Why dont YOU believe in God?

No evidence.

No logic in believing in one.

TopTierHustler

No evidence.

[QUOTE="TopTierHustler"]

No evidence.

No logic in believing in one.

Nude_Dude

But why would god change? Back in the day he never stopped showing his powers, parting seas, burning bushes, healing lepers etc etc why then and not now?

How did you determine this?

Palantas

Define "this".

What do you perceive as "evidence"? Is it a hollywood-style flash of his almighty thunder or a vision of him stroking his beard up in the sky? Apparently most of you have formed a depiction of a god in your head and automatically rejected it, surely I'm not the only one feeling a little queazy about that. (why should there be any sort of 'evidence' any way, since this is a matter of belief?) Why must logic be associated with the concept of a deity / belief? Axiomatically, aren't most of the deities' characteristics unreachable and unexplainable through the limited human logic? Just wondering. I'm asking all these stuff since I guess most atheists are familiar with the concept of constant questioning of things, which appears to be the new trend of today, while it is as old as 1700something.Nude_Dude

Because everything we have invented since the dawn of time has been a result of the occasional stroke of genius, or a result of logic and what ifs.

Something that cannot be reached logically, has no reason to be believed in.

Saying that there should be no evidence since it's a matter of belief is a childish excuse.

But why would god change? Back in the day he never stopped showing his powers, parting seas, burning bushes, healing lepers etc etc why then and not now?tenaka2

Hmm you're referring to the christian / jew / whatever god and to some people who claimed in script that they had witnessed his actions? First note, you moved from the discussion of god to the discussion of a specific depiction of god.

After that is set, I'd probably wonder the same. I'm sure some explanation will finally be given or made up.

Also, are you implying that if some guy starts parting seas and healing lepers again, you'll regain faith in your god?

Is evidence really what most of you need to believe?

A quick Wikipedia search brings up this in the US Constitution: "The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States". That sounds to me like an express Constitutional power of the Government to redistribute wealth for the purposes of your nation's general welfare, which seems to go against what the fellow on the right is saying.

Anyway, back to religion. I do wonder how one of my Mormon friends continues to be that way, even after studying religious practices from all over the world.

Planeforger

[QUOTE="Planeforger"]

A quick Wikipedia search brings up this in the US Constitution: "The Congress shall have power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States". That sounds to me like an express Constitutional power of the Government to redistribute wealth for the purposes of your nation's general welfare, which seems to go against what the fellow on the right is saying.

Anyway, back to religion. I do wonder how one of my Mormon friends continues to be that way, even after studying religious practices from all over the world.

CptJSparrow

Because everything we have invented since the dawn of time has been a result of the occasional stroke of genius, or a result of logic and what ifs. N30F3N1X

Something that cannot be reached logically, has no reason to be believed in. N30F3N1X

Saying that there should be no evidence since it's a matter of belief is a childish excuse.N30F3N1X

Thats pretty much what tax is.toast_burner

What question is this an answer to? So, the concept of belief / deity / god is an invention? (it certainly ain't feasible to begin with)Nude_Dude

Yes, that is correct, but it's beyond the point. What I said could be compressed into "logic works".

The concept of a personified god that we supposedly have to believe in because somebody told us to defies any kind of logic. It's irrational - there's no reason to adhere to it nor to think it's true.

Is this your belief? It's pretty bold. Are you familiar with what believing is? If so, what should we do with the unreachable-through-logic things? Nude_Dude

The things I "believe" as opposed to "know" come from watching my environment and reasoning on what I see. Patterns, repetition of coincidences, probability and statistics, expectations from deduction.

Pizza huts will get the highest number of customers during lunch time - I cannot prove it to you in a mathematical way but statistical evidence shows the pattern repeats day after day so it's safe to say it will keep happening for a long time.

I believe political correctness is bullsh!t, that the oligarchies we have in the western world are the worst kind of government after terroristic and military dictatorship, and that betrayal and excessive greed should be punishable as capital offenses. I cannot prove in any way that any of this is true or would be better for us, but I can tell you the reasoning I did to get to them.

I believe black holes exist - their existence is foreseen by general relativity, but because of their very nature and our limited instruments they are out of our sight's reach and *we don't know for sure*.

"I believe in God" - none of the above applies. No reasoning, no numbers, no expectations, no nothing. You believe because you are told to.

Do go on, I imagine you have more to say on that than a simple statement...Nude_Dude

Not really. It was just a caprice. Most of the people who speak regarding the logic behind their belief they too often try to shift the burden of proof to "you can't prove he doesn't exist either!" and I would prefer to avoid that.

The one with the better ulterior motives. Ever heard the saying "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man how to fish, feed him for a lifetime?" I think that applies here.BranKetra

Define "this".

N30F3N1X

How did you determine there is not a hint of evidence to back up the existence of God? What's your criteria for evidence?

I don't believe in God because of the simple reason that I see absolutely no evidence that any good-hearted or loving God exists.

there is 0 evidence supporting the existence of ANY god.

Nobody believes in God because they are told to. Telling people to believe in God is the #1 way to get them to NOT believe. There is no way any one person can make another person truly believe and accept God. And by God I mean Jesus Christ.

See, there is a reason why everyone is so frustrated with the way the world is, blaming God and telling everyone that He is incompetant and such, it's because in the world there's this thing called sin. Sin is basically anything you do to defy the laws of humanity that God set into place, that when followed would ideally lead to a world of paradise. Think about it, if EVERYONE actually DID what the Bible says to do, there would

-be no murders because nobody would murder, because God doesn't want people to murder one another.

-be no thieves because everyone would respect everyone else's property, because God doesn't want people stealing.

-be no cheating on spouses, hurt relations, fatherless or motherless children, divorces, etc, because God tells us and lays out for us what we need to do to make a happy fulfilled family - marriage til death, no infidelity, no disrespect of mothers or fathers, no divorce (hence no lawyers and greed and greedy child-support settlements, etc)

-be a lot less death because people would actually take care of themselves a lot more. No drunkenness, no smoking, no STD's (because there would be sex outside of marriage)

-be no hate because we are told to LOVE each other

See, the primary reason that people do not care to believe in God is because people do not want to be held accountable for anything. People simply want to do what they want to do, regardless of mistakes or whomever they hurt. This, and also how many churches have completely soiled the name of Jesus, using that name to make profit, make harsh judgments, etc. "Organized religion," and pretty much all religion... actually, not "pretty much" but indeed ALL religion is garbage. Why? Because what religion is is basically telling us that we need to do a certain set of things in order to be "good enough" for any sort of god in order to be able to earn our own salvation, be able to earn our own redemption, forgiveness, peace, love, etc. Like a mother who says "son/daughter, I don't love you or accept you just yet, but I will only if you do these chores." Now how many chores? And for how long? What if I do those chores but only for one day? Is that good enough? What if I do them for an entire year and then take a break and do it less because I get tired? Does that mean that my mom or dad won't accept me because I didn't go by this sort of untold schedule and capacity of chores to do? How much is enough?

The thing with Jesus is this - there can never ever be enough. You can NEVER be good enough. That is said right up front, from the start. Christianity, or actually forget "christianity," Jesus states "you can actually never be good enough for earning anything from me." Like, never, no matter what you do. Because the gift of salvation through Jesus is completely 100% free. Gifts are free, you do not pay for gifts nor do you have to "work back" a gift in order to now earn it once someone has already given it to you. It's yours. Period. All you need to do is say a heartfelt "thank you" to the giver and go and enjoy your gift. That's it. This is the fundamental point of christianity which many many churches have completely soiled because they desire money, order, authority, etc. But it really is THAT simple. In actuality, Jesus was perhaps the most anti-religious person to ever exist, even more so than us. He HATED religion because He knew that all religion was a lie and did nothing to help people. He came to stop religion completely but even so people have taken it upon themselves to make another organized religious establishment from Him.

And no, you don't need proof to believe, because then there would be no point in faith. Because even if God showed himself in physical form to the world, do you really think the world would THEN believe? The truth is, they wouldn't, because it will all go back to the being held accountable thing - people don't want to be held accountable, yet when things get tough, they seek help. Seems kinda cheap on our part. There actually IS enough proof every single day. Every time you wake up and see that gorgeous sunrise or later see that sunset. Every time you watch the ocean crash waves or how the moon makes it sparkle at night. When you see kids and they make you laugh. The fact that laughter actually exists. The fact that you have an imagination that is greater than the universe itself. These are all the big yet subtle ways God has already proven Himself to exist. We are just very used to it but we never take time to actually think about it on a deeper level. It's quite amazing really. There's your proof.

And in regards to why the world is so messed up. Well, we lots of times ask God why there is so much starvation in the world. How do you think He'd answer that? He'd probably answer it with a question, asking us "I don't know, you tell me, why IS there so much starvation in the world?" In other words, we have to power to stop it, but we don't. Like I stated above, people do something bad and then put the blame on God. How is it that we still don't see why this doesn't make sense? If we do something wrong, there are consequences. If we just did what we wanted, didn't believe or care for God at all, and at the same time expect Him to instantly fix our mistakes without even a thank you, for EVERYONE, ALL the time, do you think we'd even enjoy this life? We'd be nothing more than drones. So why get mad that there is bad in our lives when it's either directly us or other people that cause it? And meanwhile God states to us and those poeple over and over again to NOT do those things or there will be hurtful consequences. Yet... He is responsible for the bad things? Let's rethink our logic here and state why believing in God is illogical.

I like to live life, I don't rule out the possibility there could be a god (although I doubt it) but if he was a truly benevolent god like you Christians say he is he would be willing to accept my decision to make my own decisions.metroidprime55

wall of text

metalgrinch

but do you realize how many contradictions there are in the bible?

See, there is a reason why everyone is so frustrated with the way the world is, blaming God and telling everyone that He is incompetant and such, it's because in the world there's this thing called sin. Sin is basically anything you do to defy the laws of humanity that God set into place, that when followed would ideally lead to a world of paradise. Think about it, if EVERYONE actually DID what the Bible says to do, there would

-be no murders because nobody would murder, because God doesn't want people to murder one another.

-be no thieves because everyone would respect everyone else's property, because God doesn't want people stealing.

-be no cheating on spouses, hurt relations, fatherless or motherless children, divorces, etc, because God tells us and lays out for us what we need to do to make a happy fulfilled family - marriage til death, no infidelity, no disrespect of mothers or fathers, no divorce (hence no lawyers and greed and greedy child-support settlements, etc)

-be a lot less death because people would actually take care of themselves a lot more. No drunkenness, no smoking, no STD's (because there would be sex outside of marriage)

-be no hate because we are told to LOVE each other

metalgrinch

Ummm...some of the most pious people in history thought that murder was justified when it was done in god's name, that they could just take what wasn't theirs because they were taking it from heathen savages, screwed other people's wives, gotten as drunk as they damn well pleased, and singled out other groups of people to ostracize because thhey thought it was justified by the Bible. Your argument falls flat on its face right out of the gate, following the Bible does not make one a better person nor does it necessarily make the world a better place.

[QUOTE="metroidprime55"]I like to live life, I don't rule out the possibility there could be a god (although I doubt it) but if he was a truly benevolent god like you Christians say he is he would be willing to accept my decision to make my own decisions.FMAB_GTO

[QUOTE="N30F3N1X"]

Define "this".

Palantas

How did you determine there is not a hint of evidence to back up the existence of God? What's your criteria for evidence?

There's no "criteria" for evidence. That's exactly why it's called "evidence".

[QUOTE="FMAB_GTO"][QUOTE="metroidprime55"]I like to live life, I don't rule out the possibility there could be a god (although I doubt it) but if he was a truly benevolent god like you Christians say he is he would be willing to accept my decision to make my own decisions.metroidprime55

Whales throats are far too small to swallow a human.

Not really. It was just a caprice. Most of the people who speak regarding the logic behind their belief they too often try to shift the burden of proof to "you can't prove he doesn't exist either!" and I would prefer to avoid that.

N30F3N1X

For the most part I agree with what you said in your post. Personally, I prefer belief and spirituality based on observable effects and reasoning, not just on some 2000 year old book which all indications point to being a written collection of spoken-word folklore and allegorical tales. That's why I prefer to make the distinction between faith-based belief and logic-based belief, as one is based on the known and the other is based on the unknown. However, it seems to me that this person is making that distinction, that he accepts religious belief as being in the faith-based camp and has decided he can still be religious given that. I don't really think that type of thinking should be discouraged, I think most of the problem comes in with people who simply can't accept religious claims based on faith and therefore try to convince themselves and others that they hold as much empirical validity as anything else. This person isn't trying to do that as far as I can tell, and I don't think we should discourage that.

As for the part I quoted, that argument does technically hold some logical validity. I think you phrased it very well when you said burden as proof, as that is the key thing and if you get dragged too far to the logic end of this you can get dragged away from this key point. Burden of proof rests on the one making the claim, and there has been nothing sufficient to prove god. However, this is where my claim comes in that everyone is really agnostic whether they admit it or not, as the possibility of god's existence is still a valid possibility. There's no proof for it, it's a very weak logical position to take, but it's not a completely impossible possibility.

Whales throats are far too small to swallow a human.

kraken2109

I question the sanity of anyone who takes the Old Testament literally. Between the things that are outright impossible, the things which don't make sense given archeological evidence, and the unreliable nature of transcription by multiple individuals of spoken-word stories that were passed down and changed through multiple generations, the evidence is greatly stacked against it being 100% true. Of course, you can look at it as allegorical and still make an argument for your own faith. I won't buy it personally, but you can make the argument.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Lack of sufficient evidence is why I'm an atheistimaps3fanboy

How can you be a Cubs fan and not have faith? You must be some kind of masochist or fatalist or something.

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"]Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Lack of sufficient evidence is why I'm an atheisttheone86

How can you be a Cubs fan and not have faith? You must be some kind of masochist or fatalist or something.

:lol:

Nobody believes in God because they are told to.metalgrinch

There's no "criteria" for evidence. That's exactly why it's called "evidence".

N30F3N1X

How is it you define "evidence"?

EDIT: As you claim to be a rational person, I assume there is some rational process that you use to determine whether a piece of evidence is valid or not. Is this the case or not? From what you just said, it would appear that you have none. That doesn't make any sense, so hence my question.

[QUOTE="N30F3N1X"]

There's no "criteria" for evidence. That's exactly why it's called "evidence".

Palantas

How is it you define "evidence"?

EDIT: As you claim to be a rational person, I assume there is some rational process that you use to determine whether a piece of evidence is valid or not. Is this the case or not? From what you just said, it would appear that you have none. That doesn't make any sense, so hence my question.

Yeah, it's called logical evaluation. Does said evidence necessitate the existence of god? If not, does it increase the inductive probability? What is the inductive probability given the evidence? Is there relevance at all? Are there alternate conclusions that could stem from the same evidence? What is the inductive probability of them?

Yeah, it's called logical evaluation. Does said evidence necessitate the existence of god? If not, does it increase the inductive probability? What is the inductive probability given the evidence? Is there relevance at all? Are there alternate conclusions that could stem from the same evidence? What is the inductive probability of them?

theone86

I was asking for his process. Let's see if I get a "Yeah that" now.

How is it you define "evidence"?

EDIT: As you claim to be a rational person, I assume there is some rational process that you use to determine whether a piece of evidence is valid or not. Is this the case or not? From what you just said, it would appear that you have none. That doesn't make any sense, so hence my question.

Palantas

Evidence is *something* that gives validity to a thesis. If it extinguishes any objection or doubt regarding the thesis then it's proof.

The most common reason. Lack of proof.

But I'm more agnostic, because theres just as much proof of him not existing if you ask me.

I was a Christian up until I realised that the bible is one of the most horrible books in existence. I then stopped believing in god completely when I got a bit older and maturer.

toast_burner

It takes effort to believe in Casper the friendly ghost. I simply too lazy for such a thing.

[QUOTE="I"]

How is it you define "evidence"?

EDIT: As you claim to be a rational person, I assume there is some rational process that you use to determine whether a piece of evidence is valid or not. Is this the case or not? From what you just said, it would appear that you have none. That doesn't make any sense, so hence my question.

N30F3N1X

Evidence is *something* that gives validity to a thesis. If it extinguishes any objection or doubt regarding the thesis then it's proof.

Are you going to answer the edit?

God wanted to keep us slaves to his will. Lucifer (or at least, the snake, since Lucifer/Satan was only originally in the Job myth) wanted to give us free will and the knowledge of carnal pleasure.Zeviander