jump to last post 1-50 of 51 discussions (209 posts)

God? Why?

  1. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    All of "modern" man's gods have been imagined. Why would this contemporary god of christians, jews and muslims be created any differently?
    Qwark

    1. Cagsil profile image59
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      It wouldn't be created any differently. It wouldn't have been created at all, if mankind didn't come upon it by accident.

    2. profile image0
      SirDentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      First thing I have to say is that the Muslim god is not the same God of Christianity regardless of what anyone says.

      The Bible says that the laws of God are written on the hearts of all men. Everyone knows it is wrong to murder, steal, lie, etc. . .

      As far as imagining God, mans imagination cannot truly imagine anything close to who God really is. He cannot be understood.

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        As far as imagining God, mans imagination cannot truly imagine anything close to who God really is. He cannot be understood.

        And that's why all the problems. Nobody understands God.

        1. profile image0
          SirDentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I agree with part of what you wrote. Nobody understands God that's for certain. The trouble started when people stopped following God. If I ask my son to do soemthing around the house, I shouldn't have to explain why he should do it.

          Sorry for getting off topic qwark.

      2. Beth Solomon profile image60
        Beth Solomonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God, the God of Abraham.  Each of these groups took radically different paths, but it seems the same God spoke to each of these groups in different ways.

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          ..alledgedly "God spoke to each of these groups in different ways." That is but an opinion based upon the corrupted words of the "alledged" writer.

      3. LiamBean profile image87
        LiamBeanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        That right there made anything else you have to say about it irrelevant. Islam traces it's origin's back to Abraham. Abraham is also a Biblical (as in Christian) character. They even use the same first five books of the bible (the Pentateuch) as Jews and Christians...just translated into Arabic. So in essence it not only is the same god it's the exact same god.

        Attempting to claim that an "enemy" does not believe as you do is the same sort of trick Fascists used with the faithful masses. "They are not one of us so killing them is OK."



        If that's the case how do you know "he" is not the same god the Muslim's worship?

        1. aguasilver profile image87
          aguasilverposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Well if you read the Quran as well as the Bible, it's evident to anybody that the god mentioned in the Quran cannot be the same God who inspired and gave us the bible, there are too many contradictions between the Quran and the new covenant, plus the 'typesetting' instructions written as the last word in Revelations tell us specifically not to add nor take away from the words of the book.

          The Quran was written 600 years after Christ, and 250 years after the bible was settled into a canon of consistent works.

          1. LiamBean profile image87
            LiamBeanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Really? You read Arabic? Because, just like the Torah, any reading of the sacred texts requires you to read it in the original language.

            I said the bible, not the New Testament. The New Testament is a recent, as these things go, addition to the bible. The Old Testament is the same book Muslims read. In fact Abraham, husband to Sarah, is the father of both Jews and Muslims.

            I don't think Revelation belongs with the rest of those texts. It is apparently evident to researchers that the John of Revelation is not the same John as in the Gospel. Further it is evident that Revelation, unlike all the other books of the New Testament, was written roughly 60 to 120 years later.



            I know that. The "canon" also left out at least as many books as it left in. Many that were quite popular at the time.

            They continue to surface from time to time and are referred to as the Gnostic texts, though I think that's inaccurate. There is a Gospel of Mary, A Gospel of Peter, there's even a Gospel of Judas.

    3. LiamBean profile image87
      LiamBeanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      The short answer is this iteration is a little better thought out than past ones. Unfortunately, not that well thought out.

      1. profile image0
        sneakorocksolidposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Do you know your own name?

        1. LiamBean profile image87
          LiamBeanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Another brilliant show-stopping post from sneako.

    4. carolegalassi profile image78
      carolegalassiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Look around, open your eyes, look at creation, do you think this is all imaginary or is it real.  It is real and created by a real God who lives.  God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, He never changes or wavers.  Modern man has created gods of there own,in the likeness of what they want to see.  Man's gods are empty and never fulfilling and in the end will get you nowhere, just depressed, alone, and unfulfilled.

      1. cheaptrick profile image74
        cheaptrickposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Just a suggestion.You should check out Solipsism or the subjective nature of reality(thats a book).Might change your mind.

      2. profile image61
        (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        There really is no indication in nature that demonstrates creation by gods. Nature keeps demonstrating that it can completely operate entirely on it's own, and has been doing so since it's own inception.

        No, "Made in Heaven" stickers or tags on anything. Just nature doing it's own thing, sans gods.

    5. bukan profile image61
      bukanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      The God is one, we take it as our religion purpose. smile

  2. profile image0
    sneakorocksolidposted 7 years ago

    Because he is and we have proof and we're not going to tell you what it is.

    1. topgunjager profile image60
      topgunjagerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      i thought god wants you to spread the word?smile

    2. xiao_kang profile image61
      xiao_kangposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Lame answer! Wouldn't surprise me if that's what you all believe.

  3. Valerie F profile image60
    Valerie Fposted 7 years ago

    Who says there's anything contemporary about an infinite God?

    1. samsbr profile image61
      samsbrposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I dont think so any contemporary about am infinite God. In every religion God is one we people called them in different names seen as different visibility.

  4. profile image0
    sneakorocksolidposted 7 years ago

    And we're off!

    1. goldenpath profile image80
      goldenpathposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Ditto that, good buddy!

  5. aware profile image70
    awareposted 7 years ago

    i m building my own god. when im done it will be the tallest god idea on earth .

    1. Cagsil profile image59
      Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Cool. lol

      1. Stimp profile image79
        Stimpposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Will it have steps, cuz I'm kindda small.

        1. Cagsil profile image59
          Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          No steps involved! big_smile

  6. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    I ask a serious question and I get silly answers..why is that?
    There is no scripture in any monotheistic belief which factually defines this god thing. Man created the abstract concept so that "it" exists as a metaphysical superpower which can only be imagined and can only be defined in terms of conjecture and opinion. What is it about man that makes him so needy and easily led? ...anyone?
    Please offer me fact not opinion.....ty :-)
    Qwark

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      the scriptures say, we've been created as God's image.
      Maybe he was a loser.

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this
    2. aka-dj profile image79
      aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      That's interesting? You ask a SERIOUS question, and get silly answers. Now you know how we feel when we post "serious" questions, and members on your side of the divide do likewise.
      As for man imagining god, you are absolutely right. Man does "conjure up" god(s), a dime a dozen.
      But that's because they like religion. These are all false impostors.
      The REAL God, the ONLY God, actually had to reveal Himself, because He could not be made up.
      He's the One Who spoke to Moses in the burning bush. The One Who parted the Red Sea, the One Who sent Jesus to show us Who He is, and What He is like. He is the one Who created all our known universe, and the one Who, "WAS, IS and IS TO COME." The eternal One.
      Oh, but I know that you don't believe a word of it, so this thread will go the same as all the others. Debate, with no end rsult. No-one will give ground. Oh well, it keeps us typig.
      hmm

      1. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        keeps you typig ??
        lol

        1. aka-dj profile image79
          aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Typig, typo! See, I need all the practice I can get. Maybe a spellchecker will help, but that would be a bit irresponsible of me. Have to think for myself, you know! lol

        2. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I asked for "fact" not opinion...what do I get? opinion.
          Anyone like to try who thinks he can offer a credible answer? So far, same trite monotheistic tripe. Still getting the "silly" responses. Is there anyone who can offer a serious and factual response in reference to this weakness for god things in man's life?
          Qwark

          1. tantrum profile image60
            tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            the scriptures say, we've been created as God's image.
            Maybe he was a loser.

          2. aka-dj profile image79
            aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            See what I mean? You make my point for me.
            Moses was NOT a real person? He was just MY "opinion"?
            Did someone mention the word "silly"?

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Pls, to this point I have gotten nowhere. There seems to be a dirth of believers who own an oz of intellect, responding. I withdraw my question. All who respond seem to be followers. Sycophants who give credence to my view that man has also created this contemporary god thing with the inane and quite insane "hope" of gaining immortality. A portrayal of infantile sillyness. I wonder why I asked. Finis

              1. fatfist profile image83
                fatfistposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                The god concept is identical to the boogie-man. It must exist in a society because humans are rowdy and always out of control. If the government can give tax relief (free income) to the charlatans who brainwash the public, then hopefully most of the public will be in a pseudo-zombie state. Then the charlatans can step in and get their monthly dues, just like the mafia. Summarily, the government can step in, increase taxes here and there and get their part of the share.

