PDA

View Full Version : What makes you believe in god?


Nicolás89
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:01 AM
Since I was a little boy I failed to believe in a creator god, I used to read this bible for kids and think that some of the tales were very entertaining although never really thinking it might had happened.

I'm curious, what makes you a person of faith?

Talita Kumi
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:10 AM
i believe that God exists, is the only thing that makes me want to live, i have suffered depression all my life, and every day of my life, i have struggled to stay alive, but faith in God is something inexplicable, despite all the pain

Paneru
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:14 AM
Started from childhood for me. My parents are Christians and I was raised in the faith. Then, as I got older I had to work some things out for myself. The more I am learning I feel like the more my strength and faith in God has grown. Life experiences can really test you and rock your world. And one of the things I can say is that following the teachings of Christ have made my life better and more simplified. It's a journey(and definitely a work in progress) and I am really
beginning to really understand and enjoy the ride.

kiwifan
Mar 9th, 2010, 03:30 AM
My Wonderful Life. :angel:

Someone out there LOVES me...

...or I'm one of the luckiest people on the planet...:cool:

Rafito.
Mar 9th, 2010, 07:39 AM
Who's god?

abercrombieguy23
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:08 PM
George Carlton-
But I want you to know something, this is sincere, I want you to know, when it comes to believing in God, I really tried. I really, really tried. I tried to believe that there is a God, who created each of us in His own image and likeness, loves us very much, and keeps a close eye on things. I really tried to believe that, but I gotta tell you, the longer you live, the more you look around, the more you realize, something is fucked up. Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed. Results like these do not belong on the résumé of a Supreme Being. This is the kind of shit you'd expect from an office temp with a bad attitude. And just between you and me, in any decently-run universe, this guy would've been out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago. And by the way, I say "this guy", because I firmly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man. And here's something else, another problem you might have: Suppose your prayers aren't answered. What do you say? "Well, it's God's will." "Thy Will Be Done." Fine, but if it's God's will, and He's going to do what He wants to anyway, why the fuck bother praying in the first place? Seems like a big waste of time to me! Couldn't you just skip the praying part and go right to His Will? It's all very confusing

Wigglytuff
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:19 PM
www.evilbible.com

Keegan
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:44 PM
Hope.

Certinfy
Mar 9th, 2010, 02:48 PM
Del Potro winning the USO.

Barrie_Dude
Mar 9th, 2010, 03:18 PM
i believe that God exists, is the only thing that makes me want to live, i have suffered depression all my life, and every day of my life, i have struggled to stay alive, but faith in God is something inexplicable, despite all the pain
Very well said. I, too, feel this way

BuTtErFrEnA
Mar 9th, 2010, 04:07 PM
George Carlton-




so things must be perfect now for there to be God? meh...then you'd complain God gives you no choice but whatever...for those who don't believe no proof will suffice

but therein lies why I believe...because whether or not people believe, He is :) simply amazing

Golovinjured.
Mar 9th, 2010, 04:30 PM
Tanisha when she asked me 'Do you know about God?' :hearts:

abercrombieguy23
Mar 9th, 2010, 04:30 PM
so things must be perfect now for there to be God? meh...then you'd complain God gives you no choice but whatever...for those who don't believe no proof will suffice

but therein lies why I believe...because whether or not people believe, He is :) simply amazing
Yea...incredible....
http://a21.idata.over-blog.com/500x321/2/95/90/40/haiti-disaster-2010.jpg
http://mazinx.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/1210374888iraq_suicide_bombing.jpg

Barrie_Dude
Mar 9th, 2010, 04:37 PM
Yes, everything is Gods fault. We have no choice but to build shoddy buildings along fault lines and in hurricane zones and live there.... :rolleyes:

Slutati
Mar 9th, 2010, 04:48 PM
Nothing. :lol: I don't believe in god. :)

Boreas
Mar 9th, 2010, 04:49 PM
Why bother trying to covince people there's no god? Let them be. My nephew believes in tooth fairy - sooner or later he'll realize there's no such thing. God believers will realize the same moment they get hit by a bus:lol:

irma
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:09 PM
I was indoctrinated by the Calvinistic church as a kid!

But if the God that I learned to fear as a kid excists then he is definitely responsible for everything that happens afterall he is almighty, he knows everything, he was