Do you believe in God and why

[ThaiBunny]

2 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

The way you worded it before, it came across as mockery.

That was my intention

[Sunmaster]

Then I stand behind my response to that.

[Sunmaster]

Complex organic molecules found on a comet orbiting the sun. When a comet gets hot enough, it starts ejecting matter. 
Seeding life on earth?

[ThaiRebound]

If the psychology behind arguing that god exists is to reaffirm one's comfort about death, then what's the psychology among those who argue the "truth" that he doesn't exist? What is the neurosis of people who have to insist that they are right? I can't of any other reason to disprove god then either because of bad personal experience with religion, need to be "right," or obsessive-compulsive personality disorder.

[Happy Grumpy]

Yes. Absolutely.

 

All modern science and technology is wrong.

 

Iron Age farmers got it right 2 thousand years ago.

 

 

 

As humans developed, they needed answers to their questions. Before science and technology, deities were their answers.

 

Thank child indoctrination before the age of reason and the fear of burning for eternity for how it has continued.

[Tagged]

There is tuns of articles about uncertentity and overconfidence

However, wrong or right, trying to convince someone is wrong, is a hard task! Good luck

 

 

 

http://socialpsychonline.com/2016/07/certainty-confidence-opinions-psychology/

[Happy Grumpy]

12 minutes ago, Tagged said:

trying to convince someone is wrong, is a hard task!

You're wrong. 

[Tagged]

8 minutes ago, Happy Grumpy said:

You're wrong. 

You are right!

[Sunmaster]

7 hours ago, Happy Grumpy said:

Yes. Absolutely.

 

All modern science and technology is wrong.

 

Iron Age farmers got it right 2 thousand years ago.

 

 

 

As humans developed, they needed answers to their questions. Before science and technology, deities were their answers.

 

Thank child indoctrination before the age of reason and the fear of burning for eternity for how it has continued.

There is no "science VS God" fight going on, where there is only one survivor.

If God is The Absolute, All There Is, the Supreme Being, then science is just a part of it. Just like your finger is part of your body. It would be ridiculous if the finger were trying to disprove the existence of the body, because as hard as the finger might try, without the body the finger would cease to exist.

 

However, there is a "science VS religious dogma" fight going on, where science (quite rightly and thankfully) is inflicting one KO after the other, and dogma is now left battered and bruised, unable to fight back because the moves it had a few 100 years ago don't seem to work anymore. 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎9‎/‎5‎/‎2019 at 5:43 PM, Tagged said:

I believe thats something you have to discuss whit the man himself, who believe he know what the bible says, and the rest of them. 

 

Jehovas have no more space in their paradise, but continue to convert more believers. Sorry we are full, but we have a waiting list, do you want to join? 

 

There must be something that created the whole thing, but from what? That is the question, and for those who believe man made bible is the answer, good for them, but quite annoying for us. Because in power, and in majority, they are quite dangerous as any other ideology on earth. Horrible we still have to deal with these kind of beliefs in our time. 

 

Life of Brian, is my bible, and it is the best piece of true life art in my time. 

L O B was a great film- almost never made, till George Harrison fronted the money.

Many people miss the point of the film, which was that Brian wasn't the saviour and read what they want to believe into it.

Brian was probably a good Jew that believed in God.

 

There must be something that created the whole thing, but from what?

Whatever created it has to be "God". Unfortunately too many people, believers and non believers thing God is similar to a man, thinks like a man, and acts like a man, which is pretty obviously not the case. For all any of us know, "God" is a massive cloud of electricity- everything in the universe is made of matter that is operated by electricity- electrons and all that.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

There is no "science VS God" fight going on, where there is only one survivor.

If God is The Absolute, All There Is, the Supreme Being, then science is just a part of it. Just like your finger is part of your body. It would be ridiculous if the finger were trying to disprove the existence of the body, because as hard as the finger might try, without the body the finger would cease to exist.