                Think of it as the food chain. Society as we know it cannot exist without this boogie-man.

                1. Cagsil profile image59
                  Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, it could. But, requires a NEW way to think, which is productive and adds to each person's unique value to society.

                  This would help fulfill the unanswered question most look for-Why does Mankind exist?

                  Some would harp about each person having an individual mind?

                  How ever, would not negate a NEW way of thinking. It would enhance it.

                  If people followed their own individual conscience, instead of using 'another' view- and actually depended on their conscience for guidance, then the world would be a much different place.

                  If people followed the absolute of morals of mankind, and didn't vary of course, then Mankind would be completely changed.

                2. aka-dj profile image79
                  aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm sure the first disciples (apostles) would disagree with your fanciful (fairy tale) supposition that Christianity was started by some government(s) to control the masses. How ignorant a claim is that. Honestly!
                  Those men ALL died martyrs deaths OPPOSING the current poloitical/religiuous establishment of their day. OH, and let me add, all for NOTHING, because Jesus is still in the grave????
                  Now you see why RATIONAL doesn't even apply to you, because of the ignorance you display.

                  1. fatfist profile image83
                    fatfistposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    (I'm sure the first disciples (apostles) would disagree with you)
                    And this is the point I bring up dj, if there are no disciples, there is nobody to disagree. The issue or argument here is not about what I say; it's about what "YOU" say. You want people to AGREE with you.

                    (your fanciful (fairy tale) supposition that Christianity was started by some government(s) to control the masses.)
                    Your choice of words here is paramount to the discussion at hand. No matter how hard Christians try to pretend their Jesus lives in their minds, sooner or later their tongue will lash out the truth: FAIRY TALE! Jesus is a mythical character; a fairy tale; story-book reality. The only evidence for Jesus is in the new testament itself. A circular story book fairy tale is what qualifies it as a myth.
                    Christianity was Constantine's boogie-man and brainwasher to get his nation of zombies to fight wars. Just like Jesus came down and told G.W. Bush to tell the nation they need to go to war.

                    (Those men ALL died martyrs deaths OPPOSING the current poloitical/religiuous establishment of their day.)
                    Non-existent entities cannot possibly die.

                    (Now you see why RATIONAL doesn't even apply to you, because of the ignorance you display)
                    Ahhhh, now you are changing your tune. Before you were parroting that there is NO rational, only 'RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT' -- your exact words. All of a sudden you are trying to sound intelligent for the sake of getting people to agree with you. You and your herd of Christians had nothing intelligent to say earlier. What has changed in your life now that makes you think you can even qualify as an intellectual? Are you leaning towards atheism perhaps? I knew the articles in my hub would have an effect on you. The fact that you even 'peeked' in there speaks volumes. Unlike you and your sheep here on HP, I'm not here to get hub scores or fans. So don't think you are dissing me by removing your fan status. Ahhh, the passions of the heart.....priceless!!!

                    What is rational is that the Christianity you speak of is a MYTH. And I already defined what a myth is. Yes a myth HAS evidence - and plenty of it. But the evidence is ALL within the myth - that's where it ends. That is what rational is dj, not RIGHT RIGHT RIGHT as you've been parroting.

                    You say 'Ignorance?' - YES. It's Christianity's BIGGEST asset! This is what is eating you up inside, my exposure of the nonsense you parrot.

              2. aka-dj profile image79
                aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                So why ask the question? Absolutely.You get answers you don't like, and run.
                Never did get an answer about Moses. I guess you don't know.
                Perhaps you are Googling it as we speak, to get some "history" on him. At least I hope so.

      2. JBeadle profile image69
        JBeadleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Do you have any issues with a God who at a moments tantrum can flood the entire world?  How sinful were all the babies who drowned?  But it was ok because God let them into heaven after water filled into their lungs and they died.  How again is that different than Muslim matyrs?  They get to go to heaven for their sacrafices as well.  I can't believe in a God who has anger management issues such as a literal Christian god does.

        1. Flightkeeper profile image79
          Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          God did all that and has anger management issues as well? God's such a stinker.

          1. JBeadle profile image69
            JBeadleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            When I'm really busy I get grumpy sometimes as well... Maybe I should cut him some slack?  I do have beliefs so not really trying to complain too much about differing beliefs.  Not too much.  But it is a few hours from football pregrames so...

            1. Flightkeeper profile image79
              Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              There you go, God was in between football games when those terrible things happened.  Eternity probably has a much busier schedule.

        2. profile image0
          SirDentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          So now you blame God for destoying evil? Men were evil continually during that time. Any children born would have been the same way as they were taught. You should also know that God gave everyone a way out. All they had to do was board the ark before the door was sealed or build one for their families. Noah warned them for 100 years and they didn't listen to him.

          As far as the tsunami goes, God warned that it would happen. Earthquakes, famines and floods in various places will be increased. It is because of man's insistence that God leave us to our own devices.

          1. profile image61
            (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            So, you are claiming that we were warned? To whom? When? Why did it take the world by surprise and why did all those people remain in the position to be swept away by it if they had been warned?

            You are making a seriously extraordinary claim that many people would be quite upset hearing about, those whose family members were washed away, for example.

            Please clarify your position.

            1. profile image0
              SirDentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Luk 21:11  and there shall be great earthquakes, and in divers places famines and pestilences; and there shall be terrors and great signs from heaven.

              1. profile image61
                (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                While I appreciate the quote from scriptures, I am quite familiar with biblical references, especially those that are generalized doom and gloom quotes of Armageddon. Hence, we can in the past, present and future acknowledge that biblical quote to any and all natural disasters.

                It really doesn't mean anything.

                I was hoping you would answer in your own words.

    3. cheaptrick profile image74
      cheaptrickposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      IMO.you slyyy rascal you.You are clearly addressing the "Finite versus Infinite"paradox.Ya know."Which came first" etc.You are Stimulating though...

    4. LiamBean profile image87
      LiamBeanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Therein lies the problem. Who decides what is fact?

    5. jaehead profile image61
      jaeheadposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      In Genesis scripture states that God created Man in His image(IMAGEO DEI).I think the proof is always in the pudding-man being the pudding.The fact that man is incurably religious, always trying to find a way to transcend self proves without a doubt that there is some ONE responsible for his here-and-now.How every individual articulate that veries in people groups.The dangerous thing is for one not to know the ONE who is responsible for BEING or REALITY as we know it.Oh! the thing that make him so needy and easily led isn't a thing.If it is a THING that is responsible for his being here, then there is your problem-man is a thing trying to discover other things.Maybe that's why most of us have this proclivity towards MATERIALIS AND SECULAR HUMANISM.

    6. Jewels profile image81
      Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      There is a woundedness within every human that is not permanently filled by another human being. This feeling of emptiness and longing for something completely nurturing is an innate wanting.  Unfortunately it has become common for people to look outward to a personal 'god' to fulfill something which can only be found inwardly.

      The word hope leads people to see truth in another person's experiences of a godly encounter, but until they have one of their own, there feels to be a lost or missing piece of themselves.  This feeling of lack makes for neediness.   Never ever will this sense of wholeness in self be found in an external presence. A sense of wholeness can be mirrored but it's a temporary experience until you yourself become whole.  It is an experience that is to be encompasses in the very core of every human being.

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

           Jewels,  When you say something ; you have got a way of saying it; that don't quit. Bravo

  7. Doctor Roy Sylvan profile image59
    Doctor Roy Sylvanposted 7 years ago

    I can't be certain, but I do not believe the lord is my shepherd because there is a high probability I'm not a sheep.

  8. profile image0
    lynnechandlerposted 7 years ago

    God! Why are you people up so early and already at this? Give it a rest.

    1. topgunjager profile image60
      topgunjagerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      some of us live in another time zone=) what about you? what are you doing here so early?smile

  9. profile image0
    lynnechandlerposted 7 years ago

    Just getting my day started. Good morning to you!

