Do you believe in God?

[Joey D]

As much as I hate massive walls of text.....

Wait a minute, what is "the supernatural"? There is no supernatural, only things that are not yet fully understood. The fact is, that everything that was once thought of or attributed to "supernatural" has come to be fully understood and explained in purely natural terms. Expect that trend to continue.

Not everything that has been considered the supernatural has been explained. There are things I feel can never be explained about how the universe works which makes me start to question the supernatural realm. One of these being is the creation of the universe, I accept the Big Bang but what actually caused it? What was there prior to the Big Bang? Where did the matter come from? These are things that leave me wondering about a higher force that we can't comprehend.

I know the common assumption is that the matter came from a previous universe that collapsed down to a singularity and then expanded again, but my wonderment is how did it all start? Where did the initial stuff come from? At some point the initial matter had to be created through some force, whether natural or supernatural.

As for what is supernatural? It's anything beyond the realm of nature.

Cool. But all you've presented is a "neat idea", and without any evidence, you need to provide your audience (and yourself) with good reason(s) to accept such assertions. Otherwise, my assertion that a purple giraffe hiding behind Pluto is in charge of the universe is just as valid and on equal footing. So it's important to understand epistemology; how we know what we know.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BJa7WAr7aQ

I have provided myself valid evidence as I've just explained with my previous point. There is no way to explain where the matter came from for the initial Big Bang. There is no way to explain how a singularity came to be. If at some point we do prove how a singularity is made, then we are left with what created it and how did that come to be? Everything has to have a starting point, something can't just have always been.

This is enough evidence for me to believe there is something out there, I just don't know what that something is. It could be the Abraham God or it could be the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I don't know what it is, all I believe is that there is something.

Let me get this straight; you had some "openings" of misunderstanding, or wonder, or awe, and this somehow was evidence for a god or energy or something? Why? And please don't attempt to correct me on that, because you said that your "questions" made you question atheism, and atheism is simply not holding god belief, so you are therefore saying that your state of questioning had you questioning non god belief, for that's all atheism is. An atheist could believe in "cosmic energy" or even my purple giraffe; just not gods.

I've already explained this as well. There are things that are unexplainable which makes me believe in the supernatural.

Another example would be evidence of spirits and the paranormal. I'm not saying the evidence is concrete enough to make me say that ghost exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, but what I am saying is that there is enough evidence for me to be open minded about it and question things.

And to me, I feel atheism is a believe. You can tell me all you want it is a lack of belief, but I disagree with that. You believe there is no god, without any evidence when throughout all of human history we are faced with a majority of people saying there is something. A long history of something is enough for me to say that there could be some truth to it. If religion was all hogwash, people would have given up on it a long time ago.

Why can that not explained in naturalistic terms? Why do you think it is that something like 95% of the Academy of Science (truly the elite of the elite) are atheists? Surely if there were any good reason to believe in something more than the giant natural chemistry lab that the universe is, they might be on to it, no?

*See my point about the Big Bang and the universe's creation*

And yes, I believe if you were to look at a smaller picture rather then the large cosmic scale, you could easily come to the belief that god doesn't exist. But looking at the gigantic picture you are left with a lot of how and whys that more than likely can't be answered.

You believe what exactly?

And this supernatural force at work can't do anything about the 30,000 children that die of starvation every day? If it's not involved in the goings-on of our lives, then isn't it functionally non existant?

I've explained what I believe, but I'll do it again to clarify. I believe that there is the existence of a supernatural force at work in the universe, however I don't know what form it takes. I don't believe in religion, nor do I practice it, I do however practice spirituality by choice.

And I'm not saying this force somehow is all knowing or all seeing. I don't think it can't change things that are happening in my world. I don't believe in miracles, I do however believe in luck and karma that balance out the universe.

It is functionally existent through, it holds the universe together and keeps it running. That's all I believe.

a) It doesn't matter how an atheist "comes across". Whether some are militant or easy going has nothing to do with the issue. That is tantamount to, and erroneous as saying that religion is false because there are priests who rape little boys. It's a red herring.

