Do you believe in God?

Not to be rude, but how do you know that's what Christianity is about? I think you may be stereotyping a little. I just do find it a bit persecusive to be told that I'm an idiot for believing in there being something more. Not that that's what you said, but when we generalize and say something that may not necessarily be true, it comes off as offensive and then the reader is too busy being offended to actually read it. I don't want to come off that way.

Sometimes, when I read what y'all say, I can agree. But it's more of a questioning. I can't be absolutely sure about this. I said yesterday, that I believe because if I'm wrong there's nothing. I found out what that was called (and I was a little upset that this wasn't some new theory and I am some genius because I am oh so jealous of Renaissance thinkers but I digress) which is Pascal's Wager. Anyway, I'm already upset with him because of his triangle in Geometry, but he does make a point.

Okay, I don't want to sound like the persecuting Christian.

I question my belief all the time as a Christian. Do you atheists (not to single you out but this question would be directed at you) ever question yourself and say "maybe I'm wrong. Maybe there is a higher being?"

I just want to know. As Einstein said "I am neither especially clever nor especially gifted. I am only very, very curious."

Please tell me if I'm being rude. I would hate to come across that way. I hope y'all have a great day

 

Just to clarify, I did not, in any way, ever think or said you were an idiot. I know you said so too, but I'm just pointing it out. That's all :angel:
What I did was not stereotyping, I gave a broader meaning to the idea of christianity (that's the opposite of stereoptyping.). Every real Christian, everyone who knows, has studied christianity knows that the bible is to not to be read, but interpreted. Every story, every parable is a message how to be a better person, which is a beautiful thought if you think about it. The idea of an almighty god is secondary.

The idea of an afterlife, and living a good life to not be sent into hell or such has also been around much longer than christianity. They're morals, standards to live by, that's the purpose of a religion.

What's wrong with there being nothing? I think it's kinda soothing to know that this is the only chance we get.

I don't wanna sound like the persecuting atheist either

To be honest? No. Am I that arrogant? Yes, sorry about that. The thing is, if I would question my theory, then my theory would be worthless since something made me doubt that there was something higher.
So far, I've never questioned it. And as far as I know, I will never put my faith in something that I don't trust one hunderd percent.

Idem dito. If you would check the beginning of this thread, I'm the annoying one asking all the questions :lol:

No need, I love a good debate

Almost midnight. Goodnight, y'all.


One more thing. Pascal's wager implies that one does not lead a good life when one does not believe. That's a major mistake in his theory. I'm no angel, but I'm still a good person for living my life based on values, not religion.

 

Lucifer, I hope you have a good night and sweet dreams.

I'm not going to do quotes as I get super confused when I'm quoting a quote that someone has quoted (see how easy it is to be confused?), but I do have some answers/questions (we'll see when I get done because my mind seems to go off track easily).

I do understand what you mean by literal and figuritive (sp?) translation. The parables are symbolic as a model of how to live our lives. But some things (like King David) are truth. I was reading an article that someone showed me (and of course it's not on this computer so I can't share the link), but it was talking about some remains of an Israeli civilization of the time where King David would have ruled. They found in those remains of cities things that back up what the Bible says.

About religion being morals and the way to live by, I do agree. The religions have always reflected on what circumstances the civilization lives in. In Mesopotamia, their religions consisted of very bleak looks on life. If I'm not mistaken (and I very well could be XD), they believed that this was it and there's nothing else. They believed this because they were constantly in war so they had no hope.

One of the reasons that I believe in what Christianity says is that I have studied other religions and what they say is very different than what the Bible says. A lot had to do with how they described their "God". He had human attributes. But my God is beyond human if you get what I'm saying. He has qualities that I can't have as I am human. Also most of the ancient religions describe that their gods hated humans. That they were the scourge of their creation. According to what I believe, God created people to glorify Him.

You asked what was wrong with there being nothing. There isn't. It's just what's wrong if there isn't nothing. If I'm wrong about God existing, well, I just die and there is nothing. I would hoped I would have lived a good life. I hope I'm making sense. I want to articulate this just because I feel like sometimes people who are religious sound less smart (for lack of a better word), and I don't want to be taken as someone who is any less smart. I'm not saying that y'all think religious people are idiots because I don't think you think that. I just want to represent myself well.

I can respect that you have no doubts. I think that's great. Sometimes I've found that questioning it makes you stronger in what you do know.

