you want True Light then you have to look within yourself and to within your own soul.

Take your meds, bro.

But then there are the experiences that don't seem plausible in a universe governed only by chance.

Maybe, it depends what it is. Humans are notoriously garbage at estimating very small probabilities. Our brains see a one in a million chance and think "basically impossible, got it". Ignoring that with a one in a million chance that means it probably happens all the time because the planet is enormous.

That's why it's pretty important with probabilities to actually sit down and do the math instead of just going "that doesn't seem plausible". What are the chances of you seeing a piece of information that you really needed just as you needed it? Pretty small, but only for that specific piece of information. Realistically, there's all sorts of stuff out there that could be massively improving your life that you're not seeing, but you don't know because you're not seeing it until later. And all the stuff that you already learned has already improved your life so it doesn't even get added into the equation.

But if you learn enough (and in the modern age we're exposed to an awful lot of information), it's almost certain that eventually you will learn something in, say, the 24 hour period just before that information becomes relevant and useful to you. I'd say that most people in their lives at some point run into a problem and think "hey, I just learned how to deal with this yesterday!" What seems like it should be implausible is actually almost certain due to the length of time involved and the sheer number of potential opportunities.

 

[Ghost Lap]

If your own consciousness - or Capitalised Because It's Important True Light - is the only thing that's real and can only be found inside yourself, how is it that the (also Capitalised Because It's Important) "After Life" is a real thing when you - where the inside of you is - only exist within "this world and this physical reality", which is apparently "totally fake"?

It's more like this physical reality exists within consciousness, remember consciousness is fundamental and comes first, I kind of implied this.

 

[Famine]

more like this physical reality exists within consciousness

Uh-huh. Back to solipsism again. Cool.

 

[Ghost Lap]

Firstly, the ****ing irony is off the charts.

Take your meds, bro.

I'll leave those for you and your science (since that's where they come from) and your complete arrogance in ways of thinking.