Why should I believe in God?

[Ben]

So....... The basic argument is: I cant explain why X works, so that means some higher power exists.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Ben' post='581294' date='Oct 29 2007, 03:04 PM']So....... The basic argument is: I cant explain why X works, so that means some higher power exists.[/quote]


Not entirely, but why does X work where did X come from and why does X work with Y to make Z? Seems a little too perfect to me.

[SINcinnati513]

So if god doesn't need a creator, why would we?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='SINcinnati513' post='581302' date='Oct 29 2007, 03:12 PM']So if god doesn't need a creator, why would we?[/quote]


We cant phathom something that has always existed because we are attempting to grasp the concept on a plane of time. What if the existance is beyond any space/time understanding? We understand, or claim to understand our creation because we have seen things that we fit into our thoughts of how things work. (And if not we change our thoughts, the world was flat now its not, ...what if in the end we come to the same ideas the fundamentalits already had?)

And if not then we have a gross misunderstanding of how we came to be.

Or the fundamentalists might be right (just not in the literal way they think they are)?

[Jamie_B]

Also to further Go's point, if God doesnt exist why do I care about anyone other than myself and my existance and power? If God doesnt exist I only care about you so far as my needs for you, which means I dont care about others unless their existance forces me to care because I need them for my own survival and if I dont then F'em and if I do and I can manuplulate them then so be it right? My need to exist and accumulate wealth and power is all that is important.


If God doesnt exist, everyone should be republicans. (half ninja)

[Go Tory Go!]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581296' date='Oct 29 2007, 03:05 PM']Not entirely, but why does X work where did X come from and why does X work with Y to make Z? Seems a little too perfect to me.[/quote]

I assume you mean this in the context of the evolution of life on Earth. Pointing to the apparent order in life on this planet is a rather weak extrapolation or modification of Aquinas's 'Fifth Proof' and/or his 'Proof by Efficient Cause,' compared to an argument you might make (or might be making, if I misinterpret) about some supernatural entity being involved in the definition of nature's fundamental laws and constants.

Order in life forms is no evidence of the supernatural. Miller and Urey proved that biological molecules such as amino acids - the 'building blocks' of proteins, which are in turn the building blocks of life, basically. In addition, the development of large, complex systems is very possible. Please do not trust the 'eye' analogy which is the mainstay of Intelligent Design dolts, wherein they claim the eye without one of its parts is useless, and therefore couldn't have developed by random processes. There are numerous organisms, alive now and throughout life's history, who posess different levels of refinement of a light-sensing mechanism, each of which is perfectly functional in its own right.

And on randomness...it does indeed seem counter-intuitive to assume that order can be established from randomness, but with countless random events throughout Earth's 4.whatever billion years (I hope you don't think it's 7,000 years old), each event subjected to a stabilizing selective force, it is very possible to arrive at life's present state. Remember, mutation rates weren't always as they are now. Atmospheric conditions haven't always filtered out so much UV radiation, and we all know what indbreeding can accomplish. Just look to the hills of Western Pennsylvania / West Virginia.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Go Tory Go!' post='581325' date='Oct 29 2007, 03:50 PM']I assume you mean this in the context of the evolution of life on Earth. Pointing to the apparent order in life on this planet is a rather weak extrapolation or modification of Aquinas's 'Fifth Proof' and/or his 'Proof by Efficient Cause,' compared to an argument you might make (or might be making, if I misinterpret) about some supernatural entity being involved in the definition of nature's fundamental laws and constants.

Order in life forms is no evidence of the supernatural. Miller and Urey proved that biological molecules such as amino acids - the 'building blocks' of proteins, which are in turn the building blocks of life, basically. In addition, the development of large, complex systems is very possible. Please do not trust the 'eye' analogy which is the mainstay of Intelligent Design dolts, wherein they claim the eye without one of its parts is useless, and therefore couldn't have developed by random processes. There are numerous organisms, alive now and throughout life's history, who posess different levels of refinement of a light-sensing mechanism, each of which is perfectly functional in its own right.

And on randomness...it does indeed seem counter-intuitive to assume that order can be established from randomness, but with countless random events throughout Earth's 4.whatever billion years (I hope you don't think it's 7,000 years old), each event subjected to a stabilizing selective force, it is very possible to arrive at life's present state. Remember, mutation rates weren't always as they are now. Atmospheric conditions haven't always filtered out so much UV radiation, and we all know what indbreeding can accomplish. Just look to the hills of Western Pennsylvania / West Virginia.[/quote]


So what your saying is eventually we will be reduced to being steelers fans.

I dont know I have a hard time believing that rules and order came from randomness and chaos.

