For what purpose does God exist, if he exists?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NikolaiI

I will address all of your points, straight forwardly, but you will address everyone with more respect. Who here has said to you " you are talking out of your butt "? I am speaking for more than myself when I say that you need to respect people here.

---

I'll start off by ignoring the condescending tone you've used towards me in all of your post, and you in turn can "turn a cheek" to what you feel is disrespectful about my tone. I'm not a politician and am not here to be your buddy.

Quote:

---

I am not able to comprehend atoms, gravity, the movement of stars, calculus, many of these things, and many of them I cannot see with my eyes, either. Each of these is as vast an idea as the other. In the question of each of them there is their concept, their essence, related concepts, in fact the question always becomes very complicated. Yet all of them I accept as fact.

---

Because they can be scientifically proven.

Quote:

---

Anyway, God as the "Source," I can assure is an airtight axiom, or conclusion, actually, it doesn't matter which you think of it as. Anyway, I can assure you this idea is airtight.

---

There is nothing "air right" about God's existence.

Quote:

---

Prove to me that gravity exists.

---

Pick up any object nearest to you and drop it on the floor. Voila.

Quote:

---

you cannot prove to me that I exist or you exist, none-the-less what I am.

---

Cogito ergo sum. The undeniable proof that "you" exist in some form. In any case, thinking that nothing is real and none of us really exist leads nowhere.

You make a good number of assumptions about my person. Far from being a radical atheist, I have often wanted to be believe very dearly because many thinkers or writers I admire do so too (Kierkegaard, Flannery O'Connor) but the fact remains - and this is what you cannot escape, despite all your talk of concepts and essences and essences of concepts - there is no verifiable proof of any higher being.

You cannot equate the proof of gravity or calculus with the proof of god simply because you as an individual do not understand it. Gravity can be and has been proven scientifically. Calculus is a mathematical concept, not a physical force, and as such it does not "exist".

I'm not out eradicate the world of religion. I am deeply distrustful of organized religion, and I personally am unable to have any faith in a higher being/s because it would be a philosophical and intellectual suicide on my part.

Sorry, posted it twice.

1. Scientists have observed things falling (being attracted to each other) and created formulas that can predict the outcome of how two objects will be pulled to each other. The fact that they can calculate it does not mean that they know how gravity works, just that it does work. Gravity is believed to exist because of the effects of gravity in the universe.

2. About the purple bunnies, I think it's much more rational to believe in God than in purple bunnies. There are no historical documents that are reliable in measurable ways that put forth explanations about purple bunnies doing the things your statement claims they do. Purple bunnies haven't been influencing people for ages. And I'm assuming that you don't have a personal testimony that purple bunnies are an active part of your life. Purple bunnies didn't have a son that came to earth to teach people about the purple bunnies. Purple bunnies haven't left a trail of influence through history.

3. The universe glorifies God by its existence because it shows God's power. The creator of the universe would obviously need to have some serious abilities in order to make the universe. The way things work together, like chemicals and physics, to create amazing causes and effects everywhere we look is a testimony to the awesomeness of God.

I can observe gravity working. I can't observe "god" working.

There is nothing in what you have said about the universe and god that can be supported by scientific evidence.

Morten--the belief in God and Christianity has to be taken on faith. I have no 'proofs' that you desire to offer you. The Bible and God is a faith based system if you will.

You may scoff all you like and demur at the lack of scientific evidence but it will not change the truth of wom I believe in.

By the way--the forums here are generally shared with at least the veneer of courtesy--which you seem to be lacking. Perhaps you have had a bad week. Or year. But dzebra did NOT merit the butt remark and I would like to think it beneath you but I have doubts. Cheer up we'll never be friends. You've lost nothing you would have valued.

The existence of God cannot be proven or disproven so argument in that vein is not going to reach any definite conclusion. You may convince others to believe in your side but that doesn't prove either argument is true.

So to get back to the original question about God's purpose, I am an atheist and so will answer the question from my viewpoint. I believe man created the idea of God for two reasons. The first was to answer questions that we were not scientifically advanced enough to answer logically. For instance, why does it not rain some years and rain too much other years? Since early man did not have the meteorological know-how to answer that question, he chalked it up to a capricious diety.

A problem is that we then grow comfortable with our supernatural explanations and when Galileo comes along with a scientific answer people are unwilling to listen because it would require that they relinquish their belief in this now unnecessary facet of their religion.

The rain example also displays the second reason for the creation of God. The farmer whose crops are dependant on rain is now able to feel that he is making an effort to help his crops through prayer. The need to feel we are helping ourselves is very strong, and we see today whenever an athlete is injured his entire team goes down on a knee and prays while he lays on the field. Athletic injuries do not decrease in seriousness based on how many people pray or how fervently they do so, it simply makes those praying feel better.

Sorry for the long post but to sum up, God's purpose is to make people feel better about their impotence when dealing with forces beyond our control. Captainq you affirm this idea when you say that you cannot believe that existence is futile. What you mean is you choose not to because believing so would make you unhappy.

