jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (446 posts)

Name 10 EXCELLENT REASONS why THERE is a God or a Benevolent Universal

  1. gmwilliams profile image86
    gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago

    http://s3.hubimg.com/u/8004802_f248.jpg
    Being/Presence/Energy:

    1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
      Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      10 good reasons for a benevolent universe.... First one is that if the universe were not benevolent we would not exist . Second is that we would not be able to fulfil our needs and we would no longer exist.
      Our existence depends on the universe or nature supplying what we need for survival.  No air? No human life. No water? Forget it. No shelter? Too hot too cold? No humans.
      I can name perhaps a hundred reasons that there must be a benevolent being out there or at least a benevolent universe.
      But is there? Are these really reasons for the benevolence of nature or the universe or a god? Probably not. 
      True that were all those conditions I mentioned not right we would not exist. So the conditions preceded our existence and facilitated it. No benevolence was required, just the fulfilling of specific conditions.
      Science recently found out that life in the form of bacteria and basic life started on this planet much earlier than anyone had guessed possible. Our planet is around 4 billion years old. Life began 3.7 billion years ago. It seems as though it is inevitable under specific conditions.
      Can a process be benevolent? Probably not, even if its actions are in your favour. You can certainly see it that way if you choose to, but is it the truth? Not if the process does it all without any conscious  deliberation, and of course we don’t usually ascribe cause and effect acts as being the will of nature. It’s just how nature works. The nature of energy/matter, that is.
      Everyone says nature without realizing that saying nature implies a something that it is the nature of.  From physics we know there is nothing else but energy/matter.  That is what all things are made of.
      So is it not natural then that being nature ourselves, nature is benevolent toward us? At least in a subjective way?
      So in that respect you could say that there are hundreds of ways nature is benevolent to us.
      But objectively we probably have to realize that benevolence is, of course, a subjective topic, and that benevolence objectively requires a deliberate conscious act to be benevolence. Being just the way it is because of cause and effect related to the way energy/matter transform probably doesn’t objectively qualify, even if it does subjectively.

    2. Kevin Peter profile image70
      Kevin Peterposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think 10 reasons are required for this to be proved. This universe is not under the control of we human beings. Then start thinking who controls it. Nothing in this universe could be changed by us. Then there is no doubt that there is a supernatural power that controls all of us. It is none other than God.

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Why does it have to be controlled by someone? Control issues?

      2. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Then, God is to blame for all the bad things that happen. It is none other than God.

        1. Klush profile image59
          Klushposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Do you UNDERstand God?? smile

        2. 59
          wheatbaybayposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          From the beginning of time, humans have rebelled against God and his teachings. In the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve rebelled against God and they got themselves thrown out of Paradise. Adam and Eve in my opinion had it made they could have lived forever and everything was provided for them. One act of rebellion allowed evil to enter the world. The "bad things" that happen in world or results of humans rebelling against God. We have turned our back and as a result we must pay the consequences. The devil is to blame for the bad things that happen and now his time of rule is coming to an end soon. Jesus will restore the world to the Paradise that it once was and it will remain that way forever and forever.

      3. Zelkiiro profile image85
        Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Logical Fallacy Spotted: Assuming that something must control the universe.

    3. Don W profile image83
      Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Can you define "excellent" in this context. What makes a reason excellent?

      1. gmwilliams profile image86
        gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Okay, superlative!

        1. Don W profile image83
          Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          The reason I ask is because it's so subjective. There may be a reason you consider excellent, but is meaningless to me, and vice versa.

          The thing I recognise in people who believe in an omni-benevolent god, is that they take solace from that belief, in ways they don't seem able to from a naturalist world-view. I think that's one of the reasons god-belief is so persistent, the Christian brand in particular. The idea that there is an infinitely powerful, all-knowing, all-loving being that wants to help us; that our worldly existence and all it's suffering isn't the end of our journey but only the beginning; that all suffering will be wiped away someday if we choose it to be etc. Those are powerful sentiments. The naturalist view that we are the arbiters of our own existence; That when we die we cease to exist; That life is simply the accidental by-product of natural processes etc. These views have their own merits, but I'm not sure someone living in material conditions that causes them suffering every day, can take solace from them in the same way. I don't know which set of views is the truth, but I do know that human beings suffer in ways that other animals don't because of our self-awareness.We are aware of our existence, and aware that we are suffering, which creates a whole different layer of suffering on an existential level. So one of the reasons I think a benevolent god exists, is because human beings need one to. Not sure that's an excellent reason, but it is what it is.

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Don, now you've gotten down to the meat and bones. Some need a God therefore he exists. The human mind is an amazing thing and when it needs solace to survive it creates that illusion for survival.

            Everyone wants a wonderland after death, but just because we want it doesn't mean we get it.

            Being self aware can suck if you don't stay in the now. Imagining the future and all the horrors it may bring with life after death is no picnic, so we focus on the now when we catch ourselves drifting.

            Further, humans are not the only self aware creatures, while the others may not be as self aware they are still aware. But all animals know they are suffering.

            1. Don W profile image83
              Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Yes, and I think it's a real possibility that evolutionary biology plays some part in the mechanism of god-belief.



              I think the god concept is the distillation of hope (the ability to believe in a positive outcome regardless of material conditions). It is every 'good' thing conceivable in one. Asking why some people have a need for god, is like asking why some people need to hope.

              For some people god is their ultimate source of hope, their only source of hope, depending on their circumstances. I see non theists decrying belief in god, but I don't see them offering a source of hope or solace that matches the concept of god.

              Hopelessness, commonly known as despair, is not conducive to survival. So the ability to hope could have evolved as a defence mechanism, a form of mental resilience against the psychological trauma of self-awareness (knowledge that we will die). An adaptation that aids our survival.

              The Christian concept of god is one of the clearest articulations of unadulterated hope there is: god is perfection.  There literally couldn't be anything better. That's why I think god-belief is here to stay, at least for a while. Of course, none of that says anything about whether god exists. It's entirely possible that our ability to conceptualise a perfect being, is some kind of fuzzy perception of a deity. Then again it might not be.

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Wether we need it or not is irrelevant. The super-ego can and sometimes does create a simulation of the particular version of God we were either taught or need.

                You think your particular version of God is perfect as does the Muslims. Who's to say? We have all kinds of claims of God helping people with both little and big things, but no evidence to support those claims. No evidence that prayer works. No evidence that any God exists at all. It appears the only place he is exists is in the minds of those that are afraid of death and those that want to cheat death.

