Do you believe in God?And is God a he or a she?

Hermione*

Wibbs wrote: »

That's the part that ticks me off in debates like this tbh. I don't believe in your path, but I see it as yours and respect that. IMHO Too often the Atheist view is antagonistic and ironically holier than thou. And dead right.

+1.
Tbh, some of the posts in this thread have astonished and upset me to the extent that I wouldn’t post further on it to avoid even more upset. I have no problem whatsoever with anyone’s beliefs but that attitude does not seem to be universal. It saddens me – I expected more from here tbh.

Xiney

And actually, this is why I don't even like associating myself with internet atheists. Because I think a lot of them take atheism to mean, "treat everyone who does believe in god with disrespect"

I personally don't really care what other people believe. It doesn't affect me.

Faith

Hermione* wrote: »

+1.
Tbh, some of the posts in this thread have astonished and upset me to the extent that I wouldn’t post further on it to avoid even more upset. I have no problem whatsoever with anyone’s beliefs but that attitude does not seem to be universal. It saddens me – I expected more from here tbh.

I don't have any problem with other people's beliefs - unless they negatively effect me. If people believe in God/Allah/whoever else, good for them. That's grand. I don't understand a fanatical belief in a higher power, but if they want to believe in it, then I've no problem with that. What I don't like is when people try to convince me that they're right, or that their beliefs are the only correct ones. I don't like when they try and force me to listen to their beliefs or whatever.

For example, I mentioned my SILs family were over for Christmas, and are extremely religious. 90% of the time, that caused no issues. They never said anything judgmental to me about how I never went to mass or anything like that. But they insisted in reading the Christmas Story on Christmas morning. Grand, I thought, it's 10 minutes. But then they produced a 90 minute DVD of the Christmas Story. No fecking way am I sitting politely through an hour and a half long religious DVD when the 10 minute story would do the same job. It felt like they thought we'd be more influenced by the longer story, like they were trying to 'save us' from our lack of faith or something. That's when it starts to irritate me.

I imagine most people are the same really - while they may not be able to understand a person's faith, they won't say anything about it unless it starts to affect them in a way they're not happy with.

F.A.

Sorry, I don't get it. We live in Ireland, where well over 90% of schools are religious and can choose to take on your child based on your Christian faith, a country that has only recently passed a law prohibiting blasphemy, and yet, Christians come here complaining about intolerant atheists...

I have absolutely no problem with anybody's belief or lack thereof. I do mind, however, when one group tries to enforce their point of view on the others. Let's just not kid ourselves on who that first group effectively is, please. I get that words like "childish" or "naive" come across as hurtful, and I do object to them. However, when complaining, please bear in mind the actual situation in this society.

fatmammycat

'Internet atheists'? Are we a breed of our own now?
Kickout the jams I wouldn't scorn you, it is your personally held belief, and I doubt most atheists would scorn you either.

It's so easy to paint atheists as big bad smarty pants isn't it? When truthfully most atheists I know don't give one whit about what other folk think or what religion they practice, but retaliate when religion is paraded as the 'one way' or the 'truth'. (Of course we will happily debate and joke and converse in our forum, that's what forums are for).

Hrududu

Its funny. This is a topic I'm always interested in. Whenever a thread pops up here or elsewhere I'll nearly always read it. But I never ever discuss religion in real life. My family don't talk about it even though we all clearly believe different things. None of my friends discuss it either. I think its just one of those things (in my circle) that is a bit taboo.

I always wonder about the people who say they need to believe that something happens after they die. A lot say they have a fear of the lights going out and thats it. But for some reason I always found that comforting. So you just cease to exist, the same way you didn't exist before you were born. Its not like you're conciousness will be floating out there in darkness for eternity. That means all we have is this block of time between the two. Its your time to do whatever makes you happy. If you treat people well and don't harm others. Then I say make of life whatever you want.

Personally it doesn't bother me what people believe. As long as you don't force your beliefs on others then we're all good. I'd never dream of forcing my beliefs on anyone else.

cynder

I would say he was a he. but in the bible its says if anyone was to lay eyes on him they would die. so i cant see him as an old man with a beard.

Exodus 33:20 There shall no man see me, and live.
John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time.
John 6:46 Not that any man hath seen the Father. 1 John 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time

he is also called the father not mother

Ickle Magoo

Hrududu wrote: »

Personally it doesn't bother me what people believe. As long as you don't force your beliefs on others then we're all good. I'd never dream of forcing my beliefs on anyone else.

