The Problem with Belief in God

[ChristineM]

The debate between the belief and lack of and rejection of creator will not cease until evidence is found for the existence of such a being.

Those that reject the possibility of a creator cannot disprove that such a creator exists as one cannot find evidence for something that does not exist (proving a false positive) And the only way to determine that there is no such god in existence would be that no evidence that supports the belief in god be found.

Those that reserve their belief until evidence is found, will continue to wait. And either they lean towards the possibility of a deity or the unlikelihood of a deity or creator.

And believers simply do not need evidence, and use the lack of evidence of a god as evidence for the possibility of a god. Or make the blind assumption that there is one, because we haven't found evidence yet, the old "I don't know therefore god." What I would coin gnostic ignorance.

Some state they personally know their god, that they know it exists, why don't they share this knowledge and end the debate, the death and wholesale slaughter done in the name of different gods? Are they so selfish that they must to keep their god to themselves? And when asked to explain many say it is a feeling.

Feelings from my limited understanding are just releases of chemicals in the brain, so is god a chemical?

I don't deny the possibility that such a being exists, but I am confident that all the iterations of such a being that humans have talked about, those that we have documentation and stories about and those lost in our relatively short history are wrong. There are too many loop holes and obvious gaps in knowledge and understanding of our own existence and what exists around us for such inspiration to be "divine" That such a being would impart some of it's infinite knowledge upon us, only for us to document it, only to find later through our own devices that that given knowledge is incorrect.

In my opinion divine knowledge that has been proven demonstrably false, is not divine, it is the wild conjuring of the imagination when presented with a reality those that experienced it at the time did not understand and created an answer to appease the masses.

Creating an answer not founded in reality is a dangerous path that I think leads to the retardation of progress. These fabricated answers to the questions about the unknown served their purpose for a time until we had the capability to seek the answers for ourselves, But these crutches have been used for far too long and and we have been crippled by leaning on them for far too long.

Humanity has only very recently began to take its first steps on its own. And hopefully we will continue to rehabilitate our species. And discard these temporary solutions to the unknown. Imagine a world where everyone is invested in seeking the concrete truth and not squabbling as we have been doing for thousands of years over the name of a creator that has yet to have been discovered.

Or perhaps the acceptance of the multiple evidences and contradictions that collectively indicate no god exists would solve the problem, though i doubt it. The faithful will always deny that which challenges their faith.

 

[blü 2]

Eh? I said it was God who prevented those who don't respect him from understanding.

So God chooses who'll believe in [him] and who won't?

In that case, no one is responsible for their belief or lack of belief.

And of course if God is omnipotent and omniscient then back before [he] made the universe, [he] already knew in infinite detail everything everyone would ever think, say and do. Each human can only think say and do exactly what [he] always knew that person would, with no chance of even the most minute departure.

There's no other possibility. Still, it's good to see you facing up to it.

 

[Thief]

So God chooses who'll believe in [him] and who won't?

In that case, no one is responsible for their belief or lack of belief.

And of course if God is omnipotent and omniscient then back before [he] made the universe, [he] already knew in infinite detail everything everyone would ever think, say and do. Each human can only think say and do exactly what [he] always knew that person would, with no chance of even the most minute departure.

There's no other possibility. Still, it's good to see you facing up to it.

not buying any of that

God will choose
and why choose of mediocrity when the best is at hand

God knows His creation.....
but we have been given freewill......in mind and heart
(you are indeed believing as you see fit)

and why would God choose of nay-sayers?
If you can't find a means to believe in something greater than yourself......
then the only possibility is the grave

 

[outlawState]

So God chooses who'll believe in [him] and who won't?

In that case, no one is responsible for their belief or lack of belief.

Not so. It is entirely the converse.

Rom 9:22
What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction?

The matter that no-one can know God unless they follow a specified path determined by God has to be contrasted with the fact that God often tolerates those who know him not for a long time (not always though), in the hope that people will, as they age, ask themselves "why don't I know God?" "What is wrong with me that I don't him?" "Can God ever be known?"

It's a case of being willing to submit to the chosen path. It does happen that old age and sheer frustration at the lack of one's own knowledge does lead people back to God. The command today (actually for the last 2000 years) is that "all" should know God contrary to the Calvinistic edict that only some should know God. It also infers that it is the responsibility of men to know God, despite God's choices. Refusal to believe is now deemed wilful on the part of the human, but it wasn't always so, in times of paganism past. The times change. The responsibility of man changes.

