Do You Believe in God?

What are you even talking about? You might argue there are hard atheism or weak atheism, but at root level there's no difference, either you believe in a deity(deities) or you don't and if you don't, then you are an atheist.

 

god.. it's a helluva drug

 

In an ideal world, you would demand full evidence for everything, but I agree that it's not practical to do this all the time. In day-to-day existence, we encounter all kinds of information that's so trivial that it's just not worth applying the full skeptic's toolkit. If a buddy tells me that James Harden was the leading scorer last night, I'm probably going to take him at his word without further investigation.

But religion isn't like this. The world's faiths make radical claims about the nature of the universe, they want you to make major life decisions through the filter of their teachings, and they want you to give them money. I don't think this is a situation in which 'Meh, you can't demand evidence for everything' is an appropriate response to adopt.

You're misunderstanding the nature of science. Science is a lens that lets you see more clearly. Individual experiments and experimenters may be dishonest or sloppy, but the process works. Our understanding of our universe has moved relentlessly in one direction. You talk about the continual displacement of old concepts by more accurate ones like it's a bad thing - that's what the whole thing is designed to do! If you truly think that knowing more accurately is 'a very, very bad method on which to build a society' then I just don't know what to say to you.

 

We are animals on a rock that's orbiting a star. Just so happens that this planet is one (probably of many in this galaxy) which can sustain life. We happened to evolve a few thousand years ago and here we are.

I find it strange that the smarter people I know aren't religious.

 

Claims which are believed without logical evidence - hence, Faith. Faith of a religion isn't necessary without evidence, it's just evidence of a different type - one where the mind intuitively know or realize some truth that probably cannot be formed from a logical perspective, but can only be formed from some type of deep beliefs or personal experience where the thinking mind, at least of human, can never get you to (maybe due to it's limitation and perceptions of reality). This is MY GUESS due to my the slight experience of what Faith is. I have always been curious what other of strong Faith think.

Knowing more through science have little to do with our morals and ethics. Both of which are due to religions and/or culture and perhaps our genes - we are after all seems to be wired to have a sense of fear, guilt, hurt and compassion for others - without which, I wonder where that leave us (some serial killers seem to lack these senses). We need morals and ethics to work together in kindness and peace. We need Science as a tool to make our life better (hopefully).

 

Barrack Obama and Jerry Falwell are Christians. That does not mean that there is no difference in their Christianity, and the same can be said of atheists. So, the assertion that "militant athiests" is something made by religion to defend themselves is not true. Just as there can be militant Christians, there can be militant atheists, anti-theists who don't just hold that God doesn't exist, but that also believe that religion should be destroyed in the name of some scientific "progress."

Except what is knowing more accurately when applied to morals and ethics? There is no objective truth to know in those fields like there is science, and it is morals and ethics on which a society is built on above all else. Science can't answer what moral is the highest good. Aristotle's theories on science may be obsolete today, but Aristotle's philosophy is NOT. And that's the difference.
If you disagree, tell me. How can science tell what is the best system of government. How can science tell what is the meaning of life? How can science dictate how to treat our elders, or what should we do with criminals? Those are the questions which we turn to morals, and many humans turn to religion as a source of those morals - and while I may disagree with the religions and ideals they turn to, I acknowledge that it's a way of analysis and don't view the scientific method as a end all substitute.

 

First, which religion gives us the answer to the question "what is the meaning of life?" The other questions you ask can be answered by science, or, at the very least, the scientific method. For example, various criminal punishments can be studied for effectiveness in deterrence, rehabilitation, etc. You seem to be ignoring most of the social sciences.

Second, is it impossible for atheists to have or even comprehend a moral/ethical code free from religious doctrine? The absence of religion does not mean the absence of basic human values (re: humanism). It is true that some choose to base their morals on external sources such as religious doctrine, and I have absolutely no problem with that, but lets not pretend that the world would be an amoral wasteland without religion.

 

Barrack Obama and Jerry Falwell are Christians. That does not mean that there is no difference in their Christianity, and the same can be said of atheists. So, the assertion that "militant athiests" is something made by religion to defend themselves is not true. Just as there can be militant Christians, there can be militant atheists, anti-theists who don't just hold that God doesn't exist, but that also believe that religion should be destroyed in the name of some scientific "progress."