                1. Don W profile image83
                  Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Have I professed a belief in a particular god? If so, please point out which 'version' of god is supposedly my version.



                  Yes, human beings tend to be afraid of death, and tend to dislike to suffer. As such belief in an eternal life without suffering is almost inevitable for some people. If the concept of god did not exist, we would have to invent it. Rightly or wrongly, the idea of god brings with it solace for lots of people. You don't like god-belief, okay, what's your alternative? What does your world view offer that brings solace to those who may be anxious about all the things their god-belief addresses for them.

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Reality.

                    You appear to be comfortable with the illusion, but the problem is people profess that the illusion is something I need as well. No thanks, I choose life. We are here for a good time, not a long time, so have a good time, the sun can't shine everyday.

                2. 59
                  wheatbaybayposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  So what do people that don't believe in God what do you believe? Just look around you there are things that show that some higher intelligence created them. One of them is the human being. There is no way that we just evolved from some monkey.

                  1. 0
                    riddle666posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    The same old argument(all complex things need creation, but god is too complex to be created), don't you wonder who made this god thing? At least aren't you ashamed to make a contradictory statement?

                    Looks like you haven't yet evolved. Leave it man, we are humans now.

                  2. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    You're right we didn't evolve from monkeys. But we do have a common ancestor with chimps and other apes. Every bit of evidence we find points to that, from genetics to the fossil records.

  2. 0
    Beth37posted 3 years ago

    You forgot to finish the sentence.

    "Name 10 excellent reasons why there is a God or benevolent universal being... so that a group of Atheists can spend the next month, via this thread, telling you that you're either a liar or a fool."

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      I meant NOT to finish the sentence.   I really DON'T care if atheists disprove me.  That is their prerogative. I will not argue as to EACH, his/her own! 

      I KNOW that THERE is a God, Universal Being, Higher Consciousness or whatever you elect to name the Supreme Being or Consciousness.   The goodness in life is EVIDENT that there is a God consciousness permeating our being and essence.   All of us co-exist with HIM/HER.   
      http://s4.hubimg.com/u/8005183_f248.jpg

      Beth, atheists can ARGUE all THEY want.  I will NOT RESPOND.  They can ARGUE ad infinitum.  Each has a right to his/her opinion.  I have NOTHING against atheists.  They have a right to their ethical system as traditionalist religionists and spiritually inclined people do their respective ethical systems.

      1. 0
        Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

        It's smart not to argue the point. It doesn't seem to go anywhere. smile

      2. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        http://www.truthbeknown.com/images/racktorture.jpg

        "WONDERFUL EVENTS THAT TESTIFY TO GOD'S DIVINE GLORY"

        1. Disappearinghead profile image89
          Disappearingheadposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          You cannot differentiate between God and those who claim to be followers can you? If your local garage did a poor service on your car would you blame the vehicle manufacturer?

          1. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            The picture above differentiates them perfectly.



            What does that have to do with anything? Could you have created a more irrelevant example?

            1. Silverspeeder profile image60
              Silverspeederposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Stalin didn't believe in god and he had millions killed in the pursuit of his dictatorial dreams. Does that make all non believers dictatorial killers then?

              1. JMcFarland profile image91
                JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                not any more than it makes Catholics with Mustaches (hitler) genocidal supremacists.

                1. Silverspeeder profile image60
                  Silverspeederposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Absolutely. So why judge god for what men do?
                  Belief in god has nothing to do with
                  what individuals
                  with power bestowed by man upon them do.


                  The early popes ( and even thise today) for instance had nothing to do with glorification of god it was more about their own power and worship by followers.

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Sorry, Atheists don't judge any God. We do however sometimes judge people who tell us a God will be angry with us if we don't do and say as they do.

                  2. JMcFarland profile image91
                    JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    We don't judge god.  We see no evidence of god.  All we see are people that claim to follow him.

                    Actually, no I take that back.  If we're looking at specific god claims, like the god of the bible for instance, we CAN actually look at the actions claimed by that specific god.  It doesn't mean that we accept that they were DONE by god or that they demonstrate that god exists, but we can look at its attributes, actions and behavior and make a determination based on those criteria. 

                    I lost your point on the early popes.  Did they glorify themselves or glorify god?

      3. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
        Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        No you do not know that. You believe it. There is a big difference. To say you know there is a god is a lie.

        1. 0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          No, you don't know that. You believe it. There is a big difference. To say that person is lying if they consider their experience proof in the existence of God is not only the height of hypocrisy; but it almost makes it appear as if you think you can crawl into their head and examine their thoughts. You were there at every step of their life, from this disembodied vantage point. But, how is that possible? Unless....oh my god, you do exist. Why, oh why, are you denying it?

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            One simply can't know for certain a God exists as there are too many variables. One can think and hope he exists but the know thing is something they say in the company of fellow believers so they can help persuade themselves that they are correct. All one has to do is ask how they know. It's really no different then someone saying they know bigfoot exists, without ever seeing or touching him.

            1. 0
              Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I'm confused. I thought there was only one God. Are you implying there are two?  Both of you can get into other people's heads and know what they think, what they have seen....essentially be omnipresent, omniscient and all that? Are there more out there like you?

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Emile, I can tell you one can't know for certain something exists that can't be seen, heard, touched or demonstrated. One can think and hope, but not no.

                1. 0
                  Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I, personally, don't feel comfortable telling billions of people they are liars. Nor do I feel comfortable claiming that most of our ancestors are liars. I do feel comfortable saying I don't believe what they believe. But, you and I are both operating within the parameters of belief, just as everyone else is.

                  1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
                    Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I have no problem pointing out to people when they are lying to themselves and to me. Why do you have a problem with it?

                  2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                    A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Sometimes, it is absolutely necessary to face up to reality. In the case of religion, the entire population of the planet and it's future are at stake here.

                  3. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    You personally don't have to, but for some reason you don't mind telling me when I'm full of it.

                    The rest of us, those who don't mind telling someone they are delusional will gladly take care of that for you. cool cool cool cool

          2. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
            Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            No. They can not know with certainty. They do not know with certainty. And if they thought about it for a minute they would see that. I'm not saying god is a lie, though it likely is a fiction, I am saying you know there is a god with certainty is a lie, just as saying you know with certainty there is no god is a lie. You can not know either way with certainty. You can only believe one or the other to be true. I don't put faith in either concept.

