Why I believe in God?

[Hisnibs]

What an intelligent design theorist has in his arsenal as “evidence” is not actually what could characteristically be described as evidence by the way. What evidence are you postulating? Stories from the bible?

You're not really familiar with intelligent design theory, are you? ID does not use the Bible for any "evidence" - the Bible was not written to provide any evidence. ID scientists look at that same fossils, the same whatever that evolutionary scientists look at - and when they examine the evidence, they arrive at different conclusions. That's all I meant to say. Evidence does not always speak for itself.

Yes, it’s the reasons WHY IDs cannot confirm scientific findings: it’s because they obviously don’t conform to the faith. I just want to personally let you know that you're backing the wrong horse.

That is one great, big, smelly, giant sh!t sandwich of an association fallacy that you’re forcing Dr. Hill to take a bite of if I’ve ever seen one!

Thanks for your eloquent assessment -

It doesn't shock me in the slightest that language nazis are present on forums such as these. Surely you could do better than a thinly disguised ad-hominem like that?

I do not believe I'm "forcing" anybody to do anything. I drew a comparison that I though valid - just like Hill expressed an opinion he thought valid. I questioned the fairness of that opinion. You disagree - so?

You have difficulty comprehending, I’ll elaborate.

Dr. Hill thought someone insane for their faith. You compared him as someone quite like a racist profiler. The two things are not direct examples of one another. Ergo, association fallacy, or guilt-by-association.

Gettit? Maybe hand puppets need to be employed?

[NikolaiI]

"You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain of a molehill-- he knows that himself, he he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it, and so pass to genuine vindictiveness."

-The Brothers Karamazov (a great book I've had the pleasure of beginning not two days ago).

Learn from that. My mistake in words, my unfair judgment of Nikolai, was nothing but an opinion and perhaps a bias of mine. But I have explained that I meant not to insult, and yet, no one will get over it. It was tactless of me, not malicious.

I do not like to hold grudges, and as long as you don't try to hold a grudge against me I would just say I am not upset about it. I'd much rather think and discuss other things and let the matter drop, believe me. In fact that's the only thing that will happen, for if we can't let it go on this forum-thread, I will leave the thread, although it would be less unpleasant to face it and let it go and then continue with dicussions.

I've read The Brothers Karamazov several times too, and it's also one of my favourite books. It's great that you are reading such lofty writing as Dostoevsky's. I got a new translation of this for Christmas last year- one of my favourite parts are "Talks and Homilies of Father Zosimov."

As for what you said, you simply shouldn't insult people. Insulting them is like degrading them which is like undercutting them. And if someone treats you this way you shouldn't allow it because verbal attacks are related to physical attacks. Maybe I'm overanaylzing, but it was a serious thing to say. To say someone is not capable of thinkign for themselves is very serious, especially if you drop it out of the blue, entirely open, as if to say; "this could mean as much as your imagination could let it."

And lastly but most obviously; you should never insult someone with the hidden, privately intended implication that you know they can take it. The logic behind this doesnt exist and if you use this behavior in life you will alienate many people. If they even take you seriously enough for that. Most likely they would simply not like to be around you and you would just be more and more alone. There was no reason to say what you said. It was completely untrue. And having said this in an open way-- as if to leave the attack open. Now if I say something about myself, that is good, or positive; you will attack me for that because I am disagreeing with your opinion, which was a negative of me. What does such behavior leave open? Certainly debate is completely out of the window. And finally it's against, blatantly against, forum rules, which you might want to check then.

I guess the basic thing is that you don't want to spend energy to make someone else's life worse. It's just stupid.

[Virgil]

Your judges aren't chosen the same way ours are - and because of that, to an extent, you get political judges, and people chosen for their views on certain issues.

Which judges? Federal, state, or local? And are you aware that each state and localities have their own methods of choosing judges? I have no idea how your judges are picked. How do you presume to know so much about the US?

