-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Why do you believe in god?
- Thread starter BTRA
- Start date
- Status
LunaticPuma
dresses business casual
malek4980 said:
It doesn't matter whether you call it God or the Devil or Steve, a name is just a name.
The big bang defies the "normal" laws of thermodynamics by introducing high levels of energy and order going against the entropy and heat loss of the universe. God is a way for humans to summarize what goes against our current understanding of the universe and rationalizing it.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I love Nietzsche but I haven't read that one.. thanksMash said:
Evlar said:
We have natural laws that tell us that no system can be 100% efficient, and if you want to argue that what loving god would make such a law, I go back to my pest argument. What would the world be like if no system ever deteriorated with time? I'd be sharing my office with a hundred other superhumans.
the natural laws, down to the human body, down the cell, are designed to sustain life, and they do their job. The best evidence we have that the design achieves sustainability of life, is well... the sustainability of life.
God in the Christian/Abrahmic sense, fear. Fear of death, for if you didn't fear death then why would one need immortality in the everlasting life sense. This sword's blade goes past the hilt, for fear is the father of cruelty, and nothing is more cruel than wishing eternal punishment on someone who doesn't believe. Think about that, your God created a place which is, essentially, the antithesis of his very existence.
I'm just going to let loose here and let this board know what I think of religion, for I generally don't talk about it...
Religion is disingenious at best, it is a reason to be altruistic and if you were truly altruistic you would not need a reason.
When someone chooses to believe in a religion compartmentalization is an attribute that is perfected.
The inability to see past religious inheritance, or believing in what your elders believed, is contradictory to the very nature of belief systems because inheritance is replaced, and seen as, a reason.
One of my favorites that I have come to like, as presented by Mango Positive, faith is the acknowledgment that you have absolutely no justification for the silly shit you believe.
The last one I can think of before lunch was already said better than I could say it:
Great posts by Mash, Grug, and Mango Positive. I enjoy reading level headed posts even if mine aren't.
I'm just going to let loose here and let this board know what I think of religion, for I generally don't talk about it...
Religion is disingenious at best, it is a reason to be altruistic and if you were truly altruistic you would not need a reason.
When someone chooses to believe in a religion compartmentalization is an attribute that is perfected.
The inability to see past religious inheritance, or believing in what your elders believed, is contradictory to the very nature of belief systems because inheritance is replaced, and seen as, a reason.
One of my favorites that I have come to like, as presented by Mango Positive, faith is the acknowledgment that you have absolutely no justification for the silly shit you believe.
The last one I can think of before lunch was already said better than I could say it:
Mash said:
Great posts by Mash, Grug, and Mango Positive. I enjoy reading level headed posts even if mine aren't.
Ela Hadrun
Probably plays more games than you
Why do people who DON'T believe in God keep trying to explain why people DO believe in God?
You guys can go start a different thread called "Atheists: Why do those other dumbasses believe in God?"
You can talk about how brave and intelligent you are, and how if only everyone were more like you the whales would be saved and we would have hot sex on the moon by 2016, and everyone would have a wry sense of humor to make jokes like "42" with.
But come on people. Maybe it's possible to get an A in Biology 201 and ALSO believe in God.
Evonus knows what's up. You can't debate something subjective, objectively. And the atheists I know personally are all totally on board with that. But you internet atheists, man, it's all ZOMG U MUST BE BRAINWASHED U DOESN'T KNO SCIENCE
You guys can go start a different thread called "Atheists: Why do those other dumbasses believe in God?"
You can talk about how brave and intelligent you are, and how if only everyone were more like you the whales would be saved and we would have hot sex on the moon by 2016, and everyone would have a wry sense of humor to make jokes like "42" with.
But come on people. Maybe it's possible to get an A in Biology 201 and ALSO believe in God.
