8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Prove it.

If you can't then you have to admit that God could exist, even if you don't believe.

so far I can not prove it. And you?

35 minutes ago, d4dang said:

so far I can not prove it. And you?

Never mind proving it. Just tell us how you know.

Or maybe you wanted to write "I don't believe in God", but somehow got a bit carried away by enthusiasm? ????

47 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I guess my main bitch about life is that there was a whole lot more to be negative about than positive.

It's easy to be positive when things are great, but I'm not a good enough actor to pretend that things are OK when they are not.

Not really a problem now as I basically a recluse,but I do have a friend that likes to bitch about life as much as I, so we get on well when I visit.

I am not a good actor too, and the main reason is, i don't like acting and pretending. 

However, i have a different strategy, when i think that life is hitting me hard, i think of the zillion people, who are probably as innocent as i, who get hit harder, and still find the power to carry on, and even help others. 

 

51 minutes ago, d4dang said:

so far I can not prove it. And you?

Yes I have proof but not of the sort that others might accept, but I have experienced such that I believe.

However, I'm not the one that said God doesn't exist without proof.

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

God doesn't "care"

so god is heartless? lol

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

so god is heartless? lol

How do you see nature? What is the Nature? Is Nature good or bad? 

 

What do you think when you see orcas playing with seals? Do you get impressed or sad, and do you think they are cruel? God is Nature for good and bad

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Is Nature good or bad? 

yeah, good question.

flowers are good.

hurricanes and earthquakes are bad maybe?

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

yeah, good question.

flowers are good.

hurricanes and earthquakes are bad maybe?

Some flowers is healthy, some flowers is toxic, and some fowers eat insects and animals. 

 

Everything we know is Nature, thats the only thing we can prove

This topic is misnamed. It should be something like "Does religion play an important part in your life and why?".

 

Which God is real, yours or mine?

An offensive troll post has been reported and removed.

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes I have proof but not of the sort that others might accept, but I have experienced such that I believe.

However, I'm not the one that said God doesn't exist without proof.

I did not say that. Used a quote that I sent my agnostic friend. How can you thank God if there is no God. That statement has nothing to do with my beliefs. My friend however appreciates it.

18 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

I agree with the first part of this post, but i don't see the death of the physical body as the ultimate tragedy. Death happens, is part of the dual reality. 

The real tragedy is the suffering of living, and the purpose of religion is, well, it should be, to alleviate that suffering. 

How does religion alleviate the suffering of billions of impoverished people who chose the wrong parents (read: unlucky to be born into extreme poverty)? Does it feed and house them? Most people suffering in this world need a square meal (and clean water) and a roof over their heads. Religion is of no use whatsoever other than offering some hope that better will come after they have died.

 

In the Philippines the Catholic priests preach about the sin of using contraception, but don't do a thing to feed the poor families produced as a result of excessive procreation...  

1 hour ago, JensenZ said:

How does religion alleviate the suffering of billions of impoverished people who chose the wrong parents (read: unlucky to be born into extreme poverty)? Does it feed and house them? Most people suffering in this world need a square meal (and clean water) and a roof over their heads. Religion is of no use whatsoever other than offering some hope that better will come after they have died.

 

In the Philippines the Catholic priests preach about the sin of using contraception, but don't do a thing to feed the poor families produced as a result of excessive procreation...  

I'm hearing this argument very often, and it sounds a bit disingenuous. 

The wealth is relative, everywhere there are people who have too much, and people who have not enough, the rich and powerful America, the great democracy,  is not exception. 

Are you blaming religion, seriously ?

Not the big corporations, the banks, the politicians, i guess they must be all saints ????

I'm not saying that religion can solve all the problems, but it can give peace of mind to some.

10 hours ago, Hummin said:

Everything we know is Nature, thats the only thing we can prove

yeah but my point is maybe it's better to believe in nothing than to believe in "a god who doesn't care".

 

11 hours ago, save the frogs said:

so god is heartless? lol

I see the LOL, but how many people with sense think God is a human being with superpowers?

11 hours ago, save the frogs said:

yeah, good question.

flowers are good.

hurricanes and earthquakes are bad maybe?

Nature is neither bad nor good. Nature just is.

It's only humans in their arrogance that ascribe human emotions to Nature, and usually depending on the benefit/ non benefit of nature to humans eg flowers are "good", when they are only that way to attract the insects that help them reproduce, and hurricanes are "bad" because they damage our houses.

