Do you believe in God?

[PearlSeeker]

So scientists cannot conclude, based on what they surmise and examine, if the universe had a beginning. Maybe it did; maybe it didn't. I believe rather what the Bible says, in that it had a beginning. How it worked, how "God did it" is not explained in the Bible. I am convinced, however, that it had a beginning. However it happened. Similarly, I am convinced that the earth had a beginning. Thank you.

OK. But this belief is not based upon reason.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, if there was anything before the Big bang (which is a possibility in quantum gravity), then time may go back infinitely far and the universe as well. In that case, it had no beginning.

We don't know. It is one of the many possibilities.

"Time," as figured by experts so-called using whatever method they use to figure time, is wayyy beyond me. Thus, I abstain from these philosophical possibilities based on -- (?) quantum stuff...

 

[YoursTrue]

OK. But this belief is not based upon reason.

Scientists regardless of your thoughts about whether the Bible's principles and posits are based on reason, still haven't figured it out. Enjoy as time marches on, my mother would say.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, if there was anything before the Big bang (which is a possibility in quantum gravity), then time may go back infinitely far and the universe as well. In that case, it had no beginning.

We don't know. It is one of the many possibilities.

Yeah well then there's always quantum Nothingness if I remember the phrase, and even then there were some things. (Have a good one, I abstain now and possibly in the future from these discussions...) You go and learn more about Quantum Nothingness, etc, enjoy your "scientific" reasonings and whatever...

 

[YoursTrue]

God as Avatar incarnates and becomes fully human as well as fully God. A very very few humans become fully God. If the ego becomes worn out enough the intuitive human heart starts coming to the fore. Among those few are even fewer that become well known such as St. Francis of Assisi, Ramakrishna Paramhamsa and Rumi. They leave behind stories that we can use.

One example of an answer is a story about a man and his son who are going to visit someone but only have one donkey. The son, being young, tells his father to ride. After a while some complain that it should be the opposite so they switch. Soon others complain about a young son riding while the older father walks. They meet a "saintly person" (read that as a perfected one who offers this:

The saintly person replied, "The reason that all this is happening is because you want to please the people of the world. But this is not possible because each person has their own ideas. Even though you did what they wanted, you are now confused and ashamed. They found you cruel and foolish. This is your weakness, because really you are neither. But if you continue to listen to the people as you travel from one village to the next, you will never be able to get to your destination. Then you really would be foolish. Do not listen anymore to their chatter, but listen to God within you. He will guide you properly....

Avatar incarnates? What's that, please, if you will. And thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

OK. But this belief is not based upon reason.

Scientists "reason" on their quandaries re: big bang, maybe yes, maybe no, and are still wondering. OK. I'm outta that for now and hope you have a good day examining what scientists say.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Scientists "reason" on their quandaries re: big bang, maybe yes, maybe no, and are still wondering. OK. I'm outta that for now and hope you have a good day examining what scientists say.

Thank you. Enjoy the myth.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

God as Avatar incarnates and becomes fully human as well as fully God. A very very few humans become fully God. If the ego becomes worn out enough the intuitive human heart starts coming to the fore. Among those few are even fewer that become well known such as St. Francis of Assisi, Ramakrishna Paramhamsa and Rumi. They leave behind stories that we can use.

One example of an answer is a story about a man and his son who are going to visit someone but only have one donkey. The son, being young, tells his father to ride. After a while some complain that it should be the opposite so they switch. Soon others complain about a young son riding while the older father walks. They meet a "saintly person" (read that as a perfected one who offers this:

The saintly person replied, "The reason that all this is happening is because you want to please the people of the world. But this is not possible because each person has their own ideas. Even though you did what they wanted, you are now confused and ashamed. They found you cruel and foolish. This is your weakness, because really you are neither. But if you continue to listen to the people as you travel from one village to the next, you will never be able to get to your destination. Then you really would be foolish. Do not listen anymore to their chatter, but listen to God within you. He will guide you properly....

maybe they both need to walk, and give the donkey a break...

 

[sun rise]

Avatar incarnates? What's that, please, if you will. And thank you.

Since you're a Christian, John 1:14 is a statement of what I mean from a Christian perspective. The theological difference is that where Christians focus on Jesus, others focus on the Christ and count Jesus as one appearance of the Christ on Earth usually using the word "Avatar" instead of "Christ" In this viewpoint "only begotten" refers to the eternal Christ/Avatar.

 

[ppp]

I have noticed that poll's with this kind of question shows that most in this forum who are active are either Atheists or Agnostics. Actual religious people who believe in a God in a religious forum are the minority. It's not strange.

I'm not sure that a poll on this forum with that kind of question could show that. A lack of controls in participation alone could skew the results.

A belief in God is not absolutely due to a particular religion. It could also be based on reason and logic and it has been discussed for a long long time. Yet, it seems to be ignored and a lot of times the cart is shoved before the horse for whatever anti religious argumentation deemed needed.

That is false. When you capitalize god you are coloring it with an umbrella bias specific to a few religions. Now, one might arrive arrive at a conclusion of one or more gods thru an application of logic or reasoning. Perhaps. Should that ever actually occur, I will be both amazed and delighted.

Belief in God could stem from logical reasoning. Philosophical argumentation. Religions and scriptures are not absolutely necessary.

