Does God exist?
- Thread starter Kreskin
- Start date
My personal belief is that there is no God. This is not just "there is no Christianity" but that there is no omnipotent/all knowing creator of humanity or the universe in any which way.
I cannot say this is an absolute... With our level of technology and understanding, there is no proof one way or the other. I do not believe that neither my belief, nor the belief in a God is wrong in any which way. I simply cannot logic the probability of a God over all other possibilities, whether scientific, metaphysical or anywhere in between.
I disconnect all concepts from a god however. The afterlife, for example, could or could not exist independent of a god figure. The same goes for the human soul or other-worldly beings. None of these I positively believe in either, but are more possible to me than a God. After all, on a practical level, why couldn't there be non-biological parts to our essence? How is it utterly impossible that some part of us doesn't live on after death, even without god as part of the equation? Both are equally possible and impossible, imo.
I cannot say this is an absolute... With our level of technology and understanding, there is no proof one way or the other. I do not believe that neither my belief, nor the belief in a God is wrong in any which way. I simply cannot logic the probability of a God over all other possibilities, whether scientific, metaphysical or anywhere in between.
I disconnect all concepts from a god however. The afterlife, for example, could or could not exist independent of a god figure. The same goes for the human soul or other-worldly beings. None of these I positively believe in either, but are more possible to me than a God. After all, on a practical level, why couldn't there be non-biological parts to our essence? How is it utterly impossible that some part of us doesn't live on after death, even without god as part of the equation? Both are equally possible and impossible, imo.
I would argue that some people should better understand the varied kinds of people who believe in Islam. The Taliban have taken Islamic faith to the utter extreme and give a negative stereotype to the faith. There are, however, as many Islamic followers as there are Roman Catholics. I'm sure a decent chunk of Westerners are non-sexist muslims
How do you explain the Qur'an extolling people to murder (I already posted the quotes)?
I would say there are people that are Muslims and those that only pay it lip service. Just like Christianity there are only small handfuls of people that really believe the crap in their books.
The problem is though that these small groups can whip up the others into a frenzy and cause horrible things. If those people that didn't really believe could become critical thinkers they couldn't be whipped up. This is the real fear for Christian leaders. There have been studies that demonstrate less than 50% of Christian leaders really believe (I suspect Muslim leaders are the same). My premise is that they crave power and a flock of intellectually stunted people is exactly what fuels their fire.
I would say there are people that are Muslims and those that only pay it lip service. Just like Christianity there are only small handfuls of people that really believe the crap in their books.
The problem is though that these small groups can whip up the others into a frenzy and cause horrible things. If those people that didn't really believe could become critical thinkers they couldn't be whipped up. This is the real fear for Christian leaders. There have been studies that demonstrate less than 50% of Christian leaders really believe (I suspect Muslim leaders are the same). My premise is that they crave power and a flock of intellectually stunted people is exactly what fuels their fire.
If so, then the same goes for any religious group or cult. I mean... Look at the Church of Scientology.
In the end, all things fall down on the individuals both representing and worshipping a faith and not the faith itself. When religion becomes a tool or weapon, it can become a dangerous one. Without that tool or weapon, those who want to exploit others for personal gain will just seek out another weapon or tool. This would mean that the key is finding a way to reduce future generations from developing an exploitation mentality, not simply preventing them from seeing religion.
I agree entirely and that tool is critical thinking. It is such a powerful tool that anyone seeking power over people will oppose or subvert it; religious or not.
People that can think logically and for themselves are much harder to control by nefarious means such as religion, nationalism or hate. It's a wonderful tool IMO.
I don't care what they are, and where they come from, if they read that stuff, believe that book, and follow those instructions, they are
far behind present treatment of women, and deserve no respect at all.
Behe's irreducible complexity can evolve. Check the talkorigins archive, there are plausible evolutionary paths described for such things as the bacterial flagellum motor, blood clotting, the Krebs cycle, and so on, in terms of things like gene duplication and deletion and other mechanisms that are well known.
Two things you need to understand: first, very small changes accumulated over long periods of time can result in very large changes overall; second, "We don't know yet" is a perfectly legitimate response to something in nature we don't understand, invoking a deity to explain it is not. It presupposes we can never understand it even in principle, "god did it" is the only possible answer and that's all we can know. It's not a useful idea, it leads nowhere, and it's been shown to be false in so many cases by the development of science over the last few centuries it ought to be obvious that it hasn't much credibility.