            1. Don W profile image83
              Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              When is someone entitled to say they know something, rather than believe it?

              1. 0
                riddle666posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                How can anyone "know" a "thing"?

              2. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Apparently when slarty says so.

                1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Projecting again? lol..

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Is that what I do? You said it, so it just has to be so. lol

                    Truce? You don't get me, and I obviously don't get you.

              3. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                When they have evidence. I know I have a dog because others can see, hear and feel him.

                Should I say, I know there is a unicorn in my back yard?

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Did you get another one?? I thought Julie's dragon ate it

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Well, that explains why I haven't seen him in while.

                  2. JMcFarland profile image91
                    JMcFarlandposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Fluffy will be happy to know a new snack is available.  Thanks for the tip.

                2. Don W profile image83
                  Don Wposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  How do you know others can see, hear and feel your dog? By your standard, to know that you need evidence that others can see, hear and feel your dog.

                  1. 0
                    Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Because when my dog barks everyone in a ear shot jumps. When I'm walking others stop to pet him. I put his dog food in a bowl and it disappears. I pick up his stool a few times a day and I have the evidence in my green bin if you would like to see it.

  3. qeyler profile image80
    qeylerposted 3 years ago

    Beth, beautifully put!!!!

    1. 0
      Beth37posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks. Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt.

  4. Zelkiiro profile image85
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    So, those 10 reasons you were talking about...?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-qSNxL5WHQ

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      No, I want YOU to elaborate in YOUR OPINION, NOT MINE, the 10 excellent reasons why THERE is a God or if you like, a Benevolent Universal Force or better yet, a Higher Consciousness?  C'mon, I am waiting......waiting......ELABORATE, man!
      http://s3.hubimg.com/u/8005606_f248.jpg

      This is supposed to be a SYLLOGIC DISCOURSE, not an exercise in BANAL RHETORIC.  WAITING for YOUR RESPONSE-1,2,3............. You are an intelligent man, I would LOVE to hear YOUR point!

  5. 0
    Emile Rposted 3 years ago

    I don't know about 10 excellent reasons; but, I would think one reason it would be nice to have a benevolent universal consciousness would be that there was so much more to find out beyond the reality we are aware of.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Totally concur with your premise.

    2. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Sure, it would be nice. A lot of things would be nice.

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        That is what is incredibly cool about not making up one's mind without all of the facts.

        1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
          Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Well said. You're an atheist then?

          1. 0
            Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            lol

            No. If I were an atheist, then I would believe the facts were in already. I would read more into a fact I did have, in order to pretend it supported my conclusion. And then I'd get on a high horse if others didn't agree with me. Because, only my conclusions would be valid. Because I'm just smarter than anyone who comes to a different conclusion. I just know it.

            No. Atheism wouldn't suit me. Agnosticism is the life for me. smile

            1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
              Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Well you could have said that about Christians and you'd have been just as correct.as a general rule.  What you are fighting is not atheism, it's stupidity and bad reasoning. I'm with you on that one.

              There really isn't much difference between an agnostic and an atheist. Hard atheism is as impossible to defend as fundamentalist theism is. No one knows for certain one way or the other and those that tell you they do are lying to themselves as well as everyone else.

              What we are seeing though, and the reason for all this nonsense is this clash between militant fundamentalism in religion and militant atheism which has developed to counter it. Agnostics, atheists and nonmilitant Christians are collateral damage in this war, along with logic and rationality in many cases.

              And that is really a shame because moderate Christians have as much to lose in the rise of fundamentalism as we atheists and you agnostics have.  That being freedom of thought.

              There is a reason we don't want to live in a theocracy where creationism is taught in science class, science is subdued, and government is run by one religious cult or the other. There is a reason for a clear separation between church and state. We atheists and you agnostics were not allowed to exist only a few years ago and in some theocratic countries even today atheism is a crime punishable by jail time or even death.

              If we are going to be living together we need to protect each other from each other, and that's what the fundamentalists want to reverse. I'd say we have reason to be at war, and the moderate christian and the agnostic should be joining us. We have no reason to throw logic and rationality out the window, but unfortunately wars tend to bring out the worst in people.

              Regardless of whether we all think the other is delusional, the important thing is maintaining the right to think as we like on a personal level without it affecting jobs, causing segregation,and without others forcing their beliefs on us.

              The price of freedom is the right to tell others what to think. Fundamentalism does not adhere to that rule. Until it does or until it succeeds in creating a theocracy like those of the middle east our little war of words will rage on in forums like this one and in the real world.

              1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Very well said. +1

              2. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I know it could be said about Christian fundamentalists. Not much difference between the two, judging by behavior patterns. Atheism doesn't offer freedom of thought, or haven't you read through the forums?

                1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh but it does. The problem is not everyone in these forums knows what they are talking about from either a philosophical nor a scientific position. Most have poor debating skills and can't articulate what they want to say effectively.

                  There are assholes even among agnostics. They exist among any segment of the population and are always a let down when one sees one of their own in that light, so to speak.

                  And as always it seems that people ascribe way to much as being part of atheism.. Atheism is not sciencism, it is not a belief system, it is not materialism, it is not anything but one specific thing: Lack of belief in god or gods. I know atheists that think science is nonsense too, and I know others that are Zen Buddhists.

                  The baggage each individual brings with their atheism is their own, it is  not inherent in the philosophical position itself.

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    If I didn't know better, I'd think I had just been called an asshole. (Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get an iphone to accept the word asshole?)

                    It's ok though. I've labeled myself that a few times myself.

                    You do realize many are here to discuss, not debate? Those whom you accuse of not being able to articulate well are, sometimes, more of a victim of the other party's  inability to comprehend that they are simply attempting to participate in a light and friendly discussion, and have no interest in attempting to sway you to their opinion; countering point for point as if philosophy were a competition. It's all simply thought. They have a right to think what they want. You can certainly look down your nose at their thoughts; but isn't that tantamount to attempting to censure their thoughts? Doesn't the very act go against belief in the idea of freedom of thought?

                    Either way, no one has accused atheism of being sciencism (is that even a word?) although many of the more devoutly antagonistic atheists do appear to worship the words of any scientist who goes out of their way to belittle belief.

                2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Why would it? Atheism is simply a lack of belief in the supernatural.

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Just as theism is simply belief. How your actions are affected by belief, or lack of it, is another thing, entirely. Outspoken atheism when it goes out of its way to search out and belittle those with belief is an attempt to inhibit freedom of thought. No way around it.