I didn't say that because most atheists I come across are pompous asshats that it somehow proves the existence of god. What I said is that was the vehicle to start me to examine what I really believe. The behaviour didn't lead me down one road or another, it just lead me to a decision point. I could have easily examined what I believed and found that I truly didn't think there was anything in the universe.

b) Militant atheists aren't militant in their beliefs. They are merely more outspoken about their rejection of the untenable assertions of and by the theist. Do you believe in unicorns? If you really don't, and require evidence, are you militant in your disbelief of unicorns? Perhaps you would be viewed as militant on that if 90% of the world's population did believe in unicorns.

I feel they are militant in their beliefs. You can't tell billions of people they are wrong for believing in something without concrete evidence. You have to prove it to them, you have to bring forth something to to make them question their beliefs. Simply giving them some half baked rhetoric about unicorns isn't enough obviously.

Being the minority and trying to change the majority is difficult. Being militant is not a good tactic to change the mindset.

That sounds good on the surface, but we learn a great deal from those around us, and you would do well to listen to all opinions and viewpoints, not just the feelings and emotions that you are subject to in isolation.

Yes, I learn a great deal from those around me. I listen to as many sides of an idea as I can and then I try to examine why it is I accept one over the other before I draw my conclusion. I wasn't always like this but by asking questions, hearing view points, and doing a lot of thinking I have been able to define myself and my beliefs because I have evidence that I require.

This is what happens when one watches too much Oprah; a lack or degredation of critical thinking. No rational person is "agnostic" about the existence of unicorns, leprechauns, dragons, gnomes, etc. Why is the god concept granted a special status?

Fabulous argument there. I have quite a bit of critical thinking and no, I don't watch Oprah.

No rational person sits back and thinking hey I can change the world by shouting loudly. A rational person would see that it takes a certain tact to change people's beliefs and you have to be prepared to have an answer for all questions. Saying "we haven't discovered it yet" is no different then saying "God did it".

So that's what you think is humanity's best approach to understanding and moving forward? To just throw up ones hands and say "Hey, it's ok to believe whatever you want, it really doesn't matter." I suggest that you might need reminding that the individuals who flew the planes into the twin towers did so precicely because of what they believed about reality. It matters what we believe, now more than ever, and I suggest that we can no longer afford to take such an irrational path as "whatever feels good".

I'm not sure how to answer this, I don't know what humanity's best approach to moving forward is. I haven't given it enough consideration to form an opinion one way or another. I do feel though that oppressing others opinions, ideas and beliefs have caused more problems for this world then it has solved.

 

[Exorcet]

As much as I hate massive walls of text.....



Not everything that has been considered the supernatural has been explained. There are things I feel can never be explained about how the universe works which makes me start to question the supernatural realm. One of these being is the creation of the universe, I accept the Big Bang but what actually caused it? What was there prior to the Big Bang? Where did the matter come from? These are things that leave me wondering about a higher force that we can't comprehend.

The unexplained is the unexplained. There's nothing wrong with trying to put an explanation on it, but just remember that when something is unexplained, you don't have an answer. We may never be able to explain the origin of the universe, but that doesn't indicate anything supernatural.

And this discussion can go many other places if we debate whether or not something can be supernatural (what can exist that isn't natural?)

And to me, I feel atheism is a believe. You can tell me all you want it is a lack of belief, but I disagree with that. You believe there is no god, without any evidence when throughout all of human history we are faced with a majority of people saying there is something. A long history of something is enough for me to say that there could be some truth to it. If religion was all hogwash, people would have given up on it a long time ago.

People believed that there was water above the sky for a really long time, we also believed that speed and time were unrelated, that the world was flat (some still believe this). Length of a believe doesn't really justify anything. An alternative to your explanation of religion's longevity is that it was deeply pressed into the minds of the majority of people for so long that it's very hard to get rid of even if it's wrong. Also, it can't be proved wrong, and some people will rely heavily on that.

As for atheism being a belief, I think it's more like the default mindset. There isn't really a reason to believe in God, so why believe? If there were evidence then everything would be different. No one believes that a sentient B-2 stealth bomber created the world, but for all we know it could be true. Does that justify someone believing that it is true?