  10. fatfist profile image83
    fatfistposted 7 years ago

    And don't get me started on their dangerous extremist view of truth they call: ABSOLUTE TRUTH. It is their god-given license to hate, rape, slavery, genocide, wars, and to do as they please in any society they dominate. As evidenced in their bibles and scriptures. Scary stuff...

  11. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Worldwide, over 20k+ differing protestant sects have appeared since Luther. All interpret the "bible" differently and all claim they are interpreting "it" right and are the "true" christians.. Yet catholicism, adamantly claims they are the only "true" christian sect.
    Protestants "cults" are increasing in number every day
    By definition they are all "cults."
    Pls define "true christian" for me and tell me why there are so many differing interpretations of the bible.
    Pls don't offer opinion. If you cannot explain using logic and reason, don't reply.
    Ty...Qwark

  12. Valerie F profile image60
    Valerie Fposted 7 years ago

    Here is a fact:

    Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all prohibit worshiping anything that has been created, especially anything that is the work of human hands or imaginations.

    If God were invented by people, it would follow that it would be sinful to have any Faith in God.

  13. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Logic is a process. The end product of the logical process is an opinion regardless of how an opinion was formed. An opinion by any other name is still an opinion.

    1. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      ..absolutely not! Logic is a science that deals with the rules and tests of sound thinking and proofs by reasoning. Proofs rule out "opinion."

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          woke up. came over to turn this thing off, Let rephrase my previous statement so it can be better understood.

        Logic is a "scientific" process which deals with rules and reasoning analyzing the evidence presented....
        forming an opinion as to what that evidence presented points to.

      2. aka-dj profile image79
        aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Evidence requires interpretation. Scientific process requires assumptions. Becausew God (or the "god thing" as some of you call it) does not fit the criteria of science. You have to start with the evidence of/for God.If you interpret that evidence in the negatve, then you use that assumption to proceed with your "logic", God does not exist. This then demands all subsequent information revealed HAS to reinforce the negative assumption.
        All that is going on here is our two interpretations of the evidence and the subsequent assumptions differ. But it's the same logic/rationale.
        Believers do the exact opposite, and interpret the evidence in the affirmative, and make the assumption that God DOES exist, and all subsequent evidence/information will fit that paradigm.
        So, for me to be accused of being WRONG, automatically dictates that you are right. Technically, neither can be "proven".
        One critical difference between believers and non, is we have a confirming (or many) experiences to reinforce our stance. Evolution has NEVER revealed itself to me, but Jesus has.
        Yes, I am a simpleton, and I love it. Blessings.
        PS. I have never promoted or preached hate. Just thought I'd throw that in for free!

  14. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    We do have knowledge of why man is religious in the understanding of two things. The "lizard" brain response of fight or flight. and the religiosity of soul described by Jung who though the mind is hard wired to try wiggling out of our responsibilities in this way, rather than really examining the self.
    That's my take on it. smile

    1. aka-dj profile image79
      aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      This is an idea that I just can't get my head around. You say we are "hard wired" FOR religion, (supposedly an evolutionary flaw--not sure who decided it was a flaw?)and then you guys (nonbelievers) give us a hard time for being "natural, normal, everyday garden variety homo sapiens.
      So, in effect, you are reverse evangelising us BACK to some unnatural state YOU call normal?
      Sorry, but I truly don't get it. hmm

  15. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Good day  Earnist  havent seen ya for a while.  are ya feeling better?

  16. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    I'm an American by birth. I speak and understand English. Logic is as I defined it. Logic, reason and truth are the antithesis of ALL religious beliefs. There can be no REASONABLE conversation to deny that. All that can be offered is conjecture.

    1. Allan Bogle profile image81
      Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Qwark, I dont have the time to argue against your assertion at the moment but I can send you this link by the philosopher Alvin Plantinga who has spearheaded the charge that belief in God is properly basic: http://crowhill.net/blog/?p=4607

      This puts the discussion within the academic arena that I think you want an answer from. Of course whther you agree with it is another point but it will at least provide a suitable counter for discussion to continue.

      1. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this
        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Allan:
          I know that I, nor can anyone provide proofs regarding this abstract concept: "god." "Proofs" don't exist. You didn't get that message from my comment?
          My goodness, I think you may not have read my response to the end. Let me re-iterate:

              "Today he believes in a metaphysical entity which can't be  known, can't be defined and can neither be proved or disproved. An abstract concept wouldn't you agree? All that can be offered up as a "proof" of "it" is opinion or conjecture.
          Platinga is no brighter, no more knowledgeable than you or I when it comes to "knowing" this god thing. He is just another simple human creature "scratching" around trying to figure out that which only exists in human imagination. He is as intellectually immature as the rest of us.

          Why did you not consider the above in your response to me?
          Why?..because you are an easily led "follower." There is no other reasoned response you can offer for your belief in an unreasonable supernatural divinity.
          No disrespect intended, just a "reasoned" response as I see it.
          I am one of those "simple" human  beings "scratching," just like you and Platinga.
          Qwark

          1. Allan Bogle profile image81
            Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Qwark I did indeed read your post and my response is not indicative that I didn't. I just do not think it was something that you wanted to read. First of all, your assessment that it is unreasonsable to believe in God in based on your personal opinion. We disagre on this matter, it is reasonable for me because of the evidence that leads to the conclusion there is a God.

            Take Antony Flew, for decades he has been the foremost atheist in the field of philosophy, yet his conversion to deism (which stunned the philosophical community) was based on his Socratic search for truth, a process that is very interesting to read (you can google it). He thought it reasonable, you do not.

            There is no evidence that God does not exist, there is though evidence that billions of people believe in Him, that evidence is left behind of the times, people that have made claims to have experienced Him both physically (Jesus) and afterward. There is no disputing this, whether you think it was valid or that it was a case of mass hysteria involving billions of people over millenia is up to you to decide. You must decide if all those people were suddenly irrational and delusional and that you are correct.

            As far as continuing my defense that belif in God can be properly basic and rational I quote the philosopher William Craig who states that, "Man has an innate, natural capacity to apprehend God’s existence even as he has a natural capacity to accept truths of perception (like “I see a tree”). Given the appropriate circumstances—such as moments of guilt, gratitude, or a sense of God’s handiwork in nature—man naturally apprehends God’s existence…. Neither the tree’s existence nor God’s existence is inferred from one’s experience of the circumstances. But being in the appropriate circumstances is what renders one’s belief properly basic; the belief would be irrational were it to be held under inappropriate circumstances. Thus, the basic belief that God exists is not arbitrary, since it is properly held only by a person placed in appropriate circumstances."

            Millions throughout history have believed in Christ without studying philosophy, and they have not made irrational decisions.

            in your own posts though I see that you have a propensity to abandon the clear parameters you want your responses from other people to be. You claim that man has a "genetic propensity for a belief in the supernatural which is a result of the processes of natural selection." You have not answered not given me evidence to support this. You claim that the "majority of the population is intellectually unevolved." you did not answer that or provide evidential criteria for that either.

            What evidence are you basing this on, or are you wanting to see the world that way?

            1. Danny R Hand profile image61
              Danny R Handposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              You have yourself a fan!

            2. profile image61
              (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Has some new evidence come to light recently? What evidence do your refer exactly?



              Yes, apparently he changed his mind due largely in part to his introduction to Intelligent Design. Since he was a philosopher and not a scientist, perhaps he couldn't tell the difference between ID and Creationism.



              There is no evidence in a great deal of things believed to exist and you must apply that logic to everything that has been purported to exist or nothing at all. One simply does not cherry pick this or that from all the invisible entities, they must accept or reject them all.



              There is evidence that billions of people don't believe in the same god as you, too.



              No, they weren't "suddenly" irrational and delusional, it took generations of people grooming gods to get to the current versions.

              At one time, Zeus and Thor were believed to exist by a great many people.

              1. earnestshub profile image87
                earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                The Greek gods were more direct representations of the human condition though. smile

                1. profile image61
                  (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Perhaps, but they were still gods believed to exist and now fall under the category of myth.

                  I haven't seen anything that would distinguish these mythical gods from the current versions other than their purported characteristics and deeds.

