What makes religious people convienced that god(s) exist?

[Me Myself]

Blue is a color. There are many colors in the world.
Think of colors as sound, that is the frequencies between about 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz (those are the frequencies that most people can hear) reprecent colors.

Blue is the reprecented by a small range of frequencies.
Think of a note on a string on a guitar and the tighten or loosen the string slightly, the tones the string makes are all shades of blue.
You can tell the difference between different shades of the same color but you still give them the same basic name because they are very similar to each other.

Each color is reprecented by a small range of frequencies.
Where one color stops and another begin can be difficult to tell. Different people may have slightly different opinions on where blue ends an purple begins.

But blue by itself is nothing special, just like a note played on a guitar is nothing special by itself. But if you put different colors together things become interesting. Some colors go well together others don't, just like some combination of sounds are pleasing and others are not.

Watching something like a sunset is like listening to a piece of music.
Most people like watching the sunset, so I suppose you should think of the sunset as a piece of music that you like.
Each sunset is the same piece of music but played slightly different, like cover numbers. You know the basic tune which is being played out, but you don't know exactly how this version of the tune is going to sound.

Sorry, I get carried away. It was not sunset I was supposed to explain, but the color blue.
Well, as I said, blue is just a range of frequencies.
Many people associate a color with things which contains a lot of that color.
For example, when I think of the color blue I think of the sky on a summer day, such a sky can be very blue. So blue for me is a summer day.
Many other things are blue, so other people may think of different things when thinking of the color blue; a bit like how the same piece of music makes different people think of different things.

See...

That was my attempt at explaining the color blue to a blind person.
That explanation will not make a blind person know what blue looks like, but hopefully it will give that person some understanding of what colors like the color blue are like.

People have tried to explain what smelling farts are like, and I think I sort of get it even though I have never smelled one in my life.

Why can't people who have had religious experiences which helped convience them of the existence of god(s) try to explain that?

1- Awesome

2- But I was talking about blue the way it "looks" like. Religious experiences are their own explanation.

It`s really hard to explain it if you haven`t felt it. Of course I am merely giving you a "believer" point of view, but I dont think you`ll go to hell for not understanding nor anything silly like that, so I simply accept that you wont understand unless you do and that there is nothing really wrong with that.

 

[Quintessence]

Speaking from a personal standpoint, it really isn't about being "convinced." When I discovered a religion existed that spoke to me, I went through a process rediscovering what the word "god" can mean. The crux of belief (or not) in the divine revolves around how you define that term. I had to unlearn what I had been told "god" means - which was limited to classical monotheism - and take responsibility for defining what that term means for me. That meant adopting a view of the divine that is pantheistic, animistic, and polytheistic. With such a view of the divine, no convincing is needed; the existence of the gods is self-evident and obvious. It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of me deciding what god-concept I want to work with and doing it because I want to. I think the universe is an amazingly beautiful and awe-inspiring place. It's sacred and it is worthy of reverence and respect. The word "god" describes that sense of awe and reverence quite well, I think. Immanent god-concepts require little or no faith. It stares me in the face every moment of my existence in the shining of Sun and reflections of Moon.

 

[lunakilo]

Speaking from a personal standpoint, it really isn't about being "convinced." When I discovered a religion existed that spoke to me, I went through a process rediscovering what the word "god" can mean. The crux of belief (or not) in the divine revolves around how you define that term. I had to unlearn what I had been told "god" means - which was limited to classical monotheism - and take responsibility for defining what that term means for me. That meant adopting a view of the divine that is pantheistic, animistic, and polytheistic. With such a view of the divine, no convincing is needed; the existence of the gods is self-evident and obvious. It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of me deciding what god-concept I want to work with and doing it because I want to. I think the universe is an amazingly beautiful and awe-inspiring place. It's sacred and it is worthy of reverence and respect. The word "god" describes that sense of awe and reverence quite well, I think. Immanent god-concepts require little or no faith. It stares me in the face every moment of my existence in the shining of Sun and reflections of Moon.

Yes, I suppose you can see the universe itself and everyting in it as god or gods. If so I can see that it the existence of the gods is self-evident and obvious.

 

[javajo]

While I believe in God because it is self-evident (to me) that God created us and gave us a conscience and because of my experience throughout life of him always being there for me thus my trust in him has grown more and more, and because of his Word and the historical, archeological even scientific, medical and prophetic truths surrounding it, I also believe from testimony of people who had near death experiences and whose lives were profoundly and forever changed by these experiences. There was a 38 year old man who was an atheist and basically died for a short time and he went to Hell but cried to Christ to help him and he brought him back. He was operated on and lived and became a minister. This huge change did not come from a mere hallucination or whatnot, but he believed it was real, hence the great and lasting change. The more testimony I have heard and lives changed because of faith in Christ convince me. But, mainly, for me it came from hearing the Good News, which starts out as bad news, that I was a lost sinner in need of a Savior, and the strong conviction I felt from the Holy Spirit that I needed to trust Christ (I was young, I hear its harder to feel it as one gets older). And from then, seeing the difference in the lives of true Christians who are actually growing and maturing compared to others. The gap is becoming more and more clear these days...And seeing God work on me and seeing his mercy and care for me. And, mostly, from God's Word and my studies surrounding that. But that is just my experience in this life, my beliefs, that's all.

 

[Man of Faith]

Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "Experience isn't valid"
Person A: "Why do people think there is a God"

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It`s like describing blue to a person that has been blind by birth.

Hmm. I think it's more like demonstrating that you have a child to someone who hasn't felt the kind of love that a parent has for their child, which is something that happens all the time.

You don't have to "grok" an idea to confirm that the underlying concepts are true.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "Experience isn't valid"
Person A: "Why do people think there is a God"

Or...


Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "How do you know what 'experiencing God' feels like? How do you know that what you experienced is actually God?"
Person B: "But I have experienced him"
Person A: "But how do you know?"
Person B: "I just do."
Person A: "That's no answer."

 

[Willamena]

Or...


Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "How do you know what 'experiencing God' feels like? How do you know that what you experienced is actually God?"
Person B: "But I have experienced him"
Person A: "But how do you know?"
Person B: "I just do."
Person A: "That's no answer."

Person C: "Have either of you experienced reality?"

 

[Curious George]

Or...


Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "How do you know what 'experiencing God' feels like? How do you know that what you experienced is actually God?"
Person B: "But I have experienced him"
Person A: "But how do you know?"
Person B: "I just do."
Person A: "That's no answer."

Or

Person A: "how do you know there is a God"
Person B: " I have experienced them"
Person A: "isn't that interesting that is what persons C through z told me also and their version of God is completely different than yours, in fact one even was told by their experience of God to kill all her children. So, is their experience equally valid?"
Person B: "No"
Person A: "oh, so what is the difference between your experience and their experience?"
Person B: Mine was real
Person A: and their experience was not?
Person B: Correct
Person A: So you are saying you can trust your own experience but not all of those others?
Person B: Correct
Person A:Well I haven't experienced God and since you told me I can't trust other peoples experience of God- Do you like my hat?
Person B: I do not
Person A: Good by
Person B: Good by

 

[jasonwill2]

I have this VERY religious friend who keeps trying to convience me that I should believe in God because if I don't I will burn in Hell forever (which I am told is not a nice thing)

I have tried to explain to her that what she says just doesn't make sense to me.
She could just as well be telling me that 1+1=3 and I should believe in that because if I don't I will burn in Hell forever.
In my experience 1+1 does not equal 3, so I could not truely believe that even if it would save me from going to Hell.
Likewise, in my experience there are no gods. I have never met one, so I could not truely believe in the existence of god(s).
(I am trying to get my friend to accept the idea that the two of us will not be hanging out together in heaven )

So I keep wondering why some people are so convienced in the existence og god(s).
I assume that those people must have somehow met their god, why else would they think he exists?
But If they have met a god why is it so difficult to explain to others?

What am I missing here?

I've meet demons and such is why, otherwise i would of probably turned to non-religious atheism if not LaVeyanism.