  6. stclairjack profile image79
    stclairjackposted 3 years ago

    1) it seems a handy default setting for things we cannot explain, until we can explain them,.. And since we haven’t explained EVERYTHING yet, then why not keep it, eh?

    2) human beings love to insert order into chaos,.. Its what we do,.. Where monkeys see a lot of different fruits to eat,.. Humans give them all names, and assign them a place in the kingdom, phylum, class ORDER,.. Blah blah blah,… if you don’t understand how having a benevolent creator myth/belief does that, refer to rule 1.

    3) assuming that you’ve made the intellectual leap to the existence of a benevolent creator,.. Then one wonders why he/she/it needs to be benevolent,.. Well,… we like to have a fighting chance in our short little lives and in our collective if only slightly longer existence,.. We want the big bright shiny Omni-present being to be a good guy,… and we want him to be OUR good guy. (we also want him to hate the same people we do, but that comes later, wait for it)

    4) AND,… if you’ve made the leap to the spiritual side of the fence then you probably, most definitely believe there is bad in the world, and you have devised an (almost) equally powerful being responsible for that,.. Lets call him satan,.. Has a nice ring to it… because humans seek balance,.. See rule 5

    5) humans seek balance,.. Its part of the order thing,.. So as we experience the bad luck instances of life (or the results of our own stupidity cleverly re-packaged as bad luck),.. We like to pray to a benevolent Omni-present loving god thing to deliver us from the wicked machinations of this evil devil satan that has attacked us through no doing of our own. (I love the word “machination” … it's pretty.. Like a southern baptist sermon with a dictionary hiding under the bible)

    6)we like to have excuses for what we do,.. And so its rather handy to have 3000 year old texts that we can tote around in our pockets to justify what we do. Its one of the BEST bi-products of organized belief,.. Text…. So if you want 3 wives,.. Its in the bible,… if you want to stone your wife to death,.. Its in the bible,… if you want to own another human being as your slave,… its in the bible,… if you want to hang your neighbor for having slaves and 3 wives,.. Its in the bible too,… JOLLY GOOD!

    7)organized religion, catholic christianity in particular, has given us the hospital system, the college education system, the public works programs that our governments are based on today, the charity system that we know today, the study of medicine, genetics, math, astronomy,… but hey,… who’s counting… did I mention the arts?

    8) an organized structured belief system is quite possibly the ONLY reign on human ambition,.. It has given us our collective conscience,… don’t delude yourself into thinking that we all, as humans, have an IN-BORN sense of right and wrong,.. We don’t. else wise our definitions of right and wrong would not be so WILDLY  different from continent to continent… I seriously doubt that there is something unique in the water in north America than in Australia than in Italy to explain these differences.

    9) Catholics build the prettiest churches,.. But then so do the Buddhists,.. And so do the Muslims,.. And I’ll even give props to a few protestant temples of the WTF ever out there,…. So we like pretty buildings,… hows that bad?

    finally, I’m not really arguing 10 reasons for the existence of god,… I’m trying to say that its not a bad thing,… in spite of the hangings and burnings and persecutions on all sides,.. Besides the crusades and holy wars,.. The narrow mindedness and stunningly open mindedness,.. Religion has done more good than harm,…. It has raised cave men to the heights of civilization because it united them,.. All together in a common belief and common goals…. So,….

    10)…. Why not?

    1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
      Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Because we know better now. Carrying water to your house was a great way of getting water before we had wells. Should we continue carrying it just because it was the best way we had at one time?  Hardly.

      Religion is dying. It is a slow process but it will eventually be replaced by logic and reason. That's not a bad thing., It's just evolution.

      Now you may find yourself having to carry water long distances again someday, but once you are free of religion there is never a rational reason to go back. Fantasy explanations are not explanations at all. I don't see your point in wanting to say they are good enough if we don't have real ones. What is wrong with accepting the fact that there things we do not know yet? Why lie to ourselves?

      1. stclairjack profile image79
        stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        being the ever crass realist,... i hope to high heaven (pun intended) that your dream of logic and reason becomeing the gold standard of the human thought proscess becomes reality,... however,... my last foray out into the world even on so short a trip at to the village grocery (9 miles from my abode FYI),... yielded little evidence that logic and reason were dominating the world,.. on the contrary,... i think we're being savagely overwelmed by sleep pants and texting,... "common sense" has become a supper power its so uncommon.

        i find it puzzling that you think i was promoting the keeping of deep mystical superstitious beliefes,.... on the contrary,... i always tend to ere on the side of logic and reason while defering to others thier right to believe as they wish.

        i myself am a former missionery babtis who now goes to mass when i can,... i adore the rich history and traditon of the catholic church,.. it pleases me personaly to associate myself with it,... that does not mean that i insist the world convert or die (we seem to have only two faiths that still require such,.. extreme muslims and the westboro baptists),.. or that i even believe blindly in every tenet of my churches teachings,... but i take her as a whole, both the good and bad parts,... we most all of us wind up chosing one beliefe system or another in life,... weather we call it "religion" or not.

        1. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          http://www.truthbeknown.com/images/racktorture.jpg

          1. stclairjack profile image79
            stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            you already posted this artistic rendering of mans idiocy and proof of reason #6,... get a new picture,... I'd like one that illustrates #3 if you would,... perhaps the apostles playing poker (in the spirit of the dogs playing poker tapestry)... see what you can do for me. ;-)

            1. A Troubled Man profile image60
              A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              There are so many atrocities to choose from showing the very same "rich history and traditon of the catholic church" you adore. Which do you prefer, pictures of witch burnings, the Crusades, perhaps, or maybe the more recent ones in Rwanda, for example?

              1. stclairjack profile image79
                stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                ok,... I admitted already to the gross stupidity and cruelty over the years within and in the name of faith,... but I also haven not to throw the baby out with the bath water,... so dig up some pictures of homeless shelters, hospitals, science labs, schools, orphanages,.. please?... just to balance out the pictures of witch burnings,... and while we're at it,.... I was COMPLETELY UN AWARE THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WAS BUTCHERING PEOPLE IN RAWANDA,.... seriously?.... i'm pretty sure I already pointed out that there are only two well known religious groups that STILL ascribe to the "convert or die" theology,... muslims and westboro retreads,..... a butcher will cherry pick what ever dogma suits his desire to butcher,... and honest butcher will at least say "I did it cause I liked it".... but they are both butchers,.... Joseph Mengele tortured human beings in the NAME of SCIENCE,... colored soldiers were unwitting Guiney pigs for medical experiments in the name of SCIENCE,... shall we post pictures of that as well????

