Are you an Atheist/Believer?

[GAZZPA]

Paedophilia exists. Kids get cancer and die horribly. There are serial killers and tyrants who murder millions, funnily enough often in "God's" name.

Therefore there cannot be an "omnipotent, omnipresent, benevolent" God.

Man is mortal, we will all die one way or another.

All of the other things you mention are mans evil, they may claim in gods name but it is not gods doing.

We have free will, we cannot blame god for the choices we make. So your point about he cannot exist is wrong and frankly you can never say for sure

Then he is not God. God is (by all religion's definition) "all knowing, all powerful and loves us"

If he allows the actions of an evil man then he either didn't know, didn't care, or was powerless to stop it. Please don't come back with the "evil is actually good" argument and that he did it for our own good. That's absurd. People of faith love to have their cake and eat it, over and over.

I did not say that evil is good, or that he does it for our own good. The fact is that we have free will, that means we are responsible for what we do to each other.

Atheists always claim that god can not exist because we do such terrible things to each other. And yet religious teachings tell you not to do them.

You ignore gods teachings, terrible things happen and then you say, see he can't exist after all. how absurd is that.

Anyway, you are entitled to your own belief (or disbelief).

[NoshowJones]

I'd waver between 6 and 7. I can respect people's religion, or at least the right to adhere to one, as long as they respect my right not to.

Everyone should be free to practice any religion they wish, as long as they don't interfere with others.

[Guest]

Two. (2)

I have noticed a strong trend in recent years toward outspoken, militant atheism. I am willing to concede that atheists may be correct, that there is no God or gods, that people like me who do believe in any sort of deity are fools. Dawkins and the late alcoholic neo-con Hitchens have become leading exemplars of this attitude. Maybe they are right. I don't know, but... neither do they. They seem as dogmatic. annoying, and pushy in their atheism as guys like Robertson and the Graham boys are in their evangelistic religiosity. You think it's all BS, fine, but why go around ridiculing people of faith? Are you insecure in your disbelief?

I have a personal faith that guides me, but I will never try to foist in on you, I promise.

A favorite quote:

I used to be an atheist, but I gave it up. No holidays! ----Jackie Mason

People are now more free to believe or not to believe.

I come from a country which have de facto state religion. Children are being baptised to the Lutheran church and go through confirmation process "week in a field trip with girls/boys" as teenagers. It's a process which few doubts.

People tend to think belonging to the church in practical terms. It will provide nice place to get married and there is some organization which will take care of grave, once we fade away. There is very few true believers and pretty much nobody believes in creationism.

Now things are changing both in my country as well in other places. There is a movements to push the power of the religions and replace it with reasoning. Ok, I have to admit that religions and science are competing with each other, even if those should not be

It was not too long a go, even in the USA, people were discriminated according to their skin color and race. I guess this is still happening. My understanding is that there is still discrimination based on the beliefs.

Who believes what should not be an issue of any kind, but it is. I suppose we need our own Martin Luther King, to achieve true religion and non-religion equality.

[Ebenezer]

I would be a 1 on the scale which probably means that many 7s will discount my view.

My circle of friends here in Thailand is an eclectic mix of believers and unbelievers and I would not want it any other way.

Unlike the OP who thought questioning evolution was irrational and unscientific, I would question it on the basis of science (and I do have degrees in science).

It is also interesting to me that anyone can find a debate between Hitchins and a Christian to be "hugely entertaining". Look at the example below and decide for yourself.

One further thought: if the Bible is correct and and faith in Jesus Christ leads to a positive existence in the afterlife then I would posit that faith is a good thing. If this faith is misplaced then little if anything is lost. However if the Bible is correct then lack of faith would lead to an extremely negative result. Taking into account the logic of probability and consequence I would therefore urge those without faith in Jesus Christ to be 100% honest with themselves and be sure of their position. I acknowledge that I cannot prove by scientific method that God exists but neither can it be proved that he does not exist.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8MzPmkNsgU

[ABCer]

Gentlemen, Respect!