  17. terrowhite profile image60
    terrowhiteposted 7 years ago

    God! yes, it is there somewhere in teh infinity. where no one can reach. When god made us he created everything beforehand. So, taht people will not find anything difficult to survive. When something has taken birth it has to end as well..smile

  18. aka-dj profile image79
    aka-djposted 7 years ago

    Too much waffle about (a god) that is "metaphysical,conjecture, unknowable" blah, blah...
    Let's get to the one central figure,Jesus Christ.He IS GOD IN THE FLESH. Study His life, clims and teachings and you will come to no other conclusion.
    Untill then, the "fantasy" and "myth" rhetoric only comes from the unbeliever(s).
    The most highly intgellectual, educated and logical person on the planet can still br stupid, irrational and wrong. NONE of us are any better or above another.
    As I said, I am content being a simpleton. And apparently illogical and irrational, as claimed by some you here. Welcome to the human race. big_smile
    PS, @ fatfist. I stayed a fan 'cause I don't dislike you.Nor anyone else for that matter. I can leave if you want me to though.

  19. Allan Bogle profile image81
    Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago

    Qwark: "All that can be offered up as a "proof" of "it" is opinion or conjecture."

    But this also includes your opinion. Your argument that Plantinga has no evidence for such a view also is applicable to you. Where is your evidential criteria that shows proof that he is wrong?

    For example let us look at just your one post to me; Plantinga's argument is that people always believe in a certain way in which beliefs are "properly basic." Look at your comments below:

    "It just means, to me anyway, that the majority is intellectually unevolved."--Means to you, this is a sentiment, a feeling, not evidential criteria. Furthermore, the majority will disagree with you and the burden of proof is on you to support your view with factual evidence.

    "I tend to believe that there has evolved over the past 30 - 50k years a genetic propensity for a belief in the supernatural which is a result of the processes of natural selection."--You argue this point a lot in your threads here on the forums, yet I am pressed to ask you what evidential criteria do you base this on?

    "As man became a more sophisticated creature, his imagined gods followed suit. Scientific progress has enable man to explain away all that subjugated ancient men."--Once again show the factual evidence that science has done away with God.


    Now I understand your assertion that we as Christians dont have 100% proof God exists. I grant you that. There is no question that what I exercise is faith, if the proof for the existence of God was verifiable then you and I would not be having this debate. On the flip side neither can you prove God does not exist, no experiemnts, not the slightest hint of factual evidence. The difference between believers and atheists in this regard is that believers argue they have been handed down a template throughout the ages involving many individuals and the intervention of God. We have something that explains it, atheists do not.

    You know, I have studied the various proofs, the arguments, the debates between a plethora of individuals on both sides but when you imply that each one of must make sense out of what we have experienced, what we believe, etc then you are dead on Qwark.

    My path is to believe what that God is real and that He sent hs Son to us for salvation. You have chosen a different path.

    I am reminded of Pascal's quote that in the end "All our reasoning surrenders to feeling."

    1. Mark Knowles profile image61
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Lets be honest here.

      You have absolutely 0.00% proof.

      Just exactly how have you studied this non-existent proof?

      Why can you just not be honest and say that you believe through faith alone? Is there something wrong with that?

      1. Cagsil profile image59
        Cagsilposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Hey Mark,

        I've tried to explain to most, in the simplest way possible but, what they refuse to admit is that they are WRONG!

        It's not a shock, but to be expected.

        No one of any religious belief can be 100% secure that what they think they know is true, but that they can 'hope' or have 'faith', in what they think is true.

        However, I would like to point out that there is NO WAY to fool your own individual consciousness, conscience and subconscious, that there is a REAL god type entity looking out for us.

        Like you said- 0.00 proof, can not result in 100% no doubt within the consciousness, conscience or subconscious. It's an impossibility!

        1. Allan Bogle profile image81
          Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          First of all casgil, your posts are the among the most contradictory here. You have not only failed to live up to your self-described mantras judging rational behavior but clearly violate them, sometimes in the same post. Your postings are a miasma of self-defeating statements, contradictions and bizarre revelations.

          No way that my "consciousness, conscience and subconscious" can be fooled? you apparently believe you have mastered the gift of visualizing the internal machinations of your fellow man's inner being. Obviously your assessment is simply delusional.

          My innermost being tells me there is a God.

    2. profile image61
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      While you are certainly correct that no god or any other entity that may reside beyond nature cannot be shown to NOT exist, this reasoning applies to everything that cannot be shown to NOT exist. Unfortunately, in that regard, it really can't be used as an argument.

      For example, one cannot demonstrate that aliens have NOT visited earth and have NOT abducted people. One cannot demonstrate that ghosts don't exist.

      And while all you say about not having evidence to demonstrate these things don't exist is correct, one could possibly argue for example, that a tsunami that wiped out a quarter million believers who most likely all prayed to be saved from death were left with their prayers unanswered. One could argue this is indeed evidence to the non-existence of a god.

      There is also the small issue of your statement, "handed down a template throughout the ages involving many individuals and the intervention of God." I'm not so sure you clarified your point to stand as an argument, because essentially that statement is pretty much the same as any other statement of faith and not of evidence.



      Again, that would appear as a statement of faith, and that it could be misconstrued as a statement that faith in what one believes would outweigh any evidence to the contrary, if such evidence presented itself.

  20. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    @Allen   BEST articulation I have heard. 
     
            and  A MEN

  21. habee profile image92
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Aka, Christianity might not have been started to control the masses, but it has certainly been used for that specific purpose throughout history, especially in medieval Europe.

    I believe in God, Christ, and spirituality, but I'm not a big supporter of organized religion. There is a difference.

    1. aka-dj profile image79
      aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Call me dj. Aka stands for "also known as" big_smile
      Yes, I'm with you on every point. However, the arguments here make out that religion is the ONE and ONLY, almighty control mechanism used.
      That's where I disagree. Man uses politics, wealth oppression propaganda etc to do all the controlling "he" wants. I admit, that in the dark ages it was the primary one, but still not the ONLY one.
      Besides, the christian religion bears no resemblance to the "way" taught by Jesus. A point skirted by every one (bar none) of the unbelievers on these forums.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image61
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Au contraire, dj. I will happily point out that your judgmental behavior regarding "test driving your wife" and numerous other "moral standards" is one of the many things that persuades me your religion is false and you do not really believe.

        Jesus would never have behaved like that. Pity you do not seem to understand that it is people like you who do the best job of pushing us away from the bible and the christian religion. I mean - if you cannot behave like jesus - why should anyone else? sad

        Thank you for that. I really appreciate you for helping me to see how valueless your belief system is - no one follows it - they just claim to and point the finger at everyone else.

        1. aka-dj profile image79
          aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          How did Jesus behave?

          1. Mark Knowles profile image61
            Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Doesn't really matter how he behaved does it? Let's put it this way - if he behaved the way you and many of the other believers do, I am convinced I want nothing to do with it..... wink

            Thank you.

            1. aka-dj profile image79
              aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              How can you make a comparison, and then say it doesn't matter???
              How can you compare my "behavior" to His, if it "doesn't matter"?
              Sorry,but that's illogical and irrational. The two pillars of you paradigm. hmm hmm hmm hmm

              1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                No sweetheart. It is academic. Jesus is dead. It doesn't matter how he would have behaved. You are here. I watch your behavior as a demonstration of what you think jesus would have done. You are the one claiming to be a follower. You are the ones I have watched over the years. I have made my decision based on what I observe from your behavior.

                You guys seem to think jesus was condescending and judgmental.

                Capiche?

                1. profile image0
                  SirDentposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Where is the body?

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Good point. Logically - he did not exist then. DOes this mean you are coming around to my way of thinking that he was a political construct well after "a" jesus died rather than"the" jesus?

                    Or is the lack of a body supposed to be some sort of proof that he ascended to heaven? wink

                    How many bodies from that era do we have actually?

                2. JBeadle profile image69
                  JBeadleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  I have to say that Jesus was the favorite part of my Lutheran upbringing and I listened to the words he was said to speak more than the rest of it.  I had to stop being a Lutheran our of respect for Jesus.  It just didn't seem to me that Jesus would need you to cry "Uncle" or else have Dad, all of our Father's, burn us.

                  Accept Jesus or burn - not blieved by all Christians perhaps - seems to be THE THEME of Christianity.  I don't think Jesus would like that.  If there was a Jesus.  Like the Jesus Jesus not a compilation of people making a Jesus.