Anyway, I hope I don't offend anyone. That is not my desire.

Also, the only reason I'm really defending Christianity is because I understand it the best, and it is what I believe. I wouldn't go defend someone else's religion that I know nothing about, but I do want to know about other religions. I just love learning *is a nerd*

 

sounds a lot like me too, although i was considerably younger - about 10 i think. i told my dad (who was still very much a priest at the time so it was quite a big deal!) that i was atheist when i was 11. at the time he said it was fine, but he did manage to bring it up in *every* single argument we had throughout my teens!

for me it wasn't so much questions that i was asking, it was basically that i started studying (at a very very elementary level!) science, and i quickly came to the conclusion that the things i'd been taught at church/sunday school/home/wherever were just not possible. i may have been young, but i still believe that now.

absoutely - human curiosity, questioning and also dissent and the question of absolutist worldviews are absolutely crucial to the progress of human race. without these we'd still be stuck running around in animal skins and living in caves. by the way i'm not saying that progress is *always* a good thing - there have been some major bad ideas that came from progress (colonisation/imperialism, nuclear & industrial warfare, holocaust, to name a few), but it's essential that we keep trying to do more and discover more.

personally i don't think there *is* a point. nor do i think there has to be a point. each of us is here for a certain length of time - we should do with that time what we can or what we want, and that's it. some of us contribute to the furtherance of ideas for future generations, some don't, some enjoy their life, many don't, but that's just how it is. it actually kind of bothers me that there has to be some point or reason imposed on everything we do - why? why does there have to be a point? why can't we just be?

haha, don't even get me started!:guffaw::scream:

same for me really - although technically the sun and moon won't always be there, our solar system will almost certainly disappear at some point - but in our lifetimes i guess they'll always be there, unless we discover a way to live to be several billion years old and frankly, who'd want that? life is short with good reason, probably because it's nasty and brutish, to paraphrase thomas hobbes. my faith is in humans - not just faith in the good stuff either, faith in the bad stuff. being a cynic through and through i actually don't believe we're a very nice race, we do an awful lot of truly horrific things, but i can have faith in the fact that that is the case, and in the fact that some people try to counterbalance that a bit.

i agree. my dad is a priest, as i've said, and he studied theology quite deeply (as well as ancient greek and hebrew (and a bit of aramaic)), so he's read the biblical texts in their original languages as well as in modern versions. i sometimes have theological debates with him, because although our beliefs are very very different, i'm kind of fascinated by the whole thing and he's usually up for discussing it! he believes that the bible is *not* a literal text and is definitely one to be interpreted - much as we disagree he's a rational, intelligent man and i think his rationality allows him to be critical of both the bible and the church more broadly. he's certainly not a sheep like guy who just believes things because he's told to. there are many things within his church (C of E) that he thinks are wrong and he openly disagrees with these things and often campaigns about them (maybe less so now he's retired). even though he often brought up my atheism in arguments when i was younger, he's pretty open about my beliefs and lets me get on with it. i wouldn't try to change his belief either, even though i disagree with it. that's the key i think, it's about openness and not forcing people to believe something just because it's dogma. the parable nature of biblical (and indeed other) religious texts is key i think - these are stories by which people can learn to make choices as to what to do with their lives, they shouldn't be set in stone as absolute norms. the same can be said of legends, myths, fables, apocrypha and so on, and i don't think anyone would argue that something like aesop's fables should be taken as an absolute dictat on how things must be, but more as a guide to how certain situations can be handled. to me texts like aesop's fables and religious texts are very much comparable.

i suspect because it's the most prevalent religious leaning of the western world, and that most people here are from either the west itself or nations that have been influenced by the west over time. i suspect that if this forum/csi were big in the middle east, the discussion would focus more on islam.

 

I just belive that when we pass over it's into another dimension and on 'what's the point"? I want to see my beloved parents & grandparents and uncles and aunts, & friends who've passed over. and their waiting to reunite with the rest of us, when we all go too, and will all be together again. I truly believe that it will happen, so until then I try to lead a good life and be kind to those that are less unfortunate than myself~

 

My take on the why we're here thing is that we are here to learn and grow as spiritual and sentient beings. Each and every thing that happens to us teaches us or someone else a Karmic Lesson in the grand scheme of things.

Of course, all of this is my take on things, and YMMV. For all I know, I could be wrong, and it could be the human mind searching for patterns and wanting things to have a certain order and meaning.

