Believing in God

or not

181 to 200 of 252 messages
15/10/2012 at 11:21

We came to be here through a series of chemical and physical events.  It has nothing to do with an omnipotent being.

To counter the question "What was there before the big bang?", what was there before God.  That is, what was there 6,001 years ago?

15/10/2012 at 11:25
Intermanaut wrote (see)

We came to be here through a series of chemical and physical events.  It has nothing to do with an omnipotent being.

 

Proof ?

15/10/2012 at 11:29

No I don't believe in a god.

Yes having a belief system is beneficial to some people who need that crutch to exist, it's not an easy path to accept that you are ultimately alone in this world. If people believe that god put nurses intheir jobs thats up to them, it doesn't it's true. This still stems from Rickster wanting physical proof. Why would god create doctors and nurses when he could cut out the middle man and not let the bad things happen in the first place?

God either doesn't exist or he's incompetent.

...either way, why should I or anyone else believe in it?

I believe I came to be here because my dad put his penis inside my mums fanny and squirted his jism inside her at just the right time of the month that she was ovulating.

15/10/2012 at 11:31
carterusm wrote (see)
Intermanaut wrote (see)

We came to be here through a series of chemical and physical events.  It has nothing to do with an omnipotent being.

 

Proof ?

Does evolution not count?  Please prove that there's a god.

Unlike the rabid bible-thumper in Cheltenham, who thinks that the fact that there's absolutely no evidence to prove that God doesn't exist, most people require proof that something does exist.

Anyway, answer my first question: what was there before God, 6,001 years ago?

15/10/2012 at 11:32
Intermanaut wrote (see)

We came to be here through a series of chemical and physical events.  It has nothing to do with an omnipotent being.

To counter the question "What was there before the big bang?", what was there before God.  That is, what was there 6,001 years ago?

 

carterusm wrote (see)
Intermanaut wrote (see)

We came to be here through a series of chemical and physical events.  It has nothing to do with an omnipotent being.

 

Proof ?

God.

Proof?

 

edit, sorry cross post...

Edited: 15/10/2012 at 11:34
15/10/2012 at 11:35

Given that God created us in her own image, and we've evolved from primoridial goo, I'm surprised Believers haven't claimed that God must also have been goo.  QED.

15/10/2012 at 11:36

"God either doesn't exist or he's incompetent."

 

These aren't the only alternatives. e.g.

- A god could have given up on us.

- God could be a sadist, and we his little experiment.

- He could have gone to the other side of the universe and be too busy with the Planet Zorg, his latest creation, to be bothered with the earthlings at present.

- God might have died.

 

A good book on this (for my recollection of 25 years ago anyway) is The Problem of Pain by C S Lewis which discusses some of this stuff.

Edited: 15/10/2012 at 11:37
15/10/2012 at 11:44

Rickster – The old argument goes God gives us free will to do good things. Some people abuse this and do bad things. If God intervened we would no longer have the free will to do good things. You are also making an assumption of absolute morality in your comment. You cite war, famine and hatred. Are these things fundamentally wrong on some deep level that transcends humanity. Or are they merely human constructs on what’s right and wrong, good and bad? Perhaps an all loving intelligence wouldn’t see these things in the same moral light we do. After all I never hear people questioning why a God would allow creatures of less intelligence than us starve, or suffer in some way. We just accept it as the way things are and apply no moral or ethical labels to it. It’s just nature. Btw I’m not arguing for a God, just responding to your post!

FWIW I think it perfectly possible to put forward a logical argument for an intelligent creator of the Universe (Though it seems to create more questions than it answers and I find other theories much more plausible). Though of course it’s completely different to acknowledge that an intelligent creator is a logical possibility to move to a religious view of an anthropomorphised God. A view which I cannot give any credibility to.

15/10/2012 at 11:50
Intermanaut wrote (see)
Anyway, answer my first question: what was there before God, 6,001 years ago?

