Do you believe in God?

1. 75

   jainismusposted 9 years ago

   Do you believe in God?
   
   Do you believe in God? Or you are an atheist?

   replyreport
2. 40

   Borsiaposted 9 years ago

   I'm atheist.
   I can see no rational reason to believe that there is an omnipresent ultra being that can't be detected in any way, let alone seen, and yet somehow rules the world even going so far as to be playing chess with individual lives.
   Nor do I see any convincing evidence that such a being ever existed or had a hand in the creation of the universe.
   While there are many mysteries that we can not explain simply jumping to the conclusion that they are the work of some sort of a god certainly is a non-answer that does nothing to advance our knowledge.
   I am perfectly content to admit that I / we don't yet have answers to many such questions. Better to say that we don't yet know than to make up myths and fables to explain what we don't understand. The key word is "yet" as we well may someday find many of those answers, though there will always be questions we can't answer.

   replyreport
   1. 91

      peeplesposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I could not have expressed my views any better. Borsia expressed my feeling on the subject.

      replyreport
   2. 50

      paarsurreyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      If you have any good argument/proof that the One-True-God does not exist please present it here.

      replyreport
   3. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      this whole comment is a crock it begins with "I find no ""reason"" to believe" who, who thinks themselves as wise could even write such idiocy. There is no a reason to believe. How childish to even notion it!!
      " reason to believe"??? How can anyone?

      replyreport
   4. 40

      Borsiaposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      anyone with a rational logical mind requires good reason to believe anything. Far more childish to believe without reason & proof in fantasy & fables.

      replyreport
   5. 91

      chriscamaroposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Precisely.  You are presented with an idea with which you are unfamiliar.  A) You believe it without asking questions because it appeals to you or B) You criticize its accuracy until it is either debunked or deemed plausible.  I don't see the problem

      replyreport
   6. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I think I will go with this "logic".

      replyreport
3. 48

   Ericdierkerposted 9 years ago

   I fully believe. I also, know, feel, love, like, enjoy, fear, hear, see, share, sing with, cry with, hope with, go with, sleep with, dance with, fight with, eat with, earn money with, read with and live with God.
   
   In fact I do not even need to "believe" in God. I know God as well as anyone knows the back of their hand. I suppose I started out believing, but that was many many years ago. Now it would be like me saying I believe I am alive, I simply know I am. And I simply know God.

   replyreport
   1. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      someone just really insulted and hurt my feelings in my belief Is it Ok because it is anti-Christian?

      replyreport
   2. 91

      chriscamaroposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I'm assuming you're referring to me.  First, it's not anti-Christian. It's anti-theistic.  Christianity is the convenient example in this case.  Second, don't be offended until you look at the arguments objectively.  Arguments are either sound or not

      replyreport
4. 91

   chriscamaroposted 9 years ago

   Nothing pertaining to God is capable of explaining natural phenomenon.
   Nothing pertaining to God can make repeatable predictions.
   God conveniently has a bunch of human qualities and behaves like a human.
   God shows favoritism for the Earth and for human life.
   God is immaterial and yet has sentience, consciousness and a bunch of super powers which violates every scientific law we have.
   No evidence has ever existed for God's existence.
   There is an inverse proportionality between the evidence for God and the conviction people have that he exists.  Conversely, scientific people often say they don't know something and they change their mind about something when it gets disproved.
   Theists can't even agree amongst each other.
   The bible contains a lot of information which is simply impossible by today's understanding.
   People's personal conviction cannot be measured or reproduced so it can't be trusted.
   A majority argument or relying on the authority of intelligent people does not constitute a proof for anything.
   
   Humans desire a purpose in life, want to be loved, want to be guided and don't want to be alone.  God satisfies every one of those needs so it's only natural we should desperately cling to the notion, even if it has no basis in reality.  For many people, belief in a higher power is far better than a belief that we are alone and could die any moment, snuffed out of existence while the universe continues on without a care.  Problem is, that's an unnecessarily dark way to view the universe.  We're amazingly capable life-forms who can do good and feel happy.  The only limitation is one's own motivation and willingness to collaborate with others towards this common goal.

   replyreport
   1. 50

      paarsurreyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Belief in the One-True-God is very natural; it does not prohibit one accepting the scientific facts that prove to be natural.

      replyreport
   2. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Sorry but this guy has never sat for two days watching animals without interfering and just learning. this guy is an example of total lack of awareness in the moment.  Whoever this is, is a perfect example of US Public school systems products.  Ouch

      replyreport
   3. 91

      chriscamaroposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I would say that at the very least it is extremely awkward to accept both fully.  If you take the bible literally for example and you've read enough of it (or even the first page of Genesis), how do you square away what you're reading with science?

      replyreport
   4. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      One is science and the other is faith. Neither is absolute. Some folks just cannot go back and forth. Genesis is interesting but I do not think they had slide rulers and calculators back then. Come to think of it, Do we today? See the point?

      replyreport
   5. 91

      chriscamaroposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Ok... neither science nor faith is absolute in the sense that we cannot be 100% certain of either but I fail to see how this resolves the paradox of having an understanding of natural law AND also believing a bunch of stuff that goes against it.

      replyreport
   6. 48

      Ericdierkerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Camaro, that is the fun part! if life is all circles and squares and rules.... that is not much fun. That is why I hate rules and religion, they illogically put confines on belief same as you. I believe my 76 Camaro LT edition was the best car ever.

      replyreport
   7. 91

      chriscamaroposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Circles and squares don't have to mean a boring life.  I find natural law fascinating.  We bend to the laws of nature though, not the other way around.  Belief is great when something is unknown but assertions that contradict known truths, less so.

      replyreport
5. 61

   barrierbreakerposted 9 years ago

   No.  Yes.
   
   That was easy.
   
   They said my answer was too short so I made it longer.  Not as easy as hoped.

   replyreport