Evonus knows what's up. You can't debate something subjective, objectively. And the atheists I know personally are all totally on board with that. But you internet atheists, man, it's all ZOMG U MUST BE BRAINWASHED U DOESN'T KNO SCIENCE
malek4980 said:
Good point. Yes, it is very possible that the bible stories were embellished or fabricated. Some would even say that the Roman Catholic church was primarily created as a political movement. That theory becomes interesting when you realize the uncanny parallels between the bible (new testament especially) and the Egyptian book of the dead, which was written way before any of the Christian scriptures.
I myself am not sure about the validity of the bible but my alien theory is based on the assumption that what's written in the bible (and other religious texts) did occur, atleast to some extent. It's just a theory I came up with to satisfy myself after not finding any logical answers from priests and religious scholars.
malek4980 said:
Well, I believe they must of seen something to inspire those hieroglyphics. Also if you look at ancient civilizations around the world you'll find art or language that describes "sky gods" just about everywhere. Coincidence? I personally don't think so.
speculawyer
Member
Because it is hard to get a straight answer from theists on this and we try to categorize the answers we do get since many are similar.Ela Hadrun said:
soul creator
Member
hc2 said:
all words need "boundaries" at some point, especially if we're supposedly talking about a "thing". The vast amount of people throughout history have described a god as a "being/thing" with specific "properties". The vast amount of people in our current society believe in god as a "being/thing" as well. So when someone asks, "do you believe in god?", that's the definition most people assume.
Of course, if you feel the need to make up your own personal definition of "god", that's fine. Just know that it does kinda confuse things and make the word more useless, rather than clarifying anything. If we're debating the existence of Tolkien's hobbits, but you're defining hobbits as "the love that is in our hearts", then there's not really much to discuss.
hc2 said:
of course, if we're just talking about god as a "concept", then you'll get no argument from me. Of course the concept exists. But I think it's fair to say that when someone asks "why do you believe in god?", they're generally referring to the existence of an actual being, not just a "concept" in our heads.
hc2 said:
Which is perfectly fine and all if we're speaking metaphorically and/or referring to concepts in our head, and no nonbeliever will disagree with that.
But if we're discussing universal essence/spirit as a "thing" that exists entirely separate from the thoughts in our heads, then that's an entirely different issue and gets far more into "magic fantasy superstition" territory. But it's difficult to ascertain what someone is referring to, since the word "god" is sometimes used in nebulous, vague terms.
I suppose this is why I've always thought that "religious" people are really just folks who take metaphors and parables waaaay too literally
Mash said:
I can give a candidate example: e^(i.Pi) + 1 = 0
(Not that it has caused anything yet, but it's a damn good candidate for it if ever there was one!)Also, there was blood spilt over the discovery that Pi was irrational.
I would also not be surprised if 0 has a dark history to it.
AkuMifune said:
Which is more conprehensible:
That a VERY imperfect World and beings slowly was formed over trillions and trillions of years.
...or that a perfect being just magically popped into existence.
It's either: The universe as we know is it was came about on its own, or a perfect god came about on its own and created the universe. The latter is obviously a lot less believeable.
Ghost and demons are real as well as possession so I logically concluded that if a priest/shaman/holy man ect. can exorcise countless amounts of demons from individuals with their form of "the gospel" then there has to be something there that we don't fully understand. Why do those passages and rituals seem to work on these 4th or 5th density beings? If it was all just hogwash then it shouldn't work at all yet it does more times than not. Even if it only worked some of the time you still have to acknowledge its importance that it can work. Granted there are as many different methods of exorcising as there are religions in the world but they all work around the same fundamental basis that there is a creator who holds power over all including those demons and poltergeist.
Our conventional beliefs of who or what God is are all probably skewed to the point where we can't believe anything specific about God other than the fact that he most likely does exists. Given that revelation we can throw out all of the contradictions in the Bible, Koran, Cabala ect. to his existence and just know there is a creator of some form who we cannot interpret or understand their purpose or intentions.
There is more solid proof that God does exist than there is proof that he does not exist so grounded logic leans more towards him existing just most likely not in the form we have categorized and depicted for centuries. In other words, we've been lied to..........a lot.
