How Can Anyone Believe in God?

[Crimson King]

Well, the reason they are rejected is because they are too late to be written by the purported authors. They rely heavily on the stories in the existing gospels, and they contradict the beliefs taught in the orthodox gospels.

Wrong. Mark was written 30 years after Jesus died. People didn't live that old in Biblical times. The Gospel of Luke was written around 200 CE, it being the oldest. Gospel of Matthew was written around 90 CE and the Gospel of John written around 100 CE. None of the gospels are written BY the people, but by their followers.

 

[EC_Joey]

One reason I particularly dislike the Christian faith is that many of its followers, as children, are given an answer on a silver platter and told to believe in it. Questioning these answers is often seen as disruptive and tantamount to heresy.

Religion tries to explain the unexplainable. By providing answers to the basest of questions, religion seeks to establish itself as the authority upon which we should base our beliefs. It tries to instill in its followers a sense of morality and justice, laws and principles that society should follow in order to perpetuate peace and order.

While its motivations are justified, the answers they've provided to questions have stayed the same for quite a long time. Admitting a mistake or making concessions is out of the question because then the organization's authority as the moral establishment would be compromised. The presence of God is one such blanket answer to many questions that have been asked since the beginning.

 

[Byronman]

I want to know what makes them unfortunate not to know your vengeful, jealous God. Perhaps they are lucky to not know your Christian God, but extremely unlucky not to know a Muslim God. Maybe they should know the Buddha, I've heard he's a righteous dude.

I would just like to think that if there is an afterlife then a person should be allowed to get there whether they are religious are not, based solely on being a decent human being--they shouldn't have to be coerced into being decent with threats of eternal ****ation.

3 things:

1) the Muslim God and the Christian God are the same thing. They just use a different word.
2) Why do you say that knowing God is unlucky. All good people become jealous or vengeful at some poing
3) Everyone goes to the afterlife. It is just a matter of where.

the theists in this thread keep on asserting that god created matter, but assertions are useless in a debate. show us your EVIDENCE that god created anything. show us your EVIDENCE that any gods exist.

if you cant do that, then youre just being dishonest by trying to sneak bull**** by us. it would be no different from trying to claim the flying spaghetti monster did it. your claims carry the exact same weight as that until you have EVIDENCE.

That argument is a double-edged sword. Can you prove God doesn't exist?

This is a common question. The problem in your reasoning is assuming that the universe had a creation. Why must everything that exists have been created? There is nothing that necessitates this assumption. It is perfectly possible that the universe just exists, and was never created. Thus we have no need for a "creator".

That is interesting, but I do have some trouble understanding how something could just exist without having been created. It would be easier if you could elaborate a little...

Wrong. Mark was written 30 years after Jesus died. People didn't live that old in Biblical times. The Gospel of Luke was written around 200 CE, it being the oldest. Gospel of Matthew was written around 90 CE and the Gospel of John written around 100 CE. None of the gospels are written BY the people, but by their followers.

That would kind of destroy both our arguments because we do not know what happened exactly.



I feel like most of the things I am saying are being ignored =(

 

[RDK]

That argument is a double-edged sword. Can you prove God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof is on the one asserting that he does exist.

 

[Aesir]

That argument is a double-edged sword. Can you prove God doesn't exist?

The Burden of Proof rests upon the theists side. If you're making the claim that god exists, it's your job to prove your case. Not our job to disprove it.

He asked for evidence which you have yet to offer.

That is interesting, but I do have some trouble understanding how something could just exist without having been created. It would be easier if you could elaborate a little...

This strikes me odd, you have a hard time believing that, yet you appear to believe in god? whom has no beginning.

Explain this.

 

[Crimson King]

That argument is a double-edged sword. Can you prove God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof is on the believer. It's next to impossible to prove something DOESN'T exist, but not all the time. I don't believe in unicorns, but there is no way I can prove there are no unicorns in some part of the world. YOU have to prove there is a god.

That would kind of destroy both our arguments because we do not know what happened exactly.

How so? We don't know what happened because religion discredits anyone who says contrary to what they wish to portray.

 

[Byronman]

The Burden of Proof rests upon the theists side. If you're making the claim that god exists, it's your job to prove your case. Not our job to disprove it.

He asked for evidence which you have yet to offer.

Alright fair enough. There is proof in the miracles that Jesus performed (bet you saw that one coming lol).

