Religion The God Question (continued in Part 2 - link in last post)

[Power Raid]

I think these are different/separate to your inner being and inner health.

I rarely have doubts, fear or guilt. I seem to have a wider set of boundaries than most. I'm also able to kerb my guilt because I don't do s**t that makes me feel guilty (same as what religious types do but they need that structure to achieve this). Then there's all the stuff about "knowing". Whilst I don't think there is a God, I don't know and don't care. I also don't know or care what happens when we die.

It's just me and my ethics that allow me be at peace with myself (and even then I spend little time thinking about this). I don't need my hand held. Religious people need their hand held.

yep

that's probably why Christianity doesn't resonate.

 

[jinny1]

You cannot believe anything in the bible if you believe the old testament if bullshit because they are all linked by genealogy. Almost all the main characters in the old testament are linked because of incest & consanguinity.

Jesus is considered a descendant of Adam by the author of the Gospel according to Luke: “Jesus was the son of Joseph, son of Heli, ... son of Enos, son of Seth, son of Adam, son of God. (Luke 3:23-38). So as you can see now you have to believe that none of the biblical characters (and their stories) in the old and new testament are real since they are descendants of Adam (who never existed).

The entire pedigree of biblical characters in the bible collapses if a single character at any point in the pedigree was non-existent (e.g. Noah, Moses, Adam etc)

 

[Hollow Knight]

People tend not to follow what their religion tells them. What they do is twist and re-interpret thousand-year old stories to make them say what they want them to.

As we see with evangelicals in America who have managed to find a way to wrap their interpretation of Christianity around their true religion - predatory capitalism.

That's why there are plenty of perfectly reasonable religious people around - because when you get right down to it, most people are reasonable irrespective of Orders From The Sky Fairies.

Which is why it always makes me gag when these people pull out the "without God/religion, there is no morality" rubbish. They know rape and slavery are wrong for example, and they certainly didn't come to such an understanding by reading scripture. Yahweh loves slavery, and loves rape. In fact, the only thing he seems to enjoy more is genocide, with a bit of slave rape on the side.

 

[Sydney Bloods]

The whole "render unto Caesar" passage is interpreted by most people to be a position on the separation of Church and State.

right a passage that's quite clearly about whether jews should pay taxes and jesus says yes you have to pay tax. is interpreted as not having anything to do with paying taxes.

Christians are getting dumber.

they came and said to Him, "Teacher, we know that You are truthful and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any, but teach the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to pay a poll-tax to Caesar, or not? 15"Shall we pay or shall we not pay?" But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them, "Why are you testing Me? Bring Me a denarius to look at."16They brought one. And He said to them, "Whose likeness and inscription is this?" And they said to Him, "Caesar's. And Jesus said to them, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.

its clearly about taxes!

 

[Cooldude]

Wow seriously? People interpreted the Caesar line as Jesus wanting separation of church and state? Can their interpretations get any more self serving nonsensical and nefarious?

It's just a bunch of pharisees trying to make Jesus say we don't have to pay taxes so they can prosecute or kill him, but Jesus sidestepped it.

 

[Partridge]

I'm not a christian but you are miles off the mark focusing on incorrect details in the bible. The bible was written in a time where the majority of people couldn't read or write and was a combination of story telling, fact and fiction to help people make sense of the world.

And managed to completely fail at it.

Still the morals are good - disobedient child? Stone them to death. Rape a virgin? Pay 50 bucks to the Dad and she's now your wife.

There's no shortage of good material in there.

 

[Partridge]

It's very easy to criticise people who believe that Genesis is the literal truth. Most Christians don't actually believe that though. It's much harder to argue against the idea of god as the creator of the universe (i.e. the belief that god caused the big bang and everything since happened as science says) - essentially the deist position. There are good atheist vs Christian debates on Youtube on the subject featuring Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins etc.

It's actually quite simple to argue against that idea. There's no evidence, at all. So why should I believe it?

 

[Tichmond Rigers]

God exists. We know that the act of hitting has to have a hitter, the building has to have a builder, and the Universe has to have a Creator.

