- Moderator
- #3,051
Well said. I dont believe in anything actually, as universe depends on the observer, QM says. If thats the case there is nothing called objective truth and all these arguments we are having is irrelevant. The possbilities are infinite, god is one of them but not the only possibility. What shits me though is when theists say science is a human construct and then subscribe to meta physics which is another human construct. How on earth will someone have a clue what exists outside of space/time if any such place exists at all? there is no way anyone can find out so i wish these pseudo intellectuals would stop pretending that they have the answers when they are clearly nothing but frauds.
I tend to agree. As Ive said previously, I'm of the view that holds that nothing is known, or is likely to be known, of the existence of a deistic God or indeed of anything beyond material phenomena.
I define 'god' in two ways:
- an immortal, supernatural being or deity that is the perfect, omnipotent and omniscient originator/creator and ruler of the universe.
or alternatively...
- any supernatural being (deity), worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force.
Arguing the existence of such a being as a 'truth', using faith alone is intellectually dishonest. In other words this 'truth' of religion is unknowable through evidence and reason. You have to suspend reason to believe in many religious claims, such as the resurrection of corpses, bodily ascension into heaven and so on.
Faith is what you use when you don't have knowledge. If the only way one can accept an assertion is by faith, then I would suggest that the assertion can't be taken on its own merits. If faith is valid, then absolutely anything goes. Any assertion, no matter how improbable or fanciful, is valid.
There doesn't appear to be any evidence for a god, no coherent definition of 'god', (although I gave my own definition of 'god' above, but that still could leaves open a wide range of possibilities for the human imagination to conjure) no good logical argument for the existence of a god and no agreement among believers of 'god' (those that rely on faith for their belief) as to the nature and moral principles of a 'god'.
And beyond all that, there is no need for an imaginary god. Millions of people live happy, productive lives without believing in a 'god'.
As such I live my life without concern for observing the worship of an unknowable god and do not concern myself with, or follow any of religion's material trappings (all invented by man), whether that be cultural / religious practices, or texts such as the Bible and/or the Quran...beyond being an impartial, interested observer. Indeed I'm somewhat fascinated how people can suspend logic and reason and rely totally on faith for a belief that they subsequently allow to control and shape their life to such a large degree.
Be that as it may, and regardless of people's faith derived beliefs, religious practices and ancient or modern religious texts that make certain faith based claims such as the Bible, Quran or even the Book of Mormon are open to be evaluated, analysed and criticised like any other man-made practice or text.