• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yes, and still alive. Jimmy Carter is 99, and if he lives to October 1st, he will reach 100.
His wife lived to be 96, she died last November. So at least he hasn't been alone a long time.

Carter remains the nation's longest-living president; he is 99 years old. His 100th birthday is on October 1, 2024.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
His wife lived to be 96, she died last November. So at least he hasn't been alone a long time.

Carter remains the nation's longest-living president; he is 99 years old. His 100th birthday is on October 1, 2024.
Yes, I just read he "hopes" to vote for Harris in a Wikipedia article. He also is not conscious every day, according to his grandson.

The love of Rosalynn and Jimmy Carter is legendary.
 
Last edited:

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
No it isn't. We do not worship the "same God."
In the end, I don't think it matters if different people have a different conception about God. Just that they believe in the religion they are following, which has teachings that produce good fruits, and they actually strive to live those, and also have a connection within themselves with God.
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Maybe this will refresh your memory:
Yep, It was said a lot, I see. Don Adams died, Barbara Feldon is still alive at 91. Of Edward Platt as chief was older, so I know he can't still be alive.

Agent 99 was smarter and more capable than agent 86, that's for sure. She was a capable agent, which made her a good role model for women, and showing her as capable was ahead of its time. On Wikipedia, it says that Don Adams won three emmy awards for Maxwell Smart. The show is described as a combination of James Bond films, and Inspector Clouseau films (Pink Panther). Mel Brooks had a co-creator named Buck Henry. Mel Brooks said "No one had ever done a show about an idiot before. I decided to be the first."
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
Maybe this will refresh your memory:
Yep, It was said a lot, I see. Don Adams died, Barbara Feldon is still alive at 91. Of Edward Platt as chief was older, so I know he can't still be alive.

Agent 99 was smarter and more capable than agent 86, that's for sure. She was a capable agent, which made her a good role model for women, and showing her as capable was ahead of its time. On Wikipedia, it says that Don Adams won three emmy awards for Maxwell Smart. The show is described as a combination of James Bond films, and Inspector Clouseau films (Pink Panther). Mel Brooks had a co-creator named Buck Henry. Mel Brooks said "No one had ever done a show about an idiot before. I decided to be the first."

His next important project was "The Producers" which featured a musical as part of it that included the song "Springtime for Hitler". The core idea for the film was that he wanted to have some sort of satire about Hitler with a song "Springtime for Hitler". I loved that movie. In it Brooks featured Gene Wilder for the first time, who went on to star in other Mel Brooks movies, like "Blazing Saddles" and "Young Frankenstein". I loved Gene Wilder.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
In the end, I don't think it matters if different people have a different conception about God. Just that they believe in the religion they are following, which has teachings that produce good fruits, and they actually strive to live those, and also have a connection within themselves with God.
God decides what happens to a person in the longer run. He knows each person in order to make a judgment.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
In the end, I don't think it matters if different people have a different conception about God. Just that they believe in the religion they are following, which has teachings that produce good fruits, and they actually strive to live those, and also have a connection within themselves with God.
Or, just skip the gods and religions altogether and pursue moral excellence according to your conscience. Don't have one? Religions can't fix that.

You place more value in these religions than I do. Really, I look at the religious and I don't see better people. If you're a good religious person, you would have been a good atheistic humanist. If you're a bad guy outside of religion, then you'd be a bad guy in religion, and probably making money from it.

Too many of these people seem to think that good moral behavior consists of being polite and not speaking obscenities, going to church every week, promoting their faith, and contributing to the collection plate. In your faith, one also needs to talk about world peace.

All of this is in place of action. A friendly smile is not kindness. Telling people that you love them or that God loves them is not love. Giving money to the church is charity for the church and clergy, but little goes to the needy.

In America it seems that moral behavior consists of imposing Christianity on unwilling non-Christians by criminalizing abortion or trying to take their contraceptives or IVF from them, because one has been taught that that is moral behavior because their god expects it.

Also, trying to coerce LGBTQ+ to obey their understanding of their god's will. All of this is called love, and most believers complacently accept that understanding. As I said, love is action. It's action in service to the needs of another. It involves protecting, teaching, and sharing according to the needs and desires of the object of one's love, not what you wish to impose on them according to what you believe your god wants of you.
Is there any evidence disproving a god?
None is needed.

Just as you don't need evidence to believe in one (or call prophecy or life sufficient evidence to conclude that a god exists), the critically thinking empiricist doesn't need evidence against gods to be an atheistic humanist. The lack of it is enough.

Would it matter to you if there were compelling evidence that your god doesn't exist? Would you see it and adapt accordingly? Most believers don't. I've posted several times that the god of the Christian Bible, who created the world in six days including an original pair of human beings doesn't exist, but it has never had any apparent impact. People go on worshiping it anyway.

The evidence that the creation myth is as false as any other creation myth doesn't matter to any Chistian that I've encountered. Some simply disbelieve the science, and some call the myths allegory, but none in my experience say, "I guess the Bible was wrong." These are the same people who can't see internal contradictions or who consider biblical prophecy strong evidence of divine prescience.

My point is that people who didn't come to their beliefs using evidence can't be budged from them whatever evidence arises.

But they do represent having an interest in reason and evidence. Most believers don't like to say that they don't need or use it just as they are averse to calling the Bible wrong.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Or, just skip the gods and religions altogether and pursue moral excellence according to your conscience. Don't have one? Religions can't fix that.

You place more value in these religions than I do. Really, I look at the religious and I don't see better people. If you're a good religious person, you would have been a good atheistic humanist. If you're a bad guy outside of religion, then you'd be a bad guy in religion, and probably making money from it.

Too many of these people seem to think that good moral behavior consists of being polite and not speaking obscenities, going to church every week, promoting their faith, and contributing to the collection plate. In your faith, one also needs to talk about world peace.

All of this is in place of action. A friendly smile is not kindness. Telling people that you love them or that God loves them is not love. Giving money to the church is charity for the church and clergy, but little goes to the needy.

In America it seems that moral behavior consists of imposing Christianity on unwilling non-Christians by criminalizing abortion or trying to take their contraceptives or IVF from them, because one has been taught that that is moral behavior because their god expects it.

Also, trying to coerce LGBTQ+ to obey their understanding of their god's will. All of this is called love, and most believers complacently accept that understanding. As I said, love is action. It's action in service to the needs of another. It involves protecting, teaching, and sharing according to the needs and desires of the object of one's love, not what you wish to impose on them according to what you believe your god wants of you.

None is needed.

Just as you don't need evidence to believe in one (or call prophecy or life sufficient evidence to conclude that a god exists), the critically thinking empiricist doesn't need evidence against gods to be an atheistic humanist. The lack of it is enough.

Would it matter to you if there were compelling evidence that your god doesn't exist? Would you see it and adapt accordingly? Most believers don't. I've posted several times that the god of the Christian Bible, who created the world in six days including an original pair of human beings doesn't exist, but it has never had any apparent impact. People go on worshiping it anyway.

The evidence that the creation myth is as false as any other creation myth doesn't matter to any Chistian that I've encountered. Some simply disbelieve the science, and some call the myths allegory, but none in my experience say, "I guess the Bible was wrong." These are the same people who can't see internal contradictions or who consider biblical prophecy strong evidence of divine prescience.

My point is that people who didn't come to their beliefs using evidence can't be budged from them whatever evidence arises.

But they do represent having an interest in reason and evidence. Most believers don't like to say that they don't need or use it just as they are averse to calling the Bible wrong.
I needed evidence to show me there is a God. You may not agree that it is evidence, but for me it is certainly evidence. To me it is like something very, very precious, so I do not share the evidence with everyone, but as far as I am concerned there is no doubt that it is evidence that God exists.
 
Top