Could? Philosophically, sure. But anything not explicitly contradictory is philosophically possible. That is an uninteresting type of 'could' when it comes to examining reality. That is the 'could' of ignorance. It is the 'could' of knowledge that has provides substance.

I believe people should go to fundamentals rather than banking on peripherals to kill God

I'm disinterested in 'killing God'.

I think that's exactly what Nietzsche said being an Atheist with nihilistic tendencies.

I don't know you, but cannot help but wonder if you are banking on Nietzsche as a peripheral to kill influence what you think an "Atheist" is. It's a very common approach among believers to try to use atheist[1] figureheads from history as though they are some sort of atheist prophets who have an influence merely by their being who they are.


[1] Or what they think are atheist figureheads

 

[YoursTrue]

Since you're a Christian, John 1:14 is a statement of what I mean from a Christian perspective. The theological difference is that where Christians focus on Jesus, others focus on the Christ and count Jesus as one appearance of the Christ on Earth usually using the word "Avatar" instead of "Christ" In this viewpoint "only begotten" refers to the eternal Christ/Avatar.

Oh ok. Not that I understand it exactly but I do believe the Bible is God's way of communicating with his people.

 

[paarsurrey]

Do you believe in God?​

Yes, I am a believer in G-d.
I do know that some or many people who believe God to be physical and or a Spirit, they cannot perceive Him to be the Creator of the Universe, only because they cannot reconcile as to where was/is God?
Is He within the Universe/ or outside the Universe exactly at the same point of time and space?
Right?
It is a conceptual error, G-d is everywhere, inside the Universe/s and outside of them, since He is an attributive Being, not a physical person or spirit, please, right?

Regards

 

[danieldemol]

Something can be designed as self-evolving. Evolving according to predefined guidelines. See for example how AI works.

Sure it can be, and it also can be nature unfolding according to its properties in my view.

In order to have a sound logical proof of God I believe you need to rule out the later.

In other words turn your possibility into a probability.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Yes, but the analogy is between the two dimensional surface of the Earth and four dimensional spacetime. In the second case, there is no reason to think there is any 'outside'.

Nope. Multiverses arise naturally when attempting to model quantum gravity. In fact, they show up in quantum theory fairly naturally in any case. That is actually the *only* reason they are taken seriously at all.

But I notice that by pushing the intent for the tree falling in the forest back to the Big Bang, you are implicitly assuming there was an intent at that point that intended that tree to fall at that time and place. That, to me, seems highly unlikely for a number of different reasons. Primarily, the existence of an 'intent' implies a complex consciousness, which in turn implies a very complex substrate to support that consciousness. So the explanatory power is greatly diminished.

And that seems to me to encourage confirmation bias. Sure, it is nice and even moving emotionally. But that is not a reason to think it is anything more than in our heads.

There are multiverse hypotheses from cosmology which are pretty much independent of quantum theory. The pocket universe or pocket dimension hypothesis, for example, is completely unrelated to the Many Worlds interpretation of QM.

Given what we know about the irreducible randomness seemingly inherent in nature, it would be a stretch to say that any intent which initiated the Big Bang also intended a tree to fall in a forest - or even for there to be trees or forests. When the Old One first rolled the dice, He couldn’t have predicted the outcome; or so we might suppose.

That consciousness is complex, and requires a complex sub strata, implies a very special, low entropy system; such as that which existed in the very early universe: When perhaps, the creator first began to dream.

Insights and perceptions arrived at through intuition should be put to the test, obviously. Which we do by acting on them; sometimes to our cost. We learn by our mistakes, do we not?

 

[RestlessSoul]

maybe they both need to walk, and give the donkey a break...

Terrible waste of a donkey, that. Let it earn it’s keep.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I have noticed that poll's with this kind of question shows that most in this forum who are active are either Atheists or Agnostics. Actual religious people who believe in a God in a religious forum are the minority. It's not strange.

A belief in God is not absolutely due to a particular religion. It could also be based on reason and logic and it has been discussed for a long long time. Yet, it seems to be ignored and a lot of times the cart is shoved before the horse for whatever anti religious argumentation deemed needed.

Belief in God could stem from logical reasoning. Philosophical argumentation. Religions and scriptures are not absolutely necessary. I believe people should go to fundamentals rather than banking on peripherals to kill God. I think that's exactly what Nietzsche said being an Atheist with nihilistic tendencies.

What do you say??

Looks like this thread has really taken off. FWIW I believe in a Creator God. The Christian Church along with the Bible helps with that belief along with the Baha'i and Muslim communities. Atheism doesn't work for me but each to their own

 

[PearlSeeker]

Ahh, so it is that one. Well, it runs into the evil demon by Descartes as the first real version of the problem of knowing what the world is indepedent of the mind.

Remember I am a skeptic, and the presumption in that arguement is that we can know that the world is independent of the mind.
So you have to start there. How do you know about the world as independent of your mind?

Does it matter? The mind also must have a ground (first cause) in something.

P. S.: You are conversing with a real person.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Does it matter? The mind also must have a ground (first cause) in something.

P. S.: You are conversing with a real person.

Yeah, I do believe that. But I try to be honest and the first cause is unknown for anything other than being the first cause.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Terrible waste of a donkey, that. Let it earn it’s keep.

let the humans earn their keep...carry the donkey!

 

[Saggath]

"The Universe had a beginning." - We actually don't know this.

I believe your use of pronouns is incorrect.