[SINcinnati513]

Fundamentalists have a bible and a hunch. Scientists on the other hand have answers. Not all of them, but we're making progress.

Your way of thinking alters than mine. I used to think like you Jamie until I was about 18. Then I began to think for myself instead of just accepting what had been instilled into my head at a very young and gullible age. I just recently denounced my religion entirely. The last year I have read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins and God Is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens. I highly recommend them to any believer/atheist/agnostic.

I for one cannot prove or disprove the existence of a deity. But I personally believe that there is no god whatsoever. It wasn't hard for me to become an atheist. It took me getting to know an atheist for the first time and hearing his thoughts and ideas that had never once crossed my mind. It all became very simple after that. We all know what's possible and what isn't. Hopefully people here realize that miracles do not and cannot happen. We've discussed these rules that exist and we know that they can't be broken. So to think that we were magically created by a creator is as absurd as thinking that a pink elephant could appear in the room right now out of nowhere. It's just an example but we all know that this is not possible.

Creationism causes more questions than it can provide answers. After all it only has one answer, an entirely inplausible one, god. There is no evidence to support creationism, especially if you dismiss evolution. Only a bible and a hunch.

[|BlackJesus|]

[center][quote name='GoBengals' post='580814' date='Oct 28 2007, 11:48 PM']i cant stand organized religion, catholic verse methodist, vs baptist all pisses me off[/quote]


[color="#0000FF"][size=3][i]"When I told the people of Northern Ireland that I was an atheist, a woman in the audience stood up and said, 'Yes, but is it the God of the Catholics or the God of the Protestants in whom you don't believe?'"[/i]

[b]~ Quentin Crisp[/b][/size][/center][/color]

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='SINcinnati513' post='581339' date='Oct 29 2007, 04:00 PM']Fundamentalists have a bible and a hunch. Scientists on the other hand have answers. Not all of them, but we're making progress.

Your way of thinking alters than mine. I used to think like you Jamie until I was about 18. Then I began to think for myself instead of just accepting what had been instilled into my head at a very young and gullible age. I just recently denounced my religion entirely. The last year I have read The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins and God Is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens. I highly recommend them to any believer/atheist/agnostic.

I for one cannot prove or disprove the existence of a deity. But I personally believe that there is no god whatsoever. It wasn't hard for me to become an atheist. It took me getting to know an atheist for the first time and hearing his thoughts and ideas that had never once crossed my mind. It all became very simple after that. We all know what's possible and what isn't. Hopefully people here realize that miracles do not and cannot happen. We've discussed these rules that exist and we know that they can't be broken. So to think that we were magically created by a creator is as absurd as thinking that a pink elephant could appear in the room right now out of nowhere. It's just an example but we all know that this is not possible.

Creationism causes more questions than it can provide answers. After all it only has one answer, an entirely inplausible one, god. There is no evidence to support creationism, especially if you dismiss evolution. Only a bible and a hunch.[/quote]


Science has rules, rules and order. Mircles that may have been once explained as miricle are now explained by those rules, but the rule always existed we just now understand it where we did not before, but I can not fathom any rule that came from chaos.

[xamination]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581248' date='Oct 29 2007, 02:13 PM']To further expand.

I work with computers so Ill use this example.

You ask why C.

Well if Im building a computer and I need to be able for it to work so that I can see things on my monitor Ill get a video card, what your saying is why wouldnt I just use a sound card for my monitor? Why would I do that, it makes no sence? Its not what it was designed to do.

Follow?[/quote]
Ah, a lot to touch on... I'll start here first.

You forget that you are an omnipotent God here. You could put a cherry pie here and it would work. If God wanted to add some memory to his hard drive, and put a fish in the computer, I know it will work. I want you to tell me why he chose the fish.

[xamination]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581278' date='Oct 29 2007, 02:44 PM']What if the creator always existed (because were trying to comprehend him in space and time here)? And there was no creator for him. Or perhaps that explination is so far beyond our simple understanding that we cant comprehend it.[/quote]
Why can't the universe be eternal? Instead of refining your view of reality, your making up a magic man outside of your reality so you wont have to.

[xamination]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581323' date='Oct 29 2007, 03:47 PM']Also to further Go's point, if God doesnt exist why do I care about anyone other than myself and my existance and power? If God doesnt exist I only care about you so far as my needs for you, which means I dont care about others unless their existance forces me to care because I need them for my own survival and if I dont then F'em and if I do and I can manuplulate them then so be it right? My need to exist and accumulate wealth and power is all that is important.


If God doesnt exist, everyone should be republicans. (half ninja)[/quote]
That is slander, my friend. I don't need God to tell me to care about you or anyone else. Morality is decided by people, not gods. And for me, there is nothing I wouldn't do for mankind.