The entire premise for the initiating question of this thread is wrong to begin with. To ask such a question is to place God on par with created things - of which He is not.

God does not exist for a "purpose" - the question implies that God has some functional use - that His existence is contingent upon some need or use. Wrong. God exists simply because He IS. You cannot drop God into the box of created things and ask "What is this thing for?" The real question is why He created anything else at all - since His existence is self-sufficient: He needs nothing else.

General Mod Note To All, Even Though I'm Sure Most Of You Are Aware Of This By Now :)

There are specific Religious Texts Forum Rules:
http://www.online-literature.com/for...ad.php?t=15410

Remember to acquaint yourself with them or you will find that your ability to view and post to this forum might suddenly disappear for an indeterminate amount of time, and or you will receive infraction points.

Thank you in advance for your respect towards others and to the site rules.

The idea of GOd is universal, at least among humans...maybe not plants and animals. Don't know about that one. Billy Graham (I am sure that we all know him), was asked by the Russian government some years back to debate Christianity with a professor of archaeolgy in Russia. The debate began and ended with one question from Billy Graham to the professor, "In your research has there ever been a civilization which has not search for a God or Gods to worship?" The response was no, and Billy Graham debated no longer. It just goes to show that the idea of religion is nothing new. Certainly it has been around longer than the idea of no religion, more commonly refferred to as atheism. This is the belief in nothing spiritual. It is about as anti-human as it gets. The majority of standardized religous beliefs, not fanatical religous beliefs, are very human and humane in nature. I mean come on, how is Love your enemy a dishonest or non-worthwhile concept to live by. It is obviously a Divine philosophy. I suggest the reading of C.S. Lewis, who spent most of his educated life as an atheist in deep study with very intellectual men. He has written great theolgical books that explain the difficult ideas that people cannot seem to apply to their lives. I now see from where I stand in life that it is so much...soooooo much harder to believe in nothing greater than myself than to believe in a gracious, loving and all-powerful God. I wish that you guys wouldn't be so moody about this stuff. It's all in fun, but it is very important stuff and I agree that it requires serious attention but even greater respect. I thank you all for talking about what I wrote. I very much enjoy the dialogue.

Captain the same can be said of war: nearly all civilizations practise it. Still I would not use that to suggest war is good or that we should all have faith in the justice of war.

Just because war is practiced all over the world doesn't make it good. It is the fact that it is practiced and not necessarily the use and whether it is right or wrong. War is only wrong to the losing side...hahaha...not so. War is tragic, but it is a necessary evil I suppose. It just shows even more of what people are willing to live and die for. Would a generation of men fight their whole lives for an unjust cause? What is the means for which they fight and why waste the time. It must be good, but it is tragic. Look at the crusades. Millions were practically slaughtered in the name of Christ, and it is not good, but it was done. Most wars are fought over religon...interesting. Or the love of a god or Gods, ie. money or image. The things that make this world so tragic and undesirable, therefore the things that make the after-life more desirable and seekable by humans, are those created by the human's race to make themselves God. Read the Grand Inquisitor by Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Biggotry and hate cause war, seemingly for a good cause, but it is for that cause that we step on our own foot and then put that sore foot into our mouth. It makes no sense because we are not all powerful. My point was not that since reigion is practiced all over the world that it is the only way to go. The fact is that it is above all of the other things which we practice. It is a natural human incliniation. It takes no effort to move in the spiritual way. That is what we were designed for.

I would argue that the worldwide commonality of religion is not evidence of man's inherent knowledge of God's existence or even of a natural inclination towards worship, but rather as I stated a few posts ago a natural want to explain what we see around us as and to have control over our lives. Religion grants both.

I have read Karamazov and liked it (preferred crime and punishment though) but Ivan's argument in the inquisitor chapter is really against organized religion if I remember correctly (it's been a few years since I read it). This would only argue against religion itself if we assume a propensity for religion to become organized, which is an interesting question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Splendour

For what purpose does God exist then, in today's religions? There are of course a million sociological/athropological, political or even (since all have been trying to use) scientific reasons. But let's for the sake of argument say that God does exist, then what's the purpose of existence? All religions endeavours to put purpose into our life, so what's God's?

---

To inspire religious debates that bring out the worst in everyone.
I think we can all agree that there is a lesson to be drawn from that. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mtpspur

Morten--the belief in God and Christianity has to be taken on faith. I have no 'proofs' that you desire to offer you. The Bible and God is a faith based system if you will.

You may scoff all you like and demur at the lack of scientific evidence but it will not change the truth of wom I believe in.

By the way--the forums here are generally shared with at least the veneer of courtesy--which you seem to be lacking. Perhaps you have had a bad week. Or year. But dzebra did NOT merit the butt remark and I would like to think it beneath you but I have doubts. Cheer up we'll never be friends. You've lost nothing you would have valued.

---

Terrific.

Many of you have pulled the "God cannot and should not be proven" card. However, is it wrong to ask for a little basis of support when religion makes such drastic claims about the world and our existence?