 

However, there is a "science VS religious dogma" fight going on, where science (quite rightly and thankfully) is inflicting one KO after the other, and dogma is now left battered and bruised, unable to fight back because the moves it had a few 100 years ago don't seem to work anymore. 

Well said. God is everything.

 

This has been a great thread because it has made me think about what I really believe.

IMO, "God" whatever "God" is, made life, the universe and everything and then took no further part in what has gone on since. I can't believe that a loving God would have allowed AIDS, malaria and horrid people. 

[Sunmaster]

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well said. God is everything.

 

This has been a great thread because it has made me think about what I really believe.

IMO, "God" whatever "God" is, made life, the universe and everything and then took no further part in what has gone on since. I can't believe that a loving God would have allowed AIDS, malaria and horrid people. 

The "good" or "bad" values we attribute to something are purely from our limited human standpoint. Once we ascend to a higher viewpoint they become irrelevant. Malaria then is not better or worse than the common flu virus or an ingrown toenail. It just is.

They are all creations of the One. 

 

[Skeptic7]

Fun tune. Worth a listen. Clever, funny and to be point... 

 

 

[FruitPudding]

Nope.

[Tagged]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

Whatever created it has to be "God". Unfortunately too many people, believers and non believers thing God is similar to a man, thinks like a man, and acts like a man, which is pretty obviously not the case. For all any of us know, "God" is a massive cloud of electricity- everything in the universe is made of matter that is operated by electricity- electrons and all that.

Whatever created "everything", they could as most likely sit behind a desk and made our limited universes on a computer. We are just a game, a science project, entertainment, for all we know. 

 

However, you mention electricity and electrons

https://www.universetoday.com/116615/how-are-energy-and-matter-the-same/

 

 

[ivor bigun]

My God,the thread is still running,i get worn out reading it all,i must be getting up there for the discussion with the most replies,honestly when i wrote it i only expected a few to reply,anyway its very interesting,so keep going boys

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[JeffersLos]

Of course not.

 

I'm an adult. 

[CMNightRider]

When considering how life began, there are only two options.  Either life was created by an intelligent source (God) or it began by natural processes.

 

No mechanism by which non-living matter can randomly spark itself into life has ever been demonstrated. Information must come from a source of information.

 

To creationists, the incredible workings of the genetic code are not a mystery to be explained but instead a marvel to be understood as one of God’s most incredible designs.  How such a coding system (even in a simpler form) could have arisen through random interaction is yet another leap of faith by evolutionists.

 

By assuming organic compounds ejected by stars could have fortified the primordial solar system, asteroids and meteorites, and of course earth with the building blocks of life, evolutionary scientists see such findings as a source to seed the process of molecules-to-man evolution.

 

Can you imagine a molecule from space dust creating humans, animals, sea life, plant life and the universe?  If you are one of those who can imagine this happening, you need to put down your crack pipe or bong, and accept Jesus Christ as your savior and God as your creator. 

[Jip99]

3 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

When considering how life began, there are only two options.  Either life was created by an intelligent source (God) or it began by natural processes.

 

No mechanism by which non-living matter can randomly spark itself into life has ever been demonstrated. Information must come from a source of information.

 

To creationists, the incredible workings of the genetic code are not a mystery to be explained but instead a marvel to be understood as one of God’s most incredible designs.  How such a coding system (even in a simpler form) could have arisen through random interaction is yet another leap of faith by evolutionists.

 

By assuming organic compounds ejected by stars could have fortified the primordial solar system, asteroids and meteorites, and of course earth with the building blocks of life, evolutionary scientists see such findings as a source to seed the process of molecules-to-man evolution.

 

Can you imagine a molecule from space dust creating humans, animals, sea life, plant life and the universe?  If you are one of those who can imagine this happening, you need to put down your crack pipe or bong, and accept Jesus Christ as your savior and God as your creator. 

 

 

That you believe that, must give you comfort in difficult times.

 

 

I, on the other hand, rely on reality and natural processes.

[ThaiBunny]

On 9/9/2019 at 11:31 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

I can't believe that a loving God would have allowed AIDS, malaria and horrid people. 