[xamination]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581352' date='Oct 29 2007, 04:23 PM']Science has rules, rules and order. Mircles that may have been once explained as miricle are now explained by those rules, but the rule always existed we just now understand it where we did not before, but I can not fathom any rule that came from chaos.[/quote]
Your error here is that you assume that these basic rules come from somewhere. These rules exist, just as anything else, for no reason.

Let me put it this way: Why does, in your opinion, God exist?

[Fanatical]

The laws that we have found in science have always been as long as our universe has been. Of course, so did random happenings.

I'll paraphrase Carl Sagan
[i]If we lived on a changeless world there would be nothing to do, there would be no impetus for science; and if lived on an unpredictable world where things would change at random or very complex ways, we wouldn't be able to figure things out. But we live in an in-between universe, where things change, but according to patterns or rules; what we call laws of nature.[/i]

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='xamination' post='581425' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:08 PM']Your error here is that you assume that these basic rules come from somewhere. [b]These rules exist, just as anything else, for no reason.[/b][/quote]

Prove it.

[xamination]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='581443' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:23 PM']Prove it.[/quote]
Its a logical progression, as I said. Rule A leads to Rule B, Rule B to Phenomenon C, Phenomenon C To Law D, and so forth. However, as an actual infinite regression is impossible(I can explain this if you wish), there must be a few starting laws and rules that determine the very nature of the universe. Just adding God as the cause of this is just adding one more Rule - it has nothing to do with the need for a starting law.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='xamination' post='581412' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:02 PM']Ah, a lot to touch on... I'll start here first.

You forget that you are an omnipotent God here. You could put a cherry pie here and it would work. If God wanted to add some memory to his hard drive, and put a fish in the computer, I know it will work. I want you to tell me why he chose the fish.[/quote]


But if the fish worked in the computer your explination for why it worked would be adjusted beause of it. Thats not the case.

[quote name='xamination' post='581416' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:04 PM']Why can't the universe be eternal? Instead of refining your view of reality, your making up a magic man outside of your reality so you wont have to.[/quote]


Who said it cant? By end I mean end of things as we know them, if I go by my dogma the world doesnt end after Christ's return.

[quote name='xamination' post='581422' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:06 PM']That is slander, my friend. I don't need God to tell me to care about you or anyone else. Morality is decided by people, not gods. And for me, there is nothing I wouldn't do for mankind.[/quote]

You misunderstand, you specificly no but societies and those who have no need for morality. I'd also argue that morality comes from the various rules of the various faiths. Just without their gift wrapping but the same gift is in the box.

My argument was if there is no God, what do societites and those who have no need for moralites have use for morals? The surivial of the fittest would say we do what we have to get what we need to survive would it not? (As P. Diddy would say... It's all about the Benjamans baby )

[quote name='xamination' post='581425' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:08 PM']Your error here is that you assume that these basic rules come from somewhere. These rules exist, just as anything else, for no reason.

Let me put it this way: Why does, in your opinion, God exist?[/quote]


Why does God exist? Thats the question for the ages isnt it?



[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='581443' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:23 PM']Prove it.[/quote]


He may not be able to prove it, but he has faith.

[xamination]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581451' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:32 PM']But if the fish worked in the computer your explination for why it worked would be adjusted beause of it. Thats not the case.[/quote]

I think that there is some misunderstanding going on here. Lets go back to the speed of light. God, according to you, choose the speed of light to be c, either directly or indirectly. But God could have made it a google kph, or 37mph. However, he chose c. Why did he choose c? The answer is it is his nature.

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581451' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:32 PM']Who said it cant? By end I mean end of things as we know them, if I go by my dogma the world doesnt end after Christ's return.[/quote]

I was talking about why would an eternal universe need a creator.

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581451' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:32 PM']You misunderstand, you specificly no but societies and those who have no need for morality. I'd also argue that morality comes from the various rules of the various faiths. Just without their gift wrapping but the same gift is in the box.

My argument was if there is no God, what do societites and those who have no need for moralites have use for morals? The surivial of the fittest would say we do what we have to get what we need to survive would it not? (As P. Diddy would say... It's all about the Benjamans baby )[/quote]


You and I both know that getting along with one another is the only way humans have been able to survive. Morals are the behaviors that made humans successful. Look at human history, and you will see that humans are not the strongest creatures out there, but they band together and make towns and cities and fight together against nature. Those who were able to get along survived. Those who were able to get along were "the fittest"


[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581451' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:32 PM']Why does God exist? Thats the question for the ages isnt it? [/quote]

Can that question even be answered, that is what I want you to ask yourself.


