Do you believe in God? - Page 6

[dinahx]

Oh yes! Herbal Medicine is my 'proof' but I've really got lots of proofs. I love God! <3

[Niamh]

I'm an apatheist. I don't know if there's a God or not, and I just don't care.

If there is a god and he's going to be mad at me for not deducing which is "his" correct religion, then I'll be miserable in any after-life and I'd rather spend as much time as I can, here and now, being happy.

If there is a god and he is loving and forgiving and logical (and, hence, doesn't give a flying fish whether I profess fealty to him in this life), then I'm doing ok.

If there is no god, then I'm not spending the one life I have trying to impress and obey an imaginary being in the sky. I'm living my life full to the hilt in the little time I have.

Frankly, the thought of this life not being the end is depressing to me. It makes sense that religion was thought up to allay fears of this life being 'all there is', but that is just not a fear for me. An eternity of living? That sounds like hell, even if I did make it to the Mormon's top Celestial Kingdom where everything's coming up roses.

Having said all of that, I have a deeply spiritual side, it's just not tied into any religion or belief.

[dinahx]

Originally Posted by Thalia the Muse

My problem with Dawkins is that he acts like a jerk, and tends to promote the stereotype that anyone who accepts the basic facts about biology is an EVIL GOD-HATER WHO MAKES FUN OF VIRTUOUS CHRISTIANS. He's great at explaining the mechanisms of evolution -- but I think he has no grasp of human psychogy at all.

If I had a choice to hang out with Dawkins or Jesus, I would pick JC all day! One weird thing is that some people say 'I don't believe in Jesus, or I don't believe in the Bible'. Umm you don't get a choice there. The Bible exists I can hold it right now, you can say its just a story book, but it does exist and it is a best seller, and clearly, JC existed. It may be legit to not believe He was Divine, there is an argument there. But to say you don't believe in Him period? Well do people go around saying they don't believe in the (partially mythologized) Socrates or Ben Franklin?

[Thalia the Muse]

You know they aren't saying that, though -- they're being linguistically sloppy, but what they mean is "I don't believe in the divinity of Jesus" or "I don't agree with the theology of the Bible or accept it as the revealed word of God." Those are just kind of cumbersome phrases to pop out, and most people don't parse out their words that carefully.

Although I think there is a camp that denies the historical existence of Jesus -- I'm pretty sure there are a few books with that theme. It takes all kinds ...

[frontierpsych]

Originally Posted by Liquesce

Yes. Because ... I can? Belief in a conscious creative force or disbelief in that force are at their core options without a lot of evidence. They're opinions. To a certain extent they're simply preferences. There are certainly elements of religions that make more or less sense, are more or less able to be disproven, but the basic concept of a creator god ... no one knows anything. (Which I suppose makes me read as agnostic, but the cool thing about an opinion about which there are no facts to be had is anyone can hold a strong one while totally acknowledging there's no significant basis for it, because hey, there's no basis for anything else either.)

All of that said, even as a believer I will say that the strong track record of humans trying -- and demonstrably failing -- to explain natural processes through supernatural means gives a good argument to disbelief.

I like this, too. I have no issues with any one's belief or disbelief, as long as they are compassionate to those whose beliefs differ from theirs.

In general, I don't care to discuss religion specifically with people, because it tends to become a heated debate between some party or other, or someone trying to convince others of something they have no desire to believe, and I don't enjoy that kind of divisiveness. I do like discussing philosophy though, because I like to push the limits of what the human mind can imagine.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by Purple Sage

How does this work, exactly? How do you know the intrinsic value of anything?

I thought the alternative to an intelligent higher power creating the universe was a random, chaotic, indifferent, natural universe....so wouldn't the intrinsic value of things made from the random events of a random universe be, in fact, random?

It happens because intrinsic value is value that comes from what something is, not how it's created.

Something that, through it's very being, provides benefit in someway has a higher intrinsic value then something that doesn't. Intrinsic value doesn't exist seperate from what it is part of and what it is part of cannot exist without intrinsic value.