Saying "we haven't discovered it yet" is no different then saying "God did it".

They are more different than the universe is big. Say you park your car and go into a store. You come back to find the window broken. Do you not know who (or what) broke it, or did God do it?

 

[Owen.C93]

Not everything that has been considered the supernatural has been explained. There are things I feel can never be explained about how the universe works which makes me start to question the supernatural realm

Is it ironic for me to ask you to just have faith and that alot of these mysteries will be overcome. Just look at what we knew a couple of hundred years ago compared to now.

 

[homeforsummer]

How do you know I don't?

It's just an educated guess based on a fair bit of evidence.

Anyone who believes in god is beneath me and I won't take ANYTHING they say seriously. Same goes for people who don't believe in god.

And here's exhibit 1.

As for number one killer? Lunatics like you.

 

[Tic Tach]

As much as I hate massive walls of text.....

It wasn't a wall of text. It was an itemized response to your post, broken up by paragraphs. A wall of text is just that, a very long block of text with no breaks.

There are things I feel can never be explained about how the universe works which makes me start to question the supernatural realm.

Your "feeling" that there are things that can never be explained is just that - your feeling, and has no bearing on the progress of our understanding. What you need to do is display that there are things that we cannot come to an understaning on, and you cannot do that.

One of these being is the creation of the universe, I accept the Big Bang but what actually caused it? What was there prior to the Big Bang? Where did the matter come from? These are things that leave me wondering about a higher force that we can't comprehend.

Again, your "wondering" is irrelevant. If you can accept that time will go on forever, why can not that also be true for time in the other direction? We don't yet know what caused the big bang, solving those problems is enormously complex and difficult, but to usher in "magic" as even a possibility is not how science works. The big bang (by the way) does not state that it was the beginning of the universe, rather just that the big bang happened. It could very well be that it was just one expansion in an endless cycle of expansions & contractions.

And if you have a hard time comprehending something existing without having an initial cause, then how did your imagined "higher force" come into being?

Everything has to have a starting point, something can't just have always been.

According to Stephen Hawking, that just ain't so. But what does he know?

This is enough evidence for me to believe there is something out there, I just don't know what that something is.

Evidence!?!? Please........share. The entire scientific community would like to know. There's a Nobel Prize waiting for you.


Doesn't it seem odd that the "evidence for the existence of god" is completely hidden from the greatest human minds who spend their professional lives exploring how the universe functions, yet it is perfectly clear to uneducated simpletons who have access to internet-linked terminals?

A long history of something is enough for me to say that there could be some truth to it. If religion was all hogwash, people would have given up on it a long time ago.

Fail.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-tradition/

You can't tell billions of people they are wrong for believing in something without concrete evidence.

Fail.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-popularity/


I claim that there's an invisible, silent elf sitting on my shoulder. Give me "concrete evidence" that he isn't real.

You have to prove it to them, you have to bring forth something to to make them question their beliefs. Simply giving them some half baked rhetoric about unicorns isn't enough obviously.

No, the burden is on the person making the claim. The theist is making a claim. The atheist is not, he/she is rejecting those claims as they don't hold water.

Saying "we haven't discovered it yet" is no different then saying "God did it".

I do feel though that oppressing others opinions, ideas and beliefs have caused more problems for this world then it has solved.

Oppressing? Rational discourse is oppressing? You must be a member of the Oprah club.

 

[Sam48]

Put it this way, there are thousands of people with debilitating mental health problems who have nothing to do with religion, so it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch that the occasional religious believer can suffer from them too.

I accept that, but what do make of people speaking in tongues then? This doesn't necessarily happen to people who are possessed by "an evil spirit". I've seen this happen to perfectly normal people who, might I add, had no understanding of Latin.

 

[Tic Tach]

....but what do make of people speaking in tongues then?

If it's something that truely interests you and/or causes you lean towards a supernatural explanation, why not look at it skeptically and critically as you (hopefully) would on any other such matter. Maybe Google: "Speaking in tongues debunked" for a starter and see what you find.

