Do you Believe in God?

[Minor Axis]

I used to believe in God. But now I realize he never existed

With certainty, how did you determine there is no God? I'm just curious.

There is no reason to argue the existence of God, it leads to nowhere and has absolutely no impact or productive reasoning behind it.

You are right, there is no reason to argue. Nothing can be proven. But we have the intellect to consider such things so it would be a mistake not to even if it can't be resolved.

As an Atheist, I assume you don't believe in God because it can't be proven? While I don't have a problem with your position, I'd like to know if you are open minded or close minded? Just because something can't be proven does not mean it does not exist. The point I'm trying to make is that you can not believe in something cause there is no proof, but I believe it's a mistake to be certain something does not exist because there is no proof. There really are no grounds to be certain.

 

[Tomperi]

With certainty, how did you determine there is no God? I'm just curious.

What reason does anyone really have to believe in God? It's all just based on a book, written 2 millennia ago. The scriptures contradict modern findings, so why would anyone see any truth in it? Why would anyone conclude that the Judeo-Christian God is real, but not the Roman, Greek or Norse gods? I can understand if someone, who has never seen civilization or findings based on scientific research, would wonder how the world around him came to be, and concluded that someone, that is far beyond what he can grasp, made it. But such fantasies do not belong in our modern world. Today we should know better.

If I would speak and take advice from my invisible friend called Albert, I'd be considered a mentally unstable person. But if I don't call him Albert, but God, I'm seen as a perfectly normal human, morally superior to those without invisible friends.

 

[ATKU2]

I have no reason to believe in god cause if there is a god then we are all being watched over by a pervert in that matter.
I don't really care if there is a god or not cause it makes no difference to me.
Sorry to all you religious people.

 

[Minor Axis]

What reason does anyone really have to believe in God? It's all just based on a book, written 2 millennia ago. The scriptures contradict modern findings, so why would anyone see any truth in it? Why would anyone conclude that the Judeo-Christian God is real, but not the Roman, Greek or Norse gods? I can understand if someone, who has never seen civilization or findings based on scientific research, would wonder how the world around him came to be, and concluded that someone, that is far beyond what he can grasp, made it. But such fantasies do not belong in our modern world. Today we should know better.

I agree, but you are talking about God as defined by established religions. There is no compelling reason to believe they got it right. And in contrast, that by no means proves there is no controlling force in the universe that might have some intelligence associated with it. Just because it can't be proven, I don't refuse to consider the possibility. This is very different from saying that since it can't be proven, it can't be. That would be foolish don't you think? How many things can be proven today, that could not be proven 2000 years ago? Lots and lots of things.

What exactly is God anyway- a force? what kind of force? Intelligent? Looking over us- who knows? Someone wants to call it God, fine by me. But don't start rattling off "his divine rules" that gets you into heaven. The challenge is to define what and if applicable, who is God? Can't be done in any meaningful way without falling back on the old "faith" crutch which proves nothing. If it is positive faith, it just makes you feel good.

Bottom line, the problem is the details. We just don't know. So when someone tells me there is no God, they made a determination based on what exactly? Lack of proof is not proof. It is just undetermined.

 

[Minor Axis]

I have no reason to believe in god cause if there is a god then we are all being watched over by a pervert in that matter.
I don't really care if there is a god or not cause it makes no difference to me.
Sorry to all you religious people.

I'm going to play Devil's advocate. You said if there was a God, he is a pervert. So, if you believe in God, then you would also buy into spirituality. You die, you go to heaven and continue your existence. We all want to believe we'll be living the good spiritual life. Party time for eternity!

So, if there was a God what exactly do you think his job would be while we are living our lives? If bad experiences on Earth is a prelude to good experiences in heaven, why would that be a bad thing if you walked away from it having bettered yourself?

Here is a general philosophical question- If fate (for lack of imagination) snapped it's fingers and you could now have anything you desired, would this be a good or bad? How long would it take you to be bored out of your mind? There was a Twilight Zone, similar to this, guy at a casino and every time he pulled the slot, he hit the jackpot. He thought he was in heaven, but eventually realized it was hell. Challenges are a good thing for the human psych. Challenges in your life are a good thing as long as you have the right perspective and are up for the challenge.