You're quite right - if "God" exists then s/he is a complete sh*t, totally lacking in any moral sensibility and unworthy of our worship

[Tagged]

3 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

 

 

Can you imagine a molecule from space dust creating humans, animals, sea life, plant life and the universe?  If you are one of those who can imagine this happening, you need to put down your crack pipe or bong, and accept Jesus Christ as your savior and God as your creator. 

If it is Gods work, it is a miracle right? 

 

No problem to accept god, energy or a computer game, I just do not accept a man made book with the answer. And that book contains an old grumphy evil man putting his spell on people, and I am not talking about the devil, but god. 

[VincentRJ]

2 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

How such a coding system (even in a simpler form) could have arisen through random interaction is yet another leap of faith by evolutionists.

The original coding system of the first self-reproducing cell would no doubt have been relatively simple. It would have been the most simple form possible for a self-reproducing cell.  

 

The chances of such a cell being created in a single sea of soupy chemicals over a short period of time would probably have been very slim, I agree, which is probably why no new life-form has been created from inanimate chemicals in the laboratory, so far.

 

However, when you consider that there would have been a vast number of different types of soupy seas on Earth in vastly different conditions, over a period of a hundred million years or so, after the Earth first formed, the chances increase significantly.

 

When you also consider the likely vast number of planets in the universe similar to the Earth, each with their own variety of soupy seas, the chances increase even more significantly.

 

The analogy of gambling is relevant here. Whatever the odds, someone has to win, eventually. That you personally are going to win might be a leap of faith. That someone will win is almost guaranteed

 

Here's an interesting article that covers the issue. https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_life_early.html
 

[Skeptic7]

2 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

When considering how life began, there are only two options.  Either life was created by an intelligent source (God) or it began by natural processes.

 

No mechanism by which non-living matter can randomly spark itself into life has ever been demonstrated. Information must come from a source of information.

 

To creationists, the incredible workings of the genetic code are not a mystery to be explained but instead a marvel to be understood as one of God’s most incredible designs.  How such a coding system (even in a simpler form) could have arisen through random interaction is yet another leap of faith by evolutionists.

 

By assuming organic compounds ejected by stars could have fortified the primordial solar system, asteroids and meteorites, and of course earth with the building blocks of life, evolutionary scientists see such findings as a source to seed the process of molecules-to-man evolution.

 

Can you imagine a molecule from space dust creating humans, animals, sea life, plant life and the universe?  If you are one of those who can imagine this happening, you need to put down your crack pipe or bong, and accept Jesus Christ as your savior and God as your creator. 

So you're OK with living in a natural world and universe with natural processes and explanations all around us...with zero "supernatural" processes ever and never a supernatural explanation for anything...yet you are OK denying natural processes for abiogenesis and inserting some supernatural Thing??? Think maybe time you put down the pipe. 

 

No evidence of any god-creator-thing has ever been demonstrated. No evidence of anything supernatural has ever been demonstrated. You cannot explain something extremely complex and not yet quite figured out by inserting something absurd and even more misunderstood and unlikely. 

 

Please show one valid example of anything understood now, which was not previously understood, that has been attributed to a supernatural process. Just one?!? I'll help ya out...there aren't any. Not one. ZERO. 

 

Snap out of it! 

[FarFlungFalang]

31 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

No evidence of any god-creator-thing has ever been demonstrated.

Isn't the evidence all around you including yourself.Science has suggested the universe was created from the "Big Bang" which if true then the universe was "created".If the universe was not created by the "Big Bang"or something completely different then it must have always been here.As I see it the universe was either created or it wasn't.If the universe was not created then it must be eternal.If the universe was created then there must have been a "before" the creation,which to me suggests that what was before must also be the universe as "uni" to me means one.It therefore suggests to me that the "universe" is eternal. 