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Good luck with this one dealing with ATM

                  1. stclairjack profile image79
                    stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    thank you,.. i'm sure i'll need it! lol!... however I enjoy a good row, so in the same spirit as I allow belief,.. why not, ha!

                2. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  That has never stopped, it continues today and it will continue tomorrow. It is an institution that has well outlived it's usefulness and needs to be dismantled.

                  Here's a thought. Let's kick out all the clergy and replace them with doctors, nurses and teachers, and take all the wealth and resources the church has accumulated over the years and use it to provide for homeless children.



                  You've got me baffled. How do science labs and schools balance out witch burnings?



                  Yes, the church supported the government and clergy members who were committing the genocide. They tried to encourage all of their followers to embrace the new way.



                  Ah, so active complicity makes not a guilty party?



                  Yes, that is what he himself professed.

                  Former Auschwitz prisoner Alex Dekel has said:

                  "I have never accepted the fact that Mengele himself believed he was doing serious work – not from the slipshod way he went about it. He was only exercising his power."

                  It would appear that the power given to him by the Nazi party is what stoked him to madness.



                  Sure. But, the Tuskegee Syphillis experiment, along with Mengeles butcher shops, have led to what is known as the Office for Human Research Protections. In other words, the atrocities you cite have been dismantled and stopped for ethical reasons.

                  Yet, the Church goes on.

                  1. 0
                    Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    I think his point was that you seem intent on showing images of the witch burning and the atrocities committed by the church. He was asking you to try posting pictures showing the good things the church has done

                  2. stclairjack profile image79
                    stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    "Here's a thought. Let's kick out all the clergy and replace them with doctors, nurses and teachers, and take all the wealth and resources the church has accumulated over the years and use it to provide for homeless children."......... you do realize that the first doctors nurses and teachers were clergy? yes?....... and you do realize that the church wealth is wrapped up in the possession of art,.. which the church spends millions to preserve so that the world might still have it in the future,... I fail to see how we might auction off centuries old frescoes on ebay,.... and you do realize that catholic charities account for the vast majority of social work in 3rd world countries?... that catholic clergy and religious are killed every day because THEY are on the front lines in the war on poverty disease and genocide world wide?

                    the WW2 era of genocide was the product of eugenics, a theory that the church officially denounced and has roundly criticized ever since,... the catholic church hid, shuttled and protected more jews within the walls of Vatican city than Oscar schindler saved while profiteering from them,..

                    but more importantly you seem to be borderline obsessed with tearing things down,... the prized activity of a little boy who has not learned how to build with his Legos,.. so he knocks down the towers of others,...

                    so rather than accomplish anything yourself you will tear down the accomplishments of others by using their failings as weapons against them,...

                    Churchill was a drunk,.. but he saved Britain,.. Kennedy was a louse, but he began a march toward freedom and civil rights that Johnson would continue, himself a womanizer and profiteer,... Nixon was a paranoid childish ass,... but he opened up china and got us out of Vietnam,... Clinton was a flawed but lovable guy who gave America back its self image, and made southern cool again,... ......do you wana just GIVE BACK the prosperity of the 90's because your pissed Clinton got a BJ in the oval office?

                    once again I ask you,.... do you understand the concept behind the old adage re; babies and bathwater?

        2. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
          Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Well you were promoting keeping religion. Even though you do cherry pick what you like and dislike about it, just because it has been of some benefit to man kind.

          I think it may have been beneficial when it was at its worst so to speak. When the Catholic church ruled there was a uniformity. People knew what to expect and what was expected of them.

          And that regardless of the fact the underbelly of the church has always been corrupt. Priests fornicating with nuns, producing children found in the 1200s in the walls of a monastery in France during a reno.    Child molesters, Nazi collaborators, Womanizers. The Borgia' and other corrupt popes The list is as long as that of any segment of the population over the centuries.

          You look out your window and see a lot of stupidity and not much logic. I agree. But that's how evolution works. It is often a very slow progression with a small segment of society slowly changing the masses.

          Each of those dumb kids texting etc, know more about logic and technology then at any time in history. They may still be illogical at times, But not in exactly the same way their forefathers were. Each generation is seen by the last as different and taking the wrong path with their new ways..

          There is a document often sighted in which the the narrator tells us the kids are all going to hell in a handbasket, It is so relevant to what is said today that it is a shock to find out it was written in 500 BCE.

          Religion is part of the evolutionary process. It has served us but it's usefulness is nearing an end. With constantly more atheists being born every day, it stands to reason that all forms of religion are weakened.
          Canadian kids were surveyed in the 1960s. 14 percent identified as atheist. in 2011 or 12 the survey said 52 percent of kids in high schools now identify as atheist. Many western countries are seeing the same numbers.

          In the 1950s the number would have been close to 99 percent Christian, and a few decades earlier than that there were no atheists to speak of. At least no one would admit it.

          I certainly have no issue with you believing what ever you like. I was merely pointing out that what ever good religion has done it is still all a guess or a speculation passed off as the truth. The evidence for that statement is in the fact that each person has to cherry pick what they can stomach and what they can not, what they want the truth to be and what they reject.

          You might not like dogma. I can understand that. You might not like:  "deep mystical superstitious beliefs." But how do you know those are not part of the truth? You don't.

          Where do you get your religious facts when you can accept or reject the ones given to you by your traditions?

          In other words, who are you to go against the strict teachings of the truth according to your religious tradition? In the old days the inquisition had the answer to that. Any deviation was heresy.   Are you certain they weren't right?

          If they were not, what do you really have to base your belief on? What else were they wrong about? Most people don't even take the bible as literal truth. What else is left to base their faith on? Themselves? Their own interpretation? Isn't that a little egotistical and prone o being mistaken?

          So religion practiced today seems to be based on nothing but a feeling that there is a god, and your own preferences as to what the truth about that god is or is not.

          No wonder the Catholics had inquisitions. No wonder no one was supposed to read the bible. As soon as it began to be translated and  distributed by the protestants, it marked the end of a unified religion and indeed the beginning of the end of the religion itself.

          Is this a cry to go back to Catholicism and rebuild the religion that ruled the western world in Romes place for almost two thousand years? It's a good argument for it. But no.

          Why lie to ourselves that there is anything factual about Christianity or it's god? It's all feeling, predisposition, desire and speculation. Are these really where you expect to get answers?



