Do you believe in God and why

[mauGR1]

42 minutes ago, ravip said:

Oh la la... God said to forgive. If someone slaps you turn the other cheek etc. A firm believer can avoid an argument easily, me thinks... ????

Are you confusing me with Jesus ?

Ok, you are forgiven ????

[partington]

7 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

If the opinions of a comedian are being posted to make a point, then there should be no problem highlighting the opinions of well respected scientists.

To say that the opinion of a grocer or plumber carries the same weight as that of a world class scientist is a feeble attempt at downplaying their views because they are inconvenient. Otherwise we would now have millions of quotes about life from Johnny the plumber and Jimmy the grocer on the internet.
"Sometimes life is like a blocked sewer pipe. Just use the plunger of your imagination and you'll be free"
????????????

On the contrary, the idea that experts in one field have no particular special authority in another is a well recognised feature of rational thinking.

 

The fact that you are unaware of this does not mean the concept is wrong: it means your knowledge is deficient.

 

This concept even has a (slightly jokey) name: "ultracrepidarianism". See https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ultracrepidarianism

 

"Ultracrepidarianism is the tendency for people to confidently make authoritative pronouncements in matters above or outside one's level of knowledge. Often, those pronouncements fall entirely outside the ultracrepidarian's realm of legitimate expertise.

[...]

The lesson is: being an expert means being an expert at something — and "something" is specific, not universal. In other words, various forms of expertise are not interchangeable.

[...]

 

If the quoted "authority" has no expertise in the relevant field, then their authority is irrelevant to the truth of the matter.

For example, a claim that "the speed of light is about 299,792,458 meters per second^{[note 1]}" could be supported with the statements of physicists who've studied the issue; it could not be supported with the statements of a manufacturer of crayons, or even those of a biologist or chemist (that is, persons who are legitimate scientists, but in a different field). 

[...]

Ultracrepidarianism would enter the picture if a microbial geneticist (or a gherkin importer), rather than someone in a relevant field of physics, were to claim that the currently-accepted value for the speed of light is meaningfully incorrect.'

 

[Sunmaster]

6 hours ago, partington said:

On the contrary, the idea that experts in one field have no particular special authority in another is a well recognised feature of rational thinking.

 

The fact that you are unaware of this does not mean the concept is wrong: it means your knowledge is deficient.

 

This concept even has a (slightly jokey) name: "ultracrepidarianism". See https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ultracrepidarianism

 

"Ultracrepidarianism is the tendency for people to confidently make authoritative pronouncements in matters above or outside one's level of knowledge. Often, those pronouncements fall entirely outside the ultracrepidarian's realm of legitimate expertise.

[...]

The lesson is: being an expert means being an expert at something — and "something" is specific, not universal. In other words, various forms of expertise are not interchangeable.

[...]

 

If the quoted "authority" has no expertise in the relevant field, then their authority is irrelevant to the truth of the matter.

For example, a claim that "the speed of light is about 299,792,458 meters per second^{[note 1]}" could be supported with the statements of physicists who've studied the issue; it could not be supported with the statements of a manufacturer of crayons, or even those of a biologist or chemist (that is, persons who are legitimate scientists, but in a different field). 

[...]

Ultracrepidarianism would enter the picture if a microbial geneticist (or a gherkin importer), rather than someone in a relevant field of physics, were to claim that the currently-accepted value for the speed of light is meaningfully incorrect.'

 

Well, in this case, ultracrepidarianism must go both ways then, for example when materialists claim there is no higher power. They might be experts in their field regarding the material world, but have no authority whatsoever to deny the existence of Spirit. All they can offer in that respect is an opinion, which will be equal to any other opinion that comes from an non-authoritative source.

Now, if we go to look for people who have actually studied, meditated upon, experienced and ultimately realized Spirit, the so-called real AUTHORITIES of that field, then what they say must have more value, weight and truth than just an opinion brought forward by some scientists. 
Seems to me quite logical, but in reality this is rarely the case. More often than not, when a scientist speaks about being atheist, it is used to support atheism in general as if it were a fact. 

[mauGR1]

14 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Well, in this case, ultracrepidarianism must go both ways then, for example when materialists claim there is no higher power. They might be experts in their field regarding the material world, but have no authority whatsoever to deny the existence of Spirit. All they can offer in that respect is an opinion, which will be equal to any other opinion that comes from an non-authoritative source.