However, one thing that I touched on in my original post in the thread, and which I hope didn't come across wrong, is that I don't like things crammed down my throat from either side. That goes for saying that there is no God because no proof of God's existence is proof that God does not exist; as well as for people saying simply that reading the Bible is simple proof enough that God exists and that you should shut up and believe.

I actually have a rerun of Criminal Minds on, and the quote at the beginning was one from Roman Philosopher Lucretius, and it says "What is Food to one man is Bitter Poison to others." So, what works for one person may not work for some one else, or anyone else.

TBH, my own views on Religion were really qualified in my early 20's when I took an Intro to Theology class in undergrad. So much of the basic messages of all the religions we studied were virtually Identical, with a creation story from one of the other minor religions that had nothing to do with anything Judeo-Christian/Islamic that was so similar to the story of Adam and Eve that it makes sense to me that there is a God, there is One God, and his message is simple, to treat others as you would wish to be treated. The rest is just how we view Him.

As a Coda, I definitely think that one should believe what one feels comfortable with, but NEVER try and tell anyone what to believe, even if it's not to believe anything.

 

Same here. I've been called that and worse. Ever been called selfish and stubborn, been accused of wanting to break all the rules/wanting to sin sin sin without consequences? That's the one that gets flung at me the most. Don't understand why, though... since it quite obviously doesn't describe me at all. I have no desire to break all the rules. I'm actually a pretty boring person!

I may not like the idea of my mortality (in fact, it scares the everliving crap out of me), but my fear of eventual nonexistence doesn't justify buying into the idea of an afterlife in order to assuage my fears. Either there's good reason to accept the notion of existence after death or there's not. My feelings on the matter have no bearing on the reality of it all.

My apologies for the blunt response you're about to receive, but I don't know how else to word it - those things never happened. Just like Quetzalcoatl never descended into Mictlan, gathered the bones of the dead, then anointed them with his own blood, thus giving birth to the humanity that currently resides on earth. It's religious mythology. People fervently believed it, but it isn't true.

Sounds really nice... though that hasn't been the reality of my experiences with religion.

An impassioned nihilist... I love it! Pretty much describes my outlook too. There's no "greater purpose", only the purpose we divine for ourselves.

This is exactly what we discussed in my Religion & The Modern World class tonight. We even watched the South Park episode that makes fun of Scientology! I actually know a lot about Scientology. I've got pages and pages of info saved on that cult. It really is very scary.

I did a TON of questioning when I was around 16. I questioned my Catholicism, then I questioned religious belief in general, then I questioned lacking religious belief, then I questioned lacking belief in any and all metaphysical concepts and creatures, deities included. After that hurricane of questions blew away, I was left with the conclusion that it is most logical to lack belief in the existence of gods.

I've gotta say... I'm the exact opposite. I've already made my big statement about religious faith, but one more time in a nutshell: faith is epistemologically void in that it lacks any reliable mechanism by which the truth value in any claim/concept may be evaluated. It's no more dependable as a method for arriving at genuine knowledge than flipping a coin or rolling dice. It's a guessing game. Sometimes it's dangerous - it allows for unflinching conviction based on zero real world justification. On these bases, I find faith to be undesirable. I prefer reason, logic, substantiation, etc.

This is a form of Pascal's Wager. I see you've already read up on it, though. You were disappointed that someone thought it up before you.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If someone claims that there exists an all-powerful super-being who created all that we see and know, and who loves us very much, I'm gonna need more than their say-so based on belief. The most logical approach in this situation is skepticism, saying "there's no reason to believe that you're expressing anything which coincides with reality, and until you substantiate your claim, I'm going to regard it with the same lack of belief with which I regard the claimed existence of other fantastical creatures and notions (for example, the notion that there exists a tiny invisible teapot orbiting the moon)."