The one who claimed that the universe appeared without a creator claims that this entire universe appeared by chance. They claim that two atoms met and exploded to give such a coherent universe, with the sun rising and setting so routinely that you can roughly estimate when it will set 6 months before, and the moon going through phases to the point that you can roughly estimate the cycle of the moon (full moon, new moon etc.). A "big bang" will not provide such an orderly Universe, because explosions generally do not cause order, but rather disorder. We have so many evidences for this in this life.

Of course there is a God who created everything the way it is now. If people will not accept if I told them that a car was made by no one, I do not understand how some would accept that the human with many complex systems (more complex than the car itself) was not created. Science leaves many things unanswered, like why the sun is round and not square, or why it is the one who produces light and not the moon. They can explain the physical reasons behind it through observation, but no further than that. Or why the humans have a higher level of intellect than the animals. It could have easily been the grass who provided the sunlight, or the squirrels being the once with the human intellect. This is mentally possible.
I however can explain this by one sentence: "Because God attributed the sun with a round shape over a square shape, and attributed humans with this level of intellect and not the animals. He is attributed with Will, and He does whatever He Wills".

 

[Niximus]

God exists. We know that the act of hitting has to have a hitter, the building has to have a builder, and the Universe has to have a Creator.

The one who claimed that the universe appeared without a creator claims that this entire universe appeared by chance. They claim that two atoms met and exploded to give such a coherent universe, with the sun rising and setting so routinely that you can roughly estimate when it will set 6 months before, and the moon going through phases to the point that you can roughly estimate the cycle of the moon (full moon, new moon etc.). A "big bang" will not provide such an orderly Universe, because explosions generally do not cause order, but rather disorder. We have so many evidences for this in this life.

Of course there is a God who created everything the way it is now. If people will not accept if I told them that a car was made by no one, I do not understand how some would accept that the human with many complex systems (more complex than the car itself) was not created. Science leaves many things unanswered, like why the sun is round and not square, or why it is the one who produces light and not the moon. They can explain the physical reasons behind it through observation, but no further than that. Or why the humans have a higher level of intellect than the animals. It could have easily been the grass who provided the sunlight, or the squirrels being the once with the human intellect. This is mentally possible.
I however can explain this by one sentence: "Because God attributed the sun with a round shape over a square shape, and attributed humans with this level of intellect and not the animals. He is attributed with Will, and He does whatever He Wills".

Wow, the Poe is strong with this one...

 

[Hollow Knight]

God exists. We know that the act of hitting has to have a hitter, the building has to have a builder, and the Universe has to have a Creator.

The one who claimed that the universe appeared without a creator claims that this entire universe appeared by chance. They claim that two atoms met and exploded to give such a coherent universe, with the sun rising and setting so routinely that you can roughly estimate when it will set 6 months before, and the moon going through phases to the point that you can roughly estimate the cycle of the moon (full moon, new moon etc.). A "big bang" will not provide such an orderly Universe, because explosions generally do not cause order, but rather disorder. We have so many evidences for this in this life.

Of course there is a God who created everything the way it is now. If people will not accept if I told them that a car was made by no one, I do not understand how some would accept that the human with many complex systems (more complex than the car itself) was not created. Science leaves many things unanswered, like why the sun is round and not square, or why it is the one who produces light and not the moon. They can explain the physical reasons behind it through observation, but no further than that. Or why the humans have a higher level of intellect than the animals. It could have easily been the grass who provided the sunlight, or the squirrels being the once with the human intellect. This is mentally possible.
I however can explain this by one sentence: "Because God attributed the sun with a round shape over a square shape, and attributed humans with this level of intellect and not the animals. He is attributed with Will, and He does whatever He Wills".

Wait... people still use the Argument from Design and actually mean it? *cringe*

 

[Tichmond Rigers]

Wait... people still use the Argument from Design and actually mean it? *cringe*

If you saw a car, you would not claim it to come from nowhere. It does not make sense that people claim that something more orderly and complex than a car came from nowhere

 

[Tichmond Rigers]

Wait... people still use the Argument from Design and actually mean it? *cringe*

No atheist can discredit the belief that this Universe and what is in it has a Creator. The truth is, they would not accept that something as simple as a writing came from nowhere but accept that a being and system more complex than that comes out of nowhere. Does not make sense

 

[Hollow Knight]

If you saw a car, you would not claim it to come from nowhere. It does not make sense that people claim that something more orderly and complex than a car came from nowhere

Yes, I am familiar with the argument. I am also well aware how intellectually empty the analogy is.