 

[alice in chains]

As an Atheist, I assume you don't believe in God because it can't be proven? While I don't have a problem with your position, I'd like to know if you are open minded or close minded? Just because something can't be proven does not mean it does not exist. The point I'm trying to make is that you can not believe in something cause there is no proof, but I believe it's a mistake to be certain something does not exist because there is no proof. There really are no grounds to be certain.[/QUOTE]


I'm not an Athiest...I just choose not to take part in a lot of ideas...and believe me, I'm very familiar with what you're talking about. I love it when people talk about open mindedness...they're not even mentally capable most of the time of not being partisan on any topic, if they were, then they couldn't fully be WILLING to learn concepts they disagree with...I hate absolute mentalities. Mentalities in reality are always changing because that is how humans protect themselves and keep things in an understandable reality. I have a favorable argument for theists...even though I am not one and that is the idea of the Unknown. As long as their is the unknown, science and religion will never mix. Preferrably, I'd like to keep it that way.

 

[Tomperi]

What exactly is God anyway- a force? what kind of force? Intelligent? Looking over us- who knows?

The thing is, we have natural explanations for phenomena happening around us, none of which involves any divine "force". If anything, some believers distort science, and outright lie, to try and fit God into reality. So why is it that we pollute our knowledge with all this superstitious crap? It certainly doesn't advance humanity in any way. On the contrary, religion has regressed us, as a species.

And if he does exist, he sure as hell doesn't look over us.

 

[Minor Axis]

I'm not an Athiest...I just choose not to take part in a lot of ideas...and believe me, I'm very familiar with what you're talking about. I love it when people talk about open mindedness...they're not even mentally capable most of the time of not being partisan on any topic, if they were, then they couldn't fully be WILLING to learn concepts they disagree with...I hate absolute mentalities. Mentalities in reality are always changing because that is how humans protect themselves and keep things in an understandable reality. I have a favorable argument for theists...even though I am not one and that is the idea of the Unknown. As long as their is the unknown, science and religion will never mix. Preferrably, I'd like to keep it that way.

Thanks for the reply. Would you describe yourself as Agnostic? That's where I lean.

Regarding the mixing of science and religion, I agree with your point, it's tough for the faithful to bend "desire-based" dogma for "scientific-method" based science. I mean when you start out with a book, several thousand years old, written by people with minimal scientific knowledge, you have to wonder what is real vs divine intervention vs superstition vs fantasy. I just discovered the Church of Reality. Looks interesting, but I'll reserve judgement till I research it some more.

The thing is, we have natural explanations for phenomena happening around us, none of which involves any divine "force". If anything, some believers distort science, and outright lie, to try and fit God into reality. So why is it that we pollute our knowledge with all this superstitious crap? It certainly doesn't advance humanity in any way. On the contrary, religion has regressed us, as a species.

And if he does exist, he sure as hell doesn't look over us.

I agree with the tone of your post but as far as unknowns-- what are ghosts? There is research going on along with entertainment masquerading as research. While I'm not committed to the concept of ghosts as human spirits, I am intrigued by them. If they are real, which admittedly is a big "if", then what of spirits? If spirits, then what of an afterlife? Something to think about- if you go with the spiritual plane or parallel universe concept, what tools would be required for our scientists to actually research it? Just because there are no tools, does that mean it's not there?

Regarding your comment of a God who does not look over us- it depends on what you think the roll of God is. While I'm not arguing for the existence of any God, especially the "traditional God" whose role in our lives has been clearly explained by theists (sarcasm), as I've explained in other posts, you could have a hands-off God, who just allows us to live our lives. The concept would be there is a separate existence that is experienced post physical-death and his influence might be felt there. It is all conjecture, and should be taken for nothing more than that.

 

[lumpenstein]

There is no reason to argue the existence of God, it leads to nowhere and has absolutely no impact or productive reasoning behind it.

i've had this classic argument with people for forever...if you are an Athiest...do not use the phrase "God." Why? because it confuses people. if you are an athiest, do me a favor and do not take part in discussions entitled "God."

As an Atheist, I assume you don't believe in God because it can't be proven? While I don't have a problem with your position, I'd like to know if you are open minded or close minded? Just because something can't be proven does not mean it does not exist. The point I'm trying to make is that you can not believe in something cause there is no proof, but I believe it's a mistake to be certain something does not exist because there is no proof. There really are no grounds to be certain.