Now, if we go to look for people who have actually studied, meditated upon, experienced and ultimately realized Spirit, the so-called real AUTHORITIES of that field, then what they say must have more value, weight and truth than just an opinion brought forward by some scientists. 
Seems to me quite logical, but in reality this is rarely the case. More often than not, when a scientist speaks about being atheist, it is used to support atheism in general as if it were a fact. 

But, but, the materialists will say that it's all mumbo-jumbo if you cannot prove it.

They refuse to look at the big picture, their little minds being focused on their little gains.

[Skeptic7]

2 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

But, but, the materialists will say that it's all mumbo-jumbo if you cannot prove it.

They refuse to look at the big picture, their little minds being focused on their little gains.

Complete absurdity. Nice that you're staying in your lane bro. 

 

Woo-sters haven't even a picture....so much as a big picture. Little gains forward are far better than none...or stuck in reverse. And even a little mind is far better than a total void. 

[Sunmaster]

23 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

Complete absurdity. Nice that you're staying in your lane bro. 

 

Woo-sters haven't even a picture....so much as a big picture. Little gains forward are far better than none...or stuck in reverse. And even a little mind is far better than a total void. 

LOL 

The only total void in this thread comes from your "comments", and ironically enough, that void is there for everyone to see. 
For a change, how about you bring some of your own ideas to the discussion, instead of hiding behind the (valuable) comments of those you deem like-minded and spouting nonsense? 
Perhaps I'm asking too much?

[mauGR1]

21 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

LOL 

The only total void in this thread comes from your "comments", and ironically enough, that void is there for everyone to see. 
For a change, how about you bring some of your own ideas to the discussion, instead of hiding behind the (valuable) comments of those you deem like-minded and spouting nonsense? 
Perhaps I'm asking too much?

Well, the fact that some of the materialistic folks are still following this thread is quite revealing.

Every one at a certain age start to realise that a purely materialistic existence has no meaning at all, then doubts start to emerge, apparently from nowhere.

Eat, sleep, reproduce, any animal can do that, monkeys enjoy their jumping, horses enjoy their running, pigs like rolling in the mud, but humans need something more.

The divine spirit is a spark which is in every human, why some people are trying so hard to deny it, i can only explain with a successful brainwashing operated by bad teachers.

[ravip]

42 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, the fact that some of the materialistic folks are still following this thread is quite revealing.

Every one at a certain age start to realise that a purely materialistic existence has no meaning at all, then doubts start to emerge, apparently from nowhere.

Eat, sleep, reproduce, any animal can do that, monkeys enjoy their jumping, horses enjoy their running, pigs like rolling in the mud, but humans need something more.

The divine spirit is a spark which is in every human, why some people are trying so hard to deny it, i can only explain with a successful brainwashing operated by bad teachers.

Just my thoughts on your comment.

Every one at a certain age start to realise that a purely materialistic existence has no meaning at all, then doubts start to emerge, apparently from nowhere...

When one is young, healthy and doing OK, he/she enjoys life. Come sickness, age and bankruptcy the doubts you mention emerge. Humans need a 'helping hand' when in desperate situations and God is always the easiest to cling onto. Also, the fear of the life beyond, tends to bring up the same feelings. IMHO

 

[xylophone]

I occasionally glance at this thread to see what's going on, not out of any expectation that I will find something profoundly new and "life altering" and for that reason I am not seriously following it, however I see that you are, and I can understand why.

 

As I posted earlier, there are always going to be humans out there who want to believe in something, or indeed have to believe in something, because that's the way they are, and as for someone posting that folks like you, me and others "refuse to look at the big picture" well in my opinion the big picture is that it is a load of old codswallop, mainly that many humans need for whatever reason.

 

Looking at the big picture we see examples since time immemorial of the stupidity of human beings wanting to believe, and as I mentioned before, ranging from corn dollies, to tree spirits to effigies and so on.

 

The problem is it gets worse because you have the mormons (called god botherers by a friend of mine) who come knocking on your door, steadfastly believing that sometime in the mid-1800s a man called Joseph Smith was guided by an angel to some buried book, and thereby started the mormon religion (and raking in millions of dollars into the bargain).