I hope nobody here is taking this post as a

-argument

-podium

chance to preach.

OP asked a simple question. Everybody is trying to give an honest answer.

Existence of God cannot be proved or disproved within this Existence. Do not waste your time and do not offend each other beliefs.

[dotpoom]

I'll tell you what I have noticed, the people who do believe that a power greater than themselves does exist (whatever label they want to put on it)in most cases, seem to be a lot more civil in manner than those who don't, probably because they seem to have a degree of humility about them, more than lightly coming from the realization that they are not the greatest force in existence.

Me, I have no doubts about the existence of a HP. I started out with an open mind (nonbelievers seem to closed down minds)and decided to live my life as if there was a HP, even though I didn't know one way or the other. I reckoned, what have I got to lose? if there is a HP then I'm on a winner, having tapped into that power and availed of it.....and if I die and there is no HP....well, it doesn't even matter as I won't be aware of that fact.....I'll be dead.

After things started to happen for me that eventually led me to a life beyond my wildest dreams.....I now happily turn my will and my life over to this power on a daily basis......for the simple reason.....that he, she,or it is doing a far better job of running my life that I ever did.

I'm not a "Holy Joe"....just copped on eventually.

[belg]

God = DOG

evil = live

[uptheos]

I'll tell you what I have noticed, the people who do believe that a power greater than themselves does exist (whatever label they want to put on it)in most cases, seem to be a lot more civil in manner than those who don't, probably because they seem to have a degree of humility about them, more than lightly coming from the realization that they are not the greatest force in existence.

Me, I have no doubts about the existence of a HP. I started out with an open mind (nonbelievers seem to closed down minds)and decided to live my life as if there was a HP, even though I didn't know one way or the other. I reckoned, what have I got to lose? if there is a HP then I'm on a winner, having tapped into that power and availed of it.....and if I die and there is no HP....well, it doesn't even matter as I won't be aware of that fact.....I'll be dead.

After things started to happen for me that eventually led me to a life beyond my wildest dreams.....I now happily turn my will and my life over to this power on a daily basis......for the simple reason.....that he, she,or it is doing a far better job of running my life that I ever did.

I'm not a "Holy Joe"....just copped on eventually.

You set the stage nicely before starting.

[Leung Falang]

If you believe, and their is a God, you win, if you don't believe and there is no God, you lose nothing.

However if you don't believe and there is a God, you gain nothing ( Mossy' addendum to the wager )

Actually, if you don't believe and there is a God, you lose everything, as you rejected God and will in turn be rejected when your time comes.

To support Mossfinn, the Bible (we Christians call it the word of God) says that Jesus Christ said: Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Joh 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

[uptheos]

If you believe, and their is a God, you win, if you don't believe and there is no God, you lose nothing.

However if you don't believe and there is a God, you gain nothing ( Mossy' addendum to the wager )

Actually, if you don't believe and there is a God, you lose everything, as you rejected God and will in turn be rejected when your time comes.

To support Mossfinn, the Bible (we Christians call it the word of God) says that Jesus Christ said: Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Joh 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

And lo we have the virgin birth, the natural order of the universe was suspended, based on one young woman's story in a stable..........."i did not have sexual relations with that man"

[tigermonkey]

The entire basis of the OP is only designed to provoke. The OP mentions belief, faith and religion as if they are the same thing - the seven classifications are bogus and have no meaning in reality.

Simply because you BELIEVE in something does not mean that you put your FAITH in that something, and certainly does not mean that you will follow a man-made RELIGION based on that something. Religion ( derived from the Greek 'religos' meaning restriction) is merely another form of governance.

Thanks for the opportunity to bash on others for their beliefs, faith or religion ...... but I choose not to participate.

[HerbalEd]

Whenever I try to understand the vastness of the universe and how it came about (was created?) I literally start getting anxious and dizzy. How can anyone ever "understand" such. Our mental capacity and so-called logic is far, far inferior to do so.

