Why is God so difficult to believe in? [Archive]

View Full Version : Why is God so difficult to believe in?

Captainqt

03-08-2008, 06:07 PM

Why is God so difficult to believe in? It is an interesting question and one that I think I have some experience in answering. I have not always believed in God. I had to develop that belief through various means. I suppose that I will have to break it down for examination.

Why would be the first part of the question. We always have to have a reason to do something. Otherwise our entire life would be robot-like and there would exist no will of man in order to pursue that which brings his life meaning. That brings up a whole slew of new questions that we could be asking as well. These are questions that we should all ponder at least once in our lives. What is the meaning of life? What purpose am I serving in my life. Why is life worth living in the first place. When we pose these questions and answer them honestly we must use logic. That seems to be the only useful tool in tackling these tough questions. Back to the point at hand, we must consider our reasons.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This is a classic law of physic that also finds it's way into many areas of philosophy. It rings to the same tune as 'do unto others which you would have done unto you'. What I am getting at here is the active part of the reason, which is the effort that we use to support that reason. We have a choice placed in front of us and we choose. How is that motivation found? Obviously this relates to this question perfectly. Can most people actually confess that they have never been confronted with the choice of a spiritual position? I'd say that if you are reading this article or anything of the like you could not answer that in the negative. Our choices are motivated by our reasons, but often our reasons can be quite blurred. Therefore, I believe that I can conclude that our reasoning comes from a very basic moral level which we have developed over time in our lives. If one is brought up in a Christian household then most likely their choice to accept God will come from the reason of their moral upbringing. For them it would just not be right to turn away from God. That was ingrained into them. For others it is not the same. Many are not brought up in that environment, so we come across our reasoning in a different way.

The difficulty of belief in my opinion is simple. It is selfishness and pride. I look at myself and my life over the last few years and from where I stand it is in bold writing how obvious this is. For years I lived as a non-believer and for those years I made one bad decision after another. There reasons for these bad decisions were found in my motivation to make them. That motivation was purely self-indulgent. I wanted this for ME, I wanted that for ME, etc. Family meant much less to me than I meant to myself. Friends were thought of in the same light. My own story there is a very dramatic disproportionate level of love that I gave out to others versus myself. For some I am sure that the levels are not as dramatic, but it is there. Be aware, I am about to make a very bold statement...please do not take it personal! If there is not a service towars something higher than yourself, for example the common good and welfare of others, than your life loses a great deal of it's meaning and purpose. I am not saying that it makes one worthless, only that it lessens the impact that you have on others and the world. There are billions of people in the world and we all live under the same rules and regulations. There are many things that govern us which are universal. I must conclude that God is difficult to believe in simply because we cannot get over ourselves. It requires a great deal of effort and motivation to allow yourself to willfully surrender to a greater purpose. It is not easy, but from where I stand now, it is well worth it.

Morten

03-08-2008, 06:39 PM

I wholeheartedly tried to believe once, owing not a little to my admiration for Kierkegaard. However, I found it impossible to believe and still do. Mostly because there is no way of proving God's existence. Then because of my intense disgust with the hypocrisy of organized religion and the terror it still brings upon the world. Then there's the problem of evil and so forth. And while phrases such as "God is the universe" certainly have so catchy a ring to them, they're naught but empty jingles. You could replace the word god with anything and it still would be just as credible.

I'm a biological living organism with five senses and a limited lifespan. I don't intend to spend it believing in something I cannot with any of these senses perceive, hear, feel or taste, etc.

SirRaustusBear

03-08-2008, 11:22 PM

So, to sum up your theory, you believe people who aren't religious are selfish. I happen to care about those around me and still don't believe in God. Tyeing selfishness with atheism is like saying all atheist are immoral. Generalizing in such a way about any religious group is ignorant and offensive.

God is difficult to believe in because there is no scientific evidence for his existence. We are all raised to believe in reason, and faith, by its very nature, defies reason. I'm not saying believers are wrong, I am just saying their belief in a god does not stem from reason.

NikolaiI

03-09-2008, 07:04 AM

God is not difficult to believe in for everyone. He is not easy to believe in for everyone. In fact the concept of God is different for everyone, and it is as different from one person to the next as the people are themselves. In the Bhagavad-Gita it says that all paths lead to God. For some people self-realization is not possible without God; such people undoubtedly not have this position if they didn't think that turning away from God (doubting his existence) was false to what they felt was real.

I will contest my belief in God here, if anyone wishes. My belief does stem from reason. I do not need to be able to understand wholly the infinite, for it to be wholly reasonable for me to have faith in that infinite God. The idea that most religions have is that God is the source, and the infinite. Pascal said this, and Plato before him, and many Hindu mystics before Plato.

My experiences have removed all doubt that there exists a higher and more true reality, to the phenomenal or material reality that I know through the senses. I've always cared about my mental, emotional and spiritual development. The world of learning, is just one world that is a 'higher' reality beyond the senses. The spiritual world is another one of these. The big question then is whether anything or everything spiritual is real, has value, or is nothing more than illusion. There are countless ideas that are invaluable in spiritual growth, especially in Eastern traditions, but which are doubtless widely unknown or misunderstood in the West. And of course every time information changes hands, it gets distorted.

To be an atheist has nothing to do with morality. Some people are self-realized without God. The Buddha was atheist, after all. It is only because of our limited understanding or vision that we make comparisons of atheist or believer in the first place. A thought which occurred to me during a mystical experience was how brute-like human thought is; how limited. A word or human concept in the eyes of God could not possibly different from a grunt. Yet we can fix our eyes on the divinest human, and take from that our model of what divinity really is.

I've been reading some really interesting stuff recently about and by various mystics, of different faiths. It's funny how sometimes they'll get one idea so dead-on target, but then another they'll just be spouting limiting, limited or negative blah. But then I guess, I was never really any good at communicating, so I'll leave it to y'all...

Silvia

03-09-2008, 07:39 AM

In my opinion, to say that atheists only believe in what they can hear, see and touch is a little bit diminishing....I do not believe in God, but my reasons for this are not to be found in reason or science. I just happened to ask myself why I used to attend Church and pray, and I got no answer. I think believing in God simply doesn't come from my heart, but maybe it'll change some day...

bonstermonster3

03-09-2008, 08:05 AM

Actually, Captain was not trying to insult anyone-he was simply stating something that in the majority of cases is true. I lived many years as an Atheist and have spent alot of time with and alot of time talking to non-believers, both before I repented and after I repented. Face it-we are raised in a world that tells us to put ourselves first. If you can't see it and touch it, it's B.S. If someone doesn't like you, f*** 'em. You've only got one life to live, party it up! There are some who believe in things they cannot sceintifically prove, also, but still do not believe in God. But I digress to my original point. As we grow older and meet more people, we are bombarded with choices and a glimpse at how the world REALLY is. Nowhere is it promised that each person's life is to revolve solely around them; nowhere was it promised that everything in life would be fair; nowhere does it promise that a life riddled with immorality and selfishness will be without consequence. We are the "me" generation. We were not raised with any guidance as how to handle obstacles that stand in the way of our gratification and selfish indulgence. Hence, as one popular book makes very clear, we are not only the "me" generation, but also the most lonely and depressed. I grew up with an attitude that nothing and no one was better than me, and that I deserve to do whatever I want. Then when the realization sunk in that that is NOT how the world works, I was truly miserable.

Even though I did do generous things sometimes and on many occasions put others first, I still fell deep into a suicidal and self-righteouss haze. Until I gave up one dark dark when on the brink of the ultimate act of self-hatred, and He saved me after I asked for His guidance. Humbling oneself and accepting your role under the One and Only loving God is beyond explanation and I cannot adequately describe the feeling of genuine repentance. I can only live my life as best I can following the word of God and hope that my kindness and honesty will inspire others to look beyond themselves. I know my repentance was highly inspired by the shooting of those 10 girls at the Nickel Mines Amish schoolhouse (or more importantly, the forgiveness and compassion the Amish granted to the murderer and his family just days later).

As for hypocrasy-if it is hypocrasy you despise, I dare you to take a good hard look at yourself and every last person you know, as well as the world. It is brimming with hypocrasy, but do not blame the error of Christian humans to obliterate the pureness of Jesus Christ. Believing entails believing in Him, not the world. I struggled greatly with the issue of church and dealing socially with other Christians because of my dislike of hypocrasy, even though I lived as one for many years and somedays in some areas I still find myself acting as such. That is why it is vital for Christians to truly live life practicing worship, charity, forgiveness, unconditional love, compassion and generosity. You will not find one human being absent of hypocrasy, and since organized religion is organized by human beings, well-what do you really expect???? Though that was one of my big reasons for not believing when I was an Atheist, I now find it to be a convenient and rather shoddy excuse for throwing out religion. There are many devoted, sincere Christians, just as there are many severely flawed, imperfect and struggling Christians. I grew up with a bad image of Christians and Christianity itself in turn, only to be found speechless by reading of how the father of one of those little girls murdered said he forgave and that he hoped this would help people to look to Christ. I thought to myself-WOW. I recalled Columbine and the papers "The monsters next door", etc. The vengenance, spite and hatred I had grown accostumed to hearing was nowhere to be found. So who was this Jesus really and how has He left such a profound imprint on the Amish???

