How do people still belive in God?

AudreyHepburn

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Well believe whatever you want then. Just don't pretend its reasonable or rational. It isn't.

Again IN YOUR OPINION it is unreasonable.

I am a perfectly reasonable intelligent person. Believing in God does not make me anything less.

George Orwell 1982

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You see?! You have no more proof than I do so saying I should be the one to produce the evidence is hyprocritical at best and worst completely non-sensical and just ridiculous.

/Facepalm

Naturally if you say that God exists its up to you to prove it.

I'm still waiting for you disprove the idea that you are just a brain in a jar of liquid being controlled by some mad scientist.

Pittens

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

There has been killing and maiming from time immorial as well. Does that make it right? Does this mean there is a gene for killing and maiming?

Utter BS.

Who said anything about "right". Churches tried to curtail human (over)sexuality. That didn't work for most. It did for some.

Similarly if we were to go all out and try and curtail religion it would get more extreme. The US is a secular State with a fundamentalist population, fundamentalism is rising in turkey, the founders of the Taleban and the Muslim Brotherhood were tortured by the Egyptian Nationalist and secular State and tortured believers and yet look at Iraq now, Hussein ran a secular State, heck even the early Christians were martyred - the best thing that happened to them.

Banning or curtailing religion is not going to work. And how are you going to make it work in the West.

George Orwell 1982

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Again IN YOUR OPINION it is unreasonable.

I am a perfectly reasonable intelligent person. Believing in God does not make me anything less.

You might be a perfectly reasonable person but your belief in God is unreasonable.

Pittens

You might be a perfectly reasonable person but your belief in God is unreasonable.

A belief that people are reasonable is unreasonable.

Ush1

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

You see?! You have no more proof than I do so saying I should be the one to produce the evidence is hyprocritical at best and worst completely non-sensical and just ridiculous.



I never said anything like that. Re-read my post.

*sigh*

It's not hypocritical.

I never said you did, you said:

"No it just means that for me there's not enough proof for me to stop believing."

So do you believe in anything there is no evidence for?

Einhard

Raiser wrote: »

I wasn't thrown out of the House but I did have to suffer many, many hours of Mass attendance against my will growing up.

I think the reason I'm atheist stems from the fact that i was forced to go to Mass every Saturday at 6.30...the exact same time as Star Trek: The Next Generation came on!!

- There's nothing that focusses the mind more keenly on the absurd levels of nonsense involved in these Ceremonies than having to sit reluctantly in the midst of it all on a very regular basis observing and marvelling at each nonsensical, farcical detail as it is proudly trotted out and held up to subsequently fail in the light of logical, reasonable and critical evaluation.

If I feel obliged to attend now for the sake of a Wedding, or Funeral etc. my skin crawls and I choke on the atmosphere within - Most especially because in my opinion any very high proportion of the devout within any Church have minimal real good intentions towards their fellow Man and are more interested in their own selfish notions of salvation or sating whatever appetite that exists Humankind that can only be fed by regular servings of Religious practice.

I think that most atheists who attend a Mass for whatever reason, actually pay more attention to what's being said and performed than the believers do. I was at the anniversary Mass of a friend's father recently, and I was pretty certain that the priest had something mildly anti-semitic during the sermon. Afterwards, I mentioned it to a few friends who had been there, and the only person who had noticed it was a fellow atheist. The rest had just drifted off into their own little world as soo as they had sat down! In fairness though, had I to go through the same ritual week in, week out, I'd probably do the same.

Indeed, while I'm on the subject, I'd be willing to bet that the average atheist knows more about, and has explored, the tenets of a particular faith than the adherent of that faith. I think it's because the more "laissez-faire" Catholics (Muslims, Jews etc) are interested more in a vague, comforting God, than in the intricacies of the deity actually prescribed by their religion. And, as with others on this thread, I can understand that completely and certainly wouldn't hold such belief in contempt.

smash

F*ck it lads, who gives a crap about religious opinions unless you're a crazy b@stard with a bomb?

It's Friday, it's a long weekend. Why bother trying to prove each other right/wrong - it's not going to work.

AudreyHepburn

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

/Facepalm

Naturally if you say that God exists its up to you to prove it.

If anyone would bother to listen to me, I never said God definitly exists. I just believe that he does because for me it's a comfort and it's the way I was raised and I've never had any problems with it.

I don't see why I should have to justify that to anyone.

I'm still waiting for you disprove the idea that you are just a brain in a jar of liquid being controlled by some mad scientist.

Now you're just being pedantic and smart. I'm not taking the bait.

AudreyHepburn

Ush1 wrote: »

So do you believe in anything there is no evidence for?

No of course not. But I am trained archaeologist and one of the lessons we learn is that absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence, it is a gap in knowledge that we can only guess at and speculate to fill.

meditraitor

steve06 wrote: »

It's Friday, it's a long weekend. Why bother trying to prove each other right/wrong - it's not going to work.

+1

Neither of them are right


On one hand you have a bunch of arrogant athiests who waffle about logic like it was a religion. boring us to death with anti religion zeal.

on the other hand you have a bunch of deluded believers following a makey upy book written 2000 years ago by some mad lad out of his head on magic mushroom

Its friday, yayyyyy

Millicent

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

You might be a perfectly reasonable person but your belief in God is unreasonable.

Why? For some, string theory might be unreasonable. The idea that the universe is divided into multiple dimensions is crazy to some. There are dimensions that can't be detected- who knows what exists within those? *

Further, you're applying reason to something that isn't reason-based but is usually intuitively felt. Whether that's right or wrong isn't up to anyone to decide and it's not something that's likely to be disproven. There's more to the earth and the universe than we are ever likely to know. Who knows what unreasonable beliefs might turn out to be true? There's room for mystery in life and if people want to indulge that, in what is sometimes a chaotic existence, there's nothing unreasonable about that.