I definitely don't believe in any type of conventionally conceived "god" that I can talk to or that thinks about me. However, I do think ... better yet, feel ... there is "something" out there. But beyond that I know nothing about what he/she/they/it is. Again, how could I possible know or understand something like that from by pin-prick of existence within the infinite vastness of the universe and beyond?

And so ... not that it may matters to anyone/anything but me ... I like to acknowledge that "something" (that I call God) and thank and adore it for the mystery and fascination of all creation (if indeed it was "created") and of all living things ... and especially for my own creation and life. I guess you could call that "acknowledgment" and "thanks" my form of "prayer" ... and my formula for prayer is 90% thank-yous and 10% favors (i.e., "My cup already runneth over, but if you do want to give me more, here's my shopping list.")

I have a personal theory about prayer: Even if there is absolutely nothing out there and so there's nothing/no-one to "hear" your prayers, I still think prayer is helpful. I see it as talking to our true inner self ... the nice, benevolent, loving, enlightened, wise, "godly" person we really want to be. Yeah, no one may be listening to my prayers, but I am.

[orosee]

God = DOG

evil = live

Childish and uncalled for in a mostly adult and polite discussion. Take it to the pub please. Edited January 4, 2014 by orosee

[orosee]

Whenever I try to understand the vastness of the universe and how it came about (was created?) I literally start getting anxious and dizzy. How can anyone ever "understand" such. Our mental capacity and so-called logic is far, far inferior to do so.

I definitely don't believe in any type of conventionally conceived "god" that I can talk to or that thinks about me. However, I do think ... better yet, feel ... there is "something" out there. But beyond that I know nothing about what he/she/they/it is. Again, how could I possible know or understand something like that from by pin-prick of existence within the infinite vastness of the universe and beyond?

And so ... not that it may matters to anyone/anything but me ... I like to acknowledge that "something" (that I call God) and thank and adore it for the mystery and fascination of all creation (if indeed it was "created") and of all living things ... and especially for my own creation and life. I guess you could call that "acknowledgment" and "thanks" my form of "prayer" ... and my formula for prayer is 90% thank-yous and 10% favors (i.e., "My cup already runneth over, but if you do want to give me more, here's my shopping list.")

I have a personal theory about prayer: Even if there is absolutely nothing out there and so there's nothing/no-one to "hear" your prayers, I still think prayer is helpful. I see it as talking to our true inner self ... the nice, benevolent, loving, enlightened, wise, "godly" person we really want to be. Yeah, no one may be listening to my prayers, but I am.

Replace "prayer" with "meditation" or "reflection" and you've all the benefit without the shackles.

[orosee]

If you believe, and their is a God, you win, if you don't believe and there is no God, you lose nothing.

However if you don't believe and there is a God, you gain nothing ( Mossy' addendum to the wager )

Actually, if you don't believe and there is a God, you lose everything, as you rejected God and will in turn be rejected when your time comes.

To support Mossfinn, the Bible (we Christians call it the word of God) says that Jesus Christ said: Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Joh 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

3:18 and such are the reason why I will try to raise my child free of religion until it can decide for itself. What a preposterous line! To hell with tolerance and respect, or am I misunderstanding something?

[OmegaRacer]

God = DOG

evil = live

Thanks for this valuable contribution...

I've read most comments here and I think the threat needs a clarification about definitions. We tend to simplify the discussion and divide it into 2 parts: science VS religion, and this makes us endlessly argue in circles.

First of all, I think there's not much point in talking about religions. Religions are institutions created by men who tried to rationalize spiritual experiences of other men, diluting and distorting a core truth that they didn't understand through personal experience.

It's this core truth that we should look for. A truth that unites everything in contrast to religion(s), who are a product of duality and thus division.

Second, to argue about 'science VS spirituality (let's call it like that)' is fundamentally wrong, as spirituality by its very nature incorporates everything, including science.