After looking into Christianity and not looking at Christians and the denominations, I found there to be an astounding amount of perfection; and most of it consists of living for others before ourselves. Answer me honestly-what IS so bad about a religion that requires and encourages in EVERY CASE love, forgiveness, generoisity, selflessness, charity, endurance, support, encouragement, understanding and wisdom???? In fact, don't post your answer-answer it truthfully to yourself, for that is the only answer that I want you to find.

I understand why it is hard for many to believe because I have been there, but just because I understand does not mean I agree. The best I can do is give what food for thought I can and try to follow in God's footsteps better everyday, to be an example of Light and mercy.

God bless you all,

Bonnie

SirRaustusBear

03-09-2008, 12:39 PM

The fact that you "lived many years as an atheist" gives you neither the right nor the ability to speak of what motivates us all. The idea of believe being easy or difficult is kind of silly anyway, because believing is not something you can make yourself do. If i say "Start believing in Santa, Go!" you couldn't do it.

My athiesm has nothing to do with egocentricism any more than does your disbelief in Santa Claus. Do you think yourself so great that you are not just a name on his list, to be judged either naughty or nice.

Besides Plato argued being just affects one psychologically and being a good person will be rewarded with happiness in this life not the next. There are other motivations for being a good person besides fear of a vengeful diety.

Shield&Sword

03-09-2008, 12:57 PM

And you found it easy to believe in: "once upon a time (time 0) there was a little mass, alone, from where it came? no one know, any way, this mass exploded alone and made big big big bang, and this big big bang through some mumbu gumbo* reactions (see word reaction started to appear) made planets (!!!!!!!!!) for coincidence (!!!!!!!!!), and then earth started to be formed for "coincidence" and then a cell from no where appeared (through same mumbo gumbo process) in the sea, this cell (always through mumbo gumbo process) became fish, this fish in "coincidence" decided to take a walk on earth, so (really i dont know how to write this, we have 3 possibles, the fish made Valsalva maneuver and appeared legs or the humble nature gave it legs according to the fact "if your leg was cut then your child wont have it and the opposite is right" or it wait untle the "intellegent coincidence" give the legs, i know all 3 are ....).
Any way this fish became lizard and lizard became bird and other lizards became animal, and with time a monkey appeared and then the man appeared, others when i tell them the final part they correct me and say monkey is brother of man they both came from the same ancestor.
Any way this was the story of the man, if you want the story of physics and chemistry and biology and and and ... i wont finish.
* Mumbo gumbo is the "intelligent" "coincidental" reactions that came from no where and decided all things. (If any one find "intellegent" not suitable i will cancel it, i know coincidence and intelligent cant go with conicidence)
Easier to believe in ?

SirRaustusBear

03-09-2008, 02:46 PM

Simply because you do not understand a scientific theory does not make it "mumbo jumbo." For instance, the first life in the oceans came from the slow buildup of molecules that eventually formed amino acids, which make up proteins (this process had been confirmed through replication in the lab). These proteins then joined to form protocells, and there are a few theories to explain how this happened. The one that I think is best is the bubble theory, you can wiki it if you want to learn more.

Anyway, the point of explaining this was that things are easy to dismiss when given funny labels like mumbo jumbo, but doing so is to actively guard your ignorance, rather than to explore new ideas. It is easy for me to believe in science because it demands evidence, whereas religion is based in faith.

bonstermonster3

03-09-2008, 02:54 PM

SirRaustusBear,
Believing is as simple as that-I finally said "I can't do this alone, there is more to this than simply me, or simply only the things I can comprehend or simply only things that can be thoroughly explained to me as physically possible, etc". The proof of God is shown to each individual after they repent. As I said, it is indescribable and I believe nothing I will tell you in attempts to describe it would do it justice. Pretty much everyone else who has repented would tell you the same.

Santa Claus and Jesus Christ are two completely different things, therefore not a good example. Who cares about some guy who smashes himself into the chimney of every home that celebrates Christmas all in one night???? Jesus Christ came to earth to make God's word anew, right wrongs and teach the lost-and then to die a brutal death to show just how much He would go through for even those who condemned Him. The ultimate display of love, forgiveness and compassion. Nowhere did God say He would scientifically prove His existence to us-He does, however, prove Himself to those who will believe in Him without demanding whatever it is they think they deserve as a human being before they will believe in God, their Creator. I hear people tell me that all the time-about how they have prayed and/or thought about it, and if this happens or that happens or this can be proven, then God must be real. That is not repentance or believing. Repentance is the confession of sins, starting your life anew, turning to Him and allowing His love and guidance into your heart.

You really said nothing I have not heard before, such as-"I want proof, or else it isn't real". "I can't just FORCE myself to believe." Human beings CONTROL their thoughts, actions and feelings, just as we control what we believe. Things I once believed to be true, I now believe are false. If believing were beyond my control, that would be impossible. I looked at life and everything that way before, and it leads only to discontentment, bitterness, disappointment and dissatisfaction. And yes, I AM saying that those who do not know God are lost and will never achieve the fulfillment and satisfaction that believers do-He even says so. They may experience happiness, joy, and a good number of them are still generous and many non-believers do what they can for others. But they are still denying God, and without Him, fulfillment is impossible. I firmly believe that as a Christian.

So, like I said, I always listen and do my best to understand others, but that does not mean that I agree with them or condone things they do which clash with my beliefs. Hopefully someday something will strike you and you will understand humility and salvation. And yes, I really mean that.

I do not find God to be a vengeful deity, by the way-"God is merciful", "God is faithful" and let's not forget that God forgives all sinners who confess and repent. Sometimes people repent, fall back into sin and rededicate themselves, and find themselves being blessed by God more than ever. Jesus taught us to be like God; not judging, not hating; in fact, loving everyone, even those who do you wrong, forgiving and loving unconditionally. I do not fear God, I love Him, am grateful for all He has given me, I look to Him for guidance and I am proud to say Jesus is my Savior.

"Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart:...Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding." -Proverbs 3:3 & 5

"All people are worth more than the worst thing they did in their lives." -Sister Helen Prejean

"Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not;...Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things".-1 Corinthians 13:4-7

"...God is faithful..." -1 Corinthians 10:13

"The Truth shall set you free" -John 8:32

Christianity is not a vengeful religion. I didn't even tap into the gospels for any of those quotes, and Jesus had much to say on not seeking revenge and the like.

And if you think the idea of souls going to hell is solely a punishment or God seeking revenge-ponder this: God gave man free will; God wants man to have what man wants; if a person does NOT wish to spend eternity with God, why would He force them???

Just a few points I though might make you think a little bit harder about it. None of this was meant to offend you or anything. I just wanted to provide a response to what you said about what I posted. Thanks for reading what I have to say.

Bonnie

Tournesol

03-09-2008, 03:14 PM

Do we hope?
Hope to catch the bus? [time]
Hope it doesn't rain? [weather]
Hope that the one we love, loves us? [love]
Hope the maid remembered to feed the dog? [working of the brain]

Think about these things.

If we hope for things everyday, to what/whom do we hope?

Who controls these things?

Every single being has to hope for something, or has a hope of something.
If you hope, WHO do you HOPE TO?
WHO do you expect will FULFILL your HOPE???

Have you thought of it?

Is God still difficult to believe in?

SirRaustusBear

03-09-2008, 03:32 PM

If God gives you two choices: be Christian or go to Hell, than that isn't a choice at all, it is an ultimatum, much like saying give me your lunch money or I will beat you up. Sure, you get to choose, but your options are rather limited.

And the "proof" that is felt after repentence may be described by Christians, but it is also described by Scientologists. Since it is "proof," are both opposing beliefs true? Rather than admit to this paradox that would likely tear a hole in the space-time continuum, I'm going to assume that neither is truly proof, but only a feeling that reinforces your belief.

Belief is not under our control. Children do not want to believe in ghosts, and tell themselves they are not real, but they are still scared. I don't want to presume to describe your own religious experience to you, because you obviously have a much firmer grasp than I on what happened, but your description seems to be more of a realization than a choice. Choice implies that you could go either way, but you seem to have realized God's existence. At that point could you have chosen to disbelieve in God?

Oh, and I want to say that I appreciate the open mindedness and willingness to discuss ideas demonstrated by most people on this board. I hope I put forth the same respect that I recieve and if I say something that offends feel free to let me know, as that is certainly not my aim.

SirRaustusBear

03-09-2008, 03:38 PM

Hope does not need a diety to exist. What you described seems to be prayer. When you blow out your birthday candles and make a wish for a brand new car, are you asking God to deliver you a car?

Shield&Sword

03-09-2008, 03:57 PM

Hmmm, i hope you have read the definition of mumbo jumbo.
As i see you cant read between lines, and you thought that mumbo jumbo was about reaction we dont know how they work.
My point was that if all universe is coincidence then all reactions must be mumbo jumbo, coincidence lead to disorder, order are made by controlled and pre-studied actions. hope you understand cant be more clear than that.
Coincidence doesnt lead to formation of L-proteins which are indispensable to build a living form. I hope you understand what i mean by L, Levo and destro.
When amino acid is formed by coincidence then its mumbo jumbo, when its made by wise designer then its reaction, proteins are made by mumbo jumbo if they are coincidence, alfa elica proteins are mumbo jumbo if we use the coincidence lent to look at the process, and they are controlled process by wise designer.