                  Why would Jesus create a philosophy to divide when all the time he was doing examples of the opposite?  If he saw a whore and a noble - he always stood up for the whore.

                  jb

  22. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    There is no evidence at all of a god. The myth about god comes only from the myth itself, no other sources of evidence to be seen.

  23. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    Allan:
    You have not thoughtfully read my comments. You keep mentioning this god thing that is but imagined. Until you can factually define this supernatural divinity as being something other than an abstract concept created by simple man to assist him in placating his fears and abject ignorance, I cannot consider your comments to be credible. All you write about is based 100% on opinion and conjecture....period!
    I've asked you this before: "what is this god thing you write about and praise? No monotheistic scripture defines it in any form but opinion.
    The libraries of the world are rife with evidences and proofs of all I mention. If you take time to study the subjects: geology, anthropology, cosmology, chemistry, physics. ontology, epistemology, the evolution of man's penchant for beliefs in the supernatural, etc., etc.,...instead of just studying the corrupted writing and preaching of religious zealots, you wouldn't find it necessary to ask for proofs of my assertions.
    Again, you completely ignore the fact that none of us knows what we are talking about.
    We are but an incipient form of conscious, earthly life involved in trying to adapt to life on a planet that will end our existence if we don't.
    If we become "extinct," this imagined god thing will follow suit and the universe cannot know that we ever existed.
    Hallelujah and amen brother..:-)
    Qwark

    1. Allan Bogle profile image81
      Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Qwark, telling me that your proof "is in the library" doesnt cut it. You are abiding my the rigorous parameters that you ask your opponents here to abide by. You life your life like the rest of us, with many decisions being intuitively true to you because you believe them to be. Also,in light of your statement that "none of us known what we are talking about" how can you then tellme the world is "rife with evidence."

      You simply are not applying the same method for your own beliefs. If it is so easy why have you still not provided evidential criteria for the myriad of claims that you have made determining how you view belief, i.e. a "genetic propensity for a belief in the supernatural which is a result of the processes of natural selection" and that the "majority of the population is intellectually unevolved." (In fact you might want to clarify what you mean by intellectually unevolved).

      You claim that the evidence supporting these claims is so rife that it is in the libraries of the world, represented in a plethora of disciplines.

      This will be the fourth time I have asked you to provide the evidential criteria to back up this view.

      You are merely wanting it to be true, you are not exacting the same rigorous analytical process you want Christians to apply; you dont live your life by what you demand from others. Your belief is based on what then?

      1. Allan Bogle profile image81
        Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this
        1. earnestshub profile image87
          earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          i think asking for proof is a bit late. Hundreds of posts have given proof, nobody reads it they are too frightened. Go take a look at Maek Knowes new hub. smile

          1. Allan Bogle profile image81
            Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            This is connected with my two questions in which way? Or is this also a generalized blanket statement? Please show the "hundreds of posts" that people do not read "because they are too frightened" and how they are connected with the two specific questions I asked proof for.

            1. profile image0
              Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              lol  Fighting a losing battle, Alan, sorry.  Yeah, I saw what you asked for.  They are blinded by their binary system and need to proselytize "their side." 

              It isn't that there aren't rational people here.  It's just a couple of the coolest kids are atheists, and some of the others just piggyback onto that, given the approval.  I suppose Hubpages gives them a place to preach as they don't believe in congregations of any sort.

              1. Allan Bogle profile image81
                Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                In most cases I have encountered it is proven to me time and again that very few (if any) atheists live by the criteria they demand theists do. Thus their inability to respond to my requests that they provide evidential criteria for their assertions. Other "atheists" here are fueled by emotional stimuli. Self -defeating statements, repeated mantras, imposed restrictions they cannot live by (nor expect others to do) and claims they cannot prove.

                I am reminded of Malcolm Muggeridge's comment that the non-religious are a superstitious bunch, that it is not the case that when human beings stop believing in God they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse: they believe in anything.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                  Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  My my what a low opinion you have of us atheists.

                  I would point out that you studiously avoided my question to you. wink

                  1. Allan Bogle profile image81
                    Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    What question?

                2. profile image61
                  (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Quite frankly, I've not seen many atheists taking a position they cannot defend other than making the distinctive claim that gods do not exist. None of them can prove a negative.

                  That being said, the fact that centuries have flown by without the least hint of evidence of gods existence might serve as that position. It really boils down to demonstrating existence as opposed to attempting to demonstrate non-existence.

                  Perhaps, we need a few more million years to confirm their non-existence? How long do believers need to demonstrate their position?



                  What claims, exactly?



                  Do you find atheists believing in other things that are invisible and undetectable? What are those things, exactly?

      2. qwark profile image60
        qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Logic and reason. My "beliefs are not founded upon "religious faith."

        1. Allan Bogle profile image81
          Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Once again you refuse to answer. Because you know you cannot. For the fifth time, please show me the evidential criteria for the following comments that you made which you state are fact:

          a "genetic propensity for a belief in the supernatural which is a result of the processes of natural selection" and that the "majority of the population is intellectually unevolved."

          Now remember you stated that "The libraries of the world are rife with evidences and proofs of all I mention."

          Please show me these "evidences."

          Good luck with that.

          I have proved my point here; you label believers as sheep for what they think is the truth. Yet you are exactly the same way. So lets not have any more posturing on your part that you use "evidences" for your beliefs when you cannot even supply a single shred of evidence for your beliefs no matter how many times I have asked you (this is the fifth time).

          You need to face the fact that you do not live your life in accordance with what you claim. This is direct evidence that you will believe what you want to believe, evidence (or in this case) no evidence.

        2. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Allan:
          Oh, I'm truly sorry to read this: "Qwark, telling me that your proof "is in the library" doesnt cut it."
          I thought maybe that FACT would inspire you to visit your public library and do some study on your own in the subjects I mentioned in the hope that it might broaden your very narrow intellectual horizons. No insult intended.
          I have found tho, that there is little hope of finding the key that will open the closed minds of believers in MONOTHEISTIC "myth."
          I was once one of "those." I found "education" to be the key that free'd me from the rigid and binding shackles of monotheistic thought and belief.
          I am still a very ignorant person but I now allow logic and reason to rule my life. I am a much happier "soul." (whatever that is)  :-)
          Qwark

  24. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 7 years ago

    The masses in ancient Greece 'believed' in (or at least entertained the idea of) a pantheon of anthropomorphic gods.  Not so the philosophers.  In fact, Socrates was condemned to death by the masses for trying to develop a conception of God.  To Aristotle there was God, and to the Stoics there was also God.

    Yep.  Before Christianity.

  25. JBeadle profile image69
    JBeadleposted 7 years ago

    If there is a God and what God is - will be described by people who are "flawed" I suppose next to God and could only provide "flawed" ideas on what God is.  Which is why if you ask a million believers what God is you get a million different answers.

    If there is a God He'd be responsible for all of us and if your religion just pitches the God duds and saves the God winners that isn't much of a religion or statement of what God is.

    If there is a God he certainly is "hands off".  That whatever is done on earth by us is our doing.  And if there isn't a God that is true as well.

    I don't think it matters if you believe or not.  And that shouldn't be the line that divides us.  There needs to be no more lines dividing us.  Creating lines, in my opinion, is the biggest issue with beliefs and religions.  It's an either you're with us or against us many times.  That's no good.

    We need to embrace the diversity of our thoughts and allow more grace to difference in opinions.  And if you don't agree with that then go to hell!

    :-)

    I have a nice story about blaming physics instead of God in my Hubs.  I do that now when I stub my toe.  Damn physics!!!!

    jb

    1. aka-dj profile image79
      aka-djposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Jesus drew the lines, not us.
      Thanks for you offer to go to hell, but I'll pass.

      1. JBeadle profile image69
        JBeadleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        How did Jesus get to outrank God again with the Christians?  If Jesus did anything he passed along His Father's messge.  He was the messenger not The Creator.  Putting your faith and belief and banking all that on one guy who possibly hung from some wood with hundreds of others... not the best idea.