Havent a clue. I happen to believe there is a God but the proof is flakey, at least. A book written by a few people a couple of thousand years ago is no real proof at all. I was bought up a catholic but didnt believe everything, or agree with everything, I was told at church e.g. no sex before marriage. My question would be why, if two people love each other, shouldnt they be allowed to consumate that relationship by having sex. I do, however, believe that the church has helped guide me to reach my own conclusions during the course of my life and help me to become the person I am. On the other hand, I am also not convinced about the big bang theory and all that stuff. Whilst, in more recent years, there is plenty of scientific evidence to support many things, there is still no actual proof about how we came to be here. So, I believe in one thing and others believe in something else. That's how God wanted it to be when he put us here 

15/10/2012 at 11:52

This brings me back to being an agnosrtic atheist.  You will never get a concrete conclusion in a debate between believers and non-believers because of the unbridgable gap between the knowable and the unknowable.

Believers can slip between use of logic for argument's sake and the defense of "faith" whenever it suits them.  They can proclaim that their God is "unknowable" and yet at the same time endow "Him" with physical or emotional traits that we can recognise, even when those traits are incompatible when subjected to logical argument.  So you supposedly have an omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent God, except that's just impossible.  On the other hand, maybe there is a God but we've got Him wrong, e.g. as above, maybe He is all-powerful and all-knowing, but still lets people suffer, i.e. He's not benevolent.

I'm not arguing that there is possibly a God but most people have got the description wrong, I'm just arguing my opinion that the whole concept is impossibly slippery, and that anyone arguing that their God can be described in certain ways, or in any meaningful way be seen as a conscious being who cares about us, whilst still maintaining that ultimately He is unknowable, simply doesn't make any sense.

15/10/2012 at 11:53

"FWIW I think it perfectly possible to put forward a logical argument for an intelligent creator of the Universe"

...which is likely to be how the idea of a god, or gods, came about. You look at what we are part of and say something may have created it.

But it's unfortunate that this has been taken from Stage 1 (something may have created the universe) to a "Stage 2" - something DID create the universe, and that thing is God, and that God is this, or that. Not only have irresponsible clerics  created a being ("God"), they have given it a certain character and talk as if their own creation is a reality. It's all bullshit. Made up, unprovable stuff that is offensive to thinking people. 

All priests, vicars, rabbis, clerics etc should be rounded up and told, "If you can't prove it, shut up. And since you can't actually prove it - shut up!"

 

15/10/2012 at 11:54
carterusm wrote (see)
Intermanaut wrote (see)
Anyway, answer my first question: what was there before God, 6,001 years ago?

Havent a clue. I happen to believe there is a God but the proof is flakey, at least. A book written by a few people a couple of thousand years ago is no real proof at all. I was bought up a catholic but didnt believe everything, or agree with everything, I was told at church e.g. no sex before marriage. My question would be why, if two people love each other, shouldnt they be allowed to consumate that relationship by having sex. I do, however, believe that the church has helped guide me to reach my own conclusions during the course of my life and help me to become the person I am. On the other hand, I am also not convinced about the big bang theory and all that stuff. Whilst, in more recent years, there is plenty of scientific evidence to support many things, there is still no actual proof about how we came to be here. So, I believe in one thing and others believe in something else. That's how God wanted it to be when he put us here 

The proof for the existence of God isn't flaky at all.

15/10/2012 at 12:02

Mr Viper, i've heard all these arguments before, free will etc, it still goes back to making god an irrelevent construct if he has no purpose. Now, I too have no purpose for being here I just exist, but then I'm not put forward as being omnipotent and of great importance.

 

Colin McLaughlin wrote (see)

"God either doesn't exist or he's incompetent."

 

These aren't the only alternatives. e.g.

- A god could have given up on us.

- God could be a sadist, and we his little experiment.

- He could have gone to the other side of the universe and be too busy with the Planet Zorg, his latest creation, to be bothered with the earthlings at present.

- God might have died.

 

A good book on this (for my recollection of 25 years ago anyway) is The Problem of Pain by C S Lewis which discusses some of this stuff.

- A god could have given up on us.

Not much of a god then is it? If a supreme being gives up so easily why should I believe in them?

- God could be a sadist, and we his little experiment.

Not much of a god then is it? If a supreme being wants to hurt us why should I believe in them?

- He could have gone to the other side of the universe and be too busy with the Planet Zorg, his latest creation, to be bothered with the earthlings at present.