My post wasnt so difficult to understand.
I want you to tell me only one thing: the amino acid and protein and chemical reactions, are they made by coincidence (i dont talk about the process but about how they stardted from the very beginning). Did coincidence determine all? or NOT?

By the way take it easy,

SirRaustusBear

03-09-2008, 04:56 PM

While coincidence does play a role, everything did not come from one cell. The process of transformations from amino acids to living cells repeated itself many times, so it isn't as if a single coincidence created life on earth. The conditions at the time made this process probable, just like if a community lives near an unsafe nuclear reactor and several of them develop cancer, it isn't a coincidence.

Single coincedences can be very important, and an asteroid could wipe out all life on earth at any time, which would be a very significant event based on the coincidental crossing of gravitational paths, but they do not determine all.

Ryduce

03-09-2008, 07:17 PM

To me the atheist have an equal amount of absurd faith placed in the belief of nothingness.God,unprovable,requires both faith in his existence and non-existence.The only truly non-partial denomination is the agnostics,who defer both belief and disbelief,but are open to both.

The thing is we must concede the fact that all that came to be in this universe spontaneously existed in a single moment in an infinite history,when before this moment there was nothing.I think the processess of protein synthesis and evolution are rather insignificant when speaking about the existence of God.In the beginning there was nothing,then there was everything,and one day there will be nothing again,whether it be the big rip or some other cosmic destruction.

We must also concede the fact that we will all die.So atheism for some enriches the short amount of time we have here,while the exact same thing can be said for the ardent believer.So atheism and faith both serve a purpose for human nature.The need for meaning.They are just polar opposites in the quest.

Perhaps I am biased because I am a believer,and this seems absurd for the rational scientific minded community.And I doubt very seriously there will ever be any empirical evidence that either proves or disapproves God.And this is simply enough for me.I will die someday,and at worst if there is no God I've lived a deluded existence that I'm no longer even capable of conscious recognition of,so no problem there.At best,however,there is a God,in which case all is well.The essential point is that faith is not an enemy of reason,it is a supplement.It can never hurt.Especially in the face of the unprovable.

Morten

03-09-2008, 07:49 PM

Actually, Captain was not trying to insult anyone-he was simply stating something that in the majority of cases is true.
Would you kindly support this ridiculous claim? I'm from Denmark, one of the most irreligious nations in the world (along with England, Sweden, Germany, etc) and does the widespread disbelief in these countries stem from some sort of egocentrism? Why do you think that you are so saved and holy because you believe in god?

I know my repentance was highly inspired by the shooting of those 10 girls at the Nickel Mines Amish schoolhouse (or more importantly, the forgiveness and compassion the Amish granted to the murderer and his family just days later).
Despicable. A man like that cannot be forgiven.

That is why it is vital for Christians to truly live life practicing worship, charity, forgiveness, unconditional love, compassion and generosity.
No. That is why Christianity is so hypocritical. All those terms sound nice and wouldn't it be grand if we all embodied them. Only, we're human beings and therefore (also) selfish, cruel and unforgiving.

After looking into Christianity and not looking at Christians and the denominations, I found there to be an astounding amount of perfection; and most of it consists of living for others before ourselves. Answer me honestly-what IS so bad about a religion that requires and encourages in EVERY CASE love, forgiveness, generoisity, selflessness, charity, endurance, support, encouragement, understanding and wisdom????
You really think that is what Christianity preaches? I think you should re-read your history and your bible.

Morten

03-09-2008, 07:52 PM

To me the atheist have an equal amount of absurd faith placed in the belief of nothingness.
Only the atheist bases his disbelief on scientific and rational evidence. It is not unfair to ask for some sort of evidence of god's existence when religion makes so many enormous assumptions about the world. Firing off some emtpy remark about how "god is the universe", simply doesn't cut it. In other areas of life, one would not settle for such a reply.

Ryduce

03-09-2008, 08:06 PM

matt2442

03-09-2008, 08:09 PM

"The essential point is that faith is not an enemy of reason,it is a supplement.It can never hurt.Especially in the face of the unprovable."

Ryduce,

If faith is a supplement to reason, should we disregard all faith that is unreasonable? I will spare the long list of beliefs and religions that would need to be disposed of. Atheism is based on reason alone, so of course it is difficult for non-believers to believe in the absurdly held beliefs of religious people. Religious belief is not a supplement to reason, it is the abandonment of reason.

Agnostics do not defer to both belief and disbelief, they say that we cannot know. They are not open to both, they decidedly state that we are without knowledge of the subject. Ryduce, if you read your post again you can see that it is a rationalization for the existence of God and the validity of religious belief.

Atheists cannot place an equal amount of 'absurd faith' in their beliefs because their beliefs are not based on faith.

As for your final statement: 'It can never hurt.' It seems rather ridiculous that you casually placed that very significant, unsupported, and in my opinion inaccurate claim at the very end of your post as if it was fact. Religion absolutely can hurt us. It has in the past, it is doing so now, and it will continue to do so unless it is stopped.

Ryduce

03-09-2008, 08:56 PM

If faith is a supplement to reason, should we disregard all faith that is unreasonable? I will spare the long list of beliefs and religions that would need to be disposed of. Atheism is based on reason alone, so of course it is difficult for non-believers to believe in the absurdly held beliefs of religious people. Religious belief is not a supplement to reason, it is the abandonment of reason.

Well Blaise Pascal would disagree,but that is another matter.

I understand what you are saying,and the more I think about it the more astute an assessment it seems.Perhaps I was too vague.You are equating faith in God with faith in general.I was speaking about faith in the face of the unknown.Where would Quantum mechanics be had early scientist not had faith that there were unseeable atoms.Where would Columbus be had he not believed that he could reach the Indies.Thier faith led to enlightenment and discovery.So faith in this case was not abandonment of reason.

If atheism is based on reason alone how can they dismiss the possibilty of God's existence?That is rather unreasonable wouldn't you say?

Agnostics do not defer to both belief and disbelief, they say that we cannot know. They are not open to both, they decidedly state that we are without knowledge of the subject. Ryduce, if you read your post again you can see that it is a rationalization for the existence of God and the validity of religious belief.

I did say that perhaps I was biased because I am a believer.However,to me saying that you do not know is defering both belief and disbelief.The possibilty is ambiguous.Which to me is open to both sides of the argument.Maybe I am a simpleton.I don't see how I am rationalizing God's existence by saying agnostics are impartial.

Atheists cannot place an equal amount of 'absurd faith' in their beliefs because their beliefs are not based on faith.

As for your final statement: 'It can never hurt.' It seems rather ridiculous that you casually placed that very significant, unsupported, and in my opinion inaccurate claim at the very end of your post as if it was fact. Religion absolutely can hurt us. It has in the past, it is doing so now, and it will continue to do so unless it is stopped.

The belief in nothingness is a belief is it not?It is not based on scientific or rational evidence.They cannot disproves God's existence.So as I see it atheist do base thier beliefs on faith.Agnostics are the exception.

Your concluding paragraph comes from the belief that all religion is inherently evil.On a grand scale religion has led to many problems,however,there is a multitude of other terrible things that have happened that are not religion based.So we could go back and forth on that issue all day.But we are speaking on an individual basis.If someone practices a belief privately how is it harmful?I believe religion is a personal thing anyway,and there are millions of practicing religious people who have done no harm to anybody.So to lump everybody in on the same boat isn't particularly fair.

Thanks for the argument though.It's been quite thought provoking.

islandclimber

03-09-2008, 08:57 PM

Only the atheist bases his disbelief on scientific and rational evidence. It is not unfair to ask for some sort of evidence of god's existence when religion makes so many enormous assumptions about the world. Firing off some emtpy remark about how "god is the universe", simply doesn't cut it. In other areas of life, one would not settle for such a reply.

science is as much a faith as any religion... for science is a bunch of theories masquerading as facts.... notice how there are no facts in science, for everytime you observe something you effect it just in so doing, you change it... secondly everything is temporal and spatial, so there is no permanence, or infinite in science... human definitions can't go into ideas of timeless and infinite, for the very idea of these things defies all definition, to give them definition is to turn them into something else... science, even math is also based in human terms and definitions and therefore any truth it does have already assumes that human terms and definitions are correct and lasting...

so no matter whether you believe in science, or in god, or in both, you need an incredible amount of faith... with science though the curtain has been pulled over our eyes and we all now believe it to be fact when it is far from it... faith is wherever you choose to put it, and that is why it is so hard to believe completely in anything, because it requires opening yourself up completely... allowing everything to shine forth... but everyone has that ability, they just need to use it...

SirRaustusBear

03-09-2008, 10:39 PM

Islandclimber science has taught us to use reason and collect evidence that draws us towards a conclusion. Science is not "theories masquerading as facts." Science is the process of coming up with an idea and testing its validity. If scientists merely accepted their hypotheses as facts, then yes, your statement would be true; but the scientific method is in place to make sure an idea has basis and can make accurate predictions (like how calculus is able to determine information about planetary orbits that is then proven true through observation).

It is frustrating when people equivocate on the word "theory." The scientific definition of theory is different from its definition in everyday life. Our everyday word theory is much closer to a scientific hypotheses, whereas a scientific theory has been tested through experiment.

Saying that when we observe things we change them is simply false. I observe gravity every time I fall down and it has yet to change.