Anyone who's sexist is immoral, reading the Quran or not. However, some people oddly enough interpret things differently. They may follow instructions in ways that are not sexist. Let's face it though, anyone who follows the bibles exactly are more than sexist. They've likely stoned people to death for picking up sticks on the sabbath and are murderers. Yet most people aren't murderers, Catholic, Christian or not.
I'm willing to bet that most Islamic westerners are not particularly sexist (if at all), and to enrage yourself against an entire group of people because of those who represent the worst of the demographic is to be no better than a sexist individual themselves.
If you read my post accurately, I said that 'anyone' who reads that book and then goes through
their lives treating women, as we know 'those particular women' are treated, doesn't deserve
any respect, and to knit pick and pick out the one's who don't pay any attention to the rules
concerning women, is fine, they aren't part of my arguement.
I am referring to the treatment, as a result of their religion, their customs, no one should
be telling those women what they are 'allowed or not allowed' to do, it is the decision of the
women to live as free people.
We have seen over and over again, on many different channels and articles and interviews,
how unfair the treatment of those particular women are, and it is their custom.
I am not enraged, it is not my nature, so that word does not describe my character and
behavior, it was my opinion, nothing more.
I'm sorry for misinterpreting what you've said.
I'd argue that anyone who perpetuates a controllable Muslim society and impresses, through their power, sexist philosophy is completely devoid of respect. Those people who are given the option to expand their understanding beyond sexist impressions but remain steadfast in their pathetic convictions are similarly undeserving of respect.
There are many who do not have the likely ability to expand their consciousness beyond what they've been tought though, I'm sure. These people are poor victims of a form of mental slavery and through it, cause others to be even worse victims of oppression. These people are forgivable, as they can be retaught and given new tools to think with. If they choose to deny a new, more enlightened lens then they fall amongst the ranks of the immoral and respectless, but untill then they can only be deeply judged so, imo.
However, the only way to truely correct the problem is to teach early children everything neccessary for critical thinking. It needs to be an integral part of our school system. This would prevent people from being swept into zealous fervor, keeping us from merging immoral, dark-age concepts into our modern society.
I am tired of hearing about morals. I'm picking a new old word.
In spite of eannasir's, Mhz's, and Ahmadab's insistence that we are all evil and damned unless we believe in irrationalities, virtue is independent of belief.One actually CAN be a good human without believing in such nonsense.
Also, science is not in the business of proving what isn't. It is in the business of describing what IS. So far, it's done an immensely better job of describing our universe than any religion, as Dex keeps pointing out.
Belief is only hope that what one has faith in is reality. Because people have faith that imaginary beings are real, the belief is irrational. Since the dawn of humankind, when people don't understand something they conjure up some deity (with coincidentally and entirely humanistic qualities, I might add) to attribute the phenomenon to. And this all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful god is simply the result of a pissing match as to which group of irrational children has the best god. It's a massive joke.
In spite of eannasir's, Mhz's, and Ahmadab's insistence that we are all evil and damned unless we believe in irrationalities, virtue is independent of belief.One actually CAN be a good human without believing in such nonsense.
Also, science is not in the business of proving what isn't. It is in the business of describing what IS. So far, it's done an immensely better job of describing our universe than any religion, as Dex keeps pointing out.
Belief is only hope that what one has faith in is reality. Because people have faith that imaginary beings are real, the belief is irrational. Since the dawn of humankind, when people don't understand something they conjure up some deity (with coincidentally and entirely humanistic qualities, I might add) to attribute the phenomenon to. And this all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful god is simply the result of a pissing match as to which group of irrational children has the best god. It's a massive joke.
I've been a member of "The Brights" for a little over a year now. Some very intelligent people in their forums.
I recommend any who are frustrated by irrational and uncritical thinking check the site out.
The Brights' Net - Home Page
On what else could it be based?
As humanity evolved socially, religious beliefs, from the very beginning were based on ignorance, wishful thinking and very often blatant lies...
Nothing much has changed...
A religion can be based on all manners of things; love, nature (paganism), etc. Most are based on imaginary beings, though.
Pagans worshipped personifications of nature, not natural phenomenon. They would see portents in the natural phenomenon which they would interpret as having been caused by the deity of the day.
...and so I reassert that it is based upon a gross misunderstanding of the natural world.
As for religions based upon love, not a one comes to mind...
The closest any has come is Daoism, where it is not based upon love, but ones self and achieving balance in all things.
They seek to be one with the Dao, which is a personification of balance. They also devolve into the superstitious with their tendencies towards worshipping the spirits of ancestors and various deities which they believe are aspects of Dao.
They also believe that practicing the I-Ching will enable them to fortell the future.
So, without all the mystical garbage, it's a relatively noble enterprise as far as religions are concerned.