 

[Owen.C93]

Do you have to resort to stupid images and "fails" to demonstrate your point? It doesn't make you very credible.

 

[Joey D]

The unexplained is the unexplained. There's nothing wrong with trying to put an explanation on it, but just remember that when something is unexplained, you don't have an answer. We may never be able to explain the origin of the universe, but that doesn't indicate anything supernatural.

It may not explain anything involving the supernatural with you, but it does for me. I think there are things that are currently unexplainable that will be explained one day, but when you get back to the creation of the universe I don't think you can. This is where my belief in the supernatural comes in.

People believed that there was water above the sky for a really long time, we also believed that speed and time were unrelated, that the world was flat (some still believe this). Length of a believe doesn't really justify anything. An alternative to your explanation of religion's longevity is that it was deeply pressed into the minds of the majority of people for so long that it's very hard to get rid of even if it's wrong. Also, it can't be proved wrong, and some people will rely heavily on that.

However, you would have to think, if there really was no reason to believe in a higher power why would people do it? I know the common belief is that ancient man created religion to better explain the world around them, however I'd like to give ancient man more credit then that. Look at all the megalithic monuments we have, do you really think people would have built the pyramids all over the world without a just cause? I doubt it, people are smarter then that.

I might be off base, but it's the best I got right now without doing more research on the subject.

As for atheism being a belief, I think it's more like the default mindset. There isn't really a reason to believe in God, so why believe? If there were evidence then everything would be different. No one believes that a sentient B-2 stealth bomber created the world, but for all we know it could be true. Does that justify someone believing that it is true?

I don't think atheism as the default mindset, one would have to know about the supernatural in order to disbelieve it.

And there must be a reason to believe in a higher power or else more people wouldn't. Maybe I'm giving people to much credit in thinking that they are smarter then they are, but I would like to think that humans are reasonably intelligent creatures. Sure a lot of people follow religion blindly, but I think a lot of people actually have given it a lot of thought and study which allowed them to reach their conclusion.

And funny enough, doesn't Scientology teach something about DC-10 bombing volcanoes and that's how humans came to be? So your example might be closer to reality then you think .

They are more different than the universe is big. Say you park your car and go into a store. You come back to find the window broken. Do you not know who (or what) broke it, or did God do it?

Perhaps it wasn't the best example, I'll concede that. I guess the point I was attempting to make is that science has there catch all answer just as Christians have theirs. It doesn't actually answer anything, just produces more and more questions.

Is it ironic for me to ask you to just have faith and that alot of these mysteries will be overcome. Just look at what we knew a couple of hundred years ago compared to now.

It would be. I could say to have faith and the supernatural will be revealed. I don't want to have faith in something, I want to come to an answer based on what I've learned and what ideas I've had. While I do think there is a supernatural power I am completely open to anything new that comes along.

I think your beliefs on this subject should constantly be challenged. You should always be willing to learn more about different things and see why people believe the way they believe.

Do you have to resort to stupid images and "fails" to demonstrate your point? It doesn't make you very credible.

I'd just ignore it, it's not worth your time to have a discussion with someone like that.

 

[Tic Tach]

However, you would have to think, if there really was no reason to believe in a higher power why would people do it? I know the common belief is that ancient man created religion to better explain the world around them, however I'd like to give ancient man more credit then that. Look at all the megalithic monuments we have, do you really think people would have built the pyramids all over the world without a just cause? I doubt it, people are smarter then than that.

It was a "first guess" by primitive humans who tried to make sense of their world. These humans were pattern-seeking and meaning-seeking creatures who saw agency in things like thunder and earthquakes, and a lot of that residual "stuff" is still rattling around in our brains.

You might find this book interesting. Or this. Or this.

I don't think atheism as the default mindset

It is until adults instill theism into the childs mind. This cycle is a tough one to beat.

And there must be a reason to believe in a higher power or else more people wouldn't.

Yes, now we're on to something; the reasons why people believe in god. I suggest that the feelings of community and belonging are so strong a draw that belonging to a church group for example is as addictive as crack for us highly social creatures.