 

Try convincing a mormon that none of this is true and it is like banging your head against a brick wall, much the same as it is with others of similar ilk.

 

Then there are other "religions", which have different belief systems and are just as stupid. Scientology comes to mind, invented by a tug boat captain and comic book writer, and this has believers as well! 

 

Looking at the big picture, it gets even worse because we have Young Earth Creationism, a religion which believes that Earth and man were created about 10,000 years ago, this despite fossilised remains going back many millions of years, and even these people have a following. Yes they sincerely believe the 10,000 years bit – – amazing!

 

In the same context, people believe in the devil, spirits, demons, angels, resurrection and, and........many other weird and wonderful things.

 

There have been efforts by religious folk to try and reconcile the difference between the belief systems that people have and the reality of such things as evolution, linking the two together for want of better terminology, but that is only a way in which to try and bolster the rapidly falling numbers that the church, and likewise, are experiencing as people move away from the fairy stories because they find it difficult to believe them – – this especially now that science has shown that primitive forms of life can be made in the laboratory, as happened eons ago to start life on earth.

 

And an interesting story for you on evolution, which many of the god botherers don't believe in..........in 1971, biologists moved five adult pairs of Italian wall lizards from their home island of Pod Kopiste, in the South Adriatic Sea, to the neighboring island of Pod Mrcaru. Thirty six years later, researchers have shown that introducing these small, green-backed lizards, Podarcis sicula, to a new environment caused them to undergo rapid and large-scale evolutionary changes in shape, size and digestive tracts, to cope with a changed environment. 

 

Evolution at work... not a God, or a spirit or a whatever, just evolution. Of course the believers will say that it is proof of a god because he made it happen!!! Yeah sure he looked after them a lot better than he has done the victims of many world wars, or indeed the Holocaust!

 

Still the believers will believe and worship effigies and books, the spirit worshippers will believe and worship tree spirits and even their holy spirits, reincarnaters will believe, and there are even people out there who believe that we/earth are only 10,000 years old – – enough said.

 

Save your time @Skeptic7 and let these poor people have their belief systems as it is of no detriment to you if they want to believe in fairy stories!
 

[canuckamuck]

 I have learned over the years that a lot of the negativity towards spirituality is a result of fear. Denying spirituality is a defense mechanism.

Ironically, religion is also a defense mechanism. Religion in most cases is an admission of a spiritual world, but the religion provides a set of rules so that the adherent can be relieved of the mystery. The rules give steps to be followed. So the fear of the unknown is somewhat assuaged.  

 

[luckyluke]

Still not understand why some believers, and non believers feel the need to try to convince the others. 

 

Why not simply accept that we all have an own proper opinion, which is not better/correct or worse/false than another one;

and live in peace and harmony together. 

[Sunmaster]

Just now, luckyluke said:

Still not understand why some believers, and non believers feel the need to try to convince the others. 

 

Why not simply accept that we all have an own proper opinion, which is not better/correct or worse/false than another one;

and live in peace and harmony together. 

I don't think anyone here expects others to change their belief systems simply by reading a few comments on TV. What I personally would expect though, especially from people who claim to be so rational, is to rationally look at things that are presented to them and engage them in a constructive and productive discussion. 

The existence of the kundalini energy for example, the energy that is inherent in every living human being, is not an opinion. It has been well documented throughout 1000s of years and is now slowly being investigated using scientific methods, which (not surprisingly) are validating this ancient knowledge. For now only in its most basic (physical) aspect, but who knows what the future holds. You can have an opinion about what it is, where it comes from or what it does....but you can't deny its existence.

Is it only a physiological, natural force, or is it a divine spiritual force, is it both? Whatever you want to call it, the fact remains that it is real and worth discussing and exploring.
Maybe, just maybe, it holds the key to a deeper understanding of our place in the universe. If that's not worth investigating, I don't know what is.
 

Of course everyone is entitled to his opinion, that is not the point, but not all opinions (and belief systems!) are equal (like another poster pointed out: "ultracrepidarianism"). Those who have authority in a certain field carry more weight than others without. 
The problem starts when an opinion, which is based on insufficient data, is presented as a fact and anyone questioning this "fact" gets written off as a delusional fool. 

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds are not able to discuss anything.

[mauGR1]

58 minutes ago, xylophone said:

let these poor people have their belief systems as it is of no detriment to you if they want to believe in fairy stories!
 