Here it is a little different, but to what extent does religious morality, and collective values effect the verdict? Are we to assume the law is fair, and in favor, of, lets say, Homosexual Rights? To what extent? What about the rights of other minority groups? What about, for instance, Handicap people, or, for instance, poor people?

A verdict in my country is either guilty or innocent. The charges against a person are based on the law.

The fact that rich people can afford to go to court, can buy better lawyers, and sue more people attests to the imbalances, and disadvantages automatically put on the lower class. A rich person can sue on whim, a poor person generally cannot.

Suing is essentially free for a person here. Lawyers take the case based on winning. If they lose they get nothing. As to getting better lawyeres for criminal cases, well, yeah. Better lawyers only exist because someone is willing to pay for them.

A rich person, therefore, can lobby the government harder, and get their wants put forward, whereas a poor person generally cannot. That is why the Jewish Lobby, and the Gun Lobby, and the lobbyists from major corporations get more say. That is why religion, and the collected consciousness of people affiliated with religious groups get more of a vote than those who aren't.

They do not. What law is there that favors religious people? I can't think of any.

And as to social laws, I was merely using your term, which you used one post above mine. And yes, I would say I am a border-line nihilist.

You know I must agree on something with you. The power of the middle class to take money away from a minority of rich people who legally earned a living is an incredible power. And yes the power of a majority of green environmentalists to force crazy expensive regulations that a minority think are a waste of money is a problem. I truly wish I was dictator.

I don't know how old you are JBI, but I pictured you rather young. At least you sound young. To be a nihilist at your age is not a good thing. It'll erode your soul.

[Dr. Hill]

I don't think it's far fetched to say a religious person is brainwashed, that's what religion is. Taking you from when you are a child and telling you what the truth is and isn't. I in no way said it was your fault.

[NikolaiI]

Well anyway it would be nice to get back on topic... we could actually discuss the topic instead of religion.

[Redzeppelin]

It doesn't shock me in the slightest that language nazis are present on forums such as these. Surely you could do better than a thinly disguised ad-hominem like that?

It's called sarcasm, my friend - something you're familiar with as evidenced by your language below. At least mine wasn't condescending. The sarcasm was a response to your potty-language. I prefer not to return profanity with profanity. I've learned new words since 3rd grade (the year I learned profanity) and prefer to use those instead.

You have difficulty comprehending, I’ll elaborate.

Careful there: I may not be comprehending, true: but that could be due to one of two things:
1. I'm sorta dim
2. You're not as clear as you fancy yourself to be.

My vote is for #2

Dr. Hill thought someone insane for their faith. You compared him as someone quite like a racist profiler. The two things are not direct examples of one another. Ergo, association fallacy, or guilt-by-association.

Hill made a snap judgment about someone he hardly knows, based on his simplistic ideas about religious people; racists do the same thing to someone based upon their color rather than their beliefs. The comparison is not precise, but I found it relevant - both involve judging someone not as an individual, but upon very slight, often superficial evidence. You are not required to agree with the comparison for it to be valid.

Gettit? Maybe hand puppets need to be employed?

Spare me your patronizing - it doesn't make you look good, and it only makes me think I'm talking to a teenager.

[JBI]

[quote[By this inconvenient the cotyledons of her matrix were presently loosed, through which the child sprang up and leaped, and so, entering into the hollow vein, did climb by the diaphragm even above her shoulders, where the vein divides itself into two, and from thence taking his way towards the left side, issued forth at her left ear. As soon as he was born, he cried not as other babes use to do, Miez, miez, miez, miez, but with a high, sturdy, and big voice shouted about, Some drink, some drink, some drink, as inviting all the world to drink with him. The noise hereof was so extremely great, that it was heard in both the countries at once of Beauce and Bibarois. I doubt me, that you do not thoroughly believe the truth of this strange nativity. Though you believe it not, I care not much: but an honest man, and of good judgment, believeth still what is told him, and that which he finds written.