This strikes me odd, you have a hard time believing that, yet you appear to believe in god? whom has no beginning.

Explain this.

I can't explain. That is why I want to know. I don't know everything about these subjects even my own religion. But I know enough to be able to defend it. And then that argument would be for theists then.

 

[EC_Joey]

That argument is a double-edged sword. Can you prove God doesn't exist?

No. You cannot prove the existence of God, either.

Let's say there are invisible, pink elephants floating above our heads right now. They are undetectable by any conventional means. So, we have no proof that they exist. We also have no proof that they don't exist. What should we assume in this case? Should we assume that the pink elephants exist because I told you they exist, or should we assume that they don't exist, despite the fact that I told you that they exist? Being the rational beings we are, we assume that the pink elephants don't exist. Why then, should we assume that God is any different?

That is interesting, but I do have some trouble understanding how something could just exist without having been created. It would be easier if you could elaborate a little...

Give an example of how something that is given existence after being "created". I'm not well versed in physics at all, but I believe it's assumed that energy and matter cannot be created or destroyed. They can change forms, but they are always present. If this holds true, why is it so hard to believe that everything simply exists?

 

[AltF4]

Byronman:

Sure, let me try...

A theory can either be consistent or inconsistent. There is no such thing as degrees of "likelihood" for a theory. To be consistent means to be free of contradiction.

However, some theories which are consistent do not necessarily describe the universe that we happen to live in. A good example is magnetic monopoles. If you've ever taken a course on Electromagnetism, you'd know that electric charges can (theoretically) be represented as a monopole. And then when talking about magnetism, the most logical thing to do would be to describe then in the same way. In fact you can (and people HAVE) constructed entire laws and equations that would describe how the world would work with these magnetic monopoles.

...only they don't exist. (To the best of our knowledge) For whatever reason, the world doesn't happen to work like that, and instead goes off and behaves according to some other completely different set of laws.


Similarly, there are theories (which I have discussed and posted not but a post or two ago about) that describe the universe in terms of it not ever having a moment of creation. Time extends asymptotically backwards and never reaches the "moment of creation". The theory is perfectly consistent. The only question remains is whether or not it happens to correspond to our universe. But it certainly COULD. Try googling around for more details. Or just read my previous posts in this thread.

 

[Chaco]

One reason I particularly dislike the Christian faith is that many of its followers, as children, are given an answer on a silver platter and told to believe in it. Questioning these answers is often seen as disruptive and tantamount to heresy.

That is where you are wrong, questioning your religion is an excellent thing to do. As a whole, it brings you closer to your religion. I question Christianity, and the answers I came up wit only bring me closer, and those inspire new questions. Do you see where I am getting at? It is not seen as heresy when you question your religion. Actually, it is encouraged to question your religion.

 

[Byronman]

How so? We don't know what happened because religion discredits anyone who says contrary to what they wish to portray.

Because if we don't know the whole story we can't argue for or against it. And are there any recent examples of religion discrediting science? I am not being cynical I just want to know...

Give an example of how something that is given existence after being "created". I'm not well versed in physics at all, but I believe it's assumed that energy and matter cannot be created or destroyed. They can change forms, but they are always present. If this holds true, why is it so hard to believe that everything simply exists?

My bad I forgot the first law of thermodynamics. But doesn't it seem odd to you? That everything never began, just changed? I just can't except that there was no beginning. But that's just me.

 

[AltF4]

Actually, it is encouraged to question your religion.

lol, my Catholic school teachers disagreed!

 

[Chaco]

lol, my Catholic school teachers disagreed!

lulz. Well I forgot to mention that certain denominations will disagree there.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

If you guys are so curious, you could ask a Church pastor your questions, he won't bite your head off, if he is a good pastor.
It is you guys choice to believe in God, take it or leave it, we aren't going to leave it.

Again, where did matter and energy originate, the Big Bang is not the answer, this theory proposes all the matter in the universe was compressed into a very small area, smaller than a period at the end of a sentence, and when gravity could no longer compress this matter, it exploded outward.
It is an explanation for the formation of the universe, and does not explain the origin of matter.
The Bible does though, it said that it was brought into existence by God.
Of course, you can say that the Bible is no authority, but it was put onto paper and papyrus by human hands, just like your science texts, and the writers of the Bible were much wiser, and older, some lived beyond the two hundred years mark, which is astounding, and I want some of what they were eating.
Again, the Big Bang is not an explanation for the existence of matter or energy, but the formation of the universe, it does not answer my question that I answered!
My question was, how did matter and energy come into existence?
God brought them into existence.