[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581451' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:32 PM']He may not be able to prove it, but he has faith. [/quote]

[Fanatical]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='581451' date='Oct 29 2007, 05:32 PM']My argument was if there is no God, what do societites and those who have no need for moralites have use for morals? The surivial of the fittest would say we do what we have to get what we need to survive would it not? (As P. Diddy would say... It's all about the Benjamans baby )[/quote]
And yet, societies have survived for millenia prior to the acceptance of a god, and many continue without a god. A god does not give need for societal rules, only scapegoat for justification. It is in a society's best interest to have rules and laws to prosper and not collapse into anarchy. That's evolution.

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='xamination' post='581450' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:30 PM']Its a logical progression, as I said. Rule A leads to Rule B, Rule B to Phenomenon C, Phenomenon C To Law D, and so forth. However, as an actual infinite regression is impossible(I can explain this if you wish), there must be a few starting laws and rules that determine the very nature of the universe. Just adding God as the cause of this is just adding one more Rule - it has nothing to do with the need for a starting law.[/quote]
That's not a very satisfactory answer. If, as I might infer from your explanation, that the root premise of the universe is {No Reason} then why are there any rules/laws at all? From whence the first? And Why?

Logic is not any different from mathematics in the sense that they are human conventions we have devised as tools to describe our thoughts and perceptions of Nature.

And, I have my own thoughts about the nature of an infinite regression, and as a matter of logic, I agree with you. But that doesn't eliminate the need for asking about primary cause.

What I suggest people do is to get away from this silly Dawkins/Intell Design argument--both of which tend to get in the way of a truly agapic learning journey!

[xamination]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='581462' date='Oct 29 2007, 06:47 PM']That's not a very satisfactory answer. If, as I might infer from your explanation, that the root premise of the universe is {No Reason} then why are there any rules/laws at all? From whence the first? And Why?[/quote]
That's just the thing - these questions have no answers.
Its like this - the ultimate philosophical question: why does anything exist?

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='Go Tory Go!' post='581325' date='Oct 29 2007, 01:50 PM']I assume you mean this in the context of the evolution of life on Earth. Pointing to the apparent order in life on this planet is a rather weak extrapolation or modification of Aquinas's 'Fifth Proof' and/or his 'Proof by Efficient Cause,' compared to an argument you might make (or might be making, if I misinterpret) about some supernatural entity being involved in the definition of nature's fundamental laws and constants.

Order in life forms is no evidence of the supernatural. Miller and Urey proved that biological molecules such as amino acids - the 'building blocks' of proteins, which are in turn the building blocks of life, basically. In addition, the development of large, complex systems is very possible. Please do not trust the 'eye' analogy which is the mainstay of Intelligent Design dolts, wherein they claim the eye without one of its parts is useless, and therefore couldn't have developed by random processes. There are numerous organisms, alive now and throughout life's history, who posess different levels of refinement of a light-sensing mechanism, each of which is perfectly functional in its own right.

And on randomness...it does indeed seem counter-intuitive to assume that order can be established from randomness, but with countless random events throughout Earth's 4.whatever billion years (I hope you don't think it's 7,000 years old), each event subjected to a stabilizing selective force, it is very possible to arrive at life's present state. Remember, mutation rates weren't always as they are now. Atmospheric conditions haven't always filtered out so much UV radiation, and we all know what indbreeding can accomplish. Just look to the hills of Western Pennsylvania / West Virginia.[/quote]
I see God as a cosmic traveller that ensures order amongst the chaos. The best scientific representation for my belief is found in your final paragraph, where you say that "each event is subjected to a stablizing selective force".
That is exactly what I am talking about. Scientists can't explain that any more than Astronomers can explain the "spark" that initiates stellar life from proto-star into star (the instigation of gravitatonal collapse).
I understand the mythology argument against the existence of the supernatural, which is to say if it couldn't be understood, it must be from a god.
That mythology persists today but there are certain scientific inabilities to explain certain cosmic occurences that I am going to cheerfully cling to in order to convince myself that God exists.

[|BlackJesus|]

[color="#000080"][center][i]“I'm not an athiest. How can you not believe in something that doesn't exist?”[/i]

[b]~ A. Whitney Brown [/b]






[i]"If absolute power corrupts absolutely, where does that leave God?" [/i]

[b]~ George Deacon[/b]







[i]"Thank God I'm an atheist."[/i]

[b]~ Luis Bunuel[/b][/center][/color]

[|BlackJesus|]

[color="#9932CC"][center][i]"God made everything out of nothing, but the nothingness shows through."[/i]

[b]~ Paul Valery[/b]





[i]"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh."[/i]

[b]~ Voltaire[/b][/center][/color]