At least, a benevolent one. . . .
Aids
Starving children
Children who develop cancer
War
Hate
Katy Perry
Printable View
At least, a benevolent one. . . .
Aids
Starving children
Children who develop cancer
War
Hate
Katy Perry
I believe in God, I just don't like him. Hee, hee.
I don't believe in God because I was raised in a Godless household and a Godless culture. And I've seen people utterly destroyed, driven to depths of depravity and despair through absolutely no fault of their own, in light of which I find it hard to believe in the existence an active, beneficent deity.
That said, I've come to respect other people's faith in God. I see the existential solace it provides many and I can't help but approve of it. Sometimes I even envy them their faith. And Pascal's Wager actually makes a lot of sense to me. In the stark absence of certifiable proof which the thoughtful theist must endure, the possibility they might be right, along with all the boundless benefits that being right would entail, must be a great and welcome aid in maintaining their faith.
I say whatever gets one through the dark and lonely nights.
The only solace a lie can give is outer good form, even the criminal is more honest than the spiritual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
There are plenty of people who truly believe. I know one person who has no fear of death. Even when people she cares about die, she is sad they're gone but is not sad for them. She thinks God and Jesus love her and are always there to listen to her. She believes she will go to heaven and spend eternity in paradise with her family. She's a mormon and so she does not drink, smoke, nor engage in premarital sex. I honestly don't see anything wrong with that. I pressed her and pressed her, relentlessly, until I got her to admit that her faith has no foundation, but then she put the question to me "but what if it is true?" Fair enough I say.Quote:
Originally Posted by G L Wilson
The true person of faith doesn't exist, what if that is true?Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
I understand what you are getting at, though I have never heard of your sixth scourge (Katy Perry). Just wondering why one needs a reason to not believe. Belief requires a reason, not its absence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Because I haven't been convinced otherwise. Also, I have personal moral objections to the conduct and values of many of the dominant organized religions.
But it's all right, as an openly gay philandering atheist, I'm sure God wouldn't like me much if he did exist anyway.
Could be worst, at least your not a openly gay philandering atheist woman.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
I have no fear of death. Death is peace. I like Seneca's view of it – I was dead before and I will be dead again, and for me, the life in between is simply an inconvenient, excruciatingly painful phase brought on either by accident or for the amusement of this God.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
I don't ask that God should take my sufferings away, only that He should make them bearable. Is that really so unreasonable? Is it necessary that I should suffer in life, and be damned in death? Must I live in endless pain, and in death find not even a shadow of kindness or sympathy, but only – a merciless tyrant's hand, reproaching me for my helplessness? How much does He expect from me; is anyone, anywhere, able to "turn the other cheek" and live well when there is no hope for happiness, in this life or the next?
I was taught to believe in God. I don't, but I still hate Him, or the idea of Him, and the hate is killing me.
You are lucky that you are not a midget, apparently God hates the midget with a special passion, according to the Bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III
You cannot hate him as much as me. Hate is best forgotten, for dwelling on hate seeds bitterness in one's soul. Who wishes to be bitter towards life?Quote:
Originally Posted by cl154576
Should this be "as much as I do"?Quote:
Originally Posted by G L Wilson
I usually don't nitpick with grammar, but here it changes the meaning significantly ...
Hate is best forgotten, but to be clichéd – "easier said than done."
I have always found love easy to forget.Quote:
Originally Posted by cl154576
Good subject. I was musing on it the other day as I recalled Bertie Russell's Why I am not a christian.
There is no reason to believe, people believe because they want to. They are selfish and self-indulgent people who prefer myth to reality.
Both Einstein and Hawking have alluded to the concept of god to be childish fantasy, which concept I agree with 100%.
40 years after I realised it was a sham, it amazes me that people still believe.
A child of fantasy is not a creature of the dark - it is a bad analogy to call religion a childish whim. It is obviously the dark come to play in the light.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
This is all that I'll commit to when it comes to religion (I'd list this sentence as my "religious beliefs" if there were room for it on a questionnaire). Everything else means pretty much nothing to me, or at least nothing that I'd bother to discuss.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Kant and I agree that organised religion is morally repugnant.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
I don’t mind the idea of God at all, as long as it remains just that - an idea. I can never understand why humankind has taken the notion of God so seriously. It would be brilliant if God had remained just a curious imagining … something to wonder about and that’s it. No doctrine, no dogma, just a sublime idea that can never become Truth because we know we can never know.