 

[lunakilo]

Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "Experience isn't valid"
Person A: "Why do people think there is a God"

That is not exactly how the conversation is in this thread. It is more like:

Person A: "How do you know there is a God?"
Person B: "I have experienced him"
Person A: "Experienced him how?"
Person B: "It's personal and there is no way I am even going to try and explain it to you"
Person A: ""

 

[jasonwill2]

I';ve expereinced demons by them touching me. One touched me last night as detailed here in the third paragraph:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3024560-post15.html

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Why do you assume experiences are with the gods, rather than just what a theist experiences just makes them feel like the gods are with them? The experience could be as simple as finding a pencil on the ground, different people have different mindsets, a theist will never convince an atheist, and an atheist will never convince a theist. A Buddhist will never convince a Satanist and a Satanist never a Buddhist. There is good logic coming from both, but seemingly the only way to judge your logic as good logic is from your own side.

 

[lunakilo]

While I believe in God because it is self-evident (to me) that God created us and gave us a conscience and because of my experience throughout life of him always being there for me...

See, this is what I am interested in hearing about.
Can you be more specific?

...thus my trust in him has grown more and more, and because of his Word and the historical, archeological even scientific, medical and prophetic truths surrounding it, I also believe from testimony of people who had near death experiences and whose lives were profoundly and forever changed by these experiences. There was a 38 year old man who was an atheist and basically died for a short time and he went to Hell but cried to Christ to help him and he brought him back. He was operated on and lived and became a minister. This huge change did not come from a mere hallucination or whatnot, but he believed it was real, hence the great and lasting change. The more testimony I have heard and lives changed because of faith in Christ convince me. But, mainly, for me it came from hearing the Good News, which starts out as bad news, that I was a lost sinner in need of a Savior, and the strong conviction I felt from the Holy Spirit that I needed to trust Christ (I was young, I hear its harder to feel it as one gets older). And from then, seeing the difference in the lives of true Christians who are actually growing and maturing compared to others. The gap is becoming more and more clear these days...And seeing God work on me and seeing his mercy and care for me. And, mostly, from God's Word and my studies surrounding that. But that is just my experience in this life, my beliefs, that's all.

Which fits 9-10ths_Penguin's theory:

All of us construct mental models of how the world works. We then test these models (whether we realize it or not) against reality: basically, when something happens that violates our expectations (i.e. when our mental model's predictions fail), we interpret this as a problem with our model and adjust it accordingly. The rest of the time, when our mental models agree with what we experience, we interpret this as a sign that our mental models are sound.

... and that's where the problem is: we tend not to look at our mental models piece-by-piece and test each component individually. Instead, we tend to take agreement between our mental model and what we see in the world as support for our whole model. However, this makes us put unwarranted trust in the portions of our mental model that aren't actually tested very often.

 

[Sethen]

To me gods are "faces"I attribute to phenomena that exists within my world, all that governs my life and ways of thinking and perceiving the world around me. They are somewhat subconscious energies that I have unlocked and manifest in my life. They are collective, and, what I mean by this is that they are everywhere, they do exist outside of me but my mind has gathered them(from repetitive exposure to certain phenomena that they relate to) in such a way that they have become forms of their own. They are symbols of the collective phenomena that has made an impact in my world, they are archetypes. I could argue both ways on whether I need them or not but for now they are my way of connecting with the world around me and a means of self-expression.

 

[lunakilo]

I';ve expereinced demons by them touching me. One touched me last night as detailed here in the third paragraph:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3024560-post15.html

That sounds like a very interesting experience. Thanks for sharing.
I can see how an experience like that would shape ones belives.

 

[lunakilo]

Why do you assume experiences are with the gods, rather than just what a theist experiences just makes them feel like the gods are with them?

Is there a difference?
If I were to feel the precense of a god I think I would be quite convienced that that god actually existed.
I would call that an experience with a god.

The experience could be as simple as finding a pencil on the ground, different people have different mindsets, a theist will never convince an atheist, and an atheist will never convince a theist. A Buddhist will never convince a Satanist and a Satanist never a Buddhist. There is good logic coming from both, but seemingly the only way to judge your logic as good logic is from your own side.