*disclaimer: not a scientist so may be mistaken on some of this. Apologies if I am.

Ush1

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

No of course not. But I am trained archaeologist and one of the lessons we learn is that absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence, it is a gap in knowledge that we can only guess at and speculate to fill.

So why God then?

I totally agree, but a lack of evidence makes something improbable, do you not understand that?

Archaeology REQUIRES evidence.

George Orwell 1982

I CAN'T BE BOTHERED ARGUING WITH ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO BELIEVE IN GOD ANYMORE. THERE'S JUST NO POINT.

smash

yaaaayyyy

AudreyHepburn

I'm not trying to prove anyone right or wrong. It honestly doesn't bother me who believes in what.

What I resent is when some athiests look down their noses at you and try to make out you are a deluded irrational idiot for having beliefs. That's what I was responding to really.

You don't have to agree with me but don't tell I'm deluded or irrational or a fool because I'm not.

Millicent

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

I CAN'T BE BOTHERED ARGUING WITH ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO BELIEVE IN GOD ANYMORE. THERE'S JUST NO POINT.

That's reasonable. :pac:

Pittens

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

I CAN'T BE BOTHERED ARGUING WITH ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO BELIEVE IN GOD ANYMORE. THERE'S JUST NO POINT.

Oh now that you capitalised stuff religion is doomed.

smash

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

What I resent is when some athiests look down their noses at you and try to make out you are a deluded irrational idiot for having beliefs. That's what I was responding to really.

Like you, I have no problem with people believing/not believing. But it annoys me when religion believers push their beliefs in your face when you don't believe. so it works both ways. I generally don't get involved because it causes more arguments than anything else although sometimes it's hard to ignore them.

George Orwell 1982

Millicent wrote: »

Why? For some, string theory might be unreasonable. The idea that the universe is divided into multiple dimensions is crazy to some. There are dimensions that can't be detected- who knows what exists within those? *

Further, you're applying reason to something that isn't reason-based but is usually intuitively felt. Whether that's right or wrong isn't up to anyone to decide and it's not something that's likely to be disproven. There's more to the earth and the universe than we are ever likely to know. Who knows what unreasonable beliefs might turn out to be true? There's room for mystery in life and if people want to indulge that, in what is sometimes a chaotic existence, there's nothing unreasonable about that.

*disclaimer: not a scientist so may be mistaken on some of this. Apologies if I am.

String theory and other such ideas are based on evidence and rational theory not faith. Faith means believing in something without evidence. Can some please explain how believing in something without any evidence to support it is reasonable? Please.

George Orwell 1982

Millicent wrote: »

That's reasonable. :pac:

Its about as reasonable as your belief in God.

George Orwell 1982

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I'm not trying to prove anyone right or wrong. It honestly doesn't bother me who believes in what.

What I resent is when some athiests look down their noses at you and try to make out you are a deluded irrational idiot for having beliefs. That's what I was responding to really.

You don't have to agree with me but don't tell I'm deluded or irrational or a fool because I'm not.

Please explain in what sense your beliefs are rational.

AudreyHepburn

steve06 wrote: »

Like you, I have no problem with people believing/not believing. But it annoys me when religion believers push their beliefs in your face when you don't believe. so it works both ways. I generally don't get involved because it causes more arguments than anything else although sometimes it's hard to ignore them.

I didn't think I was pushing my beliefs in anyone's face

If I was then I am very sorry, that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to defend myself.

Craptacular

steve06 wrote: »

I hate telling people who believe in God to watch Zeitgeist because although I like a good conspiracy theory, I don't really get wrapped up in them.

But f*ck it... Go and watch Zeitgeist!

Yay, Zeitgeist!

It's just like a real documenatry except without any research beyond hearsay and conspiracy. So many, many, many lies and half-truths in such a small space.

smash

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I didn't think I was pushing my beliefs in anyone's face

If I was then I am very sorry, that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to defend myself.

Lol, I wasn't talking about you. I'm just talking in general. Live and let live....

Craptacular wrote: »

It's just like a real documenatry except without any research beyond hearsay and conspiracy. So many, many, many lies and half-truths in such a small space.

Just like the bible :P

George Orwell 1982

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I didn't think I was pushing my beliefs in anyone's face

If I was then I am very sorry, that wasn't my intention. I was just trying to defend myself.

I am still waiting for you to prove that you are not just a brain in a jar of liquid being controlled by some mad scientist.

AudreyHepburn

steve06 wrote: »

Lol, I wasn't talking about you. I'm just talking in general. Live and let live....


Just like the bible :P

Ah ok fair enough.

Please don't generalise though. Not all believers are that fanatical!

smash

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

I am still waiting for you to prove that you are not just a brain in a jar of liquid being controlled by some mad scientist.

Who cares if she is or not, it doesn't affect you!

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Please don't generalise though. Not all believers are that fanatical!

I know that, I wasn't generalising. I was saying that like you, when an atheist pushes their beliefs at you, it can also be the same reversed. Not all atheists are fanatical either.

AudreyHepburn

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

I am still waiting for you to prove that you are not just a brain in a jar of liquid being controlled by some mad scientist.

And I am still waiting for you to come down of the ridiculously high horse you're on but that's not going happen anytime soon is it?

Bloody Nipples

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

I CAN'T BE BOTHERED ARGUING WITH ANYONE WHO CHOOSES TO BELIEVE IN GOD ANYMORE. THERE'S JUST NO POINT.

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

String theory and other such ideas are based on evidence and rational theory not faith. Faith means believing in something without evidence. Can some please explain how believing in something without any evidence to support it is reasonable? Please.

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Its about as reasonable as your belief in God.

I thought you'd finished.