Sure a lot of people follow religion blindly, but I think a lot of people actually have given it a lot of thought and study which allowed them to reach their conclusion.

I've thought (and observed) a lot about this over the years, and I must say that I disagree. What I've found is that the vast majority of people who hold a particular religious belief, do so because it was the one instilled in them by their parents. The scant few who came to hold religious beliefs as an adult - when you peel back a layer or two, you find that they came to hold those beliefs for very poor reasons, like emotional ones. We do not find educated, emotionally mature & secure indiviuals who suddenly buy into patently rediculous beliefs.

 

[Luminis]

Everything has to have a starting point, something can't just have always been.

Well, but... That would raise the question: Who (or what) created god? If everything has to have a starting point, so would god, right?

 

[Sam48]

If it's something that truely interests you and/or causes you lean towards a supernatural explanation, why not look at it skeptically and critically as you (hopefully) would on any other such matter. Maybe Google: "Speaking in tongues debunked" for a starter and see what you find.

I'm asking you guys as atheists. It does interest me, but I have yet to formulate my own explanation for it. And yes, I did Google it. I can't find any real evidence against it.

Well, but... That would raise the question: Who (or what) created god? If everything has to have a starting point, so would god, right?

You make an excellent point, however, that's just how we think. We as humans believe if something exists, it must have begun to exist at some point. But hey, there are physicists out there challenging the existence of time itself. So who knows.

 

[Joey D]

Well, but... That would raise the question: Who (or what) created god? If everything has to have a starting point, so would god, right?

Oh trust me, I think about that all the time too when I get on this subject.

 

[Dotini]

When you look at the universe through the eyes of an astronomer, you see immediately that new stars and galaxies are being continually created.

Down here on earth, we see a hotbed for creation of life, even in the most unlikely environments such as deep seafloor vents, and even within the pores of rock itself.

Just for the sake of (friendly) argument, I'm going to suggest that the term "God" embodies and symbolizes the idea and the act of this universal creation. To me, the wonder that is creation, i.e., the summing and the process of it, is ultimate reality, ultimate truth, and ultimately God. To walk through this universe with awareness is my religion, to study it is my act of devotion.

I like to think the physics that underlies all this is isotropic, that it's the same everywhere. When I try to think of what is common to all this, what started all this, I usually settle on the idea of polarity - like darkness/light, male/female, yin/yang. Thus I think that "charge", specifically the dipole and separation of positive and negative charge, is at the heart of creation. Once we have charge separation, matter and energy find ways to create each other, and become self-assembling. Stars and life ensue. If this isn't what created God, it at least is one of the parents.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[homeforsummer]

I accept that, but what do make of people speaking in tongues then? This doesn't necessarily happen to people who are possessed by "an evil spirit". I've seen this happen to perfectly normal people who, might I add, had no understanding of Latin.

Delirium, which can happen to anybody for a variety of reasons, can easily be misinterpreted as "speaking in tongues". And with the greatest respect, someone who follows a religion is more likely to assume someone is speaking in tongues because it's familiar to their belief, rather than going for the well-understood scientific explanation.

 

[Grand Prix]

When you look at the universe through the eyes of an astronomer, you see immediately that new stars and galaxies are being continually created.

Down here on earth, we see a hotbed for creation of life, even in the most unlikely environments such as deep seafloor vents, and even within the pores of rock itself.

Just for the sake of (friendly) argument, I'm going to suggest that the term "God" embodies and symbolizes the idea and the act of this universal creation. To me, the wonder that is creation, i.e., the summing and the process of it, is ultimate reality, ultimate truth, and ultimately God. To walk through this universe with awareness is my religion, to study it is my act of devotion.

I like to think the physics that underlies all this is isotropic, that it's the same everywhere. When I try to think of what is common to all this, what started all this, I usually settle on the idea of polarity - like darkness/light, male/female, yin/yang. Thus I think that "charge", specifically the dipole and separation of positive and negative charge, is at the heart of creation. Once we have charge separation, matter and energy find ways to create each other, and become self-assembling. Stars and life ensue. If this isn't what created God, it at least is one of the parents.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

I think this aspect of polarity is rather how humans see the universe. We're not seeing the universe on an absolute frame of reference, but rather are viewing it, observing it and measuring it from a human perspective.