I don't care if people believe or not, as long as they behave in a moral and ethical manner. What I can't stand, from both sides of the fence, is the arrogance to claim the absolute truth, which kills any hope of a constructive exchange of thoughts right from the beginning.

What I personally find kind of sad is that a lot of people (both religious and atheist) don't know and often don't want to know their true potential as a human being. It's like being born with the faculty to fly, but never actually do it. Worse even, ridicule those who point you to your wings.

To summarize, I invite you not to confuse religion with spirituality, so that eventually we might realize that they can go hand in hand.

[Kluckmeister]

For what it is worth, my thoughts on god and religion:

What is the goal of belief or non belief? If a person blindly follows a certain path because he expect reward in some afterlife or conversely seeks to avoid punishment then that is belief based on superstition. It is no different than someone worshiping the sun, moon, or on any other belief of ancient civilizations who had little or no understanding of science.

However, if the belief is centered upon some moral code that is based upon doing right and avoiding wrong and those rights and wrongs are confined to basic respect for life, liberty and property and refrain from making judgments about personal life style choices (same sex marriage, abortion--to the extent that there is still an active scientific debate as to when life begins, etc.) then I see nothing wrong with believing in such a higher being, God, if you want to call it that. Religious beliefs exercised in this manner are quite similar to belief systems based upon ethical humanism and libertarian political thought, philosophies often expounded by those who are agnostics or atheists.

As a corollary to the thought above, I guess I could summarize what I admired about my father who has been dead for over fifteen years now. He was for most of his life somewhere on the scale of agnostic to atheist but during the later part of his middle age crisis he toyed with the television evangelicalism of Billy Graham before moving back to his roots. He said to me that he came to the conclusion that it was immaterial whether he believe in a God or not. If there was a God then he was one based on love and forgiveness, on proper living according to universal principals that even the most primitive pagan societies believed in long before the existence or Christianity. That being the case he came to the conclusion that the only thing such a God would be looking for at the gates of heaven was how a person lived his life not whether be believed in him. My father was a good man who lived a honest and upright life. He never cheated anyone, lied, or stole. I feel certain that if there is a God then my father is with him and if there is not then that would be okay by my father also. In the eyes of a loving God, there would be no difference between a man living a good life based on a religious moral code or one living the same life based on a ethical humanistic code. Hell does not exist, it is a superstition based on the fear and punishment to keep people in line and I reject it as out of character with a loving God. Such a God, if he exits, would merely let the unjust reach the end of their existence with their death and not seek to punish them eternally. Their punishment would be non existence and nothing more.

Given the above I have come to the conclusion that their is nothing wrong with a personal belief in a God or higher being. The problem comes when people become too dogmatic in their beliefs and organize themselves into competing religions to expose and promulgate their beliefs. In short, it is not a belief in God that leads to intolerance and war but a belief in religion.

I do agree with many of the posters here that it is currently fashionable for believers to be ridiculed for their belief but it is totally acceptable for atheists to be given free reign in promoting their non belief. I believe the root cause of this is the domination of the media, and courts by liberal progressives, who like the communists, see a belief in God as a challenge to the concept that they like to promote that more invasive government can solve all the problems of the world if only it would be allowed to operate unchecked by those with firm religious beliefs. Religion is their enemy because, in their view, it prevents social progress and anything that blocks the state from assuming more and more control of peoples lives in order to improve them must be destroyed.

[orosee]

Gazpa, while your post was pleasant to read you should know that in science - quite different from our daily language - a "theory" is about as good as it gets. This is a common argument used by Creationists to cast doubt where there is none. To make it more confusing, a "law" is of a lesser order than a "theory". More accurate definitions on the Web, I'm just telling you because using the "theory" fallacy destroys all the good arguments you may have.

I disagree, Science theory can and does become Science fact.

Example: Sir Alexander Fleming discovered and theorized that a substance found on a mould had qualities that may kill infections. We now know this to be Science fact as it was developed into Penicillin.

So a theory is exactly that, a theory. It may be in Science circles that a theory is almost as good as it gets but in truth it is still not proven. Also, if you were correct in that a theory is as good as it gets then Science has no more merit in explaining how the universe came about then religion.

lastly, I think it is wrong to state that Creationists use theory to cast doubt when there is none. There is doubt, it is not certain and just for your reference I am not claiming to be a creationist.

I think we're still not on the same page. One word only though.

You say theory where the scientist must say hypothesis.

You say fact where the (slightly drunk) scientist would say "a darn good theory" (just kidding).

But the main difference is: In science, if you can prove something wrong only once, it is discarded (or improved). In religion, if you prove it wrong a thousand times, it is still considered truth (or called a miracle).

[wym]

What hubris to imagine the human mind can actually comprehend the true nature of fundamental reality.

A thousand years from now (if civilized humanity has survived) scientists will look back on our current level of understanding with the same mocking contempt we have of the Dark Ages, and same again another millenium later.

No matter how direct a given mystic's perception of "God", s/he will only be reporting back a very splintered interpretation limited by human perception and experience, like an ant trying to comprehend the metaphysics of quantum mechanics or the "multiple worlds" interpretation of the latest string theories.

Just like a foreigner devoting a lot of time and energy to trying to understand the "truth" behind Thai politics.

Intellectual understanding is pretty pointless in these topic domains, much more productive to use a truly scientific (i.e. open-minded experimental) approach and actually implement the (perhaps only vaguely understood) principles in common between all the major areas of spiritual practice in your day-to-day life and see what works to improve your results.

In my opinion. . .

[OmegaRacer]

The entire basis of the OP is only designed to provoke. The OP mentions belief, faith and religion as if they are the same thing - the seven classifications are bogus and have no meaning in reality.

Simply because you BELIEVE in something does not mean that you put your FAITH in that something, and certainly does not mean that you will follow a man-made RELIGION based on that something. Religion ( derived from the Greek 'religos' meaning restriction) is merely another form of governance.

Thanks for the opportunity to bash on others for their beliefs, faith or religion ...... but I choose not to participate.

The word religion comes from the Latin 'religare', and means to bind, or re-bind...re-connect to the higher power.

[orosee]

#197 and #198 made reading this worthwhile.

[OmegaRacer]

What hubris to imagine the human mind can actually comprehend the true nature of fundamental reality.

A thousand years from now (if civilized humanity has survived) scientists will look back on our current level of understanding with the same mocking contempt we have of the Dark Ages, and same again another millenium later.

No matter how direct a given mystic's perception of "God", s/he will only be reporting back a very splintered interpretation limited by human perception and experience, like an ant trying to comprehend the metaphysics of quantum mechanics or the "multiple worlds" interpretation of the latest string theories.

Just like a foreigner devoting a lot of time and energy to trying to understand the "truth" behind Thai politics.

Intellectual understanding is pretty pointless in these topic domains, much more productive to use a truly scientific (i.e. open-minded experimental) approach and actually implement the (perhaps only vaguely understood) principles in common between all the major areas of spiritual practice in your day-to-day life and see what works to improve your results.

In my opinion. . .

Good post.

To people who demand proof for a HP...the tools are there for you to use and find out by yourself.

[Heng]

I'm glad there is organized religion because the world simply does not have enough resources if everyone wanted 'their share' in THIS life. By all means please continue chanting, praying, etc. for whatever one believes will result from that in THIS life and better yet for what comes AFTER this life.

I've always considered myself an average to slightly above average businessman, but it's SO much easier in a playing field where people wai spirit houses, trees, and Isuzu's.

[anon8]

Christopher Hitchins was (he died of cancer recently) a well educated man who was an author and regular columnist for various magazines (i think Vanity Fair and the Times supplement). He had a fantastic grasp of language and a huge vocabulary which he used with expert precision. He was famous for participating in healthy debates and he had an unrivaled ability to articulate his argument crushing all but the most expert debaters. He wrote a book called "God is not great" which became a best seller and that catapulted him into the "famous atheist" that he was.