Our conventional beliefs of who or what God is are all probably skewed to the point where we can't believe anything specific about God other than the fact that he most likely does exists. Given that revelation we can throw out all of the contradictions in the Bible, Koran, Cabala ect. to his existence and just know there is a creator of some form who we cannot interpret or understand their purpose or intentions.
There is more solid proof that God does exist than there is proof that he does not exist so grounded logic leans more towards him existing just most likely not in the form we have categorized and depicted for centuries. In other words, we've been lied to..........a lot.
ItAintEasyBeinCheesy
it's 4th of July in my asshole
Cause he looks so good in the mirror, Oh Yeah!
TheHeretic
Banned
Ela Hadrun said:
The existance of god is not subjective in any sense of the word. You take the laws of the universe, the logical argument for how god or gods would operate, factor in evidence supporting that argument and make a conclusion.
Its funny how when someone believes in god they can never offer any objective reasoning for doing so. Its always "because I know it" or "its in my heart" or "*ancient manuscript* says so". Assuming you do believe in God, what is your reasoning for doing so that isn't so obviously flawed as to be immediately subjected to ridicule. Understand, its not YOU i'm ridiculing, its your beliefs.
TheHeretic
Banned
Shaheed79 said:
How about instead of making a comment like "there is more solid proof god does exist" you actually provide said proof.
Shaheed79 said:
So despite believing in God for no reason, your God is completely useless. If you are going to invent a God make it useful.
Shaheed79 said:
Claiming that God cannot be understood is not an argument, not a stance at all. It is running away from debate and failing to make a point. If you are trying to convince my mind (that is to apply logic) by making an illogical statement, you have backpedaled, not advanced your point.
Earthstrike
Member
Shaheed79 said:
I think using the notion that what people believe in somehow constitutes a standard of what reality is. Does this man prove aliens exist? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFTLKEgE-Wo
Another great example would be hypnotism. If a person was hypnotised into say, not being able to move thier legs, but the hypnotist said it was by the power of god, would the man not being able to move his legs prove the existence of god? It takes more than man saying something has a particular cause to prove that that is actually the cause.
And elo hadrum, I'm getting the impression you believe the existence of god is subjective. Subjectivity would be the case if one could make god exist or not exist by belief. God is not an opinion, he's either there or he isn't. You can debate whether or not humans can ever come to know whether or not god is there, but then that still leaves open the debate about 1. evolution, a scientific assertion that is objective 2. the reasonability of believing in a particular notion of god.
TheHeretic said:
This is exactly what I was trying to portray in my original post.
It just seems there is so many scientific, logical, and mathematical reasons for the way things work or appear or whatnot, but for christianity or any other religions its always just "god made it that way". It's basically an easy cop out for saying you don't know why it happened and are less intelligent to try to figure it out or want to know why. (not calling any religious people less intelligent)
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
The level of condescending douchebaggery found in these threads are amazing.
I have gone back and forth between my Christian upbringing and atheism the past few years. Sometimes I have a feeling of a "greater presence," but this ends up being emotional and temporary.
I think it's really funny that people who claim to see a picture of the Virgin Mary in a piece of toast believe it's proof of God's existence. Even when I was certain of my Christianity, I saw that miracles lie in the world around us. To say that one can only see a miracle in toast is a blasphemy of God and all that he/she/it created that you, as a true believer, haven't noticed.
I think it's really funny that people who claim to see a picture of the Virgin Mary in a piece of toast believe it's proof of God's existence. Even when I was certain of my Christianity, I saw that miracles lie in the world around us. To say that one can only see a miracle in toast is a blasphemy of God and all that he/she/it created that you, as a true believer, haven't noticed.