Science does not necessarily attempt to define the timeless and infinite. Scientists do not say gravity will work the same way in places in which it cannot be observed (for instance the proposed parallel universes that are a part of String Theory (which is really a scientific hypothesis at this point, not a theory)).

Science is far from a curtain, it is a light in a dark room. We have discovered truths through science that effect us all every day. That is undeniable.

islandclimber

03-09-2008, 11:19 PM

matt2442

03-09-2008, 11:59 PM

theories tested... they are still theories, as scientists cannot, without huge conditions and "ifs" state anything is absolutely right or fact... which is why science is constantly changing... evolving one could say... there is no truth in science, unless one has faith.. the only reason so many believe in science is because that is the way we are educated and brought up now...

and you speak of truths with regard to calculus and science, but that is all dependent on the very notion of human terms and definitions about the universe being true and fact, which if one actually stopped and took the time to think about rather than just going by what everyone else believes, it requires a great deal of faith...

there is a reason science can only get so accurate, there is a reason quantum physics has an error principle, however small they claim it to be (10 to the negative 34th or something)... when one observes something they place an external force on it, unless it is in a vaccuum, which is not possible, for then we would no longer be able to observe it...à

and yes hypothesis is more equivalent to the everyday word theory, but that does not change that scientific theory is still not fact, nor truth for certain... it still requires just as much faith as god... for along with creating the idea of god, we also created the idea of science... and therefore, science if thought about deeply, requires just as much faith as the absurd idea of some superhuman creator god,.... I myself don't believe in either...

I believe everything is nothing, and nothing is everything... and that is the one universal truth... that is what I have faith in...

When you say that scientific ideas remain theories even after they repeatedly provide accurate predictions of observable behavior in the universe, you are quite right. However, every time a theory withstands a scientific test, we can be more confident in the validity of the theory. This is the basis for the body of scientific knowledge that humans have accumulated. It is also accurate when you say that our knowledge is constantly changing. It is however, changing directionally, toward an accurate understanding of our universe and how it works.

It is incredibly inaccurate when you say that there is no truth in science without faith. Science does not claim to know everything and is certainly not based, in any way, on faith. Faith in our own ideas and critical thinking abilities may lead us to formulate testable hypotheses, but faith is never used as a justification for results that contradict predictions.

Science is not a different form of faith. It is, in fact, far from it. Human terms and definitions allow us to understand the observable universe in ways in which we can perceive, interpret and manipulate. Human names, definitions, words, mathematics, and procedures do not discredit the results those human-defined aspects of the universe derive for us.

You can be cynical about science and obfuscate the scientific method and what it really involves, by saying that 'nothing in science is certain,' or 'everything is nothing and nothing is everything.' But when it comes down to it, you most likely put your faith in science every day when it comes to the medicines you take, the way you power your home, the clothes you wear, the food you eat, and even the technology you are using to read this message. That's right, it might seem interesting to make philosophical arguments against the validity of science or to selectively reject the evidence of science that contradicts one's religious beliefs, but if we judge by the history of human actions, people almost always trust scientific knowledge over faith-based delusions.

I hope that may help you begin to change your mind regarding your 'everything is nothing and nothing is everything belief,' because that is an absolutely intellectually shallow conclusion that most likely only allows you to avoid the task of attempting to accurately understand your existence.

islandclimber

03-10-2008, 12:59 AM

When you say that scientific ideas remain theories even after they repeatedly provide accurate predictions of observable behavior in the universe, you are quite right. However, every time a theory withstands a scientific test, we can be more confident in the validity of the theory. This is the basis for the body of scientific knowledge that humans have accumulated. It is also accurate when you say that our knowledge is constantly changing. It is however, changing directionally, toward an accurate understanding of our universe and how it works.

It is incredibly inaccurate when you say that there is no truth in science without faith. Science does not claim to know everything and is certainly not based, in any way, on faith. Faith in our own ideas and critical thinking abilities may lead us to formulate testable hypotheses, but faith is never used as a justification for results that contradict predictions.

Science is not a different form of faith. It is, in fact, far from it. Human terms and definitions allow us to understand the observable universe in ways in which we can perceive, interpret and manipulate. Human names, definitions, words, mathematics, and procedures do not discredit the results those human-defined aspects of the universe derive for us.

You can be cynical about science and obfuscate the scientific method and what it really involves, by saying that 'nothing in science is certain,' or 'everything is nothing and nothing is everything.' But when it comes down to it, you most likely put your faith in science every day when it comes to the medicines you take, the way you power your home, the clothes you wear, the food you eat, and even the technology you are using to read this message. That's right, it might seem interesting to make philosophical arguments against the validity of science or to selectively reject the evidence of science that contradicts one's religious beliefs, but if we judge by the history of human actions, people almost always trust scientific knowledge over faith-based delusions.

I hope that may help you begin to change your mind regarding your 'everything is nothing and nothing is everything belief,' because that is an absolutely intellectually shallow conclusion that most likely only allows you to avoid the task of attempting to accurately understand your existence.

well I kind of guessed something like this would come out of posting my opinions here... Intellectually shallow... hmm... interesting... how exciting!:lol: and changing my beliefs due to a short little blurb about how i attempt to avoid accurately understanding my existence... well, that is so fascinating, so dreadfully fascinating!:lol:

faith based delusions like science.. you can tell me all you want about how science is real but all those theories that pass tests and then again pass new tests eventually they run into a new test that they cannot pass and a new theory is formulated... that is science, and that process will be infinite, just like the universe... the ideas of timeless and infinite as well are beyond definition, for even defining it or giving a name to it, places it inside human time and space, if these human creations are true as you so readily assure me... but to tell you the truth, time is another human invention that is scientific, that we all depend upon, even I do, I most readily admit, but it has no validity in understanding existence... same with math, same with science, for science goes further and further into it, only to run into dead ends.. why was all this matter just randomly existing in space... why is there space, why is there anything at all, and how has it existed ad infinitum? show me a scientific answer for any of these questions that are fundamentals of existence? you can't! not one that has any even slight validity.. so you go ahead and stick to science to explain existence... I am sure it will get you incredibly far along the path of hopeless and complete delusion yourself...

and I will stick to being intellectually shallow, which is entirely why I have thought through everything you mentioned in your post, all these questions here and come to the, in my opinion, quite reasonable conclusion that science is entirely irrelevant and just as much faith based in explaining human existence... for maybe it can say what we are made of, though it has to give human created terms to it,... maybe it can say what these things do... but science hasn't the foggiest why these things exist, how they came to be, what was before them, etc... science has no answers, just a bunch of theoretical nonsense that is allowing us, humans, to destroy this planet at as fast a pace as possible... at least there was balance when we were primitive hunter gatherers.. now we just destory... and mostly due to, and through your wonderful science... that well believe in so much..

and sure I use scientific inventions.. I don't deny it... that's entirely irrelevant to questions of god and existence, etc... again I ask you to show me where science tells us how everything came to be as it is, how string theory is important to questions of existence, or quantum physics, or math, or relativity,... for in reality they aren't... as well where does it say how something can be infinite or timeless, for the very idea of science places it soley within things that can be defined, observed, measured... you can't do that with timeless, infinite, boundless, eternal... or if you can please explain how you define and measure things that are necessarily without definition? even the fact we named them is entirely absurd... :lol:

by the way I trust my faith based delusions much more than I trust anything in science when it comes to anything that matters... but maybe now that you've made such a compelling argument about how stupid I am, I think I better turn about face and listen to you:lol: yes that sounds like such a great plan...

and if you understood what I meant by "everything is nothing, and nothing is everything" with regards to existence, maybe than you might not be so quick to judge that this is incredibly intellectually shallow (and by the way impressive how you candy-coat calling me stupid...) and that I am just trying to avoid accurately understanding my existence... for philosophy is where we actually try to understand existence, not science... science may attempt to explain everyday phenomena but when it comes to questions of existence and non existence, science can't even scratch the surface, and it never will... so again I repeat, I believe everything is nothing, and nothing is everything with regards to timeless and infinite existence, which is necessarily what is behind the universe... being and non being, existence and non existence,... everything and nothing,... they are all the same.. maybe come down off your high and mighty scientific pedestal and take a look at intellectual philosophies about existence and non existence... maybe take a look at some eastern philosophy... so many of your revered scientists have... I have faith in what I believe.. do you?

PierreGringoire

03-10-2008, 01:54 AM

A partisan of science. One who claims science is the "be all end all." One who believes man's binding gizmo in a deeply multifacited and expansive universe is science-- must have 'faith' (a catch phrase to all you perceptive etymologists out there) in its theories. Matt242 - Some people who believe in God do not 'claim' to know everything. They have 'faith' --although it is limited-- it is still comparable to the type that scientists exhibit when they apply their theories to the real world.
I have an opinion about the mighty connundrum of my existence. In my heartest of hearts I believe there is a god. I believe that even though the dreariest of plights and bleakest of hopes come and go, a shadow of an Objective Truth of a Creator remains hidden but dormant nonetheless, at least to my understanding.
I am aware of my shallowness and my complete fallibility about all subjects of nature. But my 'lot' cannot be limited to the subject matter of 'science' (I mean the study of science, and our lack of ability to analyze things precisly as they are). All organized religion is highly suspect. Concepts and words themselves are so elusive as to leave everyone in any given sect with COMPLETELY different attitudes and opinions from EACHOTHER. SO, I believe self actualization most be dealt with independently. And people must follow their hearts from there, Good Hunting! (In a lot of ways I feel like I have said everything, and at the same time--to people who are reading and interpreting this from left field-- a whole lot of nothing! (: W-O-R-D-S bah!

