Do you believe in God?

[Spice]

When "Higher Power" is the descriptive used, I believe the logic is pretty clear. For all the hundreds of thousands of years life has been on this planet, science is continually discovering the unfathomable intelligent make-up of our existence.

However, ineffable faith attributes become much more of a philosophical endeavor.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, the God revealed in the biblical scriptures says,
“Come now, and let us reason together,”
Says the Lord,
“Though your sins are like scarlet,
They shall be as white as snow;
Though they are red like crimson,
They shall be as wool”
Isaiah 1:18

Yes - you found a passage from your scriptures that happens to contain a key word from what I was talking about.

Is this supposed to be impressive (or relevant)?

 

[Balthazzar]

I would say it depends on what that higher power is and what the evidence for it is.

Elephants or the universe are a higher power than individual humans and we have evidence they exist, so a vague answer to your vague question is no its not logical to reject higher power concepts.

The trouble is when we get more specific higher power concepts such as the concept of an all-knowing, all-powerful, all merciful higher power to which we have contrary evidence such as the existence of suffering in my view. It then becomes logical to reject some of those more specific concepts as I see it.

Definitions of higher power concepts, as you suggest, have a tendency to lead some types opposed. Practically speaking, God as all knowing, all powerful, all merciful is in fact evidenced in life and universe, despite the presence of suffering. In such cases, finite becomes mercy and eternal the contrary. I'm a Panentheist, so the universe is what I equate God to be, which happens to contain many little ones within its scope as children. It's all God anyway, imo. The problem with suffering is we find it painful. The benefit in that pain is understanding and efforts made to prevent it, which is also the reason we evolve, adapt, and develop into more capable beings.

For clarification of a vague question with something more substantial.

 

[danieldemol]

Definitions of higher power concepts, as you suggest, have a tendency to lead some types opposed. Practically speaking, God as all knowing, all powerful, all merciful is in fact evidenced in life and universe, despite the presence of suffering. In such cases, finite becomes mercy and eternal the contrary. I'm a Panentheist, so the universe is what I equate God to be, which happens to contain many little ones within its scope as children. It's all God anyway, imo. The problem with suffering is we find it painful. The benefit in that pain is understanding and efforts made to prevent it, which is also the reason we evolve, adapt, and develop into more capable beings.

For clarification of a vague question with something more substantial.

Thanks for clarifying. I still don't see why you think finite suffering shows God as All-Merciful though. It shows a degree of mercy, but there is a tremendous gap in my view between showing mercy and being All-Merciful.

 

[danieldemol]

science is continually discovering the unfathomable intelligent make-up of our existence

I believe science discovered the opposite. That far from our existence requiring unfathomable intelligence all it required was chemistry and the blind process of natural selection.

But if you can find me a peer reviewed science article referring to the "unfathomable intelligent make up of our existence" I'd be impressed.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Belief in God based on reason and logic? Is there a reason not to?

I don't know. You're a theist; you tell me.

Is it truly more reasonable and logical to reject higher power concepts?

It's not so much that I reject "higher power concepts;" it's that a long, earnest period of inquiry and reflection focused on the truth never once even so much as suggested that any gods might be part of what's true.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

When "Higher Power" is the descriptive used, I believe the logic is pretty clear.

Speaking personally, I have no idea what "logic" you're referring to.

For all the hundreds of thousands of years life has been on this planet, science is continually discovering the unfathomable intelligent make-up of our existence.

No, it really isn't.

 

[Balthazzar]

Thanks for clarifying. I still don't see why you think finite suffering shows God as All-Merciful though. It shows a degree of mercy, but there is a tremendous gap in my view between showing mercy and being All-Merciful.

Born to live born to die. We adapt, evolve, and develop as we go. That's life. Why does not God need to be less than what God is?

 

[Balthazzar]

I don't know. You're a theist; you tell me.


It's not so much that I reject "higher power concepts;" it's that a long, earnest period of inquiry and reflection focused on the truth never once even so much as suggested that any gods might be part of what's true.