  26. prettydarkhorse profile image63
    prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago

    if GOD is omnipotent and omnipresent, then He is everywhere and that powerful we ascribed HIM to be

    1. profile image61
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You are correct in that "we" ascribed those characteristics. smile

  27. qwark profile image60
    qwarkposted 7 years ago

    I asked the question: "God? Why?" and expected the typical trite responses from brainwashed monotheists and they haven't disappointed me.
    Lets take that question apart and analyze it. The afforementioned non thinkers haven't done that.

    1. "god"

        Before "god" can be considered to be worthy of discussion, it must be defined as something other than an abstract concept. If that is impossible, the THINKER must accept the FACT that "it" can only be considered in the form of OPINION.
        Since there is no definition of this "god" thing in any monotheistic scripture that FACTUALLY defines "it," logic dictates that "it" must be left up to the reader to define.
        If this "god" thing exists only in the minds of "believers" in "it," what is the REASONED RATIONAL involved in becoming a "believer?"
        IF this "god" thing can only be IMAGINED, why would the THINKER consider "it" seriously as being extant?
        If this "god" thing is but an imagined supernatural entity and the majority of humanity believes in "it," doesn't that speak volumes in defining humanity as being a massive group of immature, fearful and easily led followers?

    2. "why"

        IF this "god" thing cannot be known, defined, or experienced, is incorporeal and exists only in the mind of "believers," why should "it" be, to the "thinker," worthy of consideration?
        IF this "god" thing only exists as an "abstract concept," what purpose does it serve in the lives of "believers?"
        What is it in the "character" of man that considers a belief in a supernatural divinity to be necessary?
        When one studies the deadly, disgusting, fragmenting  effects of a belief in Monotheism, does is take a "rocket scientist" to understand that "it" has been and still is the bane of human progress and could, potentially, be the perpetrator of the end life on earth as we know it?
        What is the value of this "god" thing to an incipient, infantile, abjectly ignorant, semi-conscious species of life?

    I could go on but why?

    "Logical" replies would be appreciated.

    I will not respond to opinion or guess.

    Qwark

  28. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 7 years ago

    I think he's just asking for some sources on which you base your belief upon. wink, I've got some education, and as far as I can remember thinking back, when writing persuasive papers of any sort, they always asked for a person to back up their thesis statements with that kind of proof.  You are saying there are written sources, yeah?

    Anyway, I'm curious about this neurological hard-wiring brain thing you are talking about that generally creates a system for belief in God within humanity.

    1. Allan Bogle profile image81
      Allan Bogleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      He knows I am asking for sources. Thats why he still hasnt provided a shred of evidence even though I have directly challenged him five times to show me this mysterious "evidences" that he claims are "rife in the world's libraries." Your questioning will be the sixth time he is asked to provide evidence. And of course he will not be able to do so, there is no factual evidence to back his assertion up. He wants it to be true, cites it as truth but when asked for verification must face the fact that it is a fabrication.

      This coming from one who claims he is looking for the truth. Obviously he isnt.

      This is a classic example of someone who cannot admit when he is wrong, whose only motive in debate is to not lose face. I mean look at his response here; yet another reference to "hey its in the library!" This coming from an individual who claims that others who ask for proof are guilty of "very narrow intellectual horizons." The irony must be sickening when he struggles to free himself from the charge that he simply made up those assertions without any evidence to back it up.

      In the future whenever he chides a believer for not basing belief on verifiable evidence he will have to do with an asterisk which will state that he is every bit like the person he detests for believing without the evidence.

    2. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Lita:
      If you haven't studied the evolution of man's penchant for belief in the supernatural (religions), there is alot here in this site to make you aware of the "possiblity" that religion is an evolved genetic characteristic due to the anomaly "consciousness."   http://scienceblogs.com/gnxp/2009/11/th … eligio.php

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I would be willing to grant you that Religion with a big "R" may be (may)--and obviously is--part of our evolution...I say 'obviously is' as it is an aspect of culture (as denoted by the various versions of beliefs and religious groups world wide).  However, there is evidence that there have always been others who sought God in other ways--who I might be inclined to place outside this arena.

        Frankly, though, this neurological theory seems to be only part of the equation to me.  Our sciences are in their infancy, ie, and show the demarcation (partially religiously indoctrinated, to be frank) of the old division between the physical and that of the 'mind' or thought.  Just by the fact that they deal ONLY with the physical (brain structure for this, 'god holes,' etc., etc).  It's a little like postmodernism--we are now organisms doing a meta analysis of our behavior.  Useful for what it is, I guess, but not a useful analysis to go forward.

        There is so much we do not know still about the nature of the universe--or of anything.  None of this explains in a personal way to me, either, why I myself am not inclined to believe in life after death, don't believe much in organized religion, but still, I would say, am deeply religious in the sense in which Einstein said it--as in observation of the universe I glimpse God with the limited capacity of my finite mind.

        So what I'm saying is that I buy everything in that article, but still must point to the above para.

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Lita:
          Quite right! Einstein and Spinoza considered this "god" thing to be "nature." Everything that is! Man being just a "happening."
          You are also right in intimating that we are "seeking."
          What seems to right and truth today, will likely change tomorrow.
          If you've followed my thoughts, you know that I understand that all life on this planet is the product of serendipitous physics and that we exist as but a facet of naturally progressing evolution.
          We are "special" only to ourselves.
          In a couple billion years, our opportunities will end..permanently!
          In but a few more billion, our sun will engulf our solar system and die. The galaxy will re-balance itself and the "moment" man existed will have dissipated unnoticed. The "infinite" will not flinch.
          Qwark

          1. profile image0
            Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Some would argue that the infinite can be found in one moment, wink.  But my theoretical physics knowledge is not that strong.

            And the thing is, I don't really have a problem rectifying any of that above with any of the true thoughts behind any world religion - including Christianity.  I don't see any of it really at odds with thought or seeking anything.  The bastardizations and literalisms for whatever reason and often subjugation, yeah.

            Also, I come up with the opposite conclusion:  We are special (lol Have you watched the movie "Contact?"), as is the entire dream, but especially sentient beings, who one could argue, are represented by God's image on earth, Christ, who Sister Wendy (the nun and art critic), I recall, has said (and the thought stuck with me) was "the first fully conscious human being." 

            And looking at this from a cultural context, OK, didn't we already go through a period of 'darkness' (the Dark Ages) like this, where man MUST realize he is subjugated to the will of God (what is the difference between, after all, the will of God and the ruthless, serendipitous nature of the universe that can snuff out humanity in a brief second?) I don't see any.

            What is holding our development back is intolerance, literalisms and agendas, not ideas about God, per se.

            1. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Hi Lita:
              ALL you speak of is the result of "immaturity."
              MODERN man has existed for, maybe, 40 - 50 k years. We are an infant species, semi-conscious and are having problems adjusting our "uniquesness," i.e. "consciousness," to natures requirements for survival.
              If humanity cannot cure itself of the fragmenting concept: "monotheism," the 1000 years of the "Dark Ages" will wither in importance as mankind experiences a necessary diminution in population and may be reduced to "Stone Age" life.
              IF that happens, the next millenia will produce mutations in the human species that cannot be imagined.
              If you view "god" as being the macro and micro universe, there is no difference in "it's" ability to destroy. If you view "god" as monotheists imagine it to be, the difference between that mythical concept and the reality of the "universe," is "truth."
              At this moment in the evolution of "man." his survival is dubious. If he cannot function in concert with nature to ensure the viability of the species, "Mother Nature's" reaction will be absolute. The result of an inability to "adapt" is extinction.
              We are not adapting well!
              Qwark

              1. profile image0
                Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                I might agree with the sentiment in that.

                However, some might argue that the true spark within any religion is this spirit and hope and belief in a kind of sentienceness that we will 'survive'--that's what it is all supposed to represent.

                Definitely we have endlessly bastardized religious thought to fit our material and other desires. Witness any of a series of wars and other events and it is obvious. I'm not sure I'd call the proponents of all this 'children' though, or megalomaniacs. But absolutely the children need to adapt, smile, and perhaps stop being sheep as Earnest and Mark might say.

                I suppose I see God and truth as a poet should and does see it, through a few lenses and by a great deal of metaphors.  And I still say our folly is not any idea of God; monotheistic, polytheistic, or pantheistic, but OUR IDEAS (often proselytized) of what God supposedly represents and leads us to do. 