33 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

yeah but my point is maybe it's better to believe in nothing than to believe in "a god who doesn't care".

 

To me it more fascination how we look at the world we living in, and also the phsychology behind fate, belief and knownledge. How close the biggest religions and belief systems is to each other. 

 

For me there is a with sadness I witness we do not respect the Nature that gives us life, but instead strive to please a god or our own ego. 

2 hours ago, JensenZ said:

How does religion alleviate the suffering of billions of impoverished people who chose the wrong parents (read: unlucky to be born into extreme poverty)? Does it feed and house them? Most people suffering in this world need a square meal (and clean water) and a roof over their heads. Religion is of no use whatsoever other than offering some hope that better will come after they have died.

 

In the Philippines the Catholic priests preach about the sin of using contraception, but don't do a thing to feed the poor families produced as a result of excessive procreation...  

You are talking about religion which IMO is a man made organisation to control and exploit the people.

God created the universe, not religion.

40 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

yeah but my point is maybe it's better to believe in nothing than to believe in "a god who doesn't care".

I believe in God as the creator of the universe, not as a cosmic friend to make me feel good.

After I die, my life force ( soul ) returns to God, from where it came to give me life during my time alive.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You are talking about religion which IMO is a man made organisation to control and exploit the people.

God created the universe, not religion.

Wrong. You cannot separate most religions and God, and especially not the Catholic Church.

 

Let's take a quick look at the meaning of the word "religion":

 

Oxford: "the belief in and worship of a superhuman power or powers, especially a God or gods"

 

Basically religion is worship of a god. It's certainly what I'm talking about here and the theme behind this thread: "Do you believe in God and why". It doesn't define any particular god.

2 hours ago, save the frogs said:

yeah but my point is maybe it's better to believe in nothing than to believe in "a god who doesn't care".

 

Which leads us directly to the "problem of evil" and Theodicy (defending God in an evil world).

 

1. Theodicy: An attempt to justify or defend God in the face of evil by answering the following problem, which in its most basic form involves these assumptions:

1. God is all good and all powerful (and, therefore, all knowing).
2. The universe/creation was made by God and/or exists in a contingent relationship to God.
3. Evil exists in the world. Why?

2. The Logical Problem of Evil: The logical problem of evil is a deductive one. Namely, given the above problem (God is loving, all powerful and all knowing, yet evil exists), is it rational to believe in the existence of God?

 

1. God exists, is all good, all knowing, and all powerful.

2. Such a being has no limits to its ability.

3. A good being will always eliminate all the evil that it can.

4. Evil exists, so God must not.

 

https://www3.dbu.edu/mitchell/theodicy_brief_overview.htm

 

May I remind people of the biggest genocide in world history. The Flood. It's impossible to know how many people were killed by God in The Flood, but in the 1656 years after Creation, until The Flood, there were probably upwards of 4 billion people living at the time. 8 were saved.

 

This is just one example of God directly involved with the mass killing of people throughout Biblical history.

 

If I intentionally kill a single person, I'm either going to spend my life in prison, or be executed (after many years on death row), depending on where I reside.

18 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

Which leads us directly to the "problem of evil" and Theodicy (defending God in an evil world).

i already gave my theory of evil.

free will and karma.

i'm not repeating myself again.

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

I'm hearing this argument very often, and it sounds a bit disingenuous. 

The wealth is relative, everywhere there are people who have too much, and people who have not enough, the rich and powerful America, the great democracy,  is not exception. 

Are you blaming religion, seriously ?

Not the big corporations, the banks, the politicians, i guess they must be all saints ????

I'm not saying that religion can solve all the problems, but it can give peace of mind to some.

Disingenious? How did you arrive at that conclusion.

 

Let's check the meaning of it:

 

Disingenious: Oxford: "not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

 

I'm certainly not pretending I know less than I know about the situation among the poor of the Philippines.

 

I specifically used the Philippines as an example because I know too much about what goes on there and have spent years living in poor communities there. What I experienced there had a life changing affect on me.

 

Yes, I'm blaming religion and specifically the Catholic Church for the over 27% of about 114 million people living below the poverty line. I believe the real number is far higher. When the Spanish colonized the Philippines in the 1500s, they forced this religion on the people. In Thailand it's under 10% of about 71 million people living below the poverty line.

 

In 1970, they were twins, with the same population of 36 million. Look at the difference now:

 

In 1970, the economies of the Philippines and Thailand seemed like identical twins. Almost five decades later, it’s worth recounting just how much that has changed. 