And now that I've posted far too much and have probably offended everyone under the sun, I'm gonna toddle off and have myself a Powerade. Cheers! :thumbsup:

 

haha, me too! people tell me i'm too cynical (in fact last week a guy in my french class was paired up with me for an exercise and said he was scared by the level of my cynicism!), and too pessmistic, but i see it as realism too. the fact is the world is not a pleasant place and it seems more, well, realistic, to accept that and be aware of it.

i'm not scared of it at all - in fact the idea of there possibly being an afterlife (which i don't think there is, btw) - especially an eternal one - scares me far more than death ever could. who'd want to live forever? life is crappy enough anyway without wanting to extend it. even if there was an afterlife, who's to say it'd be any better than this pathetic existence? that said, if i *did* believe in heaven and hell (i don't!) i know damn well which one i'd rather go to, and it ain't heaven.

agreed.

i'm definitely a nihilist to an extent - i'm not quite on nietzsche's level (although i do think he was great) but i'm in that direction. i guess i'd be more of an existentialist - we create our own purpose/opportunities, if we want to, life is what we do with it, etc, and we're here now and that's it, nothing more.

there's a scientology 'church' centre near my college, i have to walk past it quite often. i used to wish they would stop me and ask me to do their questionnaire (they stand on the street reeling people in) because i'd love to flumox them, but when they finally did ask me i was in a manic episode so i just yelled at them. i wish i hadn't, i'd much rather have shown them how i felt in a reasoned way!

you seem to have stolen my mind:lol: i totally agree - the only things anyone can have faith in are those that we are able to quantify scientifically, and even they are suspect because science uses inductive reasoning so you can never be 100% sure that an experiment that happened one way 500 times in a row won't happen a different way on the 501st go. that said it's a far more logical way of having faith in something happening than just believing something's there because you can feel it. repeated scientific experimentation, while not conclusive, has a far more sound logical basis for hypothesising than something emotional. and really, that's all faith is, just one great big hypothesis - only one in which scientific testing is nigh on impossible, and apparently one people aren't that keen to test scientifically anyway.

yep, me too. shytownzombie is right, there isn't conclusive proof that there's no god, however there is a lot of very strong evidentiary support for ideas like evolution, the big bang theory etc that, to me anyway, contradict very strongly the idea of the existence of a god.

 

Again, you have to take that with a grain of salt. Compare it to the Odyssey. Troy has actually been found by an archeologist (Schliemann, I think). Does that mean everything that is described in the Iliad and the Odyssey is true? No. Has there never been a war between Greece and Troy? Probably yes, but not because Paris kidnapped Helen, but because of commercial benefits. It's a story, based on what were once true facts but that has evolved through so many authors and time, that only the basis is to be believed. Iliad: There was once a fight between Greece and Troy. And revenge is honourful (keep in mind that in Ancient Greece, this was honourful, so consider it a value like we know ours).
Bible: there once was a man named Jesus who was very inspiring and had a few damn good ideas. Basis: threat your neighbour like you would want to be treated yourself.

I don't know what ancient religions you studied, but if you mean Ancient Greek and Roman religions, the gods never hated man. On the contrary, they would fall in love with them, they would hem those who pray to them etc.

If ever I would stand before God and be judged, I can tell Him that I have lead a good life, and that I stood up for what I believed in. Because that's the point after all.
I also want to make one thing very, very clear here. Not believing does not mean you're not leading a good life.
I really hope you don't feel that I think you would be less smart. I love the fact that you're in this debate. I do think, and please don't take this the wrong way, that you still have a lot to experience yet. But that's a good thing. The more you can still broaden your horizon, the more knowledge you can gain in order to form a well, underbuilt perspective on the world that is truely yours.

Probably just grammar here, but to be kind to the less unfortunate ones is to be kind to the more fortunate ones. Which er.. would be a weird theory

I lead a good life not in order to have it good in the afterlife. I lead a good life because it's important to do that now. Not so I can receive something later, but because it's important to everyone around us now. You don't want to not hurt your friend because otherwise you won't get into heaven, you want to not hurt your friend because it's your friend. It's your friend you're doing it for, not self profit.

An impassionate nihilist? Lol, thanks for that :lol: I kinda like the term

I've never been accused of being an atheist. Here, it's pretty common thing, so no one is going to persecute you for not believing. If anyone would take it badly that you're an atheist, then it's not even worth the fight. I stated a bumper sticker here somewhere in the thread saying never to argue with an idiot, because they'll only beat you down with experience.
Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not saying believers are idiots. I'm saying that anyone who doesn't allow another to have his own beliefs, is an idiot.