You have a very different defintion of omnipotent to me! lol

- God might have died.

As above...

 

I'm curious as to why you refer to god as "he"? If we're made in it's image where do women fit in?

 

 

Edit: removed double quote?

Edited: 15/10/2012 at 12:03
15/10/2012 at 12:16
Colin McLaughlin wrote (see)

"FWIW I think it perfectly possible to put forward a logical argument for an intelligent creator of the Universe"

...which is likely to be how the idea of a god, or gods, came about. You look at what we are part of and say something may have created it.

But it's unfortunate that this has been taken from Stage 1 (something may have created the universe) to a "Stage 2" - something DID create the universe, and that thing is God, and that God is this, or that. Not only have irresponsible clerics  created a being ("God"), they have given it a certain character and talk as if their own creation is a reality. It's all bullshit. Made up, unprovable stuff that is offensive to thinking people. 

All priests, vicars, rabbis, clerics etc should be rounded up and told, "If you can't prove it, shut up. And since you can't actually prove it - shut up!"

 

RW create a sticky! QED

15/10/2012 at 12:17
lardarse wrote (see)

"A god could have given up on us."

"Not much of a god then is it? If a supreme being gives up so easily why should I believe in them?"

That doesn't follow. If I was god and I'd created the human race, I'd be disappointed enough with my creation not to bother with it any more. Human nature is pretty awful. You could believe in a creator who started the thing off but is so dismayed he's turned his back on us and his attentions are elsewhere.

 

 

- God could be a sadist, and we his little experiment.

Not much of a god then is it? If a supreme being wants to hurt us why should I believe in them? 

 Why, "not much of a god"? We do the same to mice and rats in our laboratories as god might be doing to us. You are confusing two ideas. Hitler wanted to hurt people (or had the effect of hurting them) but Hitler existed. He didn't not exist because he wanted to hurt people.

 

 

- He could have gone to the other side of the universe and be too busy with the Planet Zorg, his latest creation, to be bothered with the earthlings at present.

You have a very different defintion of omnipotent to me! lol

 

 Who said he had to be omnipotent?

You can't be in two places at once. Why should a god be able to be?

 

I'm curious as to why you refer to god as "he"? If we're made in it's image where do women fit in?

 

 Because it's a convention, sort of.

Maybe I should have included a definitions section in my post. 

----

I don't actually believe there is anything in the universe that corresponds to what priests and clerics etc present to us as "god". I was simply contesting your idea that either there isn't a god or he's incompetent. If there were a god, there are other explanations that could be presented besides incompetence to explain his absence/non-intervention.

 

15/10/2012 at 12:27
PhilPub wrote (see)

anyone arguing that their God can be described in certain ways, or in any meaningful way be seen as a conscious being who cares about us, whilst still maintaining that ultimately He is unknowable, simply doesn't make any sense.

Phil - Quite agree with the above.

Colin - Pretty much agree though I would question whether all priests, vicars etc think in the way you suggest. I know from experience that many reject a God in such a form.

15/10/2012 at 12:35
carterusm wrote (see)
On the other hand, I am also not convinced about the big bang theory and all that stuff. Whilst, in more recent years, there is plenty of scientific evidence to support many things, there is still no actual proof about how we came to be here. So, I believe in one thing and others believe in something else. That's how God wanted it to be when he put us here 

 Catersum – What makes you so unsure about the big bang? There is an awful lot of scientific evidence backing it up. The measurement of radiation levels in recent times match those predicted when the theory was first postulated. It’s very convincing indeed. When you say there is still no proof as to why we came to be here do you mean why we as humans exist? Or do you mean why the Universe exists. I.e why is there something rather than nothing at all?

15/10/2012 at 12:50

Not that I am claiming to be an expert on the big bang - but I do suspect that when people say they are not convinced by evolution or the big bang - it may be because they really haven't examined it very closely - and just have a vague idea about what it is. 

15/10/2012 at 13:02

Just had a quick look at William Lane Craig's website.

15/10/2012 at 13:09

yes - I just had a look too - the bit I looked at was pretty morally repugnant. 

181 to 200 of 252 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums