Does God exist? (18 Viewers)

[Cookie182]

Hmm I have long thought about it myself- I think he got it from a book or something he read. I interpret it as- God exists to believers generally as a separate entity to time/space- a metaphysical body that knows 'all', provides a moral structure- has order and ‘justice' over the natural world- rewards the deeds in their life. As human beings, we fear and contemplate our lives and the future- it is 'natural'. That is why many people turn to religion- there is a fear that if you do not believe there may be no afterlife or whatever- Im sure you get my point. Often people are brainwashed into following something as the alternative is 'missing' out in the end. Ultimately, my point here is- religion is a matter of faith. It all depends on the person and their psychological make up- personality factors, conditioning based on the environment they grew up (if they were raised in a religious household or country for that matter). Therefore, it cannot be debated as we are all different and no one will ever change anyone’s beliefs. Sure many of us are influenced to believe something, as there is always the saying- "It’s like praying, what do you have to lose"?

Overall, the point Im making is that evidence implies a physical nature- mathematically it holds a place is space/time. God is METAPHYSICAL he is separate from this as he exists on a personal level as a matter of faith- as I’ve said this level is different for every individual- therefore if you prove the existence of god, faith becomes irrelevant as there is no longer belief without proof- therefore without faith god does not exist. Also, physical evidence is separate from god- so therefore if you have physcial evidence it actually rpoves he does not exist. It all comes down to your definition of faith in the end- but yea, if there is physical proof then god cannot exist based on our definition of faith (which is part of our current definition of what god is).

Therefore, I guess religion and all this comes down to a matter of definition. In addition, Im sure ill have theists/atheists alike arguing with me but that’s fine- that is what these forums are for anyway.

Look Im still getting my head around this myself and I cant be bothered to edit my post again so yea I have probably contradicted myself.

I assume you have done yr 12 so there is a chance u have read Brave New World- jump to chapter 17- interesting stuff. I do not agree with all Huxley was saying but certainly raises some points.

His main point was that when humankind is weak and vulnerable- when we are alone and fearful we contemplate death and beyond. We inevitably turn to faith and god. However, in the Brave New World they have eliminated this need for god as they are never alone- they never become 'old' and 'weak'- hence god still exists but he is an absence- there is no faith in him.

Anyways- personally I think this is all great to philosophically debate- but I do not think any human will ever have a true understanding of religion and god. It is strictly personal.

Im still not sure what I believe-- I don’t believe a word of any religious text (they are just a collection of personal interpretations- I could write a religious text by quoting the members on this forum lol) but part of my mind sometimes does contemplate that there must be more after death then 6 ft of dirt. After all, we do not live in the Brave New World...yet anyway lol.

 

[katie_tully]

Okay so thats all well and good, but why is it so illogical to think that people can't turn to the good things that have happened in life to get them through?
There is all this emphasis on there being a higher being because people seem to need to validate their lives. It's also assumed that only Christians or Catholics can have endearing virtues. There are genuinely good people out there with good values and morals who do not rely on the Bible or a belief in a higher being to get them through.

 

[sthcross.dude]

spot on katie. christians seem to believe they have a monopoly on moral values. as ur other thread about pedophiles in the church highlights, this is a complete myth.

 

[Tulipa]

I interpret it as- God exists to beleivers generally as a separate entity to time/space- a metaphysical body that knows 'all', provides a moral structure- has order and'justice' over the natural world- rewards the deeds in their life. As human beings, we fear and contemplate our lives and the future- it is 'natural'.

So if he is a being then why would he cease to exist once he was proved to exist? That doesn't make sense

That is why many people turn to religion- there is a fear that if you dont believe there may be no afterlife or watever- im sure you get my point.

That might be the case for some people but it's hardly the reason that most people believe in God. It's a little more complicated then that.

Ultimately my point here is- religion is a matter of faith. It all depends on the person and their psychological make up- personality factors, conditioning based on the environment they grew up (if they were raised in a religious hosuehold, or country for that matter). therefore it cannot be debated as we are all differnt and no one will ever change anyones beliefs.

That's bullshit. I've changed my beliefs and I know a lot of others who have changed their beliefs due to a number of factors.

God is METAPHYSICAL he is separate from this as he exists on a personal level as a matter of faith- as ive said this level is differnt for every individual- therefore if you prove the existence of god, faith becomes irrelevant as there is no longer belief without proof- therefore without faith god is absent. It comes down to your definition of faith- but yea, if there is proof there god can not exist based on a definition of faith (which is our current definition of what god is).

Wait, wait wait wait. What? So he exists but only in people's imaginations? Essentially what you're saying is that God=Faith and that's it? There is also no current definition of God, like you've been saying it's all a matter of personal opinion.

Anyways- personally i think this is all great to philsophically debate- but i dont think any human will ever have a true understanding of religion and god.

Yes because humanity does not yet have the ability to fully prove if he exists or if he doesn't.

It is strictly peronal.

Personal? Why is it just personal?

Look im still getting my head around this myself and i cant be bothered to edit my post again so yea ive prob contradicted myself.

No shit.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

"Its like praying, what do you have to lose"

Your self respect.

 

[Tulipa]

Your self respect.

Haha crap that was left over from her post.

 

[Cookie182]

Look u obviously love tearing apart a thread- and sure i cant argue with you i made contradictions in what i said- i did write it in less then 5 mins- sum ppl reasearch this shit there whole lives.

The point i was making is that it is not a topic u can debate. I am all for scientific proof i am- but you try running it down to your local priest or the jehovo's next time they come banging at your door. For a lot of ppl religion is not debatable- before we all sign on this forum we have views in our head- your and mine will be diff. so will that of another two ppl.

You can hav ur views influenced but the point im making is that if ppl want to beleive they will. Physcial proof means nothing if god is a matter of faith. What is faith? You give me a better definition.

What do YOU belief???

 

[katie_tully]

There is no scientific proof for something that does not exist.

 

[Cookie182]

There is no scientific proof for something that does not exist.

Of course. I was merely pointing out that in a hypothetical situation, if ppl were to prove the existence it would not matter as ppl already beleive based on a personal level where god is independent of physcial evidence.

Therefore there is no point attempting to argue or proof gods existence- he exists only within you if ur that way inclined. Personally i think religion is scandalous. It groups together those with faith and began during a period in history when mankind was vulnerable. Take Christinaity, the Romans saw an oppportunity to control the people using their faith in a prophet. Instead of slaughtering the christians as they had been doing for the last hundred years they through down a church in their capital and promoted the religon throughout the empire.

Just a way of controlling the masses- but hey thas my opinion on RELIGION not GOD. I beleive they are completely two separate entites.

 

[Tulipa]

Look u obviously love tearing apart a thread- and sure i cant argue with you i made contradictions in what i said- i did write it in less then 5 mins- sum ppl reasearch this shit there whole lives.

And they can spell and normally have common sense.

The point i was making is that it is not a topic u can debate.

Again, bullshit. This is absolutely open for debate. Perhaps because you can't understand it then you shouldn't participate but this isn't something that you just believe. There is room open for interpretation in relation to the existence of God.

I am all for scientific proof i am- but you try running it down to your local priest or the jehovo's next time they come banging at your door. For a lot of ppl religion is not debatable- before we all sign on this forum we have views in our head- your and mine will be diff. so will that of another two ppl.

What scientific proof? There is little of that to substantially prove any reason for the existence of the universe.

You can hav ur views influenced but the point im making is that if ppl want to beleive they will. Physcial proof means nothing if god is a matter of faith. What is faith? You give me a better definition.

Faith: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny. If I believe in fairies aren't you going to laugh at me because there's physical proof that they don't exist? You were just equating God to faith, which doesn't make sense at all.

What do YOU belief???

That humans are too stupid to know how the world was created or even fathom our existence and as such I believe in nothing.

 

[Cookie182]

And they can spell and normally have common sense.



Again, bullshit. This is absolutely open for debate. Perhaps because you can't understand it then you shouldn't participate but this isn't something that you just believe. There is room open for interpretation in relation to the existence of God.



What scientific proof? There is little of that to substantially prove any reason for the existence of the universe.



Faith: a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny. If I believe in fairies aren't you going to laugh at me because there's physical proof that they don't exist? You were just equating God to faith, which doesn't make sense at all.



That humans are too stupid to know how the world was created or even fathom our existence and as such I believe in nothing.

Nothing will come of nothing: speak again.

 

[Tulipa]

Nothing will come of nothing: speak again.

I do not currently believe that any of the reasons for the existence of the universe are correct and thus do not believe in any of them.

The world exists because the world exists. That simple enough for you?

 

[Cookie182]

I do not currently believe that any of the reasons for the existence of the universe are correct and thus do not believe in any of them.

The world exists because the world exists. That simple enough for you?

Its too simple. It is impossible to obtain absolute impartiallity. No human can think of nothing- it is not possible to not have your opinion swayed either side. Even before you admited that you have had your views influenced upon here.

You'd make a good lawyer for the impartiallity but little more. You say this topic is debatable but what arguemnet can you produce- Nothing is the best answer you have. Why bother arguing if you have no opinion. The best you can do is the classic line-by-line tearing apart of my response and commenting on imperfections such as spelling etc.


When i finally ask for your opinin- Nothing is all you can give?

 

[Tulipa]

I do have an opinion.

It's one that's been cultivated after years of religious upbringing and a Big Bang obsessed brother. Just because I don't believe in two of the big theories about the creation of the world doesn't mean I don't think about them.

It's just that my belief is that we don't have the capability to understand the world and it works for me.

However I do argue against the existence of a God. That is too simple. The idea that a being, just one, created the world for his own purposes is shifting the onus off humanity and onto an ideal that can't be proved but uses blind faith for it's basis.

EDIT: So basically my argument is that God is one reason and people keep believing it forever and never budging from that belief but that I currently do not believe in a reason for the existence of the world. Instead I look at a number of theories and think about them. A little more complex than accepting one reason verbatim.

 

[Cookie182]

I do have an opinion.

It's one that's been cultivated after years of religious upbringing and a Big Bang obsessed brother. Just because I don't believe in two of the big theories about the creation of the world doesn't mean I don't think about them.

It's just that my belief is that we don't have the capability to understand the world and it works for me.

However I do argue against the existence of a God. That is too simple. The idea that a being, just one, created the world for his own purposes is shifting the onus off humanity and onto an ideal that can't be proved but uses blind faith for it's basis.

EDIT: So basically my argument is that God is one reason and people keep believing it forever and never budging from that belief but that I currently do not believe in a reason for the existence of the world. Instead I look at a number of theories and think about them. A little more complex than accepting one reason verbatim.

well i certainly cant argue that...

in fact now uve changed my belief lol

i belive that too

 

[katie_tully]

I just want to know, if there is a God, where did HE /SHE /IT come from?

 

[daniel4592]

Well me myself i do belive in god thats my oppinion ive been brought up to belive and im fine with it i belive in god.
Something also happend last year i couldnt find i job no matter what so at the start of the year my mum told me i should try to pray so i find a job within 1 month i was working.

 

[katie_tully]

riiiiiiiight...

 

[ellen.louise]

Well me myself i do belive in god thats my oppinion ive been brought up to belive and im fine with it i belive in god.

Was there a gap in there somewhere so you could breathe?

 

[KFunk]

The point i was making is that it is not a topic u can debate.

This is quite debatable. Making an argument for your claim you could take your previous statement that 'God's existence cannot be verified by empirical means'. If you join this with the claim that 'the only knowledge humans can have is empirically derived' then you reach the conclusion that this topic is not a suitable one for debate (edit: in light of the fact that humans could never be justified in believing that god does or does not exist in such a circumstance - agnosticism would be forced upon us).

Personally I do think that there is some ground for debate. The essential step, in my opinion, is for people to state what they mean by god in the first place. Without any specified properties we are left with a statement as vacuous as:

Gavagai exists.

'All well and good' you might say, 'but what/who is this Gavagai to which you refer?' Without some information telling us what god is like our chances of confirming god's existence are much the same as our chances of confirming the existence of Gavagai - nought. Once you attribute properties to something you can determine whether it is (in)consistent with logic and observed reality. To my mind this offers room for debate about god since such a method allows us to exclude certain specific versions of god as logically untenable. Of course, this method doesn't offer much hope of confirming the existence of a god but at least it allows us to narrow our scope and debunk impossible deities.