Is this beyond our law or our faith--against reason or the holy Scripture? For my part, I find nothing in the sacred Bible that is against it. But tell me, if it had been the will of God, would you say that he could not do it? Ha, for favour sake, I beseech you, never emberlucock or inpulregafize your spirits with these vain thoughts and idle conceits; for I tell you, it is not impossible with God, and, if he pleased, all women henceforth should bring forth their children at the ear. Was not Bacchus engendered out of the very thigh of Jupiter? Did not Roquetaillade come out at his mother's heel, and Crocmoush from the slipper of his nurse? Was not Minerva born of the brain, even through the ear of Jove? Adonis, of the bark of a myrrh tree; and Castor and Pollux of the doupe of that egg which was laid and hatched by Leda? But you would wonder more, and with far greater amazement, if I should now present you with that chapter of Plinius, wherein he treateth of strange births, and contrary to nature, and yet am not I so impudent a liar as he was. Read the seventh book of his Natural History, chap.3, and trouble not my head any more about this.[/quote]

From Gargantua, Chapter VI


Rabelais once again to the rescue. Wiggle out of that one - to what logic can we say one book is more true than the other? How is Yahweh to be believed over a Greek God? Because something is written is it necissarily true? How then can we logically say one text is the word of God, and one isn't. Judging by the fact that there are more than one texts claiming to be the word of God, or of Gods, it is clear that the majority of people are wrong. Is it then, too much of a stretch to say that faith in one book over another is a mere ignorant approach, and a poor way of reading? Is there room to believe, when one rejects other faith based beliefs? How is the Pentateuch more right than, lets say, the Koran? What about contradictions in the books? How do we settle those?

Problems, problems, and really, the only answer is that the text has no grounding in objective truth, and is only true to a believer in the text, and can never be verified as being more true than any other text.


Edit: the Rabelais quote is from a dangerously old edition, and I just noticed it is missing half the passage, pretty much. If someone could find a better Public Domain copy and post a link, I will be grateful.

[skasian]

In order to believe in God, you must experience his power. How His hand can move every single piece of your heart, soul and spirit. In order to believe in God, you must feel and taste His love. Simply, be with Him in His presence. Why I believe in God? Because I experience everyday that He is with me.
For example, in order to believe in love, you must experience love. If you never loved someone or been loved, you do not know it, hence cannot believe in love. In order to believe that you are loved, you must feel and taste love from that person no matter the distances. My point, God is the same as love. In fact we hear that God is love. We cannot see or touch love, but we can feel love. We cannot see or touch God, but we can feel God.

That last statement is quite invalid actually, we can see, hear and touch God. There have been many miracles occuring in the world, and God is in charge of it. People are speaking in tongues, having visions of the future, healing the physically and mentally sick. We are God's people and He wants us to stop being skeptical and believe that He is our God and that He loves us unconditionally.

[NikolaiI]

In order to believe in God, you must experience his power. How His hand can move every single piece of your heart, soul and spirit. In order to believe in God, you must feel and taste His love. Simply, be with Him in His presence. Why I believe in God? Because I experience everyday that He is with me.
For example, in order to believe in love, you must experience love. If you never loved someone or been loved, you do not know it, hence cannot believe in love. In order to believe that you are loved, you must feel and taste love from that person no matter the distances. My point, God is the same as love. In fact we hear that God is love. We cannot see or touch love, but we can feel love. We cannot see or touch God, but we can feel God.

That last statement is quite invalid actually, we can see, hear and touch God. There have been many miracles occuring in the world, and God is in charge of it. People are speaking in tongues, having visions of the future, healing the physically and mentally sick. We are God's people and He wants us to stop being skeptical and believe that He is our God and that He loves us unconditionally.

This is wonderful.

For those who don't believe in a Great God or the Great God, I would ask them if they have thought about The Great Universe. I am using those words just to add emphasis. How can a part of the whole ever understand the whole? Actually everything is part of God, since God is the Whole. God is not simply the Whole, God is the source of the whole and more, since God is infinite; yet the universe is also one form of God. Worshipping the universe would, end the end, take you to God, but worshipping God directly is much more direct.