+1. I very rarely discuss my atheism unless specifically asked about it or challenged, which is usually the case on the A&A forum - theists posting that atheists are actually theists denying their lord, blah, blah blah. :rolleyes:

In fact, if it wasn't the for difficulties with schooling, the rather bizarre crucifix we were sent as a gift, the people who tried to make the sign of the cross on my children, the priest that came into to my room in the hospital every day pestering me to bless my child, the guy who always wakes the kids up trying to give us bibles, etc, etc, then, well, I'd have pretty much nothing to do with theism at all far less have any reason to think anything of a certain kind of theist. I think before making sweeping statements about other forums or even other people folks should try walking in my shoes for a while & see who actually has to live with what!

I appreciate that words like naive or childish are not necessary but neither are statements about life being worthless or pointless without christianity - what does that say about atheists, or even other faiths?!

Pyr0

I certainly wouldn't believe in the conventional God(s) in modern times, organised religion and the like. I feel to believe in such things and let it affect your life is a step back in progression and developement of mankind. Belief in science and technology in my opinion should be at the forefront of society, it's the only way forward in understanding our universe and how it works/the things we can do with it and not limiting ourselves to the idea that "God made it that way, God gave us the gift of.. God created EVERYTHING".

I don't sit well with people that need God in their life to function or give them guidance in the form of a plagarised book. Yeah it puts forward a good way to live life and treat your fellow man with respect and kindness I'm not going to deny that but it never, ever works out that way. It's always going to be manipulated by people for their benifit, that's the way people were and always will be.

Funnily enough, I've always had an amusing thought. Imagine when your time has come, you die but instead of going to "Heaven" everyone regardless of faith exists in their own personal idea of "Hell". Example, a person who truly believes in the Angelic, clouds in the sky, White light, Golden Gates, Family members waiting for them when they die idea of Heaven. Only to be greeted with the exact opposite, the place they always feared to see when they died, a place where every moral, idea, belief they ever held dear in life is turned upside down and played out in front of them for eternity.

Fun times ! :pac:

Anyways, I'm starting to rant now..

Nevyn

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

In fact, if it wasn't the for difficulties with schooling, the rather bizarre crucifix we were sent as a gift, the people who tried to make the sign of the cross on my children, the priest that came into to my room in the hospital every day pestering me to bless my child, the guy who always wakes the kids up trying to give us bibles, etc, etc, then, well, I'd have pretty much nothing to do with theism at all far less have any reason to think anything of a certain kind of theist. I think before making sweeping statements about other forums or even other people folks should try walking in my shoes for a while & see who actually has to live with what!

I think that it is like white privilege, the persuasiveness of christianity in modern irish life is often not seen by most catholics be they devout or lapsed.

Lockstep

fatmammycat wrote: »

'Internet atheists'? Are we a breed of our own now?
Kickout the jams I wouldn't scorn you, it is your personally held belief, and I doubt most atheists would scorn you either.

You would very surprised. Even outside of my own personal life, see the posts by Faith, Nervous Wreck and Malari.

fatmammycat wrote: »

It's so easy to paint atheists as big bad smarty pants isn't it? When truthfully most atheists I know don't give one whit about what other folk think or what religion they practice, but retaliate when religion is paraded as the 'one way' or the 'truth'. (Of course we will happily debate and joke and converse in our forum, that's what forums are for).

I have heard this sort of inductive reasoning by atheists before; even had one who told me that bigoted atheists were a myth created by theists to try and portray themselves as persecuted. Sadly, I have had way too many atheists tell me how I should or shouldn't think (as well as many theists who do the same thing)
Humans like being self-righteous, over everything from green issues to their stance on religion. I don't see why atheists would be any different to the rest of humanity. I seem to have the opposite experience of most of the peoplen on this thread. Rather than being irritated with theists telling me what I should/shouldn't be doing, I have atheists doing the same thing

fatmammycat

I expressed surprise because I can count on one hand the amount of time in my life time I might have ever actually had a religious/atheist conversation in real life. ( not internet life, god how sad is it that I have one)
Most people would have no idea if I was religious or not. Most atheists attend weddings, funerals, baptisims of children-even their own children sometimes. If an atheist is vocal about their own beliefs these days it seems to attract the militant tag easily, yet daily in our lives we accept any manner of religious fervour, angelous on tv, religious ethos in most schools, priests in hospitals and so on.
Neither am I saying that the 'bigoted atheist' does not exist. But to read some of the comments earlier we are in danger of becoming the boogey men for very little reason because as you rightly point out human nature being what it is we are all guilty of thinking our way is the right way at some point.

Lockstep

fatmammycat wrote: »

I expressed surprise because I can count on one hand the amount of time in my life time I might have ever actually had a religious/atheist conversation in real life. ( not internet life, god how sad is it that I have one)
Most people would have no idea if I was religious or not. Most atheists attend weddings, funerals, baptisims of children-even their own children sometimes. If an atheist is vocal about their own beliefs these days it seems to attract the militant tag easily, yet daily in our lives we accept any manner of religious fervour, angelous on tv, religious ethos in most schools, priests in hospitals and so on.
Neither am I saying that the 'bigoted atheist' does not exist. But to read some of the comments earlier we are in danger of becoming the boogey men for very little reason because as you rightly point out human nature being what it is we are all guilty of thinking our way is the right way at some point.