          Is relying on the answer that feels right, always what turns out to be the right answer? No. And I could tell you why that is if you are interested.
          Does even deductive reasoning always come to the right conclusion? No. But it has a higher track record if the rules are followed than feeling does.

          Deductive reasoning follows rules of logic that force one to say that some conclusions are irrefutable.

          However, inductive reasoning in the form of the scientific method can and has refuted and falsified perfect deductive conclusions.  QM, for example and the behavior of atoms and subatomic particles have proven to defy common sense, and yet using inductive reasoning we can make perfect predictions about it and make use of it.

          What will man kind be in 1000 years? 20 thousand? A million? A billion? Where will our science bring us if we don't destroy ourselves? Can we imagine it? No.

          Can you imagine Christianity is still around in 10 thousand years? No.

          1. stclairjack profile image79
            stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            now THAT was a fantastic read that i just now got back around to catching up on,.... and weather you realize it or not, i suspect you and i agree on more than we dissagree,...

            and yes,... i think religion, in one form or another, under what ever name,... will still be around as long as the human race is,... we created it and its the ONE thing that we seem unable to let go of through the millenia,....

            religion,... or beliefe system,... code of conduct,... moral code,.. social construct?..... no matter what we call it or re-label it,... it'll be around as long as we are

            because its a uniting force,.. and a tool of power,... the single greatest unting force and tool for power in human history,... no other weapon has been developed that can touch it,..... if you drop nuclear weapons and the survivors still pray,. tell me which tool was more powerfull in the long run.

            its our favorite toy,... and we, as a race, will more than likely keep it.

            1. 0
              Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              jack, you'll find discussions with Slarty incredibly educational, enlightening, and enjoyable.  He's well-educated and thinks deeply.  He also rarely gets ruffled, even in a discussion with someone with whom he disagrees. 

              You'll often find yourself nodding in agreement to a lot of what he has to say, and he's never disrespectful. 

              Since I have an idea of how/what you believe since we've talked before, you'll find him to be a wonderful conversation partner as I have.

              big_smile

  7. ro-jo-yo profile image85
    ro-jo-yoposted 3 years ago

    In order to know the truth, one has to seek. Only you can seek for yourselves, others cannot seek for you.
    Deuteronomy 4:29 But if from thence thou shalt seek YEHOWAH thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul. 30 When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee, even in the latter days, if thou turn to YEHOWAH thy God, and shalt be obedient unto his voice; 31 (For YEHOWAH thy God is a merciful God) he will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.
    Note: The true Hebrew name of our Creator is YEHOWAH, replaced by the word LORD in most bibles.

  8. gmwilliams profile image86
    gmwilliamsposted 3 years ago

    You are all disgressing much.   Please answer the question at hand: name 10 excellent reasons as to why there is a God or if you will, a Benevolent Universal Presence/ Entity/Energy.  Just answer this simple question, please do not go off on tangents here!  Thank you ever so kindly.  Have a Nice Day!

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry can't do it. I could name 10 crapy reasons why I wish there was a benevolent God, would that satisfy you?

    2. stclairjack profile image79
      stclairjackposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      can you give a reason for joy.... or a reason for happiness?..... peace?..... god is a concept, a belief,... not a noun as we so often mistake,.... why does love exist?..... I don't know,.... but I believe it does... and I can even believe in it, despite having no proof to point to of its existence at times.

      the only good reason I can give you,... because we NEED to think there is something greater than us,.... not because there actually might BE something out there in the cosmos that really is,... but because we NEED TO BELIEVE there is.

      humans create things,.... its a "who made who" scenario..... did god make us, or did we make him,..... this co-dependent relationship seems to predate our collective thoughts about it.

      1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
        Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Well said.

        However, love is rather an easy one when you see how it works: http://slartyobrian.hubpages.com/hub/Lo … at-exactly

        Peace? That's easy too. The laws of conservation tell us that all atoms tend toward their lowest possible output of energy. This causes entropy, and entropy facilitates change.  It also causes the atom to merge with others, often different from itself which causes a new substance and a new lowest possible output of energy for the new configuration..
        A consequence of this on our level besides our level of existence itself is that all conflicts demand resolution due to entropy. All conflicts therefore result in a new order and consequently a new lowest possible output of energy and peace.

        Emotions like joy exist as a signal. They signify a need met or desire fulfilled, in the same way pain signifies an injury to the body. The body has needs that require filling too like procreation, hence our desire for sex.

        Of course that ties into why we love and what love is, and it also ties into the laws of conservation. In fact all these things are intimately related.

        Now, some people do need to believe in a higher power and others do not. Some start out believing and lose the need. Others acquire it. The need for a higher power is not as simple as it may seem. For some it is the need for purpose, or for what it can do for them, like give them eternal life, or like allowing them to see dead loved ones again, seeing that justice is done to those that hurt you and that they don't get away with it for ever, and that there is something that knows everything, even if we don't, and might be able to pass it on to us.

        If these needs are resolved by other means, that make you not need them any more, then they are obviously no longer needs. In other words there are several ways in which a need can be fulfilled or resolved.

        We don't really need to believe any of it. But we do want to, which makes it a need in a subjective rather than objective way.

        As you point out, I think we asked the wrong question from the beginning: It should not be who created this, it should be something more like: How does all this work? How did it all get here? A god may still be the conclusion for some, but at least it would not be assumed in the question.

        I think we did make this mistake in the manner of our inquiry exactly because we are creative and assumed that since we simply manipulate what is handy and we did not create the raw material we manipulate nor ourselves, there must be super human intellects or one superhuman intellect that did,.

        But the idea seems to have evolved. A lot of pagans were ancestor worshipers, spirit worshipers, nature worshipers etc. The gods came later.

  9. Zelkiiro profile image85
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    If God does exist, we really should be doing everything in our power to kill him.

    "I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things." - Isaiah 45:7

    The origin of all evil? Why shouldn't we kill it?

  10. Zelkiiro profile image85
    Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago

    I've found it! I've found a perfect image representation of our lord, Jesus Christ!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fw2RPeujDV0&t=03m24s

  11. antoniouriarte profile image58
    antoniouriarteposted 3 years ago

    lol

  12. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 3 years ago

    Saying you don't believe anything is like saying there will be no wheather today OR  I don't have an attitude. OR I don't have a temprature.