And of course if God is omnipotent and omniscient then back before [he] made the universe, [he] already knew in infinite detail everything everyone would ever think, say and do. Each human can only think say and do exactly what [he] always knew that person would, with no chance of even the most minute departure.

There's no other possibility. Still, it's good to see you facing up to it.

Foreknowledge does not vitiate man's choices, because "man is made in the image of God." The two coexist, which is a theme found throughout the bible.

Deu 30:19
This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

What is the evidence for Love, Beauty and Justice?

As an atheist, it is opportune for me that you have drawn this particular analogy. Consider:

Beauty - subjective, though anyone can easily wrap their minds around the concept. Once introduced, it becomes more or less second nature to recognize. It is easily understood why someone thinks of something as beautiful, even if we do not. It exists as a concept - useful in sharing positive experiences.

Love - subjective, not everyone loves the same people/things. It is the name given to the strongest of positive feelings toward a person, place, or thing. Again, when the concept is introduced, it becomes easy to express (even if only to yourself) the things you have love for. It exists as a concept - useful in sharing an understanding of what is most important to us.

Justice - subjective, not everyone agrees that "the punishment fits the crime," and there is endless debate on whether or not some things are even crimes requiring the implementation of "justice." It exists as a concept - useful for imparting the idea that we believe something needs to be done to curtail a particular behavior with negative consequences.

God - subjective, not everyone agrees on what God is, what His/Her/Its attributes are, how many gods there are, or if there are any at all. When the concept is introduced, it is more or less understood, but also more, less, or not at all accepted. He/She/It EXISTS AS A CONCEPT - seemingly useful for some who find it more comfortable to have a "go to" for explanations. Also useful for those who do not feel comfortable recognizing the subjective nature of things like "morality" or "justice," possibly because they feel ill-at-ease in making such choices on their own. Also useful for those who worry over death being an ultimate "end" to themselves, and looking for a way to be preserved for posterity.

So yes, God is very much like beauty, love and justice. There is no "proof" of any of them... and yet they "exist" (after a fashion) all the same.

 

[Thief]

are you a subject of this reality?

would God be a subject to His own creation?
(trick question)

 

[allfoak]

As an atheist, it is opportune for me that you have drawn this particular analogy. Consider:

Beauty - subjective, though anyone can easily wrap their minds around the concept. Once introduced, it becomes more or less second nature to recognize. It is easily understood why someone thinks of something as beautiful, even if we do not. It exists as a concept - useful in sharing positive experiences.

Love - subjective, not everyone loves the same people/things. It is the name given to the strongest of positive feelings toward a person, place, or thing. Again, when the concept is introduced, it becomes easy to express (even if only to yourself) the things you have love for. It exists as a concept - useful in sharing an understanding of what is most important to us.

Justice - subjective, not everyone agrees that "the punishment fits the crime," and there is endless debate on whether or not some things are even crimes requiring the implementation of "justice." It exists as a concept - useful for imparting the idea that we believe something needs to be done to curtail a particular behavior with negative consequences.

God - subjective, not everyone agrees on what God is, what His/Her/Its attributes are, how many gods there are, or if there are any at all. When the concept is introduced, it is more or less understood, but also more, less, or not at all accepted. He/She/It EXISTS AS A CONCEPT - seemingly useful for some who find it more comfortable to have a "go to" for explanations. Also useful for those who do not feel comfortable recognizing the subjective nature of things like "morality" or "justice," possibly because they feel ill-at-ease in making such choices on their own. Also useful for those who worry over death being an ultimate "end" to themselves, and looking for a way to be preserved for posterity.

So yes, God is very much like beauty, love and justice. There is no "proof" of any of them... and yet they "exist" (after a fashion) all the same.

We all live as if they are much more important than just a concept.
Somehow, i think they are.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

We all live as if they are much more important than just a concept.
Somehow, i think they are.

But you have to admit, no matter how important they are...
Beauty doesn't exist without a beholder.
Love doesn't exist without beings to feel it for each other.
Justice doesn't exist without a being feeling wronged and another being doing the wronging.
And lastly we have God - who very likely also doesn't exist without people to pose Him/Her/It to other people.