Note: Value does not have to equal a positive amount, value is simply the overall worth of something which can be negative.

[fresh_veggie]

I don't believe yes/no on the God topic - but a God who demands you must worship in a single way? No. How could that be possible if we're all raised in different cultures with different life experiences? God/s could not logically work that way, in my eyes.

If there are gods, or creators in that sense, to me they would be loving, compassionate, and accepting of all of their children.

I do think there are certain, natural laws...but those may just as well be inherited instincts, such as don't murder (so our species does not die out).

I think one can truly decide if they've created God in their own image once he seems to hate everyone that the individual hates. I feel like this is a problem among the people I know who are religious and "God-fearing" individuals.

[fresh_veggie]

Originally Posted by outlier

Nope. I like to say I'm a born-again atheist because I certainly didn't come out the womb believing in any gods! My parents' Christianity tried to change that as I grew up, but I have just never been comfortable with religion or seen any need for it. I love logic and reason, and religion has never given me either.

I like this, too My parents weren't religious (unless you count my dad clinging to Christian ideals just because it's his excuse to be racist (curse of Cain ) and openly, harshly anti-LGBT (). I joined the Mormons in high school, but after a few years, I could just not stomach it anymore. My logic and reason do NOT go well with being in that sect. I'm glad I joined, but it has equally caused grief. Their God is not a loving God, it is whoever they want it to be in whatever situation they choose. Their doctrine has changed so much over the years, and those nice missionaries don't tell you that when you join, because they probably don't know it themselves.

I don't believe in the power of prayer, it's just never made sense. In the Mormon church we were taught that knowledge can come from prayer, but if that were the case, couldn't we have all the "answers?" Wouldn't Mormons be pioneering advanced life-saving surgery or something else of the sort? I never got answers, so I blamed myself for not trying hard enough. Finally I got tired of the guilt. I don't believe in a God that wants you to be eternally guilty, because there is no way of ever truly knowing about things we cannot know at this point. Mostly, with the Mormons, I just had a personal clash of ethics because of the Prop 8 scandal involving the church, as well as my veganism being seen as unGodlike. (????)

[ThirdEyeMom]

I believe in God because there is no proof there there isn't one.

[KaylaBeanie]

Short answer: yes.

Long answer: I absolutely do not follow any of the Abrahamic religions(Judaism, Christianity and Islam). I totally reject that view of god. I was raised by a christian family, almost converted to Catholicism at 14, and almost converted to Judaism twice at 16 and 18. So, I've put in TONS of study to the Judeo-Christian-Islam religious view, and it does nothing for me. If heaven means spending eternity with that jealous, jerky big guy in the sky, no thank you. I also don't believe in the devil, but that wasn't the question

My beliefs follow a more eastern, Hindu/Buddhist pattern. I believe very strongly in the divine, but more so than the stereotypical agnostic cop-out. I think that god/the divine is so powerful, so much a part of everything and everyone, that it is very derogatory to restrict the divine into a big, bearded guy in the sky who has such harsh rules and regulations. So, I would say that Christians, Jews, Muslims and many other religions are the ones who are downplaying god.

[Storm Bride]

Originally Posted by bluebirdiemama

But as far as evolving culturally......
The kind of value Im talking about couldnt have "evolved culterally" because that statement implies that a person was less valuable before the culteral evolution of value, then a person is today.
The kind of value Im talking about never lessens or increases.

No - but a cultural understanding of that value can, and does, evolve.

The god I'm talking about CREATED each one of us. He took nothing, and then added each characteristic, one by one, with the end result in mind, carefully, lovingly. When we were in the womb he forsaw every thing we would do in our lives. We have free will, he forces nothing on us, the point is that He knows each one, intimately, because he created us, and loves us dearly, because he made us special and unique, and we were created out of love.

I find the idea that "he" (she, it, whatever) created each of us with love completely and utterly incompatible with the idea that "he" (she, it, whatever) foresaw everything we would do in our lives. It's one of the many aspects of religion that has always perplexed me.