    1. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Yes Jerami, we understand (not believe) that you operate entirely from a belief system and have no concept of how to understand things instead of believing in them.

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        If you only understood half as much as you think you do.
        That would be a wonderful thing.  But ...  to "believe " that to be true is truly a fanatical misconception.

        1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
          Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Bur we don't. Tell me. Is it impossible to choose not to believe something? We do it every day. We selectively choose what to believe and what not to believe. Would you not agree?

          So what would be so hard to understand about choosing not to believe any idea? And what would be so impossible then to choose not to believe anything? It is just a natural extension of what you do everyday but instead of being selective it is all inclusive,.

          I know it is hard for you to understand because we have all been told that faith is valuable. But you have to understand that to an inductive thinker it is poison.

          1. Jerami profile image78
            Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            All I'm saying is ... to Not believe there is a God  IS BELIEVING that there is No God.

            To say that you do NOT believe anything, can not be true.   ,  You know everything that you profess to be true ....   The fact is that you believe that you know the things that you think you know.

            I guess that when we feel the need to argue, we argue about the silliest of things.

            1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
              Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              "All I'm saying is ... to Not believe there is a God  IS BELIEVING that there is No God."

              No it isn't. How can I say there positively is no god? I do not know that and you don't either. I do not have to choose which idea to believe. I lack the belief that you have. You have it I do not. That is not the same as saying I believe there is no god. I do not believe there is no god, I do not know. But neither do I believe that there is one.

              I do not hold the belief, as you do, that there is a god. Let me make this clear: I lack something you have: belief. You have it I do not. It really is very simple.

              There is more than the option of believing in a positive sense and believing in a negative sense, There is not holding a belief either way. The other would be to believe everything I suppose.

              I wouldn't recommend it.

              An opinion is not a belief if there is no faith involved. Usually an opinion is based on some evidence or other. But I can have an opinion without being married to it by belief.

              Now, would you agree or not that belief and faith are intimately related? If not we aren't even working from the same definition.

              .

              1. Jerami profile image78
                Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I'm not exclusively talking about believing or not in God. 
                I am speaking in general terms about believing anything about anything.
                Was it even you I was first speaking to.   Someone said "I do not have any beliefs about anything", "either a thing is true and I know it to be true, or it isn't"     
                All I ever said was you do have beliefs.    There are things you believe to be real and things you believe are not real.   When all is said and done ...   All we have are beliefs.
                I believe that I am real and many other people believe I am real.     But for all I know ...   I am a figment of my imagination and of those that believe that I am real.

              2. 0
                Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Interesting point. In that you think it supports your position. It basically explains Jerami's also. Simply because faith, in the context you appear to be using, refers to belief without proof; but you have confined proof to strict parameters. You have omitted the possibility of proof in a philosophical sense. You want to limit it to a scientific definition.

                Even scientifically, I'm not sure much is done without a degree of faith.  No one can follow the chain of evidence back completely enough to verify the veracity of every link that has led us to the level we currently work on. We have faith in the method, which allows us to continue to build on information already agreed to be evidence.

                We have to accept some things on faith or, maybe, we accept all things on faith. Because we can't move forward without trust and confidence. And once we have placed that trust and confidence in anything, it is belief. Because, if you follow the train of discovery to its beginning, in any endeavor, everything first began with an assumption. You might consider the evidence overwhelming in support of that assumption, but that still means you were operating on a belief. It doesn't matter how many agree to place confidence in anything. Consensus does not equate to truth. It equates to group acceptance of a belief.

                1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Very reasonably argued. Thank you.

                  I'll wait until tonight to answer as I don't time this morning.

                2. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
                  Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  "Interesting point. In that you think it supports your position. It basically explains Jerami's also. Simply because faith, in the context you appear to be using, refers to belief without proof; but you have confined proof to strict parameters. You have omitted the possibility of proof in a philosophical sense. You want to limit it to a scientific definition. "

                  I am a philosopher so I do accept both deductive and inductive evidence. But no. You have a it a little wrong here. I'm talking mainly about belief always having degrees of faith. Faith does not require evidence and in fact religious faith is demanded. The religious are not supposed to ask for evidence or proof. You are to have faith. That faith as I said before gives one the illusion of certainty.

                  Belief can be had without any faith involved but that is rare and the word is loaded so it is best to avoid it if you mean an opinion which has no faith behind it but is a speculative opinion based on evidence.   

                  "Even scientifically, I'm not sure much is done without a degree of faith.  No one can follow the chain of evidence back completely enough to verify the veracity of every link that has led us to the level we currently work on. We have faith in the method, which allows us to continue to build on information already agreed to be evidence."

                  We are all in the same boat, as you once said. Science knows that there is no way to have absolute proof about many hypothesis. They are speculative ideas that are tested and retested. Often other scientists want to prove you wrong, so they do the tests as well and publish their papers.

                  Peer review is a big part of science. Even today people try to prove Einstein wrong. That's what science does. It has no faith because faith is when you think you already have the answer. Belief in science is not productive. You have to keep trying to disprove your own hypothesis.

                  If you can't falsify it and no one else can and it makes good solid predictions about the way some aspect of the universe works it might become a working model and be elevated to the status of theory. Some theories become known as facts when the results of experiments that verify the theory just become overwhelming. Like in the case of Relativity, thermodynamics and evolution to name but a few. 

                  But in science as opposed to religion there is no last word. Everything is up for re-examination, even facts.

                  Truth is relative to conditions. As long as those conditions remain the same the truth of those conditions is absolute. A fact remains a fact until the conditions change which makes it a fact. For some facts to become other than fact the laws of physics would have to change. For facts about humans and their behavior and their relationships conditions change all the time so the facts change.
                  The truth of the matter changes.

                  So new evidence coming in may point to a condition not accounted for before. That can have the effect of changing or modifying a fact. Or even prove it wrong.

                  And once proven wrong that's the end of it. In science you can show validation a million times but you never have absolute certainty. The only time you have certainty is when something is proven wrong, and that only has to happen once and everyone will toss it.

                  There is a lot of speculation in science. A lot of hope. But faith is guarded against because it blinds you to what may be wrong with your hypothesis. Science talks about probability rather than absolutes.

                  "We have to accept some things on faith or, maybe, we accept all things on faith. Because we can't move forward without trust and confidence. And once we have placed that trust and confidence in anything, it is belief. Because, if you follow the train of discovery to its beginning, in any endeavor, everything first began with an assumption. You might consider the evidence overwhelming in support of that assumption, but that still means you were operating on a belief. It doesn't matter how many agree to place confidence in anything. Consensus does not equate to truth. It equates to group acceptance of a belief."