If you are going to just trot out tired arguments that have been countered thousands of times before, can you at least have the intellectual courage to acknowledge how you go about reconciling the infinite regress that your "argument" entails?

Or can't you just save some time by reading the many, many rebuttals of the argument from design that already exist. I mean, you honestly don't think you have stumbled across some innovative new argument here... surely?

Do some reading and then if you are still stuck with "I don't understand how a (subjectively) complex universe exists, so therefore an even more complex deity (which by my own logic must also have needed a creator) must have thought it into being" then we can try and help you through it.

 

[Niximus]

Still feeling the Poe...

 

[Niximus]

Yes, I am familiar with the argument. It's just intellectually empty.

If you are going to just trot out tired arguments that have been countered thousands of times before, can you at least have the intellectual courage to acknowledge the infinite regress that your "argument" introduces?

Turtles all the way down, man.

 

[Tichmond Rigers]

Yes, I am familiar with the argument. I am also well aware how intellectually empty the analogy is.

If you are going to just trot out tired arguments that have been countered thousands of times before, can you at least have the intellectual courage to acknowledge how you go about reconciling the infinite regress that your "argument" entails?

Yes, I am happy to provide intellectual evidence for my claim against counteracting claims.

 

[Partridge]

No atheist can discredit the belief that this Universe and what is in it has a Creator. The truth is, they would not accept that something as simple as a writing came from nowhere but accept that a being and system more complex than that comes out of nowhere. Does not make sense

Yes we can. The Universe does not need a creator. The fact we don't yet know how the Universe began means exactly that - we don't know. It does not mean we give up and say "some magic man in the sky invented everything".

 

[JP2]

Yes, an omniscient, omnipotent supermind throbbing at the centre of the universe for some reason certainly solves that problem we had explaining the complexity of physical systems comprised entirely of quarks and leptons. They might have been quite difficult to explain had you not invoked literally the most complex thing imaginable to explain them.

 

[pokerspiv]

It's actually quite simple to argue against that idea. There's no evidence, at all. So why should I believe it?

Because science has not yet answered the question of what happened before the big bang. So until they come up with a better theory, people who believe in a higher being will continue to say that what existed before the big bang was their god.

Interesting debate here:

 

[Partridge]

Because science has not yet answered the question of what happened before the big bang. So until they come up with a better theory, people who believe in a higher being will continue to say that what existed before the big bang was their god.

Absolutely. They are entitled to cling to that belief. We are entitled to not take it seriously.

 

[Niximus]

I'll give this guy the benefit of the doubt that he is really just very ignorant and has never even walked past a single science textbook...

I'll add that I'm not going to go around in circles with you, so if you want to ignore this, fine, I'm not going to endlessly refute the same claims over and over.

God exists. We know that the act of hitting has to have a hitter, the building has to have a builder, and the Universe has to have a Creator.

You are introducing a being, far, far more complex than the universe to be the cause of the universe. That being then is in far more need of a creator (being even more complex), or you give it a pass and abandon your own logic. If this creator doesn't need a creator, then why assume the universe would?

If you acknowledge that it too requires a creator, then what created that creator? What created the creator of the creator. This continues infinitely.

The one who claimed that the universe appeared without a creator claims that this entire universe appeared by chance.

We don't know how the universe came to be, but as above, how did this creator come to be, by chance?

Any allowance you make to allow this creator to exist is only adding an unnecessary level of complexity. If the creator has always existed and thus escapes the requirement of a cause, why not allow the universe this origin?

They claim that two atoms met and exploded to give such a coherent universe,

OK... two things.