Urban Scholar
Member
Why do I believe? There are somethings we just can't example with all the rationale and reasoning out there. Why? Who knows to be honest. I feel there's a greater overseer(so to speak) to what we call life. Not a day goes by with me thinking that there is a "god". I've had things happen to me, I mean bad and unexplainable and yet they turned ok and fine. My optimism aside, there maybe something there. If there isn't then well then I guess one day well find out. Overall I think people naturally need something to believe in to keep them going.
TheHeretic
Banned
Urban Scholar said:
What are these things we can't "example"?
I'm not trying to convince you of anything. You can go running in the field of naked atheist embracing and celebrating the non existence of God for all I care. I just came in here to explain why I believe in God and the logic is very simple for me. If someone can logically explain to me why all these different forms of exorcism can be affective against so called demons and possessed 4th density beings then I'll reconsider but UNTIL they convince me otherwise I have no other logical conclusion other than the fact that there is a shit ton that we still don't understand about our own metaphysics. So for anyone to conclude that God cannot exist is ridiculous in my eyes because it cannot be proven other than quoting contradictions of a flawed and outright fraudulent religious history.RandomVince said:
Many people mistaken debunking the bible or other religious works as debunking the possibility of a God when the two things are entirely separate. It is highly possible that everything we've been told about God and the many religions surrounding him are false but that doesn't mean God itself does not exist. This is logic 101 here not some stuffy religious fanatic trying to hold on to the lies the church has told us since recorded history. I've seen Zeitgeist so I know how religious stories are recycled every 3000 or so years so I am not a subscriber to any modern beliefs or definitions of God and religion.
TheHeretic
Banned
Shaheed79 said:
God does not exist because the concept of omnipotence is self contradictory. Furthermore for a God TO exist it would have to be shown that the laws of nature within our universe, such as the conservation of energy, could be broken. Logic aside there is simply no evidence that a God exists, all the miracles that were rampant 2000 years ago are mysteriously absent today, funnily enough right about the time we began recording these events scientifically.
And no, you haven't given a single reason. You've given allusions to reasons you've carefully omitted. Ghosts and Demons have not been shown to be real anymore than any other supersititious force. Saying they are real doesn't make them real, you have to SHOW how they are real through some evidence.
Lol no but Dr. Reed makes a strong ass case.Earthstrike said:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=JoanScutter
His life has been ruined because of this losing several friends and family members so I don't see the motivation for hoaxing this. He himself was shot for disclosing this tape after having it produced in Mexico.
TheHeretic said:
If this is the best you've got then you're screwed. How is it contradictory? What do you define as omnipotence? The laws of nature within our universe and conservation of energy? It really sounds like you don't have the slightest clue of what you are talking about. The conservation of energy proves the non existence of God? Please o wise one go into detail I have to hear this. In the meantime forget the bible and all its tales of miracles and arks and adam and Eve its all lies and unproven. The dismissal of the bible and ALL of the religious texts of the world still DO NOT prove the non existence of a God. Anyone who subscribes to this is ignoring the basic fundamental rules of logical deduction.
Lol ghosts and demons aren't real? Do you really wish to debate metaphysics with me? I've been studying 4th, 5th density phenomenon since I was a teenager and the first thing any metaphysicist will tell you is that the "rules and laws of nature of our universe" don't necessarily apply in another dimensional plane. The rules that govern 5th density for example could be completely opposite of our laws. I can prove to you through your own logic that spirits and ghost DO exist but I want to hear your explanation to the above questions.
TheHeretic
Banned
Shaheed79 said:
Oh jeez. Omnipotence is all powerful all knowing, and there are a million contradictions most people have already heard of. Can God make a rock so heavy even he can't lift it, if God knows everything thats going to happen does he have the power to change his own destiny, etc. You don't prove somethings "non existence", you prove its existence. The burden of proof is on the claim, i'm not making the claim.