I have more to say, but then this would become a reaaaaaaally long post :lol:

 

this, basically!

i have never been accused of being an atheist, partly because i'm quite happy to stand up and be counted as an atheist, it's not something that to me warrants accusation because as far as i'm concerned it's a perfectly ok way to be. however... i have had the term atheist (and, more specifically, non christian) used against me in a very perjorative way, as if somehow not believing in god makes me an immoral evil bastard or something. i think in western society it's not so bad - i've experienced it but not to the point where it's been persecution. however in deeply religious sectors of society people definitely do see atheism as something to be persecuted or at least demeaned/looked down on/hated. in many islamic states atheism is seen as a true sin, and punishable in some quite horrible ways (and i don't think this is a pan-islamic thing, just happens in more extreme islamic states) but it's not exclusive - i've seen it/heard about it from friends/etc in deeply christian communities too. i think especially in the states there is still quite a prevailing idea that atheists are immoral, don't have values, are all psychopaths or something. it's wrong, and i think as society progresses it's getting better, but it's definitely there. the best and most widely quoted example would be george bush senior saying he didn't think atheists should be allowed full US citizenship. ok, that was 20-odd years ago, but his son implicitly (and actually i think explicitly) supported this view, so it's definitely still around. slight digression here... obama as president is a great thing for america as the first african american president, but i think it would be more shocking if america had an atheist president.

btw you quoted me not saying anything, that must be a first, me not saying anything :lol::lol:

 

Okay, I can't do the fancy quote separation (sorry, I'm challenged with technology). But I do have some answers.

Okay, I'll start with the grain of salt I do understand what you mean. I have like a filter issue where I say things (and this does mean writing them) where I don't say the most important things. Having studied the Odyssey (and some of the Iliad), I would know that the war wasn't actually started by Paris kidnapped Helen. If I'm correct (and once again I'm probably not), Homer said that it was actually started when Paris chose Aphrodite (who told him that she'd give him the most beautiful woman in the world) over Athena and Hera. But just a technicality. I do know what you're saying.

What I was saying with the proof of David was that you had said (and it is possible that I misread and/or misinterpreted) that the entire Old Testament was myth, and I just wanted to clarify that there is historical fact in it. I really hope this makes sense because I have a tendency to not prove what I was trying to when I'm writing.

On the gods that I've studied, I wasn't refering to the Greek and Roman gods (which I have also studied and I love that mythology). I was referring to the Mesopotamian gods referenced in The Epic of Gilgamesh. It was talking about their version of the Flood and their reasoning for it was that their gods were annoyed by the noise created by the humans. Also, if I remember correctly, Zeus punished Prometheus for giving fire to the humans because he deemed the humans unworthy to live. But I may be wrong.

Anyway, I hope that makes sense.

I do have a question about evolution (if that isn't taboo in the sense that it isn't "religious"). I have read two books on the matter for Biology last year. They were Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe and Darwin on Trial by Philip E Johnson. And I was wondering how things like the blood clotting system would have evolved step by step when without each of the components the entire system would fail.

If that question isn't pertinent in here, then that's okay. I was just wondering.

I hope you have a great day

 

^I would like to help you with that question, but I'm a building engineer, not a biology engineer. So I wouldn't know. Any biotechnics around here?

About the Iliad, I proved exactly your point. It's based on historical facts, but those facts have evolved so much, that you must only retain the basic message, not the story itself. The town described in OT may have existed in one or another form in that particular area, but that doesn't mean king David ruled there once. He's a mythical figure, just like Abraham, Noah, Cain and Able and whatnot.

(Oh, and the story of the Iliad does begin with Paris' choice between the godesses, but the actual war was started when he tricked Helen into coming with him. Greek literature student here )

Again, past midnight here. Goodnight

 

i didn't want to generalise, which is why i said i don't thimk it's a pan-islamic thing at all, and i really don't think it is, but some islamic states operate under strict islamic law and in those states atheism is often seen as an offence. i don't by any means think *all* muslims feel that way, there are moderate muslims just as there are moderate christians and presumable moderates in every religion, but in some areas - in fact of all religions, not just islam or christianity - there are factions that believe atheism is abhorrent. it just so happens that some states are run under islamic law which makes it more than an abhorrence and a defined criminal offence.

i think society here in britain *is* more secular and that's great, but until we make like the french and categorically separate church and state, i don't think we're any better off. the fact that our monarch is still legally called the defender of the faith sits badly with me. in fact the fact we have a monarch at all sits badly with me. in some ways i'm glad the monarch has only vestigial power, but if that's so (it is) why bother having one at all?

as for the church having less control here, i'm not so sure - i think in society at large that's true, i think people generally are fairly secular here these days, and the fact we have strong sunday trading and so on suggests that too, but until the government stops being so strongly influenced by religious interests i will not be (a) convinced or (b) happy.