                Anyway, I'd say on the world stage, religion with a big R is not being used so much as a myth for domination at this point - at least in the West (yes, I'm thinking perhaps in radical Muslim countries that IS still the case).  Materialism is the new religion of the West.

                1. qwark profile image60
                  qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Hi Lita:
                  By "sentiment," I must assume you mean opinion? There is no "thought" in what I write that is influenced by emotion.
                  You are correct. "monotheistic faith" has it's foundation based 100% on "hope." 
                  We, semi- conscious creatures understand the result of our death: an infinity of "nothingness." That is frightening! That fear creates within the evolving mind of an "infant" animal species absurd reactions.
                  One must be blind, deaf and intellectually crippled not to be able to see that "absurdity" in human action and reaction everywhere on this glimmering blue globe.
                  Man considers himself to be of greater value than other extant life. He feels he can earn "immortality" by creating, praising and worshipping a supernatural divinity, ergo placing him in a "special," "advantageous" and "deserving" position above all other life. That comforts him. If that doesn't qualify as an act of monumental absurdity, I have misinterpreted the word.
                  You mentioned the "Dark Ages." Roman catholicism ruled with an iron fist, in Machiavellian style. For 1000 years people were controlled, tortured, maimed and murdered in the name of the "lord god almighty!" These were alledged "christians!"....1000 years!
                  Islam would like to follow suit in the name of "allah!" Allahu Akbar!!! The acme of absurdity!
                  We are "humans." Humans have evolved as earth's prime predator. It is our genetic nature to "kill!"
                  Hundreds of millenia will pass before the gene for predation can be sublimated into a more socially and culturally acceptable form.
                  Personally? I predict a great and calamitous diminution of humanity within the next 100 years.
                  Mother Nature will be given another opportunity to create a more adaptable "conscious" animal species. One more to her liking.
                  Qwark

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image61
                    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Absolutely agree 100%.

                    A lot of people claim to worry about the planet.

                    Not me.

                    She will take care of business - and if that means wiping us off - then so be it.

                    The religionists think they are different.

                    Even the religionists "lite" such as Lita.

                    So silly to think we have a clue........

                  2. profile image0
                    Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Don't take the word "sentiment" too much literally, Qwark.  It's just a word.  Could very well have also meant "contents"...which, actually in this case, it did mean.

                    And I have spent tooooo much time in the religion forums.  Time to get back to reality...which for me, doesn't look that grim.  Very hard some times, but not that harshly grim.

                    I once told an old poet friend of mine, when he was waxing on as such:  A 1/2 remembered quote from The Last of The Mohicans, basically something like, "This world sucks, but it is also the light."

                    I'll have to remember it precisely and post it when I do.  smile

      2. Jewels profile image81
        Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        It's one thing to have a belief in it, another to have the experience of it.  And whilst I concur with the findings on a logical and rational level in such writings as the God Delusion, one has to go beyond the rational mind and be able to fathom beyond this level. Those experiences that are tactile and and obviously of a metaphysical nature are mappable.   Dissecting religious dogma and rationalizing spiritual experiences is a fruitless exercise, even by Dawkins because he has no way of differentiating the two.  Until he himself can experience states of consciousness beyond the ordinary rational mind, he's just making money satisfying the so called intellectuals.

  29. aware profile image70
    awareposted 7 years ago

    my god ideas are fresh . no old gods here. why i need god ideas? cus im a dreamer

  30. BigStevo3057 profile image60
    BigStevo3057posted 7 years ago

    There is so much scientific proof that our God really does exist, and He has done amazing things in my life so there's no way I can ever doubt Him again. I will be praying for all of you!

    1. earnestshub profile image87
      earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      You can leave me off the list for prayers thanks, no psychotic sky fairy for me! lol

      1. profile image0
        sneakorocksolidposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Like most Australians you do your praying to the porcelon god.

    2. profile image61
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Please clarify. What scientific proof do you refer?

  31. BigStevo3057 profile image60
    BigStevo3057posted 7 years ago

    Prayer saved my soul and it will save all of yours as well. Jesus wants us to repent and stop sinning and if you don't you will be in trouble!!

    1. profile image61
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Idle threats? I am in as serious trouble not joining Islam, as well, as are you, too. Shall we bring our sunscreen, Wayfarers and cold beers as we both roast in Islamic hell discussing our folly?

  32. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 7 years ago

    "Noooooo," what, Sneako?

  33. Danny Decay profile image79
    Danny Decayposted 7 years ago

    Yeeeah, I mean, realistically, when you look at "God", it is nothing more than a desire to have a parent-like figure watching over you, or to have something “greater than you” out there to psychologically aid someone in a time of great peril (like the saying “There’s no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole”). When god was created, the people who fabricated the idea of gods and celestial beings were of an ignorant and oppressive time period. They thought the world was flat, feared sea monsters, and thought that thunder and lightning were great heavenly battles being fought(not to mention they burned people ALIVE for not believing in their own customary ideological, self-fulfilling, restrictive, super natural rhetoric). Now that we are much more rational and the scientific community has advanced on such a prolific scale, I think it’s about time we put the unsupported fairy tales to rest and ACTUALLY start helping humanity, instead of sitting up at night praying that an invisible super being will do it for us.

    1. Jewels profile image81
      Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      If you're talking about the period where paganism was the norm, it appears that their experiences were very real and of a very spiritual nature.  There is allot of knowledge dismissed by modern religion in the understanding of the Solar Logos which was more an experience and not something vague.  The Solar Logos is akin to what is understood as Christ Consciousness in Christian teachings, and has naught to do with any being with arms and legs.  The principles of the Solar Logos are an internal experience.  Unfortunately modern Christianity dismisses the assimilation and in doing so completely misunderstand what a spiritual transformation is.  I agree that there will never be an external savior. More likely an external damnation which is the common experience of mankind as we see today.

      1. Danny Decay profile image79
        Danny Decayposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Don't labor yourself to death, God isn't real, you can stop there, unsupported facts just fuel the fire of ignorance.

        1. Danny Decay profile image79
          Danny Decayposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I mean, pledge you to YOU, right?

        2. Jewels profile image81
          Jewelsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I actually find the term God useless and irrelevant.  I don't side with the believers nor do I side with Dawkins.  The question asked is God? Why?  It's not a hard one to answer - I did it a few pages ago as to Why people seek this external arms and legs thing. It doesn't exist, not in my experience.

          Don't worry about me laboring myself to death, LOL. And I'm certainly not ignorant!  Provable - depends on what you want as proof.  If you want to feel it for yourself, I can help you with that, though I can't make you have it without allot of practice and and you actually being open to wanting to have it.  I'm talking tangible experiences here void of dogma.

  34. BigStevo3057 profile image60
    BigStevo3057posted 7 years ago

    God has touched me physically and spoken to me as well, and He will speak to you as well if you get over your conceited worldly ways and let Him rescue you from Satan

    1. JBeadle profile image69
      JBeadleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I actually believe in God.  Except God loves everyone and doesn't require Jesus.  I'm not trying to crap on anyone's belief.  This is a forum for thoughts I thought and then expressed some.  No offence intended at this point!

      I'm kinda done on the God topic but I just can't help myself sometimes.  There is a guy out here who thinks he's Jesus for crying out loud.  A few of them.  What I found amusing is even the I am Jesus people have a few ADxxxx fans who think his hubs are good.  Not that I'm knocking the two I got!!!  I'm all for fans.

      The BigSteve sort though - the ones that want to save my soul when they ring the doorbell and then wish me godspeed to hell upon leaving... that type I'm not so fond of.  Sort of runs along the lines of the non-judgemental (laugh) Bishop deciding who gets to have communion or not.  Puh-lease.

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        wink I'm basically a pantheist who really doesn't necessarily believe in God's love in any specific anthropomorphic way. I've just seen a lot of hysterics on this religion forum.

        Agree about the doorbell wringers.  Annoying.  As are any who try to sell things badly.