 

https://www.nationthailand.com/perspective/30325556

 

In Thailand, unbound by Catholicism, they introduced a successful family planning program. In the Philippines, the Catholic priest still lectures couples before they marry that contraceptives are evil. In fact, this lecture is mandatory to be married in a church.

 

The result is that Thailand has a fertility rate of 1.54, and Philippines is nearly double, at 2.77.

 

What is the process of church wedding in the Philippines?

You and your partner need to attend a canonical interview at least a month prior to your wedding. This is typically conducted by either the parish priest or an assistant. Once you have submitted your application and pay the reservation fee, you will be scheduled for an interview.

 

 

Anyway, getting back to your original comment:   

"The real tragedy is the suffering of living, and the purpose of religion is, well, it should be, to alleviate that suffering."

 

Religion does not alleviate the suffering of the poor. You need to feed them first. 

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

i already gave my theory of evil.

free will and karma.

i'm not repeating myself again.

There's no need for you to repeat anything. If you're interested in mentioning your theories, just link the appropriate post, which would take less time than typing out your reply.

13 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

Disingenious? How did you arrive at that conclusion.

 

Let's check the meaning of it:

 

Disingenious: Oxford: "not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

 

I'm certainly not pretending I know less than I know about the situation among the poor of the Philippines.

 

I specifically used the Philippines as an example because I know too much about what goes on there and have spent years living in poor communities there. What I experienced there had a life changing affect on me.

 

Yes, I'm blaming religion and specifically the Catholic Church for the over 27% of about 114 million people living below the poverty line. I believe the real number is far higher. When the Spanish colonized the Philippines in the 1500s, they forced this religion on the people. In Thailand it's under 10% of about 71 million people living below the poverty line.

 

In 1970, they were twins, with the same population of 36 million. Look at the difference now:

 

In 1970, the economies of the Philippines and Thailand seemed like identical twins. Almost five decades later, it’s worth recounting just how much that has changed. 

 

https://www.nationthailand.com/perspective/30325556

 

In Thailand, unbound by Catholicism, they introduced a successful family planning program. In the Philippines, the Catholic priest still lectures couple before they marry that contraceptives are evil. In fact, this lecture is mandatory to be married in a church.

 

The result is that Thailand has a fertility rate of 1.54, and Philippines is nearly double, at 2.77.

 

What is the process of church wedding in the Philippines?

You and your partner need to attend a canonical interview at least a month prior to your wedding. This is typically conducted by either the parish priest or an assistant. Once you have submitted your application and pay the reservation fee, you will be scheduled for an interview.

 

 

 

Ok, i see that you are convinced of what you say, and perhaps I'm wrong to see your argument as disingenuous. 

That said, the fruits of the new cult of materialism are visible to anyone who dares to look at, i can only say good luck with that.

1 hour ago, JensenZ said:

they forced this religion on the people.

i also grew up with a catholic upbringing. 

people have a responsibility to filter things out.

not let yourself get brainwashed.

32 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

i also grew up with a catholic upbringing. 

people have a responsibility to filter things out.

not let yourself get brainwashed.

This is an incredibly absurd comment. We're talking about institutional religion, from 500 years ago, instilled on an uneducated population. 94.5 percent of the population is Catholic. It's in their DNA. Perhaps you could suggest that over 100 million Catholics must give up their religion.

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

Ok, i see that you are convinced of what you say, and perhaps I'm wrong to see your argument as disingenuous. 

That said, the fruits of the new cult of materialism are visible to anyone who dares to look at, i can only say good luck with that.

I have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. I need good luck with what? Perhaps you're being disingenious and need more good luck with something.

6 minutes ago, JensenZ said:

I have absolutely no idea of what you're talking about. I need good luck with what? Perhaps you're being disingenious and need more good luck with something.

Yes, i agree with you, apparently  you have no idea of what i am talking about. 

When you'll manage to understand what I'm saying, which is just common sense imho, perhaps then we can have a meaningful debate.

..but thanks for your contribution anyway. 

Just now, mauGR1 said:

Yes, i agree with you, apparently  you have no idea of what i am talking about. 

When you'll manage to understand what I'm saying, which is just common sense imho, perhaps then we can have a meaningful debate.

..but thanks for your contribution anyway. 

Seriously? You really think your last reply was common sense? You're dreaming if that's what you think, but it's ok, I will ignore you going forward in this thread, and hope that you will do the same.