1) The Big Bang Theory has nothing to do with "two atoms meeting",
2) The Big Bang Theory does not involve an explosion.

actually, make that three things

3) The Big Bang Theory does not address the origin of the universe. The BB describes a very rapid expansion (not explosion) of the universe itself. This expansion is happening even today, and we can observe its effects.

with the sun rising and setting so routinely that you can roughly estimate when it will set 6 months before, and the moon going through phases to the point that you can roughly estimate the cycle of the moon (full moon, new moon etc.).

Hmm, this is really where my trust that you aren't just trolling is tested. It is common knowledge that the sun doesn't actually rise and set, right? You understand that it only appears to do so from our perspective because we're on a ball of rock and water that is rotating?

A "big bang" will not provide such an orderly Universe, because explosions generally do not cause order, but rather disorder. We have so many evidences for this in this life.

I think you're of the impression that we're part of some tuned system where everything is nicely timed together and ordered.

You might be shocked to learn that in fact, the moon is speeding up. It is gradually going around the Earth faster, and faster. A faster orbit means it is also getting further away. Eventually it will leave our orbit entirely! What's even more interesting, is that this speed boost is being stolen from the Earth. Every orbit, a little bit of the energy from our rotation is passed on to the moon, making it orbit faster...and us rotate slower! The nicely organised days are gradually getting longer!

Of course there is a God who created everything the way it is now. If people will not accept if I told them that a car was made by no one, I do not understand how some would accept that the human with many complex systems (more complex than the car itself) was not created.

This is just repeating the first part. I told you I'm not repeating myself

Science leaves many things unanswered

Science has not yet explained many things, in this you are correct. So, the things that science has explained - before they were explained, many had a religious or supernatural 'explanation'. What would you say to a person who insisted that diseases are caused by evil spirits and demons, rather than germs?

, like why the sun is round and not square, or why it is the one who produces light and not the moon.

Gravity
Nuclear Fusion

They can explain the physical reasons behind it through observation, but no further than that.

This is meaningless. You're assuming that there is a 'further than that' to explain and then condemning science for not explaining it.

Or why the humans have a higher level of intellect than the animals. It could have easily been the grass who provided the sunlight, or the squirrels being the once with the human intellect. This is mentally possible.

By 'mentally possible' you mean 'It's a thought I can have', right? To be completely honest, this part sounds like you're really, really high. (Not that there's anything wrong with that).

I however can explain this by one sentence: "Because God attributed the sun with a round shape over a square shape, and attributed humans with this level of intellect and not the animals. He is attributed with Will, and He does whatever He Wills".

"X is Y, because god made it that way - no further explanation needed" - do you really find this a satisfying answer?

I understand that you're a Muslim. The Islamic world used to be at the forefront of scientific discovery and progress. Please be aware that those who came before you were not satisfied with 'God did it' as the answer to everything.

Just letting you know, you need not abandon science and embrace ignorance...

 

[Tichmond Rigers]

Yes we can. The Universe does not need a creator. The fact we don't yet know how the Universe began means exactly that - we don't know. It does not mean we give up and say "some magic man in the sky invented everything".

Just to clarify, I do not believe in a "man in the sky" having created the Universe. Why? Because that belief can easily be refuted. I completely understand why people don't believe that, because I believe it is stupid. Assuming that people who believe in God all believe in this though is wrong.

I do not believe in a "Man in the sky" for many reasons.
1. The Creator of everything would not be in need of His creation. He would have existed before creating them, so would have existed without them. Hence, if everything else is created, He would not need anything. Creating the sky and then taking it as a place for Himself would mean that He changed from the state of not being in the sky to being in the sky (or from not being in a place into a place). Change occurs when one is overpowered, like the one who stops the passage of a ball by the overpowering of his hand. And the one who is overpowered is weak. Hence, this is not who I believe is God. I do not believe that the one who is able to be overpowered is God.
2. Being in the sky would mean that He is a body that takes space. And body have limits. Any thing or being with a limit needs another to have attributed that limit to the thing or being. And the one who needs another to have attributed those things to him is not God, but a creation.