It sounds to me like you are repeting 9-10ths_Penguin's argument from post #4 (he just put it better )

...

 

[Sir Doom]

I generally believe what benefits me the most. I have a solid conviction that godhood is probably the pinnacle of existence, therefore it follows that I must believe such a thing is possible. I'm not exactly sure how yet, but if I stop believing in gods than the possibility disappears. I'm not interested in that option. I can't really understand why anyone would be.

 

[lunakilo]

I generally believe what benefits me the most. I have a solid conviction that godhood is probably the pinnacle of existence, therefore it follows that I must believe such a thing is possible. I'm not exactly sure how yet, but if I stop believing in gods than the possibility disappears. I'm not interested in that option. I can't really understand why anyone would be.

Hmm, not quite sure what to make of your post.

So you believe what benefits you the most. You don't bother to examine if those beliefs are wrong? You just believe it because it seems to benifit you?

I have a solid conviction that being able to levitate would be really cool, but I don't see how that means that I must believe that it must be possible for people to learn how to levitate.
Likewise I don't see why a conviction that godhood is probably the pinnacle of existence would mean that gods must exist.

Sounds to me like you try to convience yourself that certain things are real because it would be really cool if they were.

 

[Orias]

I have this VERY religious friend who keeps trying to convince me that I should believe in God because if I don't I will burn in Hell forever (which I am told is not a nice thing)

First of all, let me clarify that not all Gods seek for your soul to burn in Hell.

Actually, it is within my opinion, that most people that will burn in Hell, are very aware of the existence of said God(s), yet they deny them for whatever reasons that get them off.

Aside that, I'm not one for firmly believing in Heaven or Hell, I am actually an advocate of M-theory, which if you know anything about, supposes that there are indeed many dimensions of existence, besides the planes that our senses are keen upon observing.

I have tried to explain to her that what she says just doesn't make sense to me.
She could just as well be telling me that 1+1=3 and I should believe in that because if I don't I will burn in Hell forever.

She could be, but I don't know your friend nor what she believes in, even more specifically which religion she claims to be apart of. Most religions are highly misrepresented, as most people that represent religion only do so for their own gain, which highly involves money which as you may have guessed, highly involves dishonesty.

In my experience 1+1 does not equal 3, so I could not truely believe that even if it would save me from going to Hell.

1+1=2, all logical people know this. Therefore it would only be logical that before our fathers, another father existed.

Likewise, in my experience there are no gods. I have never met one, so I could not truely believe in the existence of god(s).

When it comes to most people who don't believe in God, they think of the flying spaghetti monster, which in my opinion, most advocates of said God don't believe in him in such a way. I have observed that many of the faithful actually advocate strong metaphors, whether or not they are aware of it is regardless. Because they advocate something that allowed our very existence.

It is within my experience, that most who believe in God sincerely believe so, so I would take their sincerity for all its worth. You don't have to follow their exact word, nor do you have to bow the word of man. You just have the realize that when most people speak of God, they mean their God. Which may or may not correlate with your exact understanding of God.

So I keep wondering why some people are so convienced in the existence of god(s).

Probably because to those who believe in God (whether its completely defined or not) it is obvious to them. Those who do not find it obvious, need to be slapped in the face to understand that, had they not been aware of the actions compelling them to deny, they would likely not be aware of their actions that compel them to believe their disbelief as being functional to the development of God.

I assume that those people must have somehow met their god, why else would they think he exists?

Some people don't need to be told or taught that getting hit is harmful, just like some people need to experience pain to recognize it.

Its all extremely subjective, albeit, misunderstood by most.

But If they have met a god why is it so difficult to explain to others?

Probably because they were never meant to explain it. For the same reason a plumber will not do an electricians job, unless he knows how to do so.

Do you follow? I can re-clarify if needed.

What am I missing here?

Not much, you ask good and sincere questions, I would expect that you would follow up with the same if you are confused. Otherwise, I am sure you know, for all intent and purpose, why you are asking the questions you present.