I think you're missing the argument. Atheism is a binary classification: you believe in a deity or you don't. On the other hand Christianity and all other belief systems are not binary; people selectively choose doctrines and ideas on which to place more or less emphasis. People advocating the destruction of religion in the name of science are atheists, but really they're people who have chosen to become part of a church of "science" so to speak (not scientology ). It's not their atheism driving them, but a belief in the superiority of science. Furthermore, when was the last time a church was bombed or people were killed in the name of atheism? And please, don't cite examples of atrocities committed by non-religiously affiliated governments, as the logical link there is far too attenuated.

 

It always comes down to who created the creator? God has the power to do something, anything that could make his existence incontrovertible. Hell, so does Satan. Make a new star appear. Make it rain continuously over one square inch for an hour. Turn day to night for 30 seconds. What do we have for proof? The Bible? Heh.

If God is going to allow me to rot in hell for eternity for only questioning his existence, he really doesn't love me, now does he? AND he already knows my past, present, and future, right? I have no free will. Religion is a poison. For me it's either one God, or no God. No God wins.

 

So all this space debris not only came together to form complex structures such as planets, stars, comets, asteroids, etc... but also various equally complex life forms that interact with each other and even have intelligent thought beyond basic instincts to sustain bodily function.

And we don't have to buy any religion's creation story to buy that the universe was created. Saying anything else is like claiming a tornado moved through a scrap yard an formed a 747.

As for who created God, remember we're not necessarily talking about a humanoid being and I'd assume a higher power would not be limited by time and space.

 

Im not here to argue, but as a former atheist here is some food for thought.

Theoretically let's say Big Bang is truth (which is convoluted in it's self) that means that we are all an accident, it mean's that in the grand scheme of things we have no worth or purpose, we are a mistake and it's by dumb luck that we are here.

Love is just a chemical reaction in your mind, there is nothing divine about it. The love you have for your spouse, your children is man made, and is doomed just like everything else in this world.. Nothing last's. Think about it.

Before my life was self centered and all about me. Why wouldn't it be I have less than a 100 years on this planet, I mine as well do whatever I want. Right?
I could care less about anyone else, but now there is purpose to care about others.. As an athiest you may argue "well just because you dont believe in god doesnt mean you should be a **** person?!" and to that i say.. Why not?

No eternal consequence.
Nothing beyond the last day of your life.
No one that knows your deep dark secrets.

Knowing Christ has given me purpose,

P.S.

and I know I'll probably get **** on here, because it's popular to **** on religion on the internet, thanks to douche bags along the lines of Westboro Baptist.. (who theologically are absolutely not christians)

No one seems to acknowledge all of the Christian; homeless shelters, anti-sex trafficking, adoptive parents (Super common right now in the Christian culture), Well digging in 3rd world countries. Believe it or not the Church is the LARGEST single provider for Education AND Healthcare world wide, mostly in 3rd world countries.

 

Question:

Was Mary just a baby mama?

 

Saw this stupid picture and it reminded me of this stupid thread:

 

I wanted to come here and post this. Here is an interview with a drummer from a Christian band and he explains at the end of the video just a simple concept that Christians always think about and I am very curious to know from someone who doesn't believe in God their response to what he says.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/G24uAvKdu4A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Starts at 10:27 and ends at 13:26...

 

Nothing wrong with reflection and thinking the big question - good to be done.

Each to their own. Many feels that a higher power enable them to live a more purposeful life. Some don't need that. What you are is you. You can't generalize your own live, experience and expect that everyone behave and react in that way. If there is a person that was raised with very loving god-less parents who are very giving, caring, loving of all things and others, do you think that person need a God to live a more purposeful life - my guess is no.

A God is not necessary for morality. There is really no argument here. You don't need any judge outside of you to determine what is moral and not. Where does that moral within you originated from? If there is a creator, than the creator. If there is not a creator, than not the creator but simply the way human have evolved (to live together more successfully, etcs) over time. Animal btw, do have their own "moral" sense, just not as evolved as human and some more than others.

 

If you have seen my posts, you know that I view religions, in general, in a positive light. That said, I don't personally know if there is a God but if there is one, it makes sense to me it's not the God that we commonly know of. I was fortunate to be raised in a very accepting family and have grow up in a very accepting environment throughout my childhood. What drive my behaviors is that, I have a belief, that we are all connected and dependent on each other and how we behave, live our life not only affects our view of ourselves (and thus how we feels about ourselves), but also affects other people. When I die, my seemingly small insignificant life DO contribute to the overall direction and future of my family, my kids, the environment, the future of people on this Earth. That have really nothing to do with religion.