Shaheed79 said:
Yeah, it really sounds like you've been reading some serious, serious literature there. Whatever other dimensions there are or aren't, and whatever rules govern those dimensions, has nothing to do with our dimension. Whether or not ghosts and demons exist in fantasy land or alternate dimension #50102 is irrelevant and unanswerable, the question is do ghosts and demons exist in our dimension.
cyclonekruse
Member
TheHeretic said:
That entirely depends on how you define "omnipotence" (not to mention "God"). If you define omnipotence as the ability to do everything that can possibly be done, that usually clears up the contradiction. Then the answer to questions like "Can God make a square circle?" becomes "No, because a 'square circle' cannot possibly exist and, in fact, the term itself is actually meaningless hokum."
TheHeretic said:
What about a deistic or pantheistic God? You're also showing a monotheistic bias. Lastly, I don't understand why your conclusion follows from even the premise of a God like YHWH.
Shaheed79 said:
To be fair, people have throughout this thread.
Shaheed79 said:
Exorcism works on the same principles as pop-psychology treatments but with a veil of religiosity. When people have a genuine belief that they are possessed this can either be treated as a mental disorder or reinforced by the behaviour and actions of other church/temple goers of a close community, all with very similar beliefs for obvious reasons. Just as having an unhealthy body can affect your concentration and cause depression, an unhealthy mind can have physical effects, and cause psych-somatic symptons. By going through a ritual, whether that be sitting on a couch and talking to a psychiatrist or having a priest perform various actions, you become healed. Both use the same principles of psychotherapy, to me this is self-evident.
You keep appealing to logic and asking for logical refutations of god, which isn't that unreasonable, although the onus is obviously on your shoulders. My problem is people use the word logical when what they really mean is compelling argument. If you want an actual logical argument for god that involves some first-order logic then dig up St. Anselm's poem that makes an assumption and then uses reductio to derive a contradiction. This was considered proof of god for centuries by the church but it commits fallacies that are actually quite obvious. The argument basically uses the idea of god being something no greater can be conceived as a starting point and tries to show how assuming god only existing in concept form forms a contradiction. There are a tonne of problems with it in my opinion.
Godel used modal logic to make this ontological argument stronger, where he tries to prove that a being we'd think of as god is a necessary truth and not something contingent. But he relies on some fishy axioms and relies on some assumptions that some people just wouldn't find reasonable.
So if you want actual logical poofs and rebuttals of god, they're out there. They're boring and they suck the life out of the question of god's existence but people keep crying out for logic.
soul creator said:all words need "boundaries" at some point, especially if we're supposedly talking about a "thing". The vast amount of people throughout history have described a god as a "being/thing" with specific "properties". The vast amount of people in our current society believe in god as a "being/thing" as well. So when someone asks, "do you believe in god?", that's the definition most people assume.
Of course, if you feel the need to make up your own personal definition of "god", that's fine. Just know that it does kinda confuse things and make the word more useless, rather than clarifying anything. If we're debating the existence of Tolkien's hobbits, but you're defining hobbits as "the love that is in our hearts", then there's not really much to discuss.
of course, if we're just talking about god as a "concept", then you'll get no argument from me. Of course the concept exists. But I think it's fair to say that when someone asks "why do you believe in god?", they're generally referring to the existence of an actual being, not just a "concept" in our heads.
Which is perfectly fine and all if we're speaking metaphorically and/or referring to concepts in our head, and no nonbeliever will disagree with that.
But if we're discussing universal essence/spirit as a "thing" that exists entirely separate from the thoughts in our heads, then that's an entirely different issue and gets far more into "magic fantasy superstition" territory. But it's difficult to ascertain what someone is referring to, since the word "god" is sometimes used in nebulous, vague terms.
I suppose this is why I've always thought that "religious" people are really just folks who take metaphors and parables waaaay too literally
The original question was, " Why do you believe in god?" (not capitalized) Various definitions of "god":
So my "god" is closer to the Christian Science definition than any of the others. But still my concept is a bit different from it. And I use the word concept because I really am guessing. I was just trying to let the folks know what my concept is, not trying to define "G/god" or sell any particular belief. If the question was "Why do you believe in God?", that is a different topic.