Morten

03-10-2008, 04:21 AM

I never said it was unfair to ask for evidence.In fact I encourage questioning of the unknown.The thing is there is no evidence that disproves God's existence either,and there enlies the great paradox of atheism.It is simply another form of faith.
There is a great deal more evidence undermining the possibility of God's existence that there is proving it. So no, that is not the paradox of atheism. Atheism is based on evidence.

Morten

03-10-2008, 04:25 AM

science is as much a faith as any religion... for science is a bunch of theories masquerading as facts.... notice how there are no facts in science, for everytime you observe something you effect it just in so doing, you change it... secondly everything is temporal and spatial, so there is no permanence, or infinite in science... human definitions can't go into ideas of timeless and infinite, for the very idea of these things defies all definition, to give them definition is to turn them into something else... science, even math is also based in human terms and definitions and therefore any truth it does have already assumes that human terms and definitions are correct and lasting...

so no matter whether you believe in science, or in god, or in both, you need an incredible amount of faith... with science though the curtain has been pulled over our eyes and we all now believe it to be fact when it is far from it... faith is wherever you choose to put it, and that is why it is so hard to believe completely in anything, because it requires opening yourself up completely... allowing everything to shine forth... but everyone has that ability, they just need to use it...
You can't equate science with belief. I don't choose to believe in gravity; I can see it happening. I choose not to believe in religion because, well, I have never ever seen it "happen". Talking of religious belief as being something that "defies" everything else doesn't really mean anything. I mean, can you prove it? Scientific theories can be proven. Religion cannot.

El Viejo

03-14-2008, 02:51 AM

...you can tell me all you want about how science is real but all those theories that pass tests and then again pass new tests eventually they run into a new test that they cannot pass and a new theory is formulated... that is science, and that process will be infinite, just like the universe... the ideas of timeless and infinite as well are beyond definition, for even defining it or giving a name to it, places it inside human time and space, if these human creations are true as you so readily assure me... but to tell you the truth, time is another human invention that is scientific, that we all depend upon, even I do, I most readily admit, but it has no validity in understanding existence... same with math, same with science, for science goes further and further into it, only to run into dead ends.. why was all this matter just randomly existing in space... why is there space, why is there anything at all, and how has it existed ad infinitum? show me a scientific answer for any of these questions that are fundamentals of existence? you can't! not one that has any even slight validity.. so you go ahead and stick to science to explain existence... I am sure it will get you incredibly far along the path of hopeless and complete delusion yourself...

Having done it myself, I can understand how a person can simply latch onto 'faith,' also known as the proof of things unseen. It's comforting. When there's darkness all around it's nice to imagine that you've got a lantern and can see everything as it is. The flat earth. The garden of Eden. The great white throne. It's nice to have that conviction that all the other religions, and even the other sects of your own religion, are simply wrong and you'll be ok in the great by and by.

The real world is full of scary unknowns, but we're piecing it together slowly, usually to the chagrin of the religious. They like to 'challenge' science and pooh pooh findings as merely theories, although they're perfectly happy when, thanks to a theory, they can get a vaccination, fly to a destination, use a cell phone, or keep their food cold and unspoiled. They don't mind that the theories are imperfect and will be updated. They forget that their equally zealous and informed forbears considered the knowledge and technology they use so casually, that they'd be at least sorely inconvenienced without, to be the work of Satan himself.

People are naturally curious. We are incorrigible pickers-apart and restless toolmakers. Knowledge will continue to increase, and religion will continue to back away from the light, to take refuge in areas of the unknown, or at least unknown to the majority. It will continue to govern by fear. Fear of making the wrong decision. Fear of irritating God. Fear of paying for it in Hell. Eventually the swath of knowledge will leave no room except for the functional portions of their belief--whatever those might prove to be.

islandclimber

03-14-2008, 08:46 AM

Having done it myself, I can understand how a person can simply latch onto 'faith,' also known as the proof of things unseen. It's comforting. When there's darkness all around it's nice to imagine that you've got a lantern and can see everything as it is. The flat earth. The garden of Eden. The great white throne. It's nice to have that conviction that all the other religions, and even the other sects of your own religion, are simply wrong and you'll be ok in the great by and by.

The real world is full of scary unknowns, but we're piecing it together slowly, usually to the chagrin of the religious. They like to 'challenge' science and pooh pooh findings as merely theories, although they're perfectly happy when, thanks to a theory, they can get a vaccination, fly to a destination, use a cell phone, or keep their food cold and unspoiled. They don't mind that the theories are imperfect and will be updated. They forget that their equally zealous and informed forbears considered the knowledge and technology they use so casually, that they'd be at least sorely inconvenienced without, to be the work of Satan himself.

People are naturally curious. We are incorrigible pickers-apart and restless toolmakers. Knowledge will continue to increase, and religion will continue to back away from the light, to take refuge in areas of the unknown, or at least unknown to the majority. It will continue to govern by fear. Fear of making the wrong decision. Fear of irritating God. Fear of paying for it in Hell. Eventually the swath of knowledge will leave no room except for the functional portions of their belief--whatever those might prove to be.

so Morten... these scientific theories that are proven, are almost always eventually disproven.... which explains why science is always changing... secondly general science may have some ideas that can be tested and measure up, which doesn't mean they are proven, but seem to fit the observed phenomena...

what i was quite clear in saying above, is that science has no answers as to the "why" or "how" we exist... how it began? whether it did even begin? why does anything exist? how did it appear in the universe? how did the universe appear? science is hopelessly lost in all these areas... and you tell me where it gives even an attempt at answering... so in terms of universal questions science is entirely irrelevant and useless.. for the terms of science can't even begin to comprehend or understand infinite and timeless... for with these things the very notion of science is useless and is destroyed... secondly even the fact that we've given non human things human definitions invalidates all of science... you speak of gravity, but again it is just another human defined term, depending upon human created numbers and spatial and temporal awareness and creations.... so we have invented a system, and now we make your supposed proven laws about how they exist, what they are... Oh, the hypocrisy!... but again deride me for my faith...

and to Morten and El Viejo... you seem to have the misguided idea that I support or even believe in organised religion.. that my idea of god, is an Abrahamic personal god, with human characteristics, that I think of places like the garden of eden being real, that I think heaven is a human experience, relatable to the same plane of existence we are in now... and then that I have a sect, a religion and I judge all others wrong because of it...

well, maybe you should have taken the time to read some of my post... not once do I say I believe in organised religion, nor support it for the most part... not once did I say I believe in a superhuman creator god, who exists in a human defined way... not once did I say anyone is entirely wrong within any religion... for I believe that every path in life has it's own merits... even science.... but you make your assumptions and don't pay attention to what I believe, lump me and every other believer of something different in with every organised religion... and fear is the governor of my life?????? I don't believe in heaven and hell... not in any definable sense... heaven and hell are what you make of your own life and death... not governed by some external judge of all, not by a god...

so again, criticize me, though you are ignorant of what I think or believe... you must have assumed the above, right? when you were talking about fear, the disappearance of religion, my belief in the garden of eden, a great white throne, a god who saves or damns people... hmmmmm... interesting... I didn't even know myself I believed this until you so kindly helped me to understand....

but you follow your science that will never answer any of the most fundamental questions to existence and non existence... and being and non being.... to what is timeless and infinite... you live in your temporal and spatial world and never find the beauty of going beyond this... or thinking beyond the cramped confines of the scientifically styled and cynical mind....
it is your choice and I respect that... but maybe you could respect everyone else's choice to believe in something more, or something else...

And again, trumping all attempts of yours to classify me as another blind follower of any organised religion, I say my belief is that everything is nothing, and nothing is everything... for in human terms, with human definitions, that is the only way to put it.... I have faith in love... timeless and infinite love... maybe you should try it...

NikolaiI

03-14-2008, 08:56 AM

I believe with all my heart that God exists. El Viejo you say you have done it yourself, but you have not done it, not done everything. Religion is not always true religion, but don't consider all of it to be delusional. True religion is the spirituality. Island climber doesn't believe in one religion or denomination, more true than the rest. As far as I can tell, he/she believes mainly in love. That is my god, that is my religion, nothing more than that, anything developed further is based on my excursion into, and/or my recreation of a system of spirituality.

Also, not all religion is the same-- not all religion worships love, not all religion propagates love, not all religion propagates liberation, some religions propagate ignorance, desire, attachment to material engagement; such religion is not spiritual at all, but only material in nature. What island climber said about getting incredibly far along the path of hopeless and complete delusion...the reason for this is that material engagement will lead us to ignorance and despair. My friend there is a light. It shines above us, and we are blind to it. Through meditation and spirituality, we can become aware of this light. But there's a lot of darkness it must shine through to get to us.

If someone is saved, as in, saved from "Hell," for which I will substitute ignorance and despair, then they have nothing to do with fear, if they are saved truly. For salvation is only in love.