The reason why I don't believe in God is that I can't love God. I don't have that love in me, I think. I was brought up as a Catholic, my family is Catholic, I attend a Catholic University in which we are required to take theology exams, some of my best friends are deeply religious. I would believe, if I could. Probably, according to Protestantism, this means that I'm not among the chosen ones. When I was 12, right after confirmation, I realised that I had no idea why I was doing all that. It was a mere automatism, so I stopped going to Church and praying. I feel there's so much to be said about the religious upbringing of children, but that's another topic.
I'm glad this topic came up, because I think it's something I need to elaborate on, and I am interested in other people points of view and experiences on the subject.
I always found explanations of non-belief kind of an explanation after the fact. Finding reasons is always like that, reasoning is not the object, but the speech about the object.
So I wouldn't consider the reasoning behind it particularly important, as surely most people don't find the reason behind belief particularly engaging either.
Faith is the insurance of truth, science insures nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrowni
Dear Mutatis,
re: Why I Don't Believe In God
At least, a benevolent one. . . .
Aids
Starving children
Children who develop cancer
War
Hate
Katy Perry
Do you believe in Hitler?
Pavane.
Do I believe in Hitler? Of course. What a silly question. Now, if you meant "Do you agree with what Hitler did," then no. Are you suggesting that just because I didn't list him I endorse him? There's thousands of things I could have listed.
To anyone who isn't clear: this thread was jokingly made. Bien suggested it was time to make a "Why I Don't Believe In God" thread in the "Why I Believe In God" thread, hence why I made it.
Not such a silly statement. You said you didn't believe in God, presumably because of the bad things he is responsible for in your list. So, Hitler did equally bad things so I just wondered if you were prepared to believe in him too. Your criterion for belief was whether someone does bad things, you see.
On that basis, only good people exist, or at least you are prepared only to believe in them...
Oh please, you're being deliberately obtuse. Implicit in MM's post is the conception that God is a benevolent creator, so his point is that he doesn't believe in the concept of the Christian God because he doubts the benevolence of such a being who would allow the things he listed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavane
:lol: Reaching there, aren't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavane
The things on my list do not require belief, as they, without a doubt, exist, which makes your whole question and post irrelevant. A better question (though still stupid) would have been, "So, you don't include Hitler in your list of things that make you not believe in a benevolent God, so is Hitler okay with you?" But you asked "Do you believe in Hitler," which is stupid, because he undoubtedly existed. If you asked the second of the questions, I would have once again pointed out how there are thousands of things that were not listed that could have been.
Also, that you went to Hitler, the biggest analogical cliche in the book, is telling.
Frankly, I don't believe in God at all, so I don't believe he is responsible for anything.
The post was a joke. Get over it, and quit reading so much into it.
I can answer that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panglossian
It started to go sour when the alleged god enabled people to live after death.
I blame whingeing farmers myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
For the topic starter! The reasons, are not enough to reject the existance of God. the topic name should be why i dont like God if we take or want to go with these reasons. moreover i have posted and explained why sufferings and pleasures are set side by side by Lord.
but if you insisted for the same topic name then for this thread i have many arguments which are given by well known personalities to reject God's existance. like someone said " i dont beleive in God whose data is not available." nice argument. someone said" i dont beleive in God coz no one saw Him" also very nice argument! Socialogist said " We need a God to establish a good society" its also nice argement it means that people just draw a portrait of God to take shelter.
Anyone see air? anti protons? bacteria ?
God declared Quran his data. and own its every single word. prove any one fact wrong then u r free from God's existance.
short time to write more. but i have written a lot already in different posts. also my teacher words are clearing the thoughts with arguments/logics/reasons in2 two threads which i started.
there was a person who was given a title of the father of ignorance and arrogance who was also the head of his tribe. He said to other ignorants/egoistic/arrogant people i know He is right he is absolutly right. We all know he never spoke a single lie. whose chracter is above all to doubt. but if we admit him he will be the head. and we will lost the leading position. it will be shameful to accept the truth and change our self. people are sticky what they have owned. anyway
Regards
It would be shameful to become what I ain't.
Besides the fact that you can see bacteria with a standard light microscope, there is convincing evidence air exists, while there isn't that God exists. I don't see why I should assume the existence of God, I don't assume the existence of bacteria, I've seen them myself. Not that seeing is the only form of valid reliable evidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by usman.khawar
I guess some people just can't take a joke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
It all went bad when people started stocking grain. Life after death is a metaphor for the seasons, the story of religion is the story of economy. So wealth is where everything started to go sour.