I find it illogical to deny god concepts as I understand them as a panentheist, viewing everything as an extension of the universe, part of, and conscious of our existence. Gods are what exactly? In your view, I mean. What concepts did you adopt to reject? To me it's all God. I've found similar thought reflected in various religious cultures, even Abrahamic.

 

[danieldemol]

Born to live born to die. We adapt, evolve, and develop as we go. That's life. Why does not God need to be less than what God is?

I don't believe God is less than what God is. I also don't believe God is all merciful.

For me to believe God is All-Merciful I would need evidence and I don't see how letting us cruelly suffer when having the power to create a Universe entirely without suffering constitutes being All-Merciful. It just does not compute with me anymore than it would with you if I told you up is really down.

Different minds work differently I guess. We are bound not to agree on what constitutes logic or what constitutes reliable evidence for a proposition.

 

[firedragon]

I believe in a God that provides salvation to all who desire it for as long as they desire it in the spirit realm after there bodies die. In my belief God does not/has never interacted with the material realm.
(Important Disclaimer: I do not claim my beliefs are strictly logical).

The God of the OP is All-Knowing, Omnipotent, Most Merciful and sends Messengers to intervene in material human affairs in my view. In short it is the Quranist God.

The OP doesn't say anything that you have mentioned. Not the topic.

 

[firedragon]

I say what is it exactly that I'm being asked if I have a belief in?

How can I have a belief in something I don't know anything about?
How could I make a choice based on logic and reason on something which is often described as unknowable?
Should I pretend I know something about God just for the sake of answering that question?

No, I have no beliefs about God since I have no knowledge of a God to base any beliefs on.

Great. Thanks.

 

[firedragon]

You are going well off-track if you assume that "actual religious people" will be theists, though.

Theism isn't even helpful to proper religious practice.

Irrelevant but thanks for participating.

 

[firedragon]

No belief whatsoever. There's no practical point in doing so for a concept that is entirely deaf, mute, crippled, and blind and cannot interact with anything.

Do you have any evidence to your statement?

 

[firedragon]

How many people do you personally know that never had a belief in God and became a believer because of a philosophical argument?

Plenty. Many.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I find it illogical to deny god concepts as I understand them as a panentheist, viewing everything as an extension of the universe, part of, and conscious of our existence.

It's not a matter of "denying" god concepts as much as pursuing truth and noting that the pursuit doesn't end up anywhere near any gods.

Gods are what exactly? In your view, I mean.

I don't think that there's a coherent definition of "god" other than the list of every god humanity has ever believed in.

That being said, I think it's unreasonable to consider certain things referred to as "gods" by some ss gods (e.g. the Sun, the Universe, Haile Selassie, "deified" Roman emperors, etc.).

What concepts did you adopt to reject?

None. I've never believed in any gods.

To me it's all God. I've found similar though reflected in various religious thought, even Abrahamic.

What do you think makes "all" or "the universe" God? I mean, when you talk about intelligence behind the form of the universe, it certainly sounds like we disagree on what fundamentally exists, not just what to call the things we both agree exist.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Do you have any evidence to your statement?

Yes. The evidence is people's clear and obvious inability to present a living real God no matter how hard they try.

 

[firedragon]

I have had 'spiritual' experiences...but I cannot attribute them to something I can't perceive or conceive.

How could you perceive or conceive a God if any? What do you mean by that? Is it to speak or touch a God?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Plenty. Many.

What philosophical arguments convinced them?

(I ask this as someone who has never seen an argument for god(s) that didn't contain fatal flaws)

 

[danieldemol]

The OP doesn't say anything that you have mentioned. Not the topic.

The OP states;
"A belief in God is not absolutely due to a particular religion. It could also be based on reason and logic"

My response to that was essentially yes it could be if the God was a material thing, but not if it wasn't in my view.

You asked for further elaboration, that is why I took into account the concept of God you hope for us to accept as logical even though it plainly is not in my view.