[Skeptic7]

3 minutes ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Isn't the evidence all around you including yourself.Science has suggested the universe was created from the "Big Bang" which if true then the universe was "created".If the universe was not created by the "Big Bang"or something completely different then it must have always been here.As I see it the universe was either created or it wasn't.If the universe was not created then it must be eternal.If the universe was created then there must have been a "before" the creation,which to me suggests that what was before must also be the universe as "uni" to me means one.It therefore suggests to that the "universe" is eternal. 

No...well maybe, on second thought. No...if your query is evidence all around me for a supernatural creator. Yes...if referring to natural processes. 

[FarFlungFalang]

2 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

No

Why no?

[Skeptic7]

1 minute ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Why no?

see above expanded on it. 

[FarFlungFalang]

12 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

see above expanded on it. 

I would rather keep the supernatural part out at least the common meaning unless you something natural that is super which would be true if the universe was created from nothing as suggested by some and for something to be created from nothing would be pretty super even if it was or not natural.None the less the evidence does indeed surround you,I suppose the tricky part is finding out just what it is evidence of!To me it is evidence that stuff exists.Has stuff always existed?I'm suggesting that stuff has always existed.In other words existence has always existed.Call it eternal call it something else.

 I have argued against the existence of God most of my life now I've swapped sides to see if I can come up with a valid argument for the existence of God but I find most people want to bring religion into the argument because some people wrote a book and people keep referring back to that book without coming up with original and logical arguments most in fear of being labelled a religious person. 

[Skeptic7]

5 minutes ago, FarFlungFalang said:

I would rather keep the supernatural part out at least the common meaning unless you something natural that is super which would be true if the universe was created from nothing as suggested by some and for something to be created from nothing would be pretty super even if it was or not natural.None the less the evidence does indeed surround you,I suppose the tricky part is finding out just what it is evidence of!To me it is evidence that stuff exists.Has stuff always existed?I'm suggesting that stuff has always existed.In other words existence has always existed.Call it eternal call it something else.

 I have argued against the existence of God most of my life now I've swapped sides to see if I can come up with a valid argument for the existence of God but I find most people want to bring religion into the argument because some people wrote a book and people keep referring back to that book without coming up with original and logical arguments most in fear of being labelled a religious person. 

I want truth. The only time to accept or believe things is when there are actual reasons supported by valid evidence. Sure there are "feel good" reasons for people to believe in such things...it makes me feel good...it's comforting...i just can't wrap my head around it...etc. Not interested. Personally, I want to KNOW. I want to know true things and discard untrue things. Truth is based on facts, evidence, reality, logic and reason. Before any type of supernatural explanation can be considered, it first has to be demonstrated...yes? Since we have unlimited examples of natural processes every single second of our lives and zero (thus far anyway) examples of supernatural...it's obvious IMO. 

 

So you say you've argued both ways...but why??? (That question is rhetorical). Either you believe it or don't. So my actual question is...leaving all religion(s) out...do you accept, as fact, that there is some type of supernatural creator god entity thing? It's a simple "yes" or "no". I understand you are searching and exploring, but at and up to this point in time? 

 

Somehow I expect your answer to this simple question will be painfully longer than 2 or 3 letters. 

[FarFlungFalang]

14 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

I want truth. The only time to accept or believe things is when there are actual reasons supported by valid evidence. Sure there are "feel good" reasons for people to believe in such things...it makes me feel good...it's comforting...i just can't wrap my head around it...etc. Not interested. Personally, I want to KNOW. I want to know true things and discard untrue things. Truth is based on facts, evidence, reality, logic and reason. Before any type of supernatural explanation can be considered, it first has to be demonstrated...yes? Since we have unlimited examples of natural processes every single second of our lives and zero (thus far anyway) examples of supernatural...it's obvious IMO. 

 

So you say you've argued both ways...but why??? (That question is rhetorical). Either you believe it or don't. So my actual question is...leaving all religion(s) out...do you accept, as fact, that there is some type of supernatural creator god entity thing? It's a simple "yes" or "no". I understand you are searching and exploring, but at and up to this point in time? 

 

Somehow I expect your answer to this simple question will be painfully longer than 2 or 3 letters. 

 Yes!