 

[Aesir]

Alright fair enough. There is proof in the miracles that Jesus performed (bet you saw that one coming lol).

Evidence? I'd like to see it because I can say with almost certainty there were no miracles going on. If there were please post the evidence.

Because if we don't know the whole story we can't argue for or against it. And are there any recent examples of religion discrediting science? I am not being cynical I just want to know...

Wrong if theres no evidence to support a case why would you believe it? sure it would be foolish to mark it off as an impossibility but that goes with anything not just the belief in deities.

It's not illogical to not believe in god because theres no evidence to support his existence.

 

[Byronman]

lol, my Catholic school teachers disagreed!

Personally catholicism is too..."commercial" for me (probably not the best word but I can't think of anything else.

 

[EC_Joey]

That is where you are wrong, questioning your religion is an excellent thing to do. As a whole, it brings you closer to your religion. I question Christianity, and the answers I came up wit only bring me closer, and those inspire new questions. Do you see where I am getting at? It is not seen as heresy when you question your religion. Actually, it is encouraged to question your religion.

Children often go through that "why?" phase. They are told something, and they immediately ask "why?" In the case of religion, when they look for answers to questions that have no easy answers, they are either told that it is God's will or that it is stated in the Bible. They eventually learn to simply accept what they are told. I find this reprehensible.

I admit, I was going a bit overboard with hyperbole. It's certainly not as serious as heresy in this day and age. However, going back four centuries, it certainly would have been considered that serious. Galileo was punished for simply advocating heliocentrism, nowhere near as serious as questioning the existence of God.

In the case of questioning your own religion, your answers might be satisfactory for you, but perhaps not for someone who is not of the same faith. When thinking about the tough questions concerning religion, there are no definite answers. What happens when there are no answers? You start to see that the answers that religion provides are flawed. Coming to this realization, I can't see how it brings you closer to your religion.

 

[Stroupes]

My question was, how did matter and energy come into existence?
God brought them into existence.

Where's the proof?

 

[Byronman]

Evidence? I'd like to see it because I can say with almost certainty there were no miracles going on. If there were please post the evidence.



Wrong if theres no evidence to support a case why would you believe it? sure it would be foolish to mark it off as an impossibility but that goes with anything not just the belief in deities.

It's not illogical to not believe in god because theres no evidence to support his existence.

I'm not saying there is no evidence, however I cannot presently give you any. And why do you say "almost certainly" that there were no miracles?

 

[Aesir]

I'm not saying there is no evidence, however I cannot presently give you any. And why do you say "almost certainly" that there were no miracles?

Because theres no evidence, of miracles being performed at this time.

Not a shred of Primary or secondary sources that shows he ever preformed miracles.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Well, asking questions about what you believe, if it has truth in it, can remove doubts about it.
But, yes, questioning your faith can bring you closer, or push you away, mainly, the more I question my faith, the closer I get.
When i the big bang theory, I looked at the facts, and I know what I am talking about when I talk about the Big Bang, and some people here do not, they do not understand, that it is stated that the Big Bang is an on going process, of explosion and compression of the universe, eventually though, I saw how the Big Bang did not explain things fully, and could not give me the answer I needed.

 

[EC_Joey]

Again, the Big Bang is not an explanation for the existence of matter or energy, but the formation of the universe, it does not answer my question that I answered!
My question was, how did matter and energy come into existence?
God brought them into existence.

As I stated before, it is assumed that matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed. If this is true, then matter and energy never "came into existence". They simply exist.

This assumption of yours that "God brought matter and energy into existence" also assumes that God exists also. So again, I present my argument:

Let's say there are invisible, pink elephants floating above our heads right now. They are undetectable by any conventional means. So, we have no proof that they exist. We also have no proof that they don't exist. What should we assume in this case? Should we assume that the pink elephants exist because I told you they exist, or should we assume that they don't exist, despite the fact that I told you that they exist? Being the rational beings we are, we assume that the pink elephants don't exist. Why then, should we assume that God is any different?

 

[AltF4]

...JohnTheGalactic...

Did you read anything I've posted?