 

[allfoak]

But you have to admit, no matter how important they are...
Beauty doesn't exist without a beholder.
Love doesn't exist without beings to feel it for each other.
Justice doesn't exist without a being feeling wronged and another being doing the wronging.
And lastly we have God - who very likely also doesn't exist without people to pose Him/Her/It to other people.

I believe all of these things exist within.
Those who search find that which has always been there.
Beauty, Love, Justice, God.
Themselves.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I believe all of these things exist within.
Those who search find that which has always been there.
Beauty, Love, Justice, God.
Themselves.

I guess I just don't see the point in searching for "God." The other items on the list have their utility, "God" does not offer much that I can think of. Perhaps the ability to artificially base your own fortitude in what you pretend is something else - something you also pretend is stronger than yourself? I suppose that might grant one a level of stability/bravery/steadfastness greater than one could achieve on their own if they didn't feel confidence in themselves.

 

[Truthseeker]

For you, it is likely. It doesn't appear that you possess the necessary degree of connection with absolute reality for it to be any other way.


Demonstrably false. The masses did not need appeasing when the divine was revealed, as there was no such thing as democracy. Or if the masses needed palliatives to ease their everyday sufferings, they were fobbed off with ritual prostitution in the form of Asherahs & Astartes etc, and gods devoted to the same, Tammuz myths, the Queen of Heavan and the Babylonian trinity. i.e. Babylon. Yet a function of the bible is to prove that the Babylonian system of harlot religion that the masses delight in is false.

So in that sense, there is truth in the bible, in that it appears to deride the same pagan religious systems that you also have no faith in.



On the contrary. humanity is returning at a rapid rate to the Babylonian system, incorporating such "concrete truths" as men being equal to women. Lol!

The real religion, the one which connects with human reality, appears to be completely unknown to you. That is your epistemological problem, not a fault of the divine, as the divine has clearly imposed limits to knowing the divine that mandate a certain "attitude" of respect as a sine non qua - a respect that you evidently do not possess, and probably never will possess.

On the contrary. humanity is returning at a rapid rate to the Babylonian system, incorporating such "concrete truths" as men being equal to women. Lol!

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that men are better than women. Sure, the women in the Bible were under the women, but the Bible also condones slavery, but you don't say, do you, that slaves are less than their masters.

 

[outlawState]

On the contrary. humanity is returning at a rapid rate to the Babylonian system, incorporating such "concrete truths" as men being equal to women. Lol!

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that men are better than women. Sure, the women in the Bible were under the women, but the Bible also condones slavery, but you don't say, do you, that slaves are less than their masters.

The issue is not about judgement of the individual, or who's better that who. The issue is about spiritual hierarchies as defined in 1 Cor 11:3, which were established by God for all time. It defines modes and rules for behaviour. A 1 Cor 11:16 " If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God." When you enter God's church you obey God's rules for holiness. Outside of it, anything goes.

 

[Truthseeker]

The issue is not about judgement of the individual, or who's better that who. The issue is about spiritual hierarchies as defined in 1 Cor 11:3, which were established by God for all time. It defines modes and rules for behaviour. A 1 Cor 11:16 " If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God." When you enter God's church you obey God's rules for holiness. Outside of it, anything goes.

Is the command for slavery by Moses also for all time? Paul also condoned slavery, is that for all time? Nowhere in the text does it say or imply it is for all time.

 

[RedDragon94]

Some state they personally know their god, that they know it exists, why don't they share this knowledge and end the debate, the death and wholesale slaughter done in the name of different gods?

That's the Great Commission of every Christian.

Feelings from my limited understanding are just releases of chemicals in the brain, so is god a chemical?

Your limited understanding reveals that someone has greater understanding. The chemicals in your head are gifts to be used in holy worship of the thing you politely pass on knowing.

There are too many loop holes and obvious gaps in knowledge and understanding of our own existence and what exists around us for such inspiration to be "divine" That such a being would impart some of it's infinite knowledge upon us, only for us to document it, only to find later through our own devices that that given knowledge is incorrect.

Exactly, why put your full trust in science and human reasoning when you need a revelation of something greater than yourself?

These fabricated answers to the questions about the unknown served their purpose for a time until we had the capability to seek the answers for ourselves, But these crutches have been used for far too long and and we have been crippled by leaning on them for far too long.