Even mathematical calculations and physics we use to understand it are flawed, because we are analyzing the universe in such a way that it fits human understanding.

So with this mind, so who knows exactly what the universe even is? Or when it began? Or if it even had a beginning? I think these concepts may forever be too difficult to comprehend for a bunch of carbon slabs whose only "real purpose" is to reproduce anyway.

 

[Sam48]

Delirium, which can happen to anybody for a variety of reasons, can easily be misinterpreted as "speaking in tongues". And with the greatest respect, someone who follows a religion is more likely to assume someone is speaking in tongues because it's familiar to their belief, rather than going for the well-understood scientific explanation.

And when another actually makes sense of what they're muttering? In the Anneliese case, the priest understood what she was saying. He ended up serving time in prison due to her death.

 

[VRacer]

I go to church and support the institution because I firmly believe they are a force of good in this world, but don't actually believe anything that I can't see with my own eyes (that includes "God").

 

[homeforsummer]

So with this mind, so who knows exactly what the universe even is? Or when it began? Or if it even had a beginning? I think these concepts may forever be too difficult to comprehend for a bunch of carbon slabs whose only "real purpose" is to reproduce anyway.

A lot of those questions have pretty good answers. Whether the answers have been compiled through our own understanding or not, it's a whole lot more convincing than assuming some bloke made it all.

And when another actually makes sense of what they're muttering? In the Anneliese case, the priest understood what she was saying. He ended up serving time in prison due to her death.

His prison time is the result of a flawed legal system. Even reading that slightly biased article it was pretty clear she had bad health problems long before the exorcism.

And again, for someone so religious as to spend that amount of time praying it's not beyond the realms of possibility that something understandable to the priest would come across, regardless of the language. I'm afraid in cases like that I'd need more evidence than the testimony of a priest and distressed relatives.

 

[DK]

I go to church and support the institution because I firmly believe they are a force of good in this world, but don't actually believe anything that I can't see with my own eyes (that includes "God").

Don't mean to rain on your parade, but if you've heard about the sort of crap that the Catholic Church has covered up, you would be repulsed. It seems that it only takes a few bad apples to spoil the bunch.

 

[Grand Prix]

A lot of those questions have pretty good answers. Whether the answers have been compiled through our own understanding or not, it's a whole lot more convincing than assuming some bloke made it all.

Of course it is. I'm not condoning the notion of trying to better understand the universe we live in. (or even a better understanding of the creation of it, including or not including "gods") I'm just saying that it is a flawed perspective.

Let me give you an example. Space. We know that there is nothing to see in empty space. So it would make sense to see space as nothingness, yes? Yet, we do not see "nothingness." We see black. Our eyes receive no visible light coming from it, so the brain registers it as black... There must be nothing there. And yet we see black objects. Are they nothingness as well? No, they are simply objects which emit or bounce no visible light... See the flaw in our vision here?

Another example, also involving again, our favourite sense to observe the universe around us, vision. What does a red apple look like? Is it *gasp* red? Well, that depends on how you look at the red apple. Our eyes tell us it is red. It activates the red cones and only the red cones (I'm simplifying this for the sake of the argument). That means the apple is bouncing off light of the "red" part of the spectrum. But it is absorbing everything else... Blue, infrared, ultraviolet, green, indigo, whatever. Is the apple really red then? Or is it red simply because our eyes say it is? The brain has no reason to think otherwise. It only picks up the red.

Leaves are also green. Until autumn time when the photosynthesis process starts to stop, and reveals reds, browns, yellows. What most people don't realize is that those reds and browns are always there, even in summer. But they are overwhelmed by the green colour, a result of photosynthesis. The brain has no reason to assume the leaf is anything but green in summer. What is actually happening is the leaf actually consists of a whole range of colours, but our dynamic range of colour is insufficient for seeing these because of the overwhelming green. Much like a camera that is set to expose for too long only captures white. We have a limited dynamic range of vision.