Very true, however, inductive reasoning really does not correlate to my experience. It might be because I'm in my early 20s where people are more vocal about such things. It usually arises in situations like "you doing anything later" "Nah, can't" "why not" "Gotta go to mass" "Oh...etc" You're a lot less likely to have this experience if you're an atheist yourself:p Equally, have had the experience of people going on rants about how terrible religion is and how its followers are sheep.

In the same way as some theists demonise atheists as narrow minded, arrogant and self-righteous, atheists do the exact same thing. Both sides do it, so it's a bit disingenuous for one side to bitch about the other engaging in it.

Ickle Magoo

kickoutthejams wrote: »

Rather than being irritated with theists telling me what I should/shouldn't be doing, I have atheists doing the same thing

Nobody should be telling you what you should or shouldn't be doing - it's the religious proselyting that annoys me most, I wouldn't do it to someone else, most atheist wouldn't, I've certainly never seen atheists wearing sandwich boards, knocking on doors or being ever present in our schools and hospitals, etc. On teh internets, meh, there are loads of people shouting about all manner of things - most would never say a peep in real life.

There are vocal & aggressively proselyting theists and you get their opposite number in every other faith and walk of life, atheists are certainly no exception. However, that's a far cry from objecting to general debate on religion/god or denouncing all questions about or on religion/god to be tantamount to denigration or personal insult. I'm not sure why people shouldn't be allowed to say they can't understand religion or find faith baffling without being accused of being bigoted - for some of us it's simply the truth. I don't like the implication that just by virtue of being a religion and therefore important to some, no further questions can be asked.

Whatever gives you the ability to have faith and see god's work, I don't have it. I've never had it, I first started asking questions when I was three or four years old and I haven't stopped. For me, most claims of religion or god sound much the same as claims of alien abductions probably do to you. It's hard to get across that level of incredulity about a topic that some seem so utterly sure of when I have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Some of the people I love and respect most in the world are theists so please don't assume a lack of respect for a belief or point of view automatically equates to a lack of respect for the person holding it. :cool:

Nervous Wreck

kickoutthejams wrote: »

You would very surprised. Even outside of my own personal life, see the posts by Faith, Nervous Wreck and Malari.

I didn't scorn anyone. I said that, in my opinion, "a belief in a deity is just kinda ignorant". Although the word itself carries some negative connotations, if you look at the definition, you can see that the word isn't aggressive in any way. I appreciate that it can come across that way but it's not how I intended. But the harsh truth is that there are no hard facts that point to the existence of god. Please note that I'm not trying to change your opinion by saying that; I'm merely defending my point.

Malari

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

For me, most claims of religion or god sound much the same as claims of alien abductions probably do to you.

I agree with this. If you say a belief in something like alien abductions is ludicrous no-one takes it personally, but religion - people do. And not just religious people. I'm not targeting or trying to change anyone's mind with my views but I think I should able to express what I think about believing something for which there is patently no evidence.

SeekUp

A few people have mentioned needing proof of something in order to believe in it. But not having that proof and still believing in it . . . some people might call it silly, or naive, but I think that's also a pretty sufficient definition of faith, isn't it?

There are some things to which I don't need the answers, or that I'm okay with not knowing them. And while there are areas in my life that I am quite logical and like to have explanations up the wazoo, there are other areas in my life where I have faith as well, not just when it comes to this particular topic. Some people can't/don't make such leaps, and others find it easier to do so. I've got tents at both sites, just depends on which campground I'm visiting.

Vinta81

I'll be honest, I don't know what I believe in.

Malari

SeekUp wrote: »

A few people have mentioned needing proof of something in order to believe in it. But not having that proof and still believing in it . . . some people might call it silly, or naive, but I think that's also a pretty sufficient definition of faith, isn't it?

Yes it is. But the problem is that faith is automatically seen as virtuous.

Nevyn

Malari wrote: »

Yes it is. But the problem is that faith is automatically seen as virtuous.

Because of the presumption of christian faith and that being a christian makes you a good person.
I have had it said to me how can my children grow up to be good people if they are not christian
or do not have christian guidance and it's just as well they are in a catholic school.

Ickle Magoo

I was at a dinner last week in which some woman really loudly proclaimed she couldn't understand how anyone could raise their children outside of "a good" religion (hers I presume?), they would surely grow up to be immoral degenerates and it was just selfish greed on the part of the parents not wanting to give the poor child comfort when they have to go to a funeral. There was folks from all over the world, of various and no faiths at the dinner. Her ignorance was palpably cringe-worthy. :o:o:o

Nervous Wreck

SeekUp wrote: »

A few people have mentioned needing proof of something in order to believe in it. But not having that proof and still believing in it . . . some people might call it silly, or naive, but I think that's also a pretty sufficient definition of faith, isn't it?