Crippled by them how?

Imagine a world where everyone is invested in seeking the concrete truth and not squabbling as we have been doing for thousands of years over the name of a creator that has yet to have been discovered.

Concrete truth that you admit can change one day based on new information?

 

[blü 2]

God knows His creation.....
but we have been given freewill......in mind and heart
(you are indeed believing as you see fit)

Not only does God know [his] creation but being omnipotent and omniscient and omnipresent and perfect [he] knew the entire history of spacetime perfectly, down to the tiniest detail, before [he] made the universe. [He] can never be taken by surprise. [His] creatures have no choice but to move down the grooves of spacetime that [he] foresaw, indeed being omnipresent had already visited, and they have not the tiniest alternative, only the illusion of choice.

How could it be otherwise, given God's powers? Talk me through it.

 

[blü 2]

The matter that no-one can know God unless they follow a specified path determined by God has to be contrasted with the fact that God often tolerates those who know him not for a long time (not always though), in the hope that people will, as they age, ask themselves "why don't I know God?" "What is wrong with me that I don't him?" "Can God ever be known?"

EITHER God is omnipotent, and hence as pleases [him] omniscient, omnipresent and perfect, and therefore knew everything that would ever happen in the universe [he] intended to create, down to the tiniest detail, every thought, word and deed of every creature that would ever be, and created the universe knowing all that, so that the universe is the perfect outcome and reflection of [his] perfect will

OR God is not omnipotent, hence not omniscient, or omnipresent, or perfect, and made the universe blindly, not knowing what would happen, and had to wait some 14 billion years for H sap sap to crop up by chance on one of the maybe 1 to 20 septillion planets in the universe, an example of inefficiency that will never be matched

OR nature just got on with things and biochemistry happened on at least one of the planets of the universe and over 3.5 bn years or more produced H sap sap.

Which hypothesis best fits the facts we observe, do you think?

 

[sojourner]

I'm kinda the same, I'm a mormon so I believe in God and Jesus, and you know, this life is like a test. We aren't meant to prove God is real, cause if we did prove he was real then we would know for a surety. Then we would be under so much more condemnation for our sins. And just like tests, we are meant to learn here on earth by exercising our faith.
If we were to one day just prove God was there, then thats like a cheat sheet on a test. We wouldn't learn by faith or our own experiences, and then this life would be meaningless, since we are meant to learn while here on earth and prepare ourselves to meet God.
(That was longer than intended sorry)

For me it’s a whole lot more like, “Give a man a fish...” If God is a given, by virtue of having been proved, how in the world can we (as the Bible says) “work out our own salvation?” I think that everyone is different, and God is multifaceted, so that each one meets God on each’s terms. If God we’re proved, nothing would need to be worked out, and God would remain a cognitive proof, rather than an inner journey.

 

[sojourner]

The issue is not about judgement of the individual, or who's better that who. The issue is about spiritual hierarchies as defined in 1 Cor 11:3, which were established by God for all time. It defines modes and rules for behaviour. A 1 Cor 11:16 " If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice--nor do the churches of God." When you enter God's church you obey God's rules for holiness. Outside of it, anything goes.

You do realize that 1 Cor. Was written as a letter — not scripture — to a specific congregation in order to address specific concerns?

 

[allfoak]

I guess I just don't see the point in searching for "God." The other items on the list have their utility, "God" does not offer much that I can think of. Perhaps the ability to artificially base your own fortitude in what you pretend is something else - something you also pretend is stronger than yourself? I suppose that might grant one a level of stability/bravery/steadfastness greater than one could achieve on their own if they didn't feel confidence in themselves.

If you are searching for one you will find the other.
Know thyself.

 

[Trailblazer]

And lastly we have God - who very likely also doesn't exist without people to pose Him/Her/It to other people.

What people believe about God is not what makes God exist.
Logically speaking, God either exists or not.
If not even one person believed in God, God would still exist if God exists.
If everyone in the world believed in God, God would not exist unless God exists.

Nobody can ever prove that God exists because God is the Unsearchable Being.
All we can do is look at the evidence God provides and decide if it constitutes proof for us.
We cannot prove that God exists to others. Everyone has to prove that to themselves, or choose not to do so.