But that is mostly how we visualize the universe, with vision. We don't try to hear or taste galaxies and stars, we visualize them. It is perfectly natural to. After all, vision is based on light, and is the fastest way of obtaining information, but it is undeniably flawed.

So, one can imagine (or perhaps, not imagine) how an all-seeing God would see the universe from an absolute reference plane. Perfect vision, perfect sense of everything, and perhaps more ways to experience the world than we can even imagine. But of course, it could be just by our poor standards that God seems perfect... It is all relative.


I tend to get worked up and excited on stuff like this.

 

[Owen.C93]

I go to church and support the institution because I firmly believe they are a force of good in this world, but don't actually believe anything that I can't see with my own eyes (that includes "God").

So long as you can see what is good and what isn't. They may raise money for charity, but then them same people may wish to take away a homosexuals right to marry. You can be good without God.

 

[Sam48]

ignore this

 

[Akira AC]

Wow interesting thread, I will say no, I don't believe, why?

Natural selection, the mere definition of god in several cultures, the different perception about the mere concept of it, apart from that, I don't believe in any greater force that controls the universe(well,cosmic physics conditions and energy forces do exists).

My problem is that the mere concept of god is not well sustained, and is very different depending on the culture, take for example the perception of god from someone raised in China, then someone raised on Iran and then from someone raised on the US, complete different perceptions of what is god and what is its influences.

Apart from that, the basis of Christianity are mostly political, using a theological context to profess its message, a similar structure that the Islam uses, basing themselves on rules and consequences/rewards for following/denying these rules, scientific evidence and mere logical interpretation makes these rules complete flawed, to a point in which the lose all validity.

Personally, I don't think that people who believe in a superior being are wrong, what I think is that is a psychological need in any human being, which depends mostly in each individual personality and perception of the world, and this also includes development environments and other conditions that determinate the perception of the world for each person.

Everyone needs to follow some basic rules, even the maddest person follows some rules, but they are not in common with the natural, logical or reasonable trends, this also applies to religion, which is a method of control(and no I'm not one of those guys of "the conspiracy") to regulate some of the self destructive behaviours like incests (which produces child's deformities),assassination, robbery and other "unacceptable behaviour" like homo-sexualism and bigamy(I approve both).

 

[Omnis]

I don't participate in this thread because it would consume me. However, have any of you listened to Father Barron? He presents wonderful Catholic commentary on a lot of current events, issues, and theological philosophy, etc. Check him out on youtube.

 

[terminator363]

I don't participate in this thread because it would consume me.

It would with me too. There is far too much to discuss. I'm not a fan of religion because so much conflict has been (and still is) going on surrounding it. I won't believe it until there is scientific proof. But I'm coming to think that's impossible.

 

[homeforsummer]

Of course it is. I'm not condoning the notion of trying to better understand the universe we live in. (or even a better understanding of the creation of it, including or not including "gods") I'm just saying that it is a flawed perspective.

It becomes less flawed with every discovery, though, whereas the concept of a God reveals no further discoveries, and in a modern world the answers we can come up with make the need to believe in a higher power less relevant.

Let me give you an example. Space. We know that there is nothing to see in empty space. So it would make sense to see space as nothingness, yes? Yet, we do not see "nothingness." We see black. Our eyes receive no visible light coming from it, so the brain registers it as black... There must be nothing there. And yet we see black objects. Are they nothingness as well? No, they are simply objects which emit or bounce no visible light... See the flaw in our vision here?

A slightly flawed example.

We see space as black because the universe is so old that light from the farthest reaches simply hasn't reached us yet, and theoretically never will, with the expansion of space. Even if it did, the life of stars is finite so with every new pin-prick of light reaching us, another expires. Space will always look black, not because there's nothing there, but because what is there isn't observable.

Black objects on Earth are, by and large, observable. They don't reflect no light, they just reflect less than their surroundings. Try turning the light off and you'll quickly see black objects disappear. Our eyes aren't sensitive enough to pick up something black in complete darkness.