 

[Chaco]

Well, asking questions about what you believe, if it has truth in it, can remove doubts about it.
But, yes, questioning your faith can bring you closer, or push you away, mainly, the more I question my faith, the closer I get.

That is the same for me. When you find truths, in one area you remove your doubts. When it comes to something where you can't find an answer, ask one wiser than yourself. Go to a church and ask a pastor. They will give you your answers.

 

[EC_Joey]

That is the same for me. When you find truths, in one area you remove your doubts. When it comes to something where you can't find an answer, ask one wiser than yourself. Go to a church and ask a pastor. They will give you your answers.

Not everyone will be satisfied with those answers. Mainly because there are questions that don't have answers. Having an answer for everything doesn't automatically make all those answers valid.

 

[Chaco]

Not everyone will be satisfied with those answers. Mainly because there are questions that don't have answers. Having an answer for everything doesn't automatically make all those answers valid.

Yes, that is to the point. But here is where it goes deeper, if you can't find an answer. You have sought after, that's where belief keys in. It is ultimately up to what you believe in. I doubt that any one person's perceptions here will change. Why? Because of Allegory of the Cave. You have to believe beyond what you see.

 

[Aesir]

Pastors do not give answers they, sit you down look at you and say. "It's all part of gods divine plan", or "have faith". To question in your religion simply leaves you with more questions and leads you down the path of confusion.

Doesn't the law of Conservation of Energy state Matter cannot be created nor destroyed? just to note a law needs Empirical evidence in order to a law so in that respect I think we can say that this holds more water then god has.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Personally, from what I've learned about religion (my Grandparents have been trying to convert me for years, so I've had a lot of 'teaching'), the inquisitive nature of people, and the scientific method...

...if questioning your religious beliefs brings you closer to God, you probably aren't doing it right.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Pastors do not give answers they, sit you down look at you and say. "It's all part of gods divine plan", or "have faith". To question in your religion simply leaves you with more questions and leads you down the path of confusion.

Doesn't the law of Conservation of Energy state Matter cannot be created nor destroyed? just to note a law needs Empirical evidence in order to a law so in that respect I think we can say that this holds more water then god has.

Not my pastors, they give me my answers, I already do not have to be told have faith, cause I do, and know it is all part of Gods plan.

And, matter can be converted into energy, right, is that what a nuclear reaction does? Also, can the vice versa happen? Such as energy being converted into matter, it is possible for energy to be converted into matter, and humans have accomplished this process.
It is obvious that an all powerful being, God, could convert his energy into matter, with relative ease.

 

[EC_Joey]

Yes, that is to the point. But here is where it goes deeper, if you can't find an answer. You have sought after, that's where belief keys in. It is ultimately up to what you believe in. I doubt that any one person's perceptions here will change. Why? Because of Allegory of the Cave. You have to believe beyond what you see.

I see the Allegory of the Cave differently than you do. The person that emerges from the cave and learns about the outside world and its existence can only do so if they have broken free of the chains. Until this happens, there is no reason to believe that anything outside the cave exists.

Someone could tell the men inside the cave that there are flying pink elephants underneath a brown sky outside, but that is not necessarily true. The same applies to God. If someone tells one of the men that God exists outside the cave, why should that man believe what is told to them? Only until they break out of the cave can they verify that things exist outside the cave.

 

[RDK]

Yes, that is to the point. But here is where it goes deeper, if you can't find an answer. You have sought after, that's where belief keys in. It is ultimately up to what you believe in.

Reality doesn't give a crap what you believe. There are right and wrong answers to things, period.

It is obvious that an all powerful being, God, could convert his energy into matter, with relative ease.

It's also obvious that an all-powerful flying spaghetti-monster could have crapped his pants and magically created the universe. According to your line of thinking, it's possible.

 

[Byronman]

I see the Allegory of the Cave differently than you do. The person that emerges from the cave and learns about the outside world and its existence can only do so if they have broken free of the chains. Until this happens, there is no reason to believe that anything outside the cave exists.

Someone could tell the men inside the cave that there are flying pink elephants underneath a brown sky outside, but that is not necessarily true. The same applies to God. If someone tells one of the men that God exists outside the cave, why should that man believe what is told to them? Only until they break out of the cave can they verify that things exist outside the cave.

Your kind of helping his argument don't you think? That is what I got out of it, you may have meant something else.

Anyway I read something rather interesting. You can read these articles if you want: http://www.doesgodexist.org. Feel free to agree, disagree, provide input, etc.