Science concerns knowledge of the material, and knowledge of physical nature. Yet it ignores the spiritual aspect, and thus creates a great imbalance. Although, this has been the path of science until now. There are many scientists who believe in God. Or at least, who profess they do. I am not saying that professing to believe in god is equivalent to believing, nor to reaping any kind of benefit from it, that is, any kind of goodness, or living a spiritually wholesome life. Of course these things are not related. Yet...what is the point of arguing. What you are propagating is limited view. You are denying the existence of something...yet it is considered to be everything, the non-dualistic source...you do not believe in more fundamental layers of being, or am I incorrect? You do not believe in a non-dualistic source of love for our being?

El Viejo

03-14-2008, 03:30 PM

...trumping all attempts of yours to classify me as another blind follower of any organised religion, I say my belief is that everything is nothing, and nothing is everything... for in human terms, with human definitions, that is the only way to put it.... I have faith in love... timeless and infinite love... maybe you should try it...

You assumed that my quoting you meant that I was addressing you personally, whereas I was addressing the faithful in general. You are included, of course, but I chose your remarks because they are representative of the religion side of the argument; that is, that science is imperfect, belief is superior, and Escheresque incantations (e.g. 'everything is nothing and nothing is everything') hold it all together.

Back to the original question, "Why is God so difficult to believe in?" it depends on how one defines God. If by "God" one means the Ancient of Days, the guy on the Great White Throne, the reasons are different than if one sees him, for example, as the invisible rules that govern the behavior of the universe. In the latter case the only difficulty is in regarding God as a person.

islandclimber

03-14-2008, 04:01 PM

You assumed that my quoting you meant that I was addressing you personally, whereas I was addressing the faithful in general. You are included, of course, but I chose your remarks because they are representative of the religion side of the argument; that is, that science is imperfect, belief is superior, and Escheresque incantations (e.g. 'everything is nothing and nothing is everything') hold it all together.

Back to the original question, "Why is God so difficult to believe in?" it depends on how one defines God. If by "God" one means the Ancient of Days, the guy on the Great White Throne, the reasons are different than if one sees him, for example, as the invisible rules that govern the behavior of the universe. In the latter case the only difficulty is in regarding God as a person.

I didn't say that those words or incantations as you call them hold it all together, I don't believe human words or terms or forms or numbers, define anything on an infinite and timeless scale... for they all necessarily fall apart... and this is why it is so much more difficult to believe than in the human invention of science and math...

and far from being imperfect, I believe science is entirely false and falls apart completely when held up beside an infinite light... if only for the fact we invented it, we created it, we made up terms and definitions and try to explain the universe with them... but it all falls apart, for human terms and definitions are locked within a temporal and spatial box... sure they can be handy for while we're alive here on earth, with all our materialism and obsession with ourselves, but on a timeless, infinite scale, they are meaningless... useless... and again I have no desire to regard god as a person, I have no desire to even use the term god, just to put it in words sure, same with my "escheresque" statement about everything is nothing, nothing is everything.... it is just a way to get the beginnings of an idea of what infinite and timeless really means... and they themselves are terms created by us so even they fall apart... only conscious awareness can remain, only essence, only faith, only love...

plus I don't see any invisible rules governing the universe... and if my remarks are representative of the religious argument in general, then why did you not address anything that I actually said, you addressed what appeared to be what you think I believe and do so again now, without really following or understanding what I said... I don't think in terms of god and no god, or existence and non existence, life and death, and afterlife, heaven and hell, belief and non belief... with meditation (and it is my own form of meditation arrived at through studying buddhism, hinduism, taoism, even abrahamic mysticism) you can arrive at a place where human definition falls apart...

please do explain the way in which science explains and has laws for how this happens... meditation and all... passing from this existence for however fleeting a moment... please explain the way in which science says we exist and the why and even the how... in fact just the how... for in any discussion of believing or not believing in some kind of form of godhead science is irrelevant unless it can disprove this, or at least offer some plausible or even non plausible idea of its own as to why and how there is existence, there is the universe, there is thought... please do enlighten me....

Wintermute

03-14-2008, 04:03 PM

Lote-Tree

03-14-2008, 04:09 PM

It seems like we're only trying to convince ourselves.

Cheers,
Doug (the Agnostic)

There is much truth in that!

islandclimber

03-14-2008, 04:14 PM

Ryduce

03-14-2008, 04:32 PM

El Viejo

03-14-2008, 05:11 PM

I believe with all my heart that God exists. El Viejo you say you have done it yourself, but you have not done it, not done everything. Religion is not always true religion, but don't consider all of it to be delusional. True religion is the spirituality. ...

Science concerns knowledge of the material, and knowledge of physical nature. Yet it ignores the spiritual aspect, and thus creates a great imbalance.

What you are propagating is limited view. You are denying the existence of something...yet it is considered to be everything, the non-dualistic source...you do not believe in more fundamental layers of being, or am I incorrect? You do not believe in a non-dualistic source of love for our being?

I've believed a number of things with all my heart, but not all of them turned out to be real. It's a small logical leap to realize that belief does not make a thing so, and to the corollary, that things can be so without our believing them.

A "non-dualistic source of love for our being." I guess you mean a good God without a Satan as a partner or opponent.

No, I do not believe in such a source.

I do believe that we are made of tiny building blocks that array themselves in a seemingly infinite, but still finite number of ways, like magnets, but far more complex. The same bag of blocks holds the pieces that make me, a banana, a star. The interactions of the pieces, and their combinations, are complex beyond our comprehension, except in general terms, although we're making progress.

We like analogies to explain things. It helps if we relate the unknown to something we understand. People needed a way to articulate their sense that the universe had meaning and order that didn't always appear orderly. God, the paternal, mercuric, capricious artisan filled the bill. Analogies are also too often taken beyond their useful limits. That's how we get the idea of a guy on a throne, or limitless, ineffable love.

I do believe in love, but it comes out of us, as we choose, and not from some place else. It can be impressive, but clearly not limitless.

El Viejo

03-14-2008, 05:23 PM

Just curious: Have any of y'all ever changed your minds by reading these forums? I've been reading these things for a couple of years and I've never seen anyone say, "Ok, you're right, god exists." Or, "Maybe I've been a little hasty in placing my faith in this or that god." It seems like we're only trying to convince ourselves.

Cheers,
Doug (the Agnostic)

You've got that right. I heard that in a debate the only people whose positions change appreciably are those who were uncommitted to begin with.

It takes time to change a perspective. I didn't become an atheist overnight. I didn't stop seeing homosexuality as a disease or a sin overnight either. Change takes time, and the light bulb really has to want to change.

So in the short term, it would appear that we're trying to convince ourselves, and that's a valid activity. We are also, however, trying to convince one another, which is also a valid activity, but we'd need a longer view to see any results.

People who exchange arguments in good faith put themselves in a position to both change minds and change their own minds.

A friend of mine described a game he and his wife used to play with some other couples they knew. They'd choose a hot topic, divide into opposing teams, and debate the issue for twenty minutes or so. Then they'd change sides and do it again, arguing the opposite view. I've never found anyone to play this game with, and the hard part would be playing in good faith. Forums like this are the closest substitute I can get.

El Viejo

03-14-2008, 05:37 PM

I believe science is entirely false and falls apart completely when held up beside an infinite light...

human terms and definitions are locked within a temporal and spatial box...
on a timeless, infinite scale, they are meaningless... useless...

why did you not address anything that I actually said, you addressed what appeared to be what you think I believe and do so again now, without really following or understanding what I said...
... please do enlighten me....

I don't think I can address anything you actually said, because I don't think you actually said anything. Back to the 'everything is nothing' statement for a moment. I pulled 'Escheresqe' out of my hat, as it were, because your reasoning is much like an Escher drawing. Water flowing uphill, stairs that end up at their own bottom again. Just because something can be imagined, drawn, or articulated does not mean it can be. True, it can 'be' in the delightfully entertaining and comfortable recesses of our minds, and it's fun to go play there, but eventually we have to come out and use stairs that go somewhere, and work with the fact that water goes downhill only. I like to play in my mind too, it's great fun, probably healthy even. But when it comes to understanding how my cell phone works or where my food comes from or what to do about the man collapsing on the sidewalk in front of me, or what happens when I die, I come back outside.

islandclimber

03-14-2008, 06:23 PM

QUOTE=El Viejo;542592]I don't think I can address anything you actually said, because I don't think you actually said anything. Back to the 'everything is nothing' statement for a moment. I pulled 'Escheresqe' out of my hat, as it were, because your reasoning is much like an Escher drawing. Water flowing uphill, stairs that end up at their own bottom again. Just because something can be imagined, drawn, or articulated does not mean it can be. True, it can 'be' in the delightfully entertaining and comfortable recesses of our minds, and it's fun to go play there, but eventually we have to come out and use stairs that go somewhere, and work with the fact that water goes downhill only. I like to play in my mind too, it's great fun, probably healthy even. But when it comes to understanding how my cell phone works or where my food comes from or what to do about the man collapsing on the sidewalk in front of me, or what happens when I die, I come back outside.[/QUOTE]

I understand the Escher reference, but maybe Escher had something of a truth in his drawings of supposed impossibilities, enigmas, paradoxes, whatever you want to call them....