To talk about what you have mentioned specifically though, the Universe IS in need of a Creator. The sun for instance is in need of a place. Time lapses on it. Its shape is round. It omits light and is a colour. These characteristics need another to have specified it with this. It isn't square because the One Who specified it with that attribute did not Will for it to be square but rather round. An african is not normally white skinned because they have a Creator who attributed them with a darker skin. Also, we have all experienced a time when things did not go our way, even if what we wanted was easily achievable. What stopped us from doing what we wanted to do? Not everything goes as I will, and not everything goes as you will. But there must be One's Will that everything occurs by. Hence, if I will something and God Willed that what I willed for didn't happen, it won't occur the way I wish.

To make it easier for you to understand, I will give an example. A king or ruler is more powerful than what the people living in their nation are. Their will overpowers their citizens. Hence, if a king or a judge sentences them to go to jail, they will be put there whether or not they want to be there.

None of us chose to be alive, or chose to be born where we were born, or chose our race, or chose our families. These things were assigned to us. Hence, there is one who assigned us with these things. None of us chose to have a heart, hands, feelings, intellect, feet and many other things. If you compare the kings example to this, one would realise that the One Who did create us is attributed with Power over us.

Like we did not choose to be the way we are, the sun, the stars, the planets and the Earth did not either. So they all must have a Creator

 

[Catastic82]

 

[Hollow Knight]

God of the gaps. Every time you don't understand something, you plug God in there.

 

[Tichmond Rigers]

I'll give this guy the benefit of the doubt that he is really just very ignorant and has never even walked past a single science textbook...

I'll add that I'm not going to go around in circles with you, so if you want to ignore this, fine, I'm not going to endlessly refute the same claims over and over.



You are introducing a being, far, far more complex than the universe to be the cause of the universe. That being then is in far more need of a creator (being even more complex), or you give it a pass and abandon your own logic. If this creator doesn't need a creator, then why assume the universe would?

If you acknowledge that it too requires a creator, then what created that creator? What created the creator of the creator. This continues infinitely.


We don't know how the universe came to be, but as above, how did this creator come to be, by chance?

Any allowance you make to allow this creator to exist is only adding an unnecessary level of complexity. If the creator has always existed and thus escapes the requirement of a cause, why not allow the universe this origin?



OK... two things.

1) The Big Bang Theory has nothing to do with "two atoms meeting",
2) The Big Bang Theory does not involve an explosion.

actually, make that three things

3) The Big Bang Theory does not address the origin of the universe. The BB describes a very rapid expansion (not explosion) of the universe itself. This expansion is happening even today, and we can observe its effects.



Hmm, this is really where my trust that you aren't just trolling is tested. It is common knowledge that the sun doesn't actually rise and set, right? You understand that it only appears to do so from our perspective because we're on a ball of rock and water that is rotating?


I think you're of the impression that we're part of some tuned system where everything is nicely timed together and ordered.

You might be shocked to learn that in fact, the moon is speeding up. It is gradually going around the Earth faster, and faster. A faster orbit means it is also getting further away. Eventually it will leave our orbit entirely! What's even more interesting, is that this speed boost is being stolen from the Earth. Every orbit, a little bit of the energy from our rotation is passed on to the moon, making it orbit faster...and us rotate slower! The nicely organised days are gradually getting longer!



This is just repeating the first part. I told you I'm not repeating myself


Science has not yet explained many things, in this you are correct. So, the things that science has explained - before they were explained, many had a religious or supernatural 'explanation'. What would you say to a person who insisted that diseases are caused by evil spirits and demons, rather than germs?



Gravity
Nuclear Fusion


This is meaningless. You're assuming that there is a 'further than that' to explain and then condemning science for not explaining it.

By 'mentally possible' you mean 'It's a thought I can have', right? To be completely honest, this part sounds like you're really, really high. (Not that there's anything wrong with that).



"X is Y, because god made it that way - no further explanation needed" - do you really find this a satisfying answer?

I understand that you're a Muslim. The Islamic world used to be at the forefront of scientific discovery and progress. Please be aware that those who came before you were not satisfied with 'God did it' as the answer to everything.

Just letting you know, you need not abandon science and embrace ignorance...

Look, I am really struggling with this multi quote thing to be honest. Bear with me