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Reality doesn't give a crap what you believe. There are right and wrong answers to things, period.



It's also obvious that an all-powerful flying spaghetti-monster could have crapped his pants and magically created the universe. According to your line of thinking, it's possible.

There are right and wrong answers to things? What, maybe that explained why I didn't get a 100% on that last test for Drivers Ed. (watch out on the road, lol).

Why, I stated, since man can convert energy into matter, it is possible, and so, since matter was created by God, to explain how it was created, he converted his energy into matter.

And do not give me that crap, I am explaining myself, and it seems logical to believe that God can do something we can do.

 

[DARKALONDITE]

Oftentimes I question how people can be aetheist. Though I hae a few aetheist friends and don't question their beliefs, I disagree with them. I'll tell you somethig, nobody knws how God thinks. Just basing your beliefs on the Bible and what other people say is idiotic. People need to learn to develop their own beleifs based on what they feel.

 

[Deleted member]

Oftentimes I question how people can be aetheist. Though I hae a few aetheist friends and don't question their beliefs, I disagree with them. I'll tell you somethig, nobody knws how God thinks. Just basing your beliefs on the Bible and what other people say is idiotic. People need to learn to develop their own beleifs based on what they feel.

Alt, RDK, snex, you know who you are:

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=177276

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Oftentimes I question how people can be aetheist. Though I hae a few aetheist friends and don't question their beliefs, I disagree with them. I'll tell you somethig, nobody knws how God thinks. Just basing your beliefs on the Bible and what other people say is idiotic. People need to learn to develop their own beleifs based on what they feel.

People base their beliefs on the words of many and many other texts all the time, it is no mistake. But, we have to listen to what people say and have to have a discerning mind.

 

[Aesir]

Not my pastors, they give me my answers, I already do not have to be told have faith, cause I do, and know it is all part of Gods plan.

And, matter can be converted into energy, right, is that what a nuclear reaction does? Also, can the vice versa happen? Such as energy being converted into matter, it is possible for energy to be converted into matter, and humans have accomplished this process.
It is obvious that an all powerful being, God, could convert his energy into matter, with relative ease.

Except the bible doesn't say that.

It's easy to fall back on god did it, but what makes that belief anymore valid then Zeus did it? Or Isis did it? or Dionysus did it?

What makes your god anymore special then the other previous gods I just mentioned?

 

[Johnthegalactic]

Except the bible doesn't say that.

It's easy to fall back on god did it, but what makes that belief anymore valid then Zeus did it? Or Isis did it? or Dionysus did it?

What makes your god anymore special then the other previous gods I just mentioned?

The Bible says God made created the universe, and i was explaining how he must have done it.
I was explaining how God did it, just like how a lawyer can explain how someone did something, it is easy to point and say he did it, but I showed how he did it.

 

[EC_Joey]

And, matter can be converted into energy, right, is that what a nuclear reaction does? Also, can the vice versa happen? Such as energy being converted into matter, it is possible for energy to be converted into matter, and humans have accomplished this process.
It is obvious that an all powerful being, God, could convert his energy into matter, with relative ease.

Yes, all matter has an associated energy, and the reverse applies. This is what Einstein's equation states, that E = MC^2. This still supports the law of conservation of energy/matter.

We're back to the beginning again. You say that God could convert his energy into matter, but this is not creating matter out of nothing, like the Bible states.

AltF4, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Energy and matter are the same thing, but in two different forms. Also, one cannot exist without the other. All matter has energy, an example is that most matter is constantly in motion. If this is right, then matter and energy have always existed. There is no period of time in which matter did not exist. If this is true, then God did not create anything. The main argument you have given is that "God must exist because he created the universe/matter". However, if there was no "creation" then this means your argument is false, and God does not exist.

So far what I'm seeing is that you're simply twisting what people are telling you so that they fit what you are trying to tell us.

 

[Aesir]

The Bible says God made created the universe, and i was explaining how he must have done it.
I was explaining how God did it, just like how a lawyer can explain how someone did something, it is easy to point and say he did it, but I showed how he did it.

What you're using is assumptions without any proof to back them up. What reason do you believe that god orchestrated this in such a way? Why create a needless addition?

in the case for the big bang how come you have to include god into the equation? It is far more easier to exclude god and acquire the same results. You're over complicating a process that doesn't need to be complicated.