    2. profile image61
      (Q)posted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Seriously, I'm not going there. wink

  35. gramon1 profile image72
    gramon1posted 7 years ago

    The only "facts you will get are that "this is the true God..." and "the Bible says..."
    There are no facts, but conjecture that People in each religion turn into "truth" by comparing notes with people who agree with them. If you and I decided that God is a Chicken that is really speaking "tongs" when it cloacks, we could build a Book that would explain the universe, all morality, and the meaning of life. And if we really wanted to push it, we could say that Chicken has touched us and performed miracles. After all, miracles happen every time the unexpected happens in our favor, in a way that can not be explained.

    Chicken bless you!

    1. JBeadle profile image69
      JBeadleposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think God is a Chicken but I do have a Yahoo! group chicken_talk which is moderated by a person who believes they are an actual chicken, Senior E. Clucky he goes by.  Great moderator.  Strange guy.

  36. wsp2469 profile image60
    wsp2469posted 7 years ago

    I can't believe you get points for stirring up shit in the forum.  I guess it beats the hell out of actually writing a hub though,  huh?
    Someone who has NO faith questioning the faith of others. 
    That's a "no-brainer". 
    Try writing a hub about something only YOU care about and see if you can get attention.
    I do that every day.  THAT is a TRUE challenge!

  37. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    I am amazed daily by life and nature, but that does not confine me to the beliefs in one book written by a bunch of sexist controlling men, or the impossible invisible entity it worships. smile

    1. wyanjen profile image88
      wyanjenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I'm amazed by life and nature. I'm amazed at how long, how much time, was needed for the Earth to develop and evolve into the beautiful planet we live on today.
      It is more profound to me that nature has evolved and grown, than is the idea that it was made by some magic being.

      1. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        The othe amazing thing about belief in a god is how psychotic the biblical god is. Why would someone worship an entity worse than the worst of mankind. These projections of evil in the bible are nonsensical in the light of psychological knowledge and should be abandoned as science must with it's ideas that are outmoded. smile

        1. wyanjen profile image88
          wyanjenposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Hear Hear.

          I'm off, take good care earnest

          1. earnestshub profile image87
            earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Bye for now wyanjen. smile

  38. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    The knowledge you speak of is prolific, and known to those who will open their minds to it.
    For starters how do you get off passing of a rewritten book of lies as somehow beyond reproach. Not one single shred of evidence to support the psychotic nonsense lies therin.
    The god you worship is a completely mad rendition of a controlling entity designed to fool the unsophisticated people of their time. The only way this rubbish still gets hawked is through indoctrination, otherwise who would even consider such a crazy invisible entity?

  39. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    I just read your latest hub Mark. Impressive! smile

  40. Mark Knowles profile image61
    Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago

    Thanks Earnest. First of it's type I have written. smile

  41. ddoingit1 profile image61
    ddoingit1posted 7 years ago

    The Almighty, the orical of earth trough space and time, the man of myth of religion of heavenly images, the highlite of protecting earth, protecting the heaven of joice, for heaven of earth of religion V heaven of oricla simulation, of felling of touch. in the presence of original solar fashioning complexes, see the image of religion by Micheal Angelo, to mia Angelou, to the mezmeroriztion of mirrors of the Last Super, Pyramids of Giza, Aztec Indians, Stone Hendge, Wall Street the collective miracles of stream scaping of ideals, the mirror image of the fleet escaping the mirrors aws we wonder through the life of religion we are the forula of heaven information, essence of religion of anti-grandure, of anti strike paths, past the denial of rebolting controbutions, of religions mind is the myth, past the highlife of mirrors past the nuropothy of life is the path past the mirrors to a new relief past denial is the secretions past the dting eye to the dying focal serum of logic past the die V denial is epoluge past defense of lies, past the historical essence of heaven is just a prayer away of repentants, of your necessary means to an end is the forum past the denial you are the retrobution past lives being sacrid, past the mobility of religion to a new dawn of religion is the stability of life past death to a new theatrical mirror of life past the scopistetic ideal we are the necessary solar mind of logic of religion of life past the mind of God

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      This is so sensual !
      You're going to turn me on!
      R U A man ?  big_smile

  42. profile image0
    lyricsingrayposted 7 years ago

    We need something to believe in because we have been programmed with fear.  Fear of everything.  We are desperately searching for something safe or a savior because we seem uncap able to help each other and save each other which is well in our own capacity,not needing that of another source.  Yet we choose to remain afraid and hope for a greater being that we can hang onto even after we die.  Yet fear death the most. Confusing.

  43. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    Top post Qwark, well reasoned. smile

    1. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Thanks Earnest! :-)

  44. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 7 years ago

    This harmless little blue green planet will simply shrug us off like flicking off a bug if we annoy it too much. "Mother" nature is one harsh critic, and if we keep polluting and raping the surface we will simply cease to be. The first poem I wrote as a kid described man as the only animal that messes in it's own space.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image61
      Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      No question.

      Unless you think a god is speaking to you. In which case you are vulnerable and will.... cause the end. Seems a lot of the religionists actually want it. Or is that just me?


      "our beliefs are always going to be scoffed at and abused until that great and terrible day,"

      1. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        There does seem to be a zeal for the end amongst religionists. It's as if the end will prove them right, and that is far more important to them than doing anything to prevent it. lol

  45. The Bard profile image82
    The Bardposted 7 years ago

    If any of you have visited Down House in Kent - the home of Charles Darwin - embraced it's atmosphere, treaded his sandwalk (his thinking path) in the surrounding countryside, where day by day, year after year he dwelled and produced his theories; or read his book "The Voyage of the Beagle" an account of his travels of five years, and then understood that for another 50 years he meticulously produced his "Origin of Species" in the face of pressure beyond the reason of common man - (only 150 years ago - and is now a theory of accepted fact- evolution), then you will know that science, however volatile, is the only known answer to our existence.

    Creationists come along and decry all this, and believe that Adam and Eve started the ball rolling with the assistance of an almighty God. Some would say so malevolent that he needed to create Lucifer just to make him look good.

    But before you all start getting upset - even Darwin did not denounce God. His faith was sorely tested when one of his daughters died, but never did he denounce God. Atheists and Humanists jump on the bandwagon and cite him erroneously as proof of the God Delusion.

    I may be one, or both, or neither. But in this year of the 200th anniversary of Darwin's Birth, and the 150th of his publications, it is a timely reminder that reason and knowledge above all will be the saviour of mankind. That if God exists, then he created us with brains that would question his existence, and empowered us with skills and the humanity to ensure fundamental concepts of survival.

    It is the Darwinian theory of Survival of the Fittest which should tell us that we are unique and special. After all - we got this far. Everything else is history.

  46. wsp2469 profile image60
    wsp2469posted 7 years ago

    I think someone should take the energy expended here and just write a damn-ass hub!  Use some quotes and respond with a hub.
    I do it all the time and I am the hubpages whipping boy when it comes to being flagged.
    Trust me.  (I've had almost 2 dozen hubs flagged to date!)  Quote the people you need to quote, include their pics and links to their profiles and hubs and go to town!

  47. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 7 years ago

    Not miss Lita Sorensen
    lol

    1. profile image0
      Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Ms.  And I'm quite good at reading tone.

      lol (You can take that as a joke, though, if ya want.)

      Have a good day (seriously) to both of you. smile

      1. Mark Knowles profile image61
        Mark Knowlesposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        LOL

        You too, Ms. Sorensen. I will try not to take mine - or myself - too seriously though. wink

      2. tantrum profile image60
        tantrumposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        lol lol
        Have a good day as well!

        And I prefer 'miss', as I was playing with that word too !

    2. Jerami profile image78
      Jeramiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Mornin Tantrum  and you too Lita
        who should we ignore today??  just teasin
            NOBODY !!!

  48. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 7 years ago

    Good morning Mark, wasn't ignoring awalaago
    jumped to bottom of page to say hi  didnt see ya.

  49. prettydarkhorse profile image63
    prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago

    why not, Why? GOD?

  50. topgunjager profile image60
    topgunjagerposted 7 years ago

    Why God? Why not the sphagetti monster? He's as real as it gets=)

    1. prettydarkhorse profile image63
      prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      hi topgun!

      1. topgunjager profile image60
        topgunjagerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        hello, I like your new pic=)

        1. prettydarkhorse profile image63
          prettydarkhorseposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          thanks, thats me,

 
working