I think we can all agree :biggrin5:
Sorry, I think your reasoning is way off line, so I'm not going to debate the point with you, but I will make this one note:Quote:
Originally Posted by usman.khawar
Your god declared your quran his data.
Christians believe their god declared the christian bible his data.
Buddhists believe Buddha declared his writings to be his data.
Hindus believe Vishnu declared Śruti and Smriti his data.
Jews believe g-d declared the Old Testament his data.
If you ever get consensus among believers as to which completely contradictory piece of writing is the right one, I might be interested.
(The idea that I don't like the idea of god is silly - I'd love there to be a benevolent, omnipotent god who saved children from starvation or death by diarrhoea from dirty drinking water when he wasn't too busy helping sportspeople win games.)
God needs cash!Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrowni
God is greedy for souls and riches, apparently.
Authoritative statements like this from religious people really freak me out. Who's putting this stuff in their heads? Are they repeating someone? How can they find this inarguable, and put it forward as though it would convince other people? It implies a skewed view of reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by usman.khawar
Man is proof of God, apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Though it is not as if MM's definition is the only one out there, nor is it a rule that we have to stick to it.Quote:
Oh please, you're being deliberately obtuse. Implicit in MM's post is the conception that God is a benevolent creator, so his point is that he doesn't believe in the concept of the Christian God because he doubts the benevolence of such a being who would allow the things he listed.
Fear, I would reckon -- people in general, and children especially, can be quickly indoctrinated by fear, and in some cases where they can't, the courageous and outspoken get killed. I think these sectarians tend to make such dogmatic statements more to convince themselves than anyone else. --Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
In any case, there isn't exactly a "normal" view of reality, nor is there a "normal" method for viewing reality. I don't want to commit myself to complete relativism, though, because there seem to be human constants when it comes to moral and otherwise transcendental ideas about the world, and there are delusions that can put life and happiness in jeopardy. The only way to judge a world view or an assumption is in terms of its practical (or impractical) effects, a means which can also bid room for some form of religion. A number of people have used this sort of argument to defend religion in some form (e.g. Kant) and reading of the Bible in schools (e.g. Huxley). Moreover, this argument betokens the idea that religion and God can only be refuted on practical grounds instead of theoretical ones -- For, after everything, the believer can always resort to fideism.
For the record I'll say that I believe in "God" in a way that doesn't require faith. For me, God is what I term that idea which answers the fundamental absurdity of existence; the answer to that question so shrouded in mysteriousness we cannot barely ask it.
Orphan, athiest and all ! I would like to read the evidence that how u can see air. But my dear! If u people consider that after developing delicate n sophisticated machines we are able to see bacteria. And may b with more advancement and developing machines we will be able to see anti protons as well. But I like to say one fact for your consideration. Besides that we just can feel air only and we can see bacteria through fine machines so I have to say that to see God, who is creator of all universes and all living and non living beings, we need refined senses. We cannot see him through these body’s senses which are not reliable as you guys must hear the word illusion. Eye is not always reliable. If you put ur right hand in cold water and left in hot for a while and then put both hands together in normal water what you feel ? this is very simple that to see God we need more refine senses. He is not available in the reach of these body senses. You have to develop your senses. You have to refine your senses. He exist little ahead what you have at this time. There is no other exam as well. If He had showed himself then there was no logic for creating brain. If we can’t see a thing this is not the proof that thing doesn’t exist.
About God declared Quran his data I wrote a lot if u guys are serious to understand what I wanted to say kindly read than discuss. Lord blames Jews, Christians etc that they change the words of lord (Budha never said that his writing were from Lord). You can find some moral laws in those but besides those there are lot of contradictions/versions. No book is telling you about any scientific facts with logics. Everybody knows that. If someone due to prejudice is sticky to say that crow is always white then I m not ready to talk with him. I said if anyone find single mistake/error/contradiction from Quran than Quran proved wrong. And God with full confidence said in Quran that He will protect its each word, no one can find a single contradiction from it. There are so many scientific, anthropologist, biologist, cosmologist, etc facts which are proved in this era. How can u justify that fourteen hundred years ago a man with no laboroties/ equipments giving statements with absolute accuracy. Just for example “We made this universe from a big accident (big bang) and we are expanding this universe, everything is moving in its orbit” in single verse God is giving 100% accurate statements/facts with full confidence. Quran is absolutely different book from other jew’s and Christians one’s which were also from the Lord.
Such a "God" is of no use whatsoever then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cunninglinguist