and it is such a matter of great importance to know how a cellphone works,... extraordinary connected to this discussion... food came along long before science.. that was called primitive man.. hunter gatherers.... they weren't too advanced you know, and somehow they survived to spawn our corrupted race of people with no faith in anything they can't see or explain in some way related to math and science.... and so you tell me what happens when you die... tell me outside the recesses of your mind what happens when you die? you say I said nothing... but I did ask you a very specific question that you and every other person who thinks the same way seems to avoid... give me the how and why as explained by science??? tell me about these supposedly:

tiny building blocks that array themselves in a seemingly infinite, but still finite number of ways, like magnets, but far more complex. The same bag of blocks holds the pieces that make me, a banana, a star. The interactions of the pieces, and their combinations, are complex beyond our comprehension, except in general terms, although we're making progress.

aren't these, according to you, what we are made of? and how does your science prove this, even the fact they are finite? tell me how you're not just having faith in something that you and science really know nothing at all about? for that's what it sounds like... if everything is made of little finite building blocks than where did they come from, or are they infinite in terms of timeless existence, just not in spatial existence? please explain all this to me? why you're ideas are right , and why they require less faith and are rooted in reality, and please tell me why you're reality rooted ideas (which you haven't explained) on what happens after death are better and require less, supposedly, absurd faith than mine.,.. please, again, I ask you to enlighten me, for if I have been saying nothing, what you have been saying is less than nothing... you're argument consists of telling me I'm not saying anything, rather than refuting, or even challenging what I say, what I believe in... I don't mind at all having my beliefs challenged even torn apart if you can... but to just tell me I'm saying nothing, that's just childish... you selectively choose parts to quote that by themselves don't say much, but altogether it says alot..

lastly I would really like to know how anything is entirely finite... for that matter tell me, with your scientific view how is it possible for there not to be a creator god... for I don't believe in a creator god, but if the world is finite, and we are finite, everything had to have been created by something infinite, everything had to come from somewhere if you like you say everything is finite... but my view in which the true reality behind this illusion, is that there are no beginnings or ends, or definitions, or forms, and everything is infinite and timeless, there is no required creator god...

it is funny how that works for science does kind of necessitate a god of some sort to have gotten the ball rolling... but please actually answer the questions I ask this time... there are quite a few building up now from these posts where I supposedly say nothing... please tell me the truth that science tells about the universe...

cheers

NikolaiI

03-14-2008, 06:35 PM

NikolaiI

03-14-2008, 06:48 PM

it is funny how that works for science does kind of necessitate a god of some sort to have gotten the ball rolling... but please actually answer the questions I ask this time... there are quite a few building up now from these posts where I supposedly say nothing... please tell me the truth that science tells about the universe...

cheers

Your posts are incredibly valuable, incredibly inspiring, and enlightening in fact. I know I am not the only one who thinks so. What you are doing is wonderful, and the words you write are like a beautiful song. I just wanted to say this...to counteract the negativity of someone saying that you didn't say anything. Just want to offer my gratitude.

ajsa

03-14-2008, 09:23 PM

God Is So Easy To Believe...look Around You!!!

islandclimber

03-14-2008, 09:54 PM

Your posts are incredibly valuable, incredibly inspiring, and enlightening in fact. I know I am not the only one who thinks so. What you are doing is wonderful, and the words you write are like a beautiful song. I just wanted to say this...to counteract the negativity of someone saying that you didn't say anything. Just want to offer my gratitude.

thank you Nikolai... I can only say the same thing to you of your posts and your own beliefs that I have had the pleasure to read of. So, thank you. You make the forum a better place to be around with your positive and beautiful outlook on life. :)

Ajsa, you have it so right... just look around and it is so easy to have faith in some form of god... and all are the same in the end, all paths go to the same thing, as long as they are filled with love...

cheers

aabbcc

03-16-2008, 09:48 AM

I recently discovered this post on somebody's weblog.
Though it is basically an ironisation of the question asked, there are a few valuable points. Also, it is a good laugh. :D If you believe you might be offended by its contents, please skip it.

Click me. (http://divinesatirist.blogspot.com/2007/07/what-its-like-to-be-atheist.html)

El Viejo

03-17-2008, 11:06 AM

...I did ask you a very specific question that you and every other person who thinks the same way seems to avoid... give me the how and why as explained by science??? tell me about these supposedly:

"tiny building blocks that array themselves in a seemingly infinite, but still finite number of ways, like magnets, but far more complex. The same bag of blocks holds the pieces that make me, a banana, a star. The interactions of the pieces, and their combinations, are complex beyond our comprehension, except in general terms, although we're making progress."

aren't these, according to you, what we are made of?

and how does your science prove this, even the fact they are finite?

tell me how you're not just having faith in something that you and science really know nothing at all about? for that's what it sounds like...

if everything is made of little finite building blocks than where did they come from, or are they infinite in terms of timeless existence, just not in spatial existence?

please explain all this to me? why you're ideas are right , and why they require less faith and are rooted in reality, and please tell me why you're reality rooted ideas (which you haven't explained) on what happens after death are better and require less, supposedly, absurd faith than mine.,..

please, again, I ask you to enlighten me, for if I have been saying nothing, what you have been saying is less than nothing... you're argument consists of telling me I'm not saying anything, rather than refuting, or even challenging what I say, what I believe in... I don't mind at all having my beliefs challenged even torn apart if you can... but to just tell me I'm saying nothing, that's just childish... you selectively choose parts to quote that by themselves don't say much, but altogether it says alot..

lastly I would really like to know how anything is entirely finite... for that matter tell me, with your scientific view how is it possible for there not to be a creator god... for I don't believe in a creator god, but if the world is finite, and we are finite, everything had to have been created by something infinite, everything had to come from somewhere if you like you say everything is finite... but my view in which the true reality behind this illusion, is that there are no beginnings or ends, or definitions, or forms, and everything is infinite and timeless, there is no required creator god...

it is funny how that works for science does kind of necessitate a god of some sort to have gotten the ball rolling... but please actually answer the questions I ask this time... there are quite a few building up now from these posts where I supposedly say nothing... please tell me the truth that science tells about the universe...

cheers

Ok, islandclimber, you have asked many, many questions, more than I included in the above quote and, as you pointed out, there are yet many more in your other posts. You have repeatedly asked me to 'enlighten' you. Seriously, me prove to you that atoms and all their subparts exist? Pick up a book. Write to CERN. Ask your child's science teacher. Lots and lots of people are better qualified than I to explain it all to you.

But my sense is you're not interested in the answers. When toddlers discover 'why?' they simultaneously discover they can corner anyone with an incessant barrage. They aren't seeking answers, at least not to their questions. They're conducting an experiment in behavior analysis and verbal communication. As an adult you've presumably finished with that sort of experimenting and have other motives. Perhaps you feel if you ask enough unanswerable questions, and they're always right there, just behind the last discovery, then you 'win.' Or perhaps it just feels good to get someone's attention for a couple of hours.

On to a sampling of your questions, heavily edited to save space:

--give me the how and why as explained by science--

Science isn't about 'why' in the sense you're using it. It doesn't seek ultimate meaning and purpose. Science merely strives to answer the mechanical, and has done the job so far. You're already familiar with the 'how.'

--tell me about these supposedly: "tiny building blocks..."--
--aren't these, according to you, what we are made of?--
--and how does your science prove this--

Are you actually asking me if particles exist? How science proves there are atoms? That we're made of them? If you didn't pay attention during your primary education, I can't offer you anything else.

--even the fact that they are finite?--

I can't guess what you mean by this. I don't think science has tried to prove their finity, in or otherwise. We've got nothing to measure infinity by anyway. We could have a whole discussion just on the concept of infinity.

--tell me you're not just having faith--

Well, I am 'just having faith.' It's a different variety than yours though as mine requires demonstrated, reproducible results before I believe it.

--where did they come from, or are they infinite--

Couldn't tell you. We all wonder where things come from. We can either investigate or make up something that sounds right. Those little worms that appear on meat that's been left out too long come to mind. Spontaneous generation, or...? Behind every answer there's usually another question, but this doesn't mean science has failed. Failure is ours when we don't retain what we learned and use it to find the answer to the next question.

--lastly I would really like to know how anything is entirely finite...if the world is finite, and we are finite, everything had to have been created by something infinite--

Things, structures, can be broken down into their components. Break an egg. Pulverize it. The structure ceases to exist. It's finite. Keep breaking it down, dry it out, smash the dust, and still pieces persist. Perhaps they are infinite, but we can't prove it because we don't have enough time. As for the finite having been created by the infinite, that leap of logic is absurd. You're using the fact of a thing's existence as proof that it was created, and created by something infinite. Welcome to the fuzzy world of ID.

And so on. But again it's hard to believe you're serious. You claim to reject science and what it's shown us so far. You show contempt for the idea that it's good to understand common technology. Yet you use the science you dismiss, the technology you despise, to tell the world you don't believe in them.

islandclimber

03-17-2008, 01:46 PM

Ok, islandclimber, you have asked many, many questions, more than I included in the above quote and, as you pointed out, there are yet many more in your other posts. You have repeatedly asked me to 'enlighten' you. Seriously, me prove to you that atoms and all their subparts exist? Pick up a book. Write to CERN. Ask your child's science teacher. Lots and lots of people are better qualified than I to explain it all to you.