[kcstar]

Originally Posted by KaylaBeanie

My beliefs follow a more eastern, Hindu/Buddhist pattern. I believe very strongly in the divine, but more so than the stereotypical agnostic cop-out. I think that god/the divine is so powerful, so much a part of everything and everyone, that it is very derogatory to restrict the divine into a big, bearded guy in the sky who has such harsh rules and regulations. So, I would say that Christians, Jews, Muslims and many other religions are the ones who are downplaying god.

I will say, I have known Christians, Jews, Muslims, and others who don't stick with the "big, bearded guy in the sky" imagery.

I also tend more towards mysticism and existentialism. There are mystic strains within ALL of the major world religions.

As for Christianity, in the Catholic schools I had a religion textbook titled "Jesus of History, Christ of Faith".

The more I've learned about early Christianity and the history of the 1st century of the common era, the more I've come to believe this is true. I am inclined to believe that there was a historical teacher with a name like Yeshua or Jesus. (I have read people argue even this point.) I also understand that there was a mythical (Joseph Campbell connotation, not intended to be derogatory) Christ, one of many dying and rising gods, whose story was merged with Jesus somewhere around the 2nd century or so.

Is Jesus the Christ? That is a question of faith, which can only be answered person-by-person.

As an existentialist, my concern about other people's beliefs is only that they find what is meaningful to them. Whether it be atheism, Christianity, science (with or without religion), Islam, Buddhism, etc.

As a mystic/panentheist, I believe in the spark of divinity within each and every being (human, plant, animal, even stone), which is a source of intrinsic value.

As a Pagan / Joseph Campbell Jungian mythologist, I see value in nearly all myths, including the harvest (dying and rising) gods such as the Christ.

As an engineer, I value science and accept that the theory of evolution is what best fits our understanding at this time.

[Liquesce]

Originally Posted by KaylaBeanie

I absolutely do not follow any of the Abrahamic religions(Judaism, Christianity and Islam). I totally reject that view of god.

All three have very, very different views of god from one another. And to the best of my knowledge none involve beards.

[KaylaBeanie]

Originally Posted by Liquesce

All three have very, very different views of god from one another. And to the best of my knowledge none involve beards.

Ha, I've seen too many movies

I'm in a class where we study different religions, and while debated hotly, it's generally accepted that Jews, Muslims and Christians worship the same god. Obviously there are discrepancies, with Jews and Muslims not being able to reconcile the holy trinity with monotheism, and Christians believing in the holy trinity while the others don't. The differences between the religions are many, but I've always been taught that the god all three(four, if you count Rastafarianism) of the Abrahamic religions worship the Abrahamic god.

[yokosmile]

Originally Posted by ThirdEyeMom

I believe in God because there is no proof there there isn't one.

There's no proof that the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist either.

[dinahx]

Any religion I am in involves a beard, and not a patchy one.

I have come full circle on the creation issue, especially on the subject of motive & PR. I feel like it is the side of Science that has the most to gain, via patent law, of denying the existence of God. Growing up, I felt like the only correct position was pro Darwin, anti-fanatical. But it seems that there is a clear motive in science for denying a creator or giving a 'jury's out'. They gain moral relativism, like 'who's's to say it is wrong to clone mice for eyelash research?' or 'who's's to say we can't own a seed or say, contaminate the whole world's corn with our patented genome?'

I am into science, but I could also be into Auto Air Brushing, in the end ain't nothing but a flawed pursuit of man, as likely to bring us 'salvation' as beautiful horsemanship.

And my education clearly glossed over yk, Social Darwinism?

[Liquesce]

Originally Posted by KaylaBeanie

Ha, I've seen too many movies

I'm in a class where we study different religions, and while debated hotly, it's generally accepted that Jews, Muslims and Christians worship the same god. Obviously there are discrepancies, with Jews and Muslims not being able to reconcile the holy trinity with monotheism, and Christians believing in the holy trinity while the others don't. The differences between the religions are many, but I've always been taught that the god all three(four, if you count Rastafarianism) of the Abrahamic religions worship the Abrahamic god.