TheHeretic
Banned
cyclonekruse said:
Onmipotence literally means unlimited power. If we define everything that can possibly
then how has God defied possibility time and time again. If God can only do whats possible then he might as well be you or me, I can do everything thats possible. This all depends on which God we are talking about but generally most people are either Christian, Jewish or Muslim. Most religions in the western world branch from those 3, i'm not going to make my arguments towards people who aren't claiming anything just to cover all my bases.
cyclonekruse said:
Most religions are monotheistic, most claims about god are monotheistic, and the arguments don't change going from 1 god to a billion gods. A deistic God is an irrelevant God. Deism reaches a whole new level because not only do they buy into first cause arguments and God of the gaps, they make their God entirely useless. If you are going to invent a God you might as well invent stories about heaven and hell, you've already made the leap from rationality.
TheHeretic said:
.......
..............
Just who's mathematics are you subscribing to here? Poincare? Heisenberg? Enstein? I'm going to need you to have at least a BASIC understanding of singularity theorems, quantum mechanics, space manifolds and metaphysics. For you to say ghost and demons in "our dimension" just shows how unknowledgeable you are on this subject.
TheHeretic
Banned
Shaheed79 said:
:lol
Ok, joke character confirmed. Moving on.
As for physical proof of singularities of what could be described in our understanding as "ghosts" then I'll post some interesting links here for you.
Ghost Hunters Analysis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMzfVgYRWII
Follow up EVP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75A6_94zyPw
The amount of scrutinizing this video and EVP have gone through and still no one can explain this phenomenon using our own "laws of nature and universe".
I have tones more of these but I first must address this.
Joke character? Is this how you are going to go about debating me? I think you are frightened to death right now to make such an accusation. What we know of as ghosts DO NOT exist in our plane of reality i.e. another dimension. They are able to break through these dimensional barriers through means which can only be describe as unexplainable singularities where they have interacted with our own physical plane. They draw energy from their surroundings i.e. anything that emits energy like batteries or humans because interacting with our dimension apparently requires a lot of 3rd density energy.
Ghost Hunters Analysis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMzfVgYRWII
Follow up EVP
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75A6_94zyPw
The amount of scrutinizing this video and EVP have gone through and still no one can explain this phenomenon using our own "laws of nature and universe".
I have tones more of these but I first must address this.
Joke character? Is this how you are going to go about debating me? I think you are frightened to death right now to make such an accusation. What we know of as ghosts DO NOT exist in our plane of reality i.e. another dimension. They are able to break through these dimensional barriers through means which can only be describe as unexplainable singularities where they have interacted with our own physical plane. They draw energy from their surroundings i.e. anything that emits energy like batteries or humans because interacting with our dimension apparently requires a lot of 3rd density energy.
TheHeretic
Banned
Shaheed79 said:
oh shiz its maury
TheHeretic
Banned
Fatbot said:
We have to borrow them from you guys i'm afraid
cyclonekruse
Member
TheHeretic said:
Omnipotence is usually defined as "all-powerful" not "unlimited," at least in the Christian understanding that you're mostly arguing against. And what do you mean you can do everything that's possible? I certainly can't unless you mean only one outcome is ever possible and that's the one that I do, I suppose.
TheHeretic said:
Numbers to back this claim up?
TheHeretic said:
This I'll believe as far as on the Internet goes.
TheHeretic said:
This couldn't be more wrong. Not only do polytheists claim different properties for their gods (not necessarily omnipotent) but polytheism generally defeats the argument from evil by having multiple gods with different goals (and humans stuck in the middle).
TheHeretic said:
If you want to say "God does not exist" you have to disprove every God.
TheHeretic said:
I doubt you'd find many deists who would say they invented a God. Rather, they probably went from the first-cause argument and then surmised what other properties that God would have. And they decided a non-interfering God best fit with the evidence of their observations. Of course different deists could have done different things to get to their beliefs so I can't generalize too far.
- Status