                  Right. Consensus as in philosophical agreement does not guarantee truth. There are even philosophical deductive points that can not be refuted and have to be considered  logically true. But it does not mean they are true. It only means that if all of the variables of the argument are fact then the argument must be true. But remember that that the earth being flat was such an argument before we knew that the variables of the argument were not true.

                  But deductive logic only goes so far. Experience is the best teacher. So natural philosophers, later to be called scientists, started using inductive reasoning. Experience, observe, test. Verify tests and make sure they are repeatable by anyone. Anyone competent of course. 

                  When we sailed around the world we knew it wasn't flat, And when we learned about gravity we found out why we do not fall off. And when we learned about space we discovered that the people on the "underside" of the world were not upside down. Up and down is relative to conditions.as well as perception.

                  Yes we all have to make choices every day. We are forced to. We try to make the best choice we can, But we do not know the exact outcome of a choice or always even how we came to make that particular choice. Do we have to have faith that our choice is correct? No. It is a hit and miss game every day. Do we think we will be right? Sure, we hope so.

                  But instead of belief, what we can do, and some of us always try to do, is work out probability and take our best guess. My guess is that paying the electric bill will provide me with the best odds that the electric company will leave my power on. The probability approaches 100 percent, in fact. But even that does not guarantee that my power will remain on in the event of a power outage.

                  Belief can be turned into assessing probability, for which no faith is required, just a best guess in the tricky parts.

                  What about conviction? You said we have to have confidence in our choices and that confidence comes the belief that we are right. Right?

                  Am I confident that I have a lot of answers? Yes. Through faith? No. Through finding formulas through deductive and inductive reasoning. Through using logic. But if I fail to use it correctly then I know I can be wrong. I have been many times. I have had to abandon complete belief systems many times.

                  It is not easy admitting you were completely wrong to others. But often if you have faith that you are right, it is much harder to admit it to yourself.

                  So I know that my beliefs never helped me. My faith was always wrong and shattered. So how do you avoid the heartbreak and inner turmoil of shattered faith? Not allow yourself to have any.

                  The best tool I found for that for myself is inductive as well as deductive reasoning. No faith is required and in fact it is harmful to the process. It colors your results. Hence, believe nothing because very little is absolutely certain. You can only deal in probability when you do not have all the facts.

                  Tentatively accept facts as long as they remain facts. Drop any idea that you know has been falsified through logical or empirical means. Be open to new evidence.

                  In other words use everything you can to get information and fall to nothing. Wait and see when you don't know.

                  None of this requires any degree of faith. It works or it does not. Following this formula does work for me. It may not work for everyone.

                  1. 0
                    Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                    Concise is apparently not your forte. I'll read this through tomorrow when I can see it better. Iphones aren't really the thing to use when reading what amounts to a hub. I will probably respond. Since, although you appear to think you are giving yourself a wide berth; it appears to me, after a quick review, you are in the same boat as the rest of us. But, like I said....damn, that's a long post. I could easily have missed the clincher that seals your argument.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I understand a great deal more than you believe, Jerami. And, I know that's hard to believe when all you have is a belief system to provide you with answers, albeit wrong answers.

          1. Klush profile image59
            Klushposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            He's happy with his long-cherished religious illusions. He likes them over a scientific one. smile

            1. Jerami profile image78
              Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              And you believe your statement although you have no proof.
              I do happen to believe in science. However the same thing happens in the scientific community as does in the religious world.   Science can prove that a thing does exist while they often disagree upon its cause and/or effect.    The evidence can be only what it is. The hypothesis is not always a scientific fact though many might think that it is.
                  Just like in a jury trial. Just because the evidence appears such that a jury may convict the person on trial, he may in reality be not guilty.   
              Just like in the O.J Simpson trial. The evidence was what it was. Though he was pronounced Not Guilty; he might well have been.   In the world of public opinion, the Jury is still out. 
              Just because stuff is declared to be evidence it means very little. It requires proper presentation in order to convince a jury to come to the conclusions you desire.   The defense presents the same evidence from a different prospective hoping for a different outcome.  In reality our decision does not change what the truth is.  General consensus does not change the facts though it can alter our perception of it.
              Facts do not equal truth.  Though many of us often “believe” that it does.

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Well said.

              2. 0
                Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Great point

              3. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Yes Jerami, that is the problem you "believe" in science, but don't understand anything about science. Huge difference.



                That is pure baloney, religion has never shown anything to exist that it claims. Scientist never state a hypothesis is a fact. Where do you get this nonsense?



                That is all irrelevant. You are not making a point. Trials and their outcomes have nothing to do with science.



                It means the difference between what is real and what is not real, hence it has great meaning.



                Science does not work on general consensus nor has it anything to do with trials and juries.



                Yes, they do. 



                No, YOU believe that, we don't.

            2. 0
              Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              I see him as incredibly open minded and not prone to attempt to belittle because of a difference of opinion. Not something you find often among the ranks of atheists and theists.

              1. 0
                Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Hey Emily, I agree with you!

                1. 0
                  Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  OMG!!! I got to screenshot this!!

    2. 0
      Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Do you ever wonder why that is so difficult for some to grasp?

      1. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
        Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Perhaps because it is not true?

        1. 0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          No, that's not it. smile

      2. 0
        Rad Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        That's a very good question. One which you should be asking yourself. Why do some people not belief in God despite the years of childhood indoctrination and the endless threats of eternal hellfire?

        1. robblev profile image58
          robblevposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          The same reason people don't believe in santa clause despite the years of childhood indoctrination and the endless promises of eternal presents.

        2. 0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          ARGH rad man. You've substituted one belief for another. I guess once a believer, always a believer. Eh?

      3. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Yes I do.   Some people who proclame to be the brightest have the most dificulty understanding the simplest of things.     Yes we did have some wheather today, and yea i do have an attitude (I think mine is pretty good compared to some)   and yes we all have a temprature and we all believe something.  To believe we don't believe anything is a belief.

        1. 0
          Emile Rposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I agree. I think belief is inextricably tied to sapience.

    3. Slarty O'Brian profile image86
      Slarty O'Brianposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      No it isn't. If you have a temperature that's a fact.
      No need to believe those things at all.

  13. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 3 years ago

    Thank you very much  Rad Man and Emile ...   I'm speachless ..

 
working