The problem is how all three faiths define the characteristics of that god, the actions and intentions of that god, are different. So while there are commonalities in terms of certain religious stories and personalities (although, again, with not always insignificant discrepancies), and while each successive faith makes an overt claim of sameness to the one(s) that came before, the very different views of what god does remains.

Clear as mud? : Obviously the same-god perspective is a very popular one, but it only works well on a historical level. On a theological level it's really hard to reconcile without resorting to an "all roads lead to the same" point which itself can also be extremely difficult to fit into some of the religions involved. Or a "blind men and an elephant" type of analogy, but we're not talking trunks and tails here ... we're talking directly contradicting information.

[MusicianDad]

Originally Posted by KaylaBeanie

Ha, I've seen too many movies

I'm in a class where we study different religions, and while debated hotly, it's generally accepted that Jews, Muslims and Christians worship the same god. Obviously there are discrepancies, with Jews and Muslims not being able to reconcile the holy trinity with monotheism, and Christians believing in the holy trinity while the others don't. The differences between the religions are many, but I've always been taught that the god all three(four, if you count Rastafarianism) of the Abrahamic religions worship the Abrahamic god.

And of course, there are Christian sects that don't believe in the holy trinity either.
(Just had to point that out)

[KaylaBeanie]

Originally Posted by Liquesce

Clear as mud? : Obviously the same-god perspective is a very popular one, but it only works well on a historical level. On a theological level it's really hard to reconcile without resorting to an "all roads lead to the same" point which itself can also be extremely difficult to fit into some of the religions involved. Or a "blind men and an elephant" type of analogy, but we're not talking trunks and tails here ... we're talking directly contradicting information.

Very true, I actually have argued many times that it would seem impossible that it is exactly the same god...why did he all of a sudden become so nice for the Christians? I very much was referring to the historical aspect, since on a strictly textbook level, the three are somewhat intertwined at times.

Originally Posted by MusicianDad

And of course, there are Christian sects that don't believe in the holy trinity either.
(Just had to point that out)

While studying Islam a few weeks ago, my professor pointed out that Muslims view themselves as the only truly monotheistic religion of the 3 Abrahamic faiths. Christians, at a minimum, believe in Jesus, which to Muslims is very much polytheism. I don't recall the explanation given as to why they think Jews aren't monotheistic...idol worship way back when, I think he might have said?

[orangewallflower]

Originally Posted by bluebirdiemama

The look I saw on his face when he said those words was not a "Im comparing goofy theories to make creationism seem ridiculous" look. It looked more to me like "oh, yeah, you've been asking me for 2 interviews now if we have any ideas as to how the first living cell came about, and here is one thing I think we should look into."
BTW- for anybody who didn't watch that, that was the only suggestion he had as to how the first living cell came about.

No, it really wasn't. The deal is that how the first cell came about is simply not contained within the theory of evolution. He doesn't know. Nobody knows, and scientists are very open about htat. We will probably never know. Anything that anyone says about the origin of life is conjecture. Dawkins thinks it is extremely unlikely that the first life form was the work of a divine creative hand. He is not saying he knows for sure, but it is really unlikely that it was divine.Then he says that if life on earth were indeed the result of intelligence (again, unknowable and not contained within the theory of evolution as much as Ben Stein seems to want it to be) design, he conjectures that it is more likely that on some planet unknown to us some intelligent creatures came about through some form of evolution (and the origin of life on this conjectured planet is similarly unknowable at this point) and they had the ability to go to earth and create life. But you see, Dawkins doesn't believe in intelligent design so he doesn't think that is at all likely, just more likely than a divine force. You will never see anything like this when he talks about his actual field of expertise: evolution. And his new book _The Greatest Show on Earth_ would help you a great deal to at least understand the theory. You are arguing against ideas made by creationists, not by evolutionary scientists and that is what is so frustrating about the conversation. You *can* understand evolution and why it really isn't a threat to a belief in God (as long as you don't insist on a fundamentalist view of him) but are you willing?