You don't quote me directly, but, as you are repeatedly referring to the "big picture" i was talking about in a previous post, i have to give you an answer.

You made several sarcastic examples of beliefs which are not mine, nor other poster's on this thread, that surprises me a lot, since normally i enjoy your posts and your spirit of observation.

So, to look at the "big picture" means, for example, to understand that, despite having an "ego", we are part of a whole, that includes visible and invisible things and beings.

To look at the "big picture" means that if you feed materialism, you feed greed, and, as far as i know, there is enough greed around in this world, as you can see with your eyes.

Now, if somebody told you that believing in material possessions is better than believing in eternal justice, that is a fairy tale imho.

 

[luckyluke]

Sunmaster, your reasoning and explaining is to complicated for me, simple mortal. 

 

If one has to understand all these complexity to be able to believe or not, it is obvious that "religion/believing" is not for everyone. 

 

 

I keep it simple;

as "non-believer" I try to do good, and not bad intentionally. 

 

I have much respect for the "believers" who do the same. 

 

I am 71+ now, I will continue to do the same as much I can. 

 

Death can happen quickly, or not now, and I am curious, if there is"something" or not? 

 

However I will not change my way of living/doing.

 

Nor my opinion, unless there is suddenly something what I consider as tangible facts, not what others consider as being. 

 

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, ravip said:

Just my thoughts on your comment.

Every one at a certain age start to realise that a purely materialistic existence has no meaning at all, then doubts start to emerge, apparently from nowhere...

When one is young, healthy and doing OK, he/she enjoys life. Come sickness, age and bankruptcy the doubts you mention emerge. Humans need a 'helping hand' when in desperate situations and God is always the easiest to cling onto. Also, the fear of the life beyond, tends to bring up the same feelings. IMHO

 

I find your comment reasonable, i have no objection.

The fact that "God is always the easiest to cling onto" doesn't mean that s/he doesn't exist.

[yodsak]

[ravip]

19 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

I find your comment reasonable, i have no objection.

The fact that "God is always the easiest to cling onto" doesn't mean that s/he doesn't exist.

The grey area is that there are so many "God's" spread around on this planet, how could one guarantee that the "God" one believes is the genuine one and the others are fake?

 

[yodsak]

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, ravip said:

The grey area is that there are so many "God's" spread around on this planet, how could one guarantee that the "God" one believes is the genuine one and the others are fake?

 

If you gave it a little thought, it would be obvious to you that humans, built as they are, are just trying to describe something which is not really possible to describe.

Suppose you are able to communicate with dogs, and ask your favourite dog to describe say, an airliner in every detail, you wouldn't expect an accurate description, would you ?

Yet, looking at the nature outside and inside ourselves, we might be able to penetrate some of the mysteries that surround us, and answer some crucial questions.

 

[ravip]

7 minutes ago, yodsak said:

So, what are the selection criteria? And how can it be proved to be the genuine product? 

[sirineou]

1 minute ago, ravip said:

10 minutes ago, yodsak said:

So, what are the selection criteria? And how can it be proved to be the genuine product? 

Can your god do tricks like that.If he can he is in.

 

 

[Sunmaster]

46 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

Sunmaster, your reasoning and explaining is to complicated for me, simple mortal. 

 

If one has to understand all these complexity to be able to believe or not, it is obvious that "religion/believing" is not for everyone. 

 

 

I keep it simple;

as "non-believer" I try to do good, and not bad intentionally. 

 

I have much respect for the "believers" who do the same. 

 

I am 71+ now, I will continue to do the same as much I can. 

 

Death can happen quickly, or not now, and I am curious, if there is"something" or not? 

 

However I will not change my way of living/doing.

 

Nor my opinion, unless there is suddenly something what I consider as tangible facts, not what others consider as being. 

 

I'm sorry if I can't express myself better. English is my 3rd language, so maybe that's where the problem is. 

 

Like you, I too try to keep things simple. I talk about the things I know first hand and things I have learned/studied...I don't appeal on anyone's faith or ask them to blindly believe me. 