Summarising the last two paragraphs: Space is black because of a lack of light. Black objects are observable as black because they don't reflect as much light. Neither is technically nothingness.

"Black" is just a manifestation of a lack of light. It's not a colour like red or green, but that doesn't mean we're observing it wrongly.

Discerning light and dark isn't a problem with our colour receptiveness. If anything, light and dark is one of the most basic things the universe has to offer, given that the speed of light is one of the universe's constants. It's something that offers no philosophical alternatives, unlike "is the colour red really red?" and similar.

And that's the thing about physics or any other science. Once you have a few constants chucked in there it becomes much harder to argue that we're just seeing everything "from our flawed perspective", as opposed to seeing things as they actually are. A certain set of rules govern the universe whether we're around to observe them or not. Once you start building outwards with those rules in mind scientific discovery becomes much more reliable, and it becomes more nonsensical to claim that really there's a higher power out there doing all of this.

 

[Grand Prix]

It becomes less flawed with every discovery, though, whereas the concept of a God reveals no further discoveries, and in a modern world the answers we can come up with make the need to believe in a higher power less relevant.



A slightly flawed example.

We see space as black because the universe is so old that light from the farthest reaches simply hasn't reached us yet, and theoretically never will, with the expansion of space. Even if it did, the life of stars is finite so with every new pin-prick of light reaching us, another expires. Space will always look black, not because there's nothing there, but because what is there isn't observable.

Black objects on Earth are, by and large, observable. They don't reflect no light, they just reflect less than their surroundings. Try turning the light off and you'll quickly see black objects disappear. Our eyes aren't sensitive enough to pick up something black in complete darkness.

Summarising the last two paragraphs: Space is black because of a lack of light. Black objects are observable as black because they don't reflect as much light. Neither is technically nothingness.

"Black" is just a manifestation of a lack of light. It's not a colour like red or green, but that doesn't mean we're observing it wrongly.

Discerning light and dark isn't a problem with our colour receptiveness. If anything, light and dark is one of the most basic things the universe has to offer, given that the speed of light is one of the universe's constants. It's something that offers no philosophical alternatives, unlike "is the colour red really red?" and similar.

And that's the thing about physics or any other science. Once you have a few constants chucked in there it becomes much harder to argue that we're just seeing everything "from our flawed perspective", as opposed to seeing things as they actually are. A certain set of rules govern the universe whether we're around to observe them or not. Once you start building outwards with those rules in mind scientific discovery becomes much more reliable, and it becomes more nonsensical to claim that really there's a higher power out there doing all of this.

Precisely what I was trying to convey, the brain registers the perception of nothingness as "black", because there is "nothing" to see. I already mentioned that we have a dynamic range of vision. Which is another interesting thing to consider, it's a dynamic range, not a static range. Dynamic range has been beneficial in our evolutionary past though.

I don't think you are quite understanding my point yet though. The rules of the universe we're looking for are just that, rules. Another fabrication of the human mind to understand our existence. They are there waiting to be discovered, yes, but there will always be some aspect that we won't come across, because (and this is my favourite bit) we have no reason to think otherwise. Much like a blind person born with the condition has no reason to assume what a purple giraffe looks like, we loveable humans have very little understanding of higher reference planes. We can only speculate what other dimensions are like. Whose to say there isn't a "God" out there that can't interact with our dimension of being and understanding? We have no way of proving it, and we have no way of disproving it either.

Maybe it just isn't important.

 

[Mr. S]

I go to church and support the institution because I firmly believe they are a force of good in this world, but don't actually believe anything that I can't see with my own eyes (that includes "God").

"A force of good"?

This institution killed an awful lot of people...for being "wizards", "witches" or "being posessed by the devil".


They're everything but nice people. Even today they still try to tell people how to live their life and condemn gay and lesbian people or women who are getting an abortion.

 

[fitftw]

^ thank you. Church is nothing but a telemarketing scam. All they want is your support in the form of cold, hard, cash. Have fun wasting your Sunday mornings for something so ridiculous.

I'd rather stay in bed and possibly go to hell when I die.