But my sense is you're not interested in the answers. When toddlers discover 'why?' they simultaneously discover they can corner anyone with an incessant barrage. They aren't seeking answers, at least not to their questions. They're conducting an experiment in behavior analysis and verbal communication. As an adult you've presumably finished with that sort of experimenting and have other motives. Perhaps you feel if you ask enough unanswerable questions, and they're always right there, just behind the last discovery, then you 'win.' Or perhaps it just feels good to get someone's attention for a couple of hours.

On to a sampling of your questions, heavily edited to save space:

--give me the how and why as explained by science--

Science isn't about 'why' in the sense you're using it. It doesn't seek ultimate meaning and purpose. Science merely strives to answer the mechanical, and has done the job so far. You're already familiar with the 'how.'

--tell me about these supposedly: "tiny building blocks..."--
--aren't these, according to you, what we are made of?--
--and how does your science prove this--

Are you actually asking me if particles exist? How science proves there are atoms? That we're made of them? If you didn't pay attention during your primary education, I can't offer you anything else.

--even the fact that they are finite?--

I can't guess what you mean by this. I don't think science has tried to prove their finity, in or otherwise. We've got nothing to measure infinity by anyway. We could have a whole discussion just on the concept of infinity.

--tell me you're not just having faith--

Well, I am 'just having faith.' It's a different variety than yours though as mine requires demonstrated, reproducible results before I believe it.

--where did they come from, or are they infinite--

Couldn't tell you. We all wonder where things come from. We can either investigate or make up something that sounds right. Those little worms that appear on meat that's been left out too long come to mind. Spontaneous generation, or...? Behind every answer there's usually another question, but this doesn't mean science has failed. Failure is ours when we don't retain what we learned and use it to find the answer to the next question.

--lastly I would really like to know how anything is entirely finite...if the world is finite, and we are finite, everything had to have been created by something infinite--

Things, structures, can be broken down into their components. Break an egg. Pulverize it. The structure ceases to exist. It's finite. Keep breaking it down, dry it out, smash the dust, and still pieces persist. Perhaps they are infinite, but we can't prove it because we don't have enough time. As for the finite having been created by the infinite, that leap of logic is absurd. You're using the fact of a thing's existence as proof that it was created, and created by something infinite. Welcome to the fuzzy world of ID.

And so on. But again it's hard to believe you're serious. You claim to reject science and what it's shown us so far. You show contempt for the idea that it's good to understand common technology. Yet you use the science you dismiss, the technology you despise, to tell the world you don't believe in them.

El Viejo, I don't find it necessary to ask any elementary school teacher about science, to tell the truth, I even studied a year of engineering at University, before I went into the arts... I studied statics, dynamics, chemistry, calculus, linear algebra, and so on and so forth... I've taken courses in anthropology, archaeology, philosophy, religion, etc... I studied quite a wide range of subjects, because I believe in having a wide base of knowledge, and because I think it is essential to know things about even what you disagree with, and argue against, such as science in this case... so to tell me to go ask an elementary school teacher is beyond ridiculous, it is absurd... and I am very interested in real answers, for if they could be given, and actually proved to be true, rather than just theorized upon, I would be inclined to change my mind, if they were true, but science can't do this, so it becomes entirely irrelevant in any quest to explain (and if you so desire we can disregard the why question) even how we exist, how we came to exist, how we continue existing, what we are, what we will be after death, what the universe is, what infinite and finite are... again, if for some reason, I am entirely mistaken in asking these questions and elementary school teachers or even university profs have proven answers or even reasonable scientific theories on these questions please do tell me so... otherwise it is pointless for us to be having this discussion as you just keep evading and eluding everything I ask... and trying to claim I am more ignorant than an elementary school child about science... but I am sorry to disappoint, I do keep up to date on science, for I find it interesting to see what delusion is come up with next, what complete nonsense that is entirely irrelevant to anything important in existence...

secondly with regard to particles and subatomic particles.. science hasn't proved anything about their existence, especially the how they exist, and how they came to exist... and for that matter even the proof they exist is very sketchy, and entirely based on supposition, human definition and upon instruments we created to detect things we assumed existed... you also said these blocks were finite in one of your above posts... that is an absurd claim to make... you claim to know that the so called building blocks go down to a finite source in the end... back that up please????????????

again though you state your faith requires demonstrable, reproducible results.... still none of these results tells us anything about the essential questions of existence, even excluding the "why"... so what is it exactly that you have faith in? the answer to how a cell phone is made... the misplaced and absurd theories on the "big bang" and "quantum physics" and "string theory"???? tell me how they've shown reproducible results or even demonstrable results on any of these theories that still don't go into the fundamentals of existence? next of course is that Buddhism, one of those religions you so easily dismiss, for much of what I say has roots (whether it is the exact same or not) in eastern philosophy and religion, buddhism is based entirely on empiricism... or at least so Siddhartha taught and tried to demonstrate, it is entirely through selfexperience and self experiment that we discover our buddha nature, our false physical finite nature, and our infinite buddha nature... he did it through meditation and said each path to this was equal, one must discover for themselves the fundamental answers to existence and non existence... he didn't believe in the idea of a god, a godhead, but no god... and if you don"t know the difference between these look it up... he used rational empirical experimentation and meditation to come to enlightenment and taught that everyone had to do so... there was no just saying a god exists because someone told you, as you assume we all think, no faith put it absolutely nothing that could be proved, such as science and superhuman creator gods... but faith is in knowledge that meditation on the self, and on the infinite has provided... please explain how your science does better than this?

and I did not claim that because something is finite it is created by something infinite, i just stated it as a consequence of saying something is finite in existence... for something finite has to necessarily be made of something infinite, which is why on the most elementary level everything is necessarily infinite, and don't say the reason we can't prove this or even discover this is because of lack of time, for that's absurd beyond belief... the reason we can't prove this is because human definition and form (and therefore science) cannot even slightly comprehend what infinite is, or how it is... but it is necessary, unless you are saying existence and nonexistence are finite, and everything is finite, which is totally false... I think it is basically fact that everything is infinite, and timeless on the most elementary or whatever you want to call it, level... otherwise it would have had to come out of something infinite, and as I've said many times I don't believe in a creator god, so don't try to pawn that off as being my belief... for please tell me how something finite could even come to be? no questions of why, just scientific "how".... tell me how something could just begin and than end, with nothing at all before or after... tell me please, i really do want to learn and as science seems like such an amazing teacher.... please tell me about these books and theories I've been missing??? but I will stick to me totally reasoned conclusion that I have 100 percent faith in, that everything is nothing, and nothing is everything, and everything is infinite and timeless on an elementary level... and you stick to misguided ideas of science and finite existence...

I think I said much earlier if you were paying attention, that yes I use science and technology for now... it is here, and I am in a life that depends on it for the time being as I have responsibilities to family and friends... and if that makes me a hypocrite, so be it... I really don't mind... for I am not saying science is useless here upon earth in this finite, human defined part of our existence... I am saying it is part of the illusion of this human defined existence and holds people back from enlightenment and faith in what really matters, it stops people from doing things liek meditating on the self and the infinite, and the nature of existence, and it is blinding for we enslave our children blindly to the false laws and theories of science that all fall apart against the reality of infinite and timeless existence...

and if you want to discuss the merits of science, it has done more to destroy the world than anything, far more so than religion... look at pollution, look at the weapons used in wars, many of which had nothing to with religion but ethnicity, and ideology... look at the atomic bomb, one more great miracle of science, and the coal power plant, and the gas guzzling trucks and suvs that seems so prevalent even in the cities... look at the world falling apart at the seams because of the greatness of science... so, in response to all the attacks I've seen on religion here, and no, I am not defending the track record of organized religion, which is something I don't actually believe in, I am just saying don't be hypocrites yourselves... your god is science and it has done more harm than any religion...

my religion is timeless and infinite love, selfless love... whether I completely follow it yet, is another matter, for it is difficult to surrender entirely to infinite and timeless love, but I do have faith that it is everything... I just need to allow myself to surrender to it... love, that's all, love...

cheers

El Viejo

03-17-2008, 06:04 PM

El Viejo, ...

my religion is timeless and infinite love, selfless love... whether I completely follow it yet, is another matter, for it is difficult to surrender entirely to infinite and timeless love, but I do have faith that it is everything... I just need to allow myself to surrender to it... love, that's all, love...

cheers

You know, this has been strange. I haven't had such a strange conversation since talking with a guy who thought the moon landings were faked. That's not to say it hasn't been enjoyable, islandclimber, but I'm done now.

EV

blazeofglory

05-11-2008, 09:39 PM

Coincidences have something beyond, a causation. Nothing happens without some basis. Every idea has a root from which it grows.

ampoule

05-11-2008, 10:01 PM

Why is God so difficult to believe in? It is an interesting question and one that I think I have some experience in answering. I have not always believed in God. I had to develop that belief through various means.

It is not difficult for me to believe in God. I cannot remember a time when I did not believe. I have wondered and questioned like anyone else. Sometimes it all seems so absurd. I truly believe the difficulty comes from people not wanting to give up control or worried that they are going to be made fools of or that they are simple minded. Personally, I love the wonderful mystery of it all.

blazeofglory

05-12-2008, 09:06 PM

It is really hard to believe in God and there is no evidence of his existence to approve of this fact. Even if exists, where? in heaven? we can not see him or her for God is believed to be formless.

If he or she does exist it is only through manifestations. We human beings are then God' manifestations. Therefore in form there is no anything called God in existence.