There are some things to which I don't need the answers, or that I'm okay with not knowing them. And while there are areas in my life that I am quite logical and like to have explanations up the wazoo, there are other areas in my life where I have faith as well, not just when it comes to this particular topic. Some people can't/don't make such leaps, and others find it easier to do so. I've got tents at both sites, just depends on which campground I'm visiting.

It's the funny thing about faith. Some people (and I'm not saying you SeekUp, just some people) throw the word around like it's some sort of trump card, like 'believe'. How many times, I can not tell you, I have had people say to me "Well I don't need proof; I have faith. I belieeeve." It's often coupled with them saying "You just don't have faith. You don't believe in anything."

And to those people, I reply, Sorry. You're mistaken. I do have faith. I have faith in myself and my values. I have faith in the way I choose to live my life and the implications there of. I have faith in my family and friends: faith that they're good people and I can rely on them. Sometimes my faith in these things are tested. Other times, broken. Such is the risk of having faith. I accept that. Also, I do believe. I'm not a nihilist. I believe in the sun and the sky, in planets and in people. I believe in people's capacity to love and hurt and to make up stories.

The issue of faith. Sure, I have faith in the things I've listed above and in an awful lot more. One of those things is logic. Another one, science. The logical, scientific truth, unedited, about god (any and every version) is that it is a construct of human superstition. As someone rightfully said earlier in the thread, thousands of years ago, humans did not know what we now know about the universe. So they created gods. There was a sun god and a moon god and a god of love and war and the sea and even a god of gods. We now reject these notions. There is no sun god. It's simply a big mess of crazy gases in space. No love god but electrical signals from the brain that cause emotion. No sea god but a vast expanse of water.

Years later, the idea of god still lives on, out of superstition ("there might be a cosmic balance that I should try to uphold") or fear ("what if this is all there is? I couldn't cope with that") or a simple lack of knowledge of how the universe was created ("well we haven't a clue what sparked the big bang so it must have been god").


My point is, without a shred of actual, tangible proof (and we have none), god is nothing more to me than a story that was made up hundreds of thousands of years ago and survived too long. So that's why, for me, faith alone doesn't cut it. I can't have faith in a story. No matter how widely believed that story is to be true, it's still just a story.

WindSock

Thaedydal wrote: »

REally?
As I know it there are male and female Loa in 'Voodoo' or Vodun.

Probably so. Perhaps I was just getting it into my head that it was matriarchial, as ztoical explained that there is a strong presence of women or queens.

Eh there are no deities in Buddhism.

In Tibetan Buddhism there are. Possibly from it's closeness to India and Hindi deities.

http://www.iloveulove.com/spirituality/buddhist/buddhistdeities.htm

Faith

kickoutthejams wrote: »

You would very surprised. Even outside of my own personal life, see the posts by Faith, Nervous Wreck and Malari.

I should perhaps have been clearer in my post. As I said above, I have no issue at all with people having faith in religion. One of my best friends is quite religious, but she never talks about it. That sounds like you, kickoutthejams. From your post, I can't imagine anyone having a problem with your beliefs. You don't sound like you harp on about them, or try to convince others of them. I'm scornful of the more fanatical people. The people who you seen around here posting things like "If you watch porn, your marriage is doomed to fail and you'll go to hell" or "you'll go to hell if you engage in sex before marriage" etc. The people who believe prayer is the answer to serious illness, not medicine. The people who put faith in god above all else, with no proof whatsoever. That's when I get scornful. Again, I don't mean to offend anyone, but as others have posted, devout faith is not something I've ever experienced, and can never understand. I'm a scientist - if someone tries to convince me that Creation is true, not evolution - that's the kind of blind faith I'll never understand. A woman came into work before Christmas, buying Richard Dawkins new book for her OH. She told me "He loves weird books. We'll have some fights about this. I don't believe in evolution, you see", and yeah, I looked at her and though FFS.

But please don't interpret my post to mean that I'm scornful of your private beliefs.

pikachucheeks

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I believe in people's capacity to love and hurt and to make up stories.

I always think it's interesting to take the comparison and God and Love.
You can't physically *see* either, you can't prove their existence, you just feel their presence and know yourself whether they're real for you or not,

Nervous Wreck

pikachucheeks wrote: »

I always think it's interesting to take the comparison and God and Love.
You can't physically *see* either, you can't prove their existence, you just feel their presence and know yourself whether they're real for you or not,

No. Love is an emotion like any other (hate, loneliness, fear etc). It does exist. There are parts of the brain (amydalae mar shampla) whose main function is to regulate emotion. "Feeling" a chemical-enduced reaction originating in the brain is in no way comparable to 'feeling' the presence of a god.

Galvasean

SeekUp wrote: »

A few people have mentioned needing proof of something in order to believe in it. But not having that proof and still believing in it . . . some people might call it silly, or naive, but I think that's also a pretty sufficient definition of faith, isn't it?

There are some things to which I don't need the answers, or that I'm okay with not knowing them. And while there are areas in my life that I am quite logical and like to have explanations up the wazoo, there are other areas in my life where I have faith as well, not just when it comes to this particular topic. Some people can't/don't make such leaps, and others find it easier to do so. I've got tents at both sites, just depends on which campground I'm visiting.

Well since I had a good ramble about religion/spirituality not having any solid evidence I best reply to this.
There is a big difference in having faith in something like the scientific method which has been tried and tested and shown to be sound on a consistent basis, than there is to say, have belief in an omni-potent superbeing that no one has provided a shed of tangible evidence that shows it is real. Yes, there are gaps in the scientific understanding of the universe, but that does not make it reasonable to insert whatever you like into said gaps (for instance God). That's where the phrase 'God of the gaps' comes from.
When I'm met with a situation that I don't fully understand I side with whatever explanation seems the most likely and reasonable. For example, an earlier poster mentioned a case involving a sick child whom doctors believed they couldn't save. She (thankfully) had a miraculous recovery. I would be more inclined to believe that either the doctors had misdiagnosed the girl's illness or that she recovered by some other natural means, as opposed to quite literally being saved by the hand of God.

I'm not trying to 'get at' anyone or change people's beliefs by posting in discussions such as this one. I am however, making sure that my position is known and understood, because frankly, there are some seriously woeful misrepresentations of people such as myself floating around. Already in this thread peopel have likened atheists to things like smug or arrogant, which in itself is unfair as atheists are not unified by anything other than not believing in God(s). Anything outside of that is up to the individual. Some atheists are terrible people. Others are wonderful. However, it is by and large not their atheism that makes them so.

Handsome Bob

Galvasean wrote: »

Some atheists are terrible people. Others are wonderful. However, it is by and large not their atheism that makes them so.

Aye, some people are just ****, if it wasn't expressed through atheism then it would be expressed through something else.

That being said it works both ways. One of the arguments I have utter contempt for is that religion is the cause of all wars. Religion in the hands of the wrong people is what causes war, it's not the belief itself. I really can't stand that argument, it's like absolving the indvidual of all responsibility.

Galvasean

LZ5by5 wrote: »

One of the arguments I utter contempt for is that religion is the cause of all wars. Religion in the hands of the wrong people is what causes war, it's not the belief itself. I really can't stand that argument, it's like absolving the indvidual of all responsibility.

I concur. It is a fairly ignorant argument. While religion can be used as a great excuse to go to war, if it didn't exist they'd use something else.

Catari Jaguar

Any believers in prayer here?

Personally I don't believe in prayer or hope/ wishing.. or luck for that matter. I can't hope "it's sunny tomorrow cos I'm going to the beach". It either WILL or WON'T be sunny. I have no sway on that whatsoever.

My boyf's Gran is a Jehovahs Witness and is constantly "praying" for him. He had Crohn's diesease, she says "I prayed for you to get better." This annoys the crap out of him as he is total atheist.

- God, didn't make me better, doctors did.
- Well God provides Doctors

:rolleyes:

Or they're stuck in a traffic jam getting to hospital and she prays, and it clears. Yea, God did that ok.... He has nothing better to do that fix traffic jams.

Argh! :mad:

If something good happens, God did it. If something bad happens, well God works in mysterious ways. The Lord giveth the Lord taketh away..There's just no sense in this.

I remember getting the "students prayer" giving to me in Leaving Cert year. If I want to get an A in an exam then I best make sure I study hard, not rely on some God to magically get me a good mark because I prayed. Course, Gran will say "I prayed you'd do well in your exams." How insulting is that? You get no credit for your own powers.

Much like "prayer" improves patients chances of survival. NO IT DOESN'T. They say studies confirm this. Oh really? Most likely YOUR OWN positive thinking and the strength to go on fighting instead of giving up helped you survive. Broken hearts, stress and depression can cause illness, so the opposite obviously applies too. Doesn't mean God mircaulously chose you to heal because you prayed.

This attitude annoys me so much. It is an excuse for not taking responsibility for your life. You got "misfortune"? Well go sort it out! I'm a great believer that life rewards action and you make things happen yourself.

"I wish I wasn't so fat" So stop wishing and start eating right and exercising, or save up for lipo. There's no magic wand gonna sort you out.

So many people find God(s) during tradegy or in the face of death, as a last resort when they're scared and don't know what else to do. Especially people that never believed before. Would God not see straight through that and even find it offensive to be used like that??

Ickle Magoo

Galvasean wrote: »

I concur. It is a fairly ignorant argument. While religion can be used as a great excuse to go to war, if it didn't exist they'd use something else.

+1

Iirc the first ever massacre has been dated to over eight & a half thousand years ago, weaponry, warfare, violence, tribal friction. It's been going on since we first stood up, religion is just another difference used to justify it.

liah

In retrospect I can see that maybe some of my posts came off as condescending or rude; this was never my intention. I just genuinely am curious as to how the religious think (see: the reply to the girl's recovery, the reply to life after death), because I don't understand it myself because I obviously have a different viewpoint, but am very willing to consider that of others once I know the reasons why they think as they do.

As for my first post I equated the idea of God to Santa or Zeus or Ra.. which, at least for the latter two, I consider fair enough, though I suppose the Santa bit could be seen as a pot shot-- it isn't, it's just that I honestly believe all of them to be on the same level, as any Christian would believe the Roman or Greek gods about as real as Santa, so I hope nobody has taken offence to that.

I do apologize for my use of the word "juvenile." I suppose it was unwarranted, it's just how it appears to me in regards to a lot of people who believe things without considering why; it was not meant to be directed at anyone here.

Dave!

I'm an atheist, and like most people I don't really care what people believe privately. However I don't think religious faith is something that should be automatically deserving of respect. All beliefs are subject to scrutiny and criticism (though there is a time and a place), and when subjected to that, religion falls into the same category as belief that Elvis is still alive, fairies, etc.

If I started telling people that I believe in and worship Thor or Zeus, and that I talk to them regularly, then there are few people in the world who would not consider me a bit on the odd side. But go to church and pray to the Christian god and nobody bats an eyelid !

I don't see the difference tbh.

One of the things that made me see how silly religion and superstition in general is is when I started to consider all of the gods in history, the Greek gods, pagan gods, etc. Where've they all gone to?! It seems to me that they were created to fill a gap in our understanding, to explain things like thunder (Thor), the sun (Apollo), etc.

In the same vein you have demons and possessions being used to explain away siezures, fits, and mental illness, because we didn't have the medical scientific knowledge we have now.

We're still learning about the origins of the universe, so until we understand it fully there'll always be that 'first cause/spark' god that hides away on the fringes of scientific understanding.

Galvasean

Lil Kitten wrote: »

Any believers in prayer here?

Personally I don't believe in prayer or hope/ wishing.. or luck for that matter. I can't hope "it's sunny tomorrow cos I'm going to the beach". It either WILL or WON'T be sunny. I have no sway on that whatsoever.

My boyf's Gran is a Jehovahs Witness and is constantly "praying" for him. He had Crohn's diesease, she says "I prayed for you to get better." This annoys the crap out of him as he is total atheist.

Surprisingly, praying has been seen to have more negative effects than good. Basically,if you are aware taht people are praying for you, you are more likely to 'worry yourself sick'. More here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html

Lil Kitten wrote: »

Much like "prayer" improves patients chances of survival. NO IT DOESN'T.

Reminds me of this comic:

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Iirc the first ever massacre has been dated to over eight & a half thousand years ago, weaponry, warfare, violence, tribal friction. It's been going on since we first stood up, religion is just another difference used to justify it.

If you go back even further (over 50,000 years ago) there is evidence to show that Homo sapiens (that's us) murdered neanderthals.
Go back even further, some 3 or 4 million years ago, and it wouldn't surprise me if we discovered evidence of rival clans of Australopithecus (our ape like ancestors) killing each other.
We are a very warlike species unfortunately.

Nevyn

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Aye, some people are just ****, if it wasn't expressed through atheism then it would be expressed through something else.

That being said it works both ways. One of the arguments I have utter contempt for is that religion is the cause of all wars. Religion in the hands of the wrong people is what causes war, it's not the belief itself. I really can't stand that argument, it's like absolving the indvidual of all responsibility.

My religion has never start a war.

pagancornflake

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

No. Love is an emotion like any other (hate, loneliness, fear etc). It does exist. There are parts of the brain (amydalae mar shampla) whose main function is to regulate emotion. "Feeling" a chemical-enduced reaction originating in the brain is in no way comparable to 'feeling' the presence of a god.

And we know this about emotion purely by neural stimulation as recorded by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Other than this, it can easily be argued that emotions are simply the humanization of categories of similar events and qualities in the environment i.e. an intangible thing inferred from apperceptive stimuli. This can be said of the inference of god also, since the same areas of the amygdalae in addition to parts of the neocortex become active when presented with stimuli or situations containing a transcendental motif.
If, as you claim in your rebuttal, the reality of something depends only on its correlate in the brain and whether or not it has a cognitive basis (I say not), then I would say that god would have a similar degree of evidence to emotion.

Nervous Wreck

pagancornflake wrote: »

And we know this about emotion purely by neural stimulation as recorded by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Other than this, it can easily be argued that emotions are simply the humanization of categories of similar events and qualities in the environment i.e. an intangible thing inferred from apperceptive stimuli. This can be said of the inference of god also, since the same areas of the amygdalae in addition to parts of the neocortex become active when presented with stimuli or situations containing a transcendental motif.
If, as you claim in your rebuttal, the reality of something depends only on its correlate in the brain and whether or not it has a cognitive basis (I say not), then I would say that god would have a similar degree of evidence to emotion.

I didn't say any such thing. I said that we have evidence for emotion and none for god. Anything can "easily be argued" when you ignore the need for tangible evidence. It then becomes a battle of who can say the biggest words, argue the best or simply sound the most convincing. I have no taste for such a battle and so will gladly hand victory to you.

pagancornflake

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

I didn't say any such thing. I said that we have evidence for emotion and none for god.

Nervous Wreck wrote:

Love is an emotion like any other (hate, loneliness, fear etc). It does exist. There are parts of the brain (amydalae mar shampla) whose main function is to regulate emotion. "Feeling" a chemical-enduced reaction originating in the brain is in no way comparable to 'feeling' the presence of a god.

I said that you claimed as much, and you most certainly did. This was obviously implicit in your rebuttal. If it was not what you intended to say, then it is your fault for using the incorrect language. The evidence you provided was that there was a neural correlate for emotion. I replied by stating that there was the same neural correlate for transcendental ques. Anything that happens in the brain is a chemically induced process, so your mention of this is irrelevant, as axon firing takes place in order to prompt the neural structures for transcendental correlates.

tl;dr in terms of evidence, emotion is as much a construct as god is. Cognitive psychology does nothing to argue otherwise IMO.

Nervous Wreck wrote:

Anything can "easily be argued" when you ignore the need for tangible evidence.

I provided just as much as you did, on your terms. You interpolated a conclusion while making the erroneous assumption that the evidence supported only your side of the argument.

philologos

panda100 wrote: »

Do you believe in a greater being? If Yes do you envisage that being as a man or a women?

Yes, and neither male or female. I refer to God as my Father, but that is only because of how I relate to Him rather than discussing any clear gender. Gender is a biological concept, since God is without body one could hardly say male or female in this case.

panda100 wrote: »

I'm an atheist now but I used to believe in Catholic God. For me God was a white,bearded man who lived up in the sky.

Did you get that idea from the Simpsons or something?

Perhaps it was Michelangelo in his painting of the Sistine Chapel:

panda100 wrote: »

I've been thinking recently why I always thought God was a man and not a women, especially since women give birth to life. I wonder why God is always potrayed as a man?

Probably because the Scriptures were written by men, and they referred to God as a Father like I do. There is nothing stopping you referring to God as female, indeed Solomon personifies wisdom in female form at the start of Proverbs claiming that "she is calling out to you".

Also as for Jesus' teachings being good. I think there are only three options concerning Him, either He was a liar, mentally insane, or the Son of God. If you read through the Gospels you can see how thoroughly offensive His views were. If God were merely fiction, then one would questions why most of the Gospels concern God, the Kingdom of God, and everything to with faith and reliance in the Father.

My 2 cents.

panda100

Jakkass wrote: »

Probably because the Scriptures were written by men, and they referred to God as a Father like I do. There is nothing stopping you referring to God as female, indeed Solomon personifies wisdom in female form at the start of Proverbs claiming that "she is calling out to you".

Also as for Jesus' teachings being good. I think there are only three options concerning Him, either He was a liar, mentally insane, or the Son of God. If you read through the Gospels you can see how thoroughly offensive His views were. If God were merely fiction, then one would questions why most of the Gospels concern God, the Kingdom of God, and everything to with faith and reliance in the Father.

My 2 cents.

I'm not sure wether you are Christain or not Jackass but presuming you are since you mentioned Jesus.
I know Christian God comes in three forms but in Heaven God is in his 'true' form, which from the bible seems to be undoubtetly male.

God chose the male form when he was on earth. It seems a very cliched thing for God to do imo,to preach about equality for women but to take the form of the favoured gender. Also anytime angels of the Lord was sent from Heaven in the bible they were in Male form.

Also I realise you are not Catholic so this is just a general point not directed at you, but Catholic teaching is very strict that because God took male form on earth ,then it is only men who are allowed to act as Jesus in the Catholic Church. Hence why women are not allowed to become priests. The more I think about it the more ridiculous it all seems and I cannot believe I believed in Catholic mumbo Jumbo for so long!

philologos

panda100 wrote: »

I'm not sure wether you are Christain or not Jackass but presuming you are since you mentioned Jesus.
I know Christian God comes in three forms but in Heaven God is in his 'true' form, which from the bible seems to be undoubtetly male.

Yes, I am a Christian. God has always been a Trinity. Christians believe that Jesus existed for all eternity before He came in human flesh as the Son. God isn't God without any one part of the Trinity.

panda100 wrote: »

God chose the male form when he was on earth. It seems a very cliched thing for God to do imo,to preach about equality for women but to take the form of the favoured gender. Also anytime angels of the Lord was sent from Heaven in the bible they were in Male form.

There could have been a number of reasons for that. The first being that He would have had a better audience when He was alive if He were male. Remembering that Jewish society at that time did not regard the testimony of a woman in court as valid.

As for the "favoured gender". I'm not entirely sure that this is true. God related to women right through the Biblical text. God relates through many women to this day. As for angels, there is very little interaction concerning angels at all in the Bible. I would again probably say that it was due to culture that angels were chosen as such rather than anything else.

God works through different times and different places in history.

panda100 wrote: »

Also I realise you are not Catholic so this is just a general point not directed at you, but Catholic teaching is very strict that because God took male form on earth ,then it is only men who are allowed to act as Jesus in the Catholic Church. Hence why women are not allowed to become priests. The more I think about it the more ridiculous it all seems and I cannot believe I believed in Catholic mumbo Jumbo for so long!

You're right, I don't share this view. I think women have a place to serve God in the community and in every day life.

You have to ask yourself, what is man made and what isn't. This is why I regard myself as being able to interpret the Bible, and then discuss it with others to gain a personal instruction of it. Although a controversial belief in some circles, I regard the church as the priesthood of all believers to a certain extent. Each Christian can share with another, each Christian builds another up. There isn't necessarily a heirarchy, although some are called to be preachers, others called to be encouragers, some called to pray etc.

Thaedydal wrote: »

Because of the presumption of christian faith and that being a christian makes you a good person.

Is this incorrect? I think Christian values do make the world a better place, and people better people.

Herbal Deity

pagancornflake wrote: »

This can be said of the inference of god also, since the same areas of the amygdalae in addition to parts of the neocortex become active when presented with stimuli or situations containing a transcendental motif.

All this means is that an emotion called "awe" or whatever exists, it says nothing about whether or not a god exists.

kev9100

Jakkass wrote: »

I think Christian values do make the world a better place, and people better people.

When you say Christian values, I presume you're talking about being kind, generous and helping your fellow man, correct?

Presuming that you say yes, where does it say that these are Christian values? These values are in all of us and it does'nt matter if one is a believer or not imho.

philologos

kev9100 wrote: »

When you say Christian values, I presume you're talking about being kind, generous and helping your fellow man, correct?

Being kind, generous and helping your fellow man can be interpreted in certain ways. What struck me when I first was reading the Scriptures, particularly the Gospels and the letters of the Apostles was the behaviour they commanded in comparison to the behaviour that secular society commands. Christianity goes above and beyond that for me, and it is something to always strive for.

Whenever I hear "I'm basically good already" I hold that with scepticism, as there is always something higher that we can aspire to.

kev9100 wrote: »

Presuming that you say yes, where does it say that these are Christian values? These values are in all of us and it does'nt matter if one is a believer or not imho.

These values amount to more than what you have described.

Walls

I believe in God, but the older I get the less I want to involve the opinions of others in that belief.

Galvasean

Jakkass wrote: »

Being kind, generous and helping your fellow man can be interpreted in certain ways. What struck me when I first was reading the Scriptures, particularly the Gospels and the letters of the Apostles was the behaviour they commanded in comparison to the behaviour that secular society commands. Christianity goes above and beyond that for me, and it is something to always strive for.

Tell me, what is it about behaviour in a Christian society that goes above and beyond that of a more secular one?

philologos

I haven't referred to a Christian society in my post. Rather I have referred to the standard of behaviour expounded upon in Christian Scripture, and the standard of behaviour expounded upon in secular society.

I certainly believe that the ideals that people hold to can be a source of betterment and that if one truly aims to live by Christian principles, then yes they will live righteous lives.

skywards

liah wrote: »

Particularly with the Christian god-- do a bit of research and you can tell that every single detail is stolen from religions that existed hundreds and hundreds of years prior to the first edition of the Bible. It's all plagiarism.

I agree with your entire post, but especially this part. Being of the nerdy sort, I've read a lot of the old stories and tales, and its quite obvious that it is plagiarism at its finest.

philologos

I'm very interested as to how it is obvious considering that the Judeo-Christian canon spans a period of about 3,000 years. Perhaps you could elaborate a bit more on that?

skywards

Jakkass wrote: »

I'm very interested as to how it is obvious considering that the Judeo-Christian canon spans a period of about 3,000 years. Perhaps you could elaborate a bit more on that?

Isis and Osiris comes to mind.