Not everything is black or white, in fact very few things are. The same goes for the material and the immaterial world. If you look at material (a stone for example) close enough, you will find that in reality there is very little material and a lot of empty space (atoms; protons and electrons) and if you look even closer, you'll find that even that little material dissolves into pure energy and "states of possibilities" (quantum particles, waves...). 
The way from material to immaterial is a gradual one and not black and white. My main point is to find the place along that line where we can all agree. 
How far anyone can go along this line, depends upon our intellect and the openness to question what we think we know.

 

[mauGR1]

7 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

My main point is to find the place along that line where we can all agree. 

Very intellectually honest of you.

Don't expect many others to be as honest as you ????

[sirineou]

9 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

The way from material to immaterial is a gradual one and not black and white. My main point is to find the place along that line where we can all agree. 


 

That is very simple we can all agree in what we know, and leave the rest to the imagination.

[luckyluke]

Sunmaster, I am Belgian, and English is my 4th.language. 

You are too academic for me. 

I leave to others to further discuss with you. 

I am a simple mind and my convictions and doing are simple too. 

I don't need intellectual discussions/debates to know what is right in my opinion, and what  I want to believe or not. 

But I know we are all different. 

Case closed for me. 

[Sunmaster]

38 minutes ago, ravip said:

The grey area is that there are so many "God's" spread around on this planet, how could one guarantee that the "God" one believes is the genuine one and the others are fake?

 

Why waste time to find out which God or which religion is the right one? They all have a piece of truth.

Instead, look for what they all have in common and strip it down to its essence. Examine the partial truths they present and judge for yourself if they are valuable to you or not, and then you can piece them together to form a bigger Truth, a bigger picture. Don't trust anyone who claims to hold the copyright on Truth and threatens you with eternal damnation if you "don't buy" their books.

In the past centuries, if you wanted to learn about Spirit, you had not much choice but to become a monk and follow the teachings of your elders. Nowadays, there's no need to follow any specific religion to find this kind of knowledge.

It's out there if you want to read about it, and more importantly, it's in here, if you want to experience it.

[TooBigToFit]

Just talk to a rock for the rest of your lives. If you believe the rock is your god, you will feel fulfilled until your deaths.

[transam]

At this time in mans evolution, folk now worship the iPhone, it is now their new god...????

[xylophone]

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

You don't quote me directly, but, as you are repeatedly referring to the "big picture" i was talking about in a previous post, i have to give you an answer.

You made several sarcastic examples of beliefs which are not mine, nor other poster's on this thread, that surprises me a lot, since normally i enjoy your posts and your spirit of observation.

So, to look at the "big picture" means, for example, to understand that, despite having an "ego", we are part of a whole, that includes visible and invisible things and beings.

To look at the "big picture" means that if you feed materialism, you feed greed, and, as far as i know, there is enough greed around in this world, as you can see with your eyes.

Now, if somebody told you that believing in material possessions is better than believing in eternal justice, that is a fairy tale imho.

 

My post wasn't meant to offend you, and I wasn't really quoting examples of belief which I thought were yours, but which I consider run through this thread on occasion.

 

As for the "big picture" it's not surprising that one can take this in so many forms, because it applies to so many things, and again my big picture was meant to be different to yours (this as per your example in your last post).

 

And for the record, there are many people in this world who believe that material possessions are better than believing in "eternal" justice and this is played out time and time again (a president for example).

 

For me, a fairy tale is something which cannot be proven, seems of another world, is sometimes quoted as a miracle, is re-quoted in several different forms and formats and can be changed to suit the time and needs, and that is my opinion, so we differ.

 

But as I said to another poster, let people have their beliefs because nothing will change them – – and I did mention the mormons, and if you have ever tried to convince one that Joseph Smith was not the "chosen one", or to others, that the world is older than 10,000 years, then you certainly understand that it is impossible.

 

PS. I have just noticed this in one of your posts and I wholeheartedly disagree with it........The divine spirit is a spark which is in every human. 

Edited December 4, 2019 by xylophone

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, xylophone said:

For me, a fairy tale is something which cannot be proven, seems of another world, is sometimes quoted as a miracle, is re-quoted in several different forms and formats and can be changed to suit the time and needs, and that is my opinion, so we differ.

 

That's fair enough, and btw i was not offended.

I said a few times that i prefer a honest atheist rather than a dishonest religious bigot.

The facts are more important than any opinion.

I am not religious, but i have come through logical steps to believe in an intelligent design at the source of the material world, i hope you understand that not all believers are brainwashed.