[skasian]

NikolaiI, I agree with you completely. The universe, world, land, human beings, all these organic substances are merely a small footprint created by God. The reason why having a belief or faith in God for the first time is so difficult is because us human beings can never be measured against God, therefore for us, it is impossible to fully understand God. Most people will depict a big guy upstairs with soft white beard however we must understand that God is much much more. We must understand he is simply “ununderstandable”. We have no capability of processing the very power of God. For example, how Jesus walked on water, and how he turned water into wine-this is impossible for us to grasp because it cannot be explained by science, law of matter of our world constructed by us humans. (I could go on how in physics, Newtons Law of motion is broken by Jesus walking on water, and how in chemistry, H2O converting into wine cannot be done) Science has limitations, it is also uncertain. Science reflects the extent of our intellectual ability, therefore our intellectual ability has great limitations, which rounds back to my point. We arent developed to understand or question God. However we are developed to serve God by loving him and praising him. We are developed to understand God's Words and follow them to live peacefully with our neighbours in our world. That's our function in this world. Our meaning of life.

[NikolaiI]

NikolaiI, I agree with you completely. The universe, world, land, human beings, all these organic substances are merely a small footprint created by God. The reason why having a belief or faith in God for the first time is so difficult is because us human beings can never be measured against God, therefore for us, it is impossible to fully understand God. Most people will depict a big guy upstairs with soft white beard however we must understand that God is much much more. We must understand he is simply “ununderstandable”. We have no capability of processing the very power of God. For example, how Jesus walked on water, and how he turned water into wine-this is impossible for us to grasp because it cannot be explained by science, law of matter of our world constructed by us humans. (I could go on how in physics, Newtons Law of motion is broken by Jesus walking on water, and how in chemistry, H2O converting into wine cannot be done) Science has limitations, it is also uncertain. Science reflects the extent of our intellectual ability, therefore our intellectual ability has great limitations, which rounds back to my point. We arent developed to understand or question God. However we are developed to serve God by loving him and praising him. We are developed to understand God's Words and follow them to live peacefully with our neighbours in our world. That's our function in this world. Our meaning of life.

One thing I wonder is- atheists say they don't believe in the power of God, but if you have spent the last 5 years of your life speaking and trying to convince people that God does not exist, you will not probably see any of his power. God is something worth searching for. George Harrison said, and I know I probably quote this too often, "Many things in life can wait, but the search for God cannot wait."

But anyway I agree absolutely that our function is to serve God. Our natural position is service. If we serve God, we benefit everyone and everything, just like watering the roots of a tree is the way to benefit the whole tree.

[skasian]

One thing I wonder is- atheists say they don't believe in the power of God, but if you have spent the last 5 years of your life speaking and trying to convince people that God does not exist, you will not probably see any of his power. God is something worth searching for. George Harrison said, and I know I probably quote this too often, "Many things in life can wait, but the search for God cannot wait."

But anyway I agree absolutely that our function is to serve God. Our natural position is service. If we serve God, we benefit everyone and everything, just like watering the roots of a tree is the way to benefit the whole tree.

Please, keep on spreading that quote by George Harrison, it deserves to be used very frequently. I too believe searching for God and serving Him comes before anything in our lives - and also it is our purpose to be imitators of Jesus Christ, which is what Christian means: Little Christ.

[blazeofglory]

I believe in God thinking that it salvages me. From the gripe of vices. I believe in God thinking that it walls me from the rest, and gives me a distinct identity of myself and that sets me apart from others. My God may fight for me, and of course we have gods that fight for us.

[skasian]

I believe in God thanking that he takes pity and mercy on people that does not surrender their hearts for Him. I believe in God thanking that He died in the cross when he was mocked, spat on and laughed at by His own children. I believe in God thanking that He is rock in the tough times.

[blazeofglory]

I believe in God thanking that he takes pity and mercy on people that does not surrender their hearts for Him. I believe in God thanking that He died in the cross when he was mocked, spat on and laughed at by His own children. I believe in God thanking that He is rock in the tough times.

Your God is your father figure, a protector. He is your comfort zone and beyond that he is a sheer nothing.