I liked listening to him very much but I did not agree with his scathing remarks on religion. He was a clever man with great ability with language and very intimidating to many I am sure, but people tend to follow him like sheep. I guess it's that kind of "well he's smarter then me so he must be right" thinking, it happens a lot with people and even though he would have likely torn me to pieces in a debate about religion this has more to do with his command of the English language then anything else.

Apart from his views on religion I liked him very much though,, you can google his debates, very entertaining.

Thank you! Yesterday I tryed to explain why Hitchens is often quoted, and why he universally admired. His death recently was a sad loss for all men.

His clarity of thought, and his command of language... Listening to him debating, or just speaking is like music.. It is better than music.

I have read his book 'God is not great, and how religeon poisons everything' several times to learn, and to also to English language.

For people didn't follow Hitchens, maybe watch this short intervuew w AC:

[Ulic]

I'm a strong 7 but it does not stop me from living as if there were a God, as I try to do the right thing

and treat others as I would like to be treated. I think this is much better than Catholic priest who are believers

but I put into two categories, those who are paedophiles and those who cover up for paedophiles.

[anon8]

...

but people tend to follow him like sheep. I guess it's that kind of "well he's smarter then me so he must be right" thinking, it happens a lot with people and even though he would have likely torn me to pieces in a debate about religion this has more to do with his command of the English language then anything else.

Ughh, in post above I agreed w you and thanked you, how well you described Hitchens command of language. I spoke too soon.

Just now I finished reading you post's last paragraph, where you say atheists follow him like a sheep.

Not so!

I was Atheist, and firm believer that endless conflict in mid east between arab jewish, is direct result of religeous extremists of both side.

Atheist do not follow Hitchens like sheep, most admire his clarity of thought and razor shArps mind.

Atheists are not known to blindly follow anybody, wouldn't you agree?

I said in earlier post, all scientists, all physicists admire the genius of Alfred Einstein, they don't follow Einstein like sheep, it is not blind faith, it is admiration.

Edited January 4, 2014 by valgehiir

[BusyB]

Have to say that I'm impressed this one ain't morphed straight into a slagfest that was slammed shut by the entire moderator crew.

Also have to say that prayer only helps the prayer.

[indyuk]

I'm 70% Christian, 20% Buddhist and 10% Atheist.

I consider all three to be religions.

I also believe in Darwin's Natural Selection Thesis and all of the research derived from it. We human beings are only special in that we got further along the evolution time line than any other species discovered to date

There is one life. After Life is illogical.

[kinmaew]

Notice to the Atheist. How the hell did all this begin?, it just didnt happen. Big bang is a load of crap we simply dont know enough and have only scratched the surface. One nano second before the big bang where exactly was this? had to be somewhere. Belive me someone had to light the pilot light and this is not from a religious standpoint its just logic, you dont get something from nothing. All atheists I have met or even listened to are misterable people. You only have to look at the beauty of this earth and universe and the order of the universe to know that there is a loving higher power.

[Kluckmeister]

I'm glad there is organized religion because the world simply does not have enough resources if everyone wanted 'their share' in THIS life. By all means please continue chanting, praying, etc. for whatever one believes will result from that in THIS life and better yet for what comes AFTER this life.

I've always considered myself an average to slightly above average businessman, but it's SO much easier in a playing field where people wai spirit houses, trees, and Isuzu's.

Your comments seem more than a bit cynical of religion and sarcastic too boot. If I am interpreting your thoughts correctly, you are saying that religion tends to make people satisfied, or at least accepting, of what they have even if life has given them the short end of the stick and that is okay by you because it makes more resources available for the more rapacious, including yourself, and it makes it easier for you to pull the wool over the eyes of the sheep around you.

To the extent I am right about what you have said, I guess a character such as yourself would add credence to the liberal progressive viewpoint I talked about in my earlier post (#198) that believers must be destroyed because their beliefs makes in more difficult for the state to deal with rapacious businessmen such as yourself.