If there is no reason to argue the existence of god why are you arguing in its favour? I am an Atheist; I will use the word 'god' as I please. Why can't Atheist take part in discussions of god? Fundamentalist Christians feel free to trash sciences they don't even comprehend in order to defend their shaky religion.

As for the final bolded quoted statement, it is logically bankrupt. Anything can be imagined or speculated upon but until there is confirmable evidence supporting it, it remains nothing more than speculation. You seem to be playing the ploy that just because something can't be disproven there is a chance it does exist. Nice try but that gambit has been argumentively discarded a long time ago.

 

[deathpwnag3]

of course

 

[rosev]

I do believe.

Believe in his existance and in his Power, and most important I believe in his Love...
thats all i will say

 

[alice in chains]

lumpenstein, I'm not a theist and that last quote was an attempt at quoting Minor Axis. I don't argue Christianity; I argue possibilities until proven wrong.

 

[daniellllleee]

This should be an anonymous poll.
However, since my opinion is my opinion and I have the right not to argue it with any of you, I'll go ahead it put it out there that no, I do not believe in God.
Don't question my beliefs please.

 

[lumpenstein]

lumpenstein, I'm not a theist and that last quote was an attempt at quoting Minor Axis. I don't argue Christianity; I argue possibilities until proven wrong.

That may be but my point stands. One cannot prove a negative. If any ignoramus dares challenge me to prove god doesn't exist I will rightfully tell them to go get stuffed.

 

[Minor Axis]

I argue possibilities until proven wrong.

I do too. It's the exact opposite of saying "if it can't be proven I don't believe in it." Where it would be more prudent to say, "if it can't be proven, I'll reserve judgement for now".

Don't question my beliefs please.

Only by questioning divergent views may understanding be gained. It's not a bad thing as long as intentions are good.

That may be but my point stands. One cannot prove a negative. If any ignoramus dares challenge me to prove god doesn't exist I will rightfully tell them to go get stuffed.

It can't be proven that God exists or does not exist, but that is good enough for Atheists to not believe in God. It can't be proven that God exists, but because they "feel it" and most of them have been indoctrinated from early on, the believers believe in god. Divergent views neither with a firm basis for belief. The only reasonable position based on what we know is "I don't know."

 

[alice in chains]

lumpenstein...sorry, I don't argue with morons who are going to tell me to "go get stuffed" Is that a scientific term or something you made up on your own? Case closed.

 

[Minor Axis]

That may be but my point stands. One cannot prove a negative. If any ignoramus dares challenge me to prove god doesn't exist I will rightfully tell them to go get stuffed.

This ignoramus dares you to prove god exists or he does not exist! The expectant world will cheer in triumph or moan in agony depending on your findings.

 

[lumpenstein]

lumpenstein...sorry, I don't argue with morons who are going to tell me to "go get stuffed" Is that a scientific term or something you made up on your own? Case closed.

Retract the moron comment or you are reported. I argue from the point of logic. If you don't agree with me it doesn't give you the right to resort to name calling. If you think I was telling you to get stuffed you are absolutely wrong. I was referring to no one in particular and was using what is called "rhetoric". If you don't understand that you certainly not qualified to call me or anybody else a moron. My use of ignoramus refers to any person that does not know, and therefore misinterprets, the use of simple logic. Let's say that challenging somebody to prove a negative is not allowed in logic. That is a fact as established as the law of gravity.

 

[lumpenstein]

This ignoramus dares you to prove god exists or he does not exist! The expectant world will cheer in triumph or moan in agony depending on your findings.

It would be illogical for me to attempt to prove that something that doesn't exist exists. It is cyclical argumentation.

 

[Minor Axis]

It would be illogical for me to attempt to prove that something that doesn't exist exists. It is cyclical argumentation.

It is cyclical but you believe strong enough not to believe in God, based on something. Is it just lack of proof? So be it but nothing is proven or disproven based on no proof. Until the proof appears, the existence of God, an entity who lives in a supposed divine and undetectable space remains undetermined imo. It's your right to say there is no divine space because we can't locate one, but what does that prove? Nada.

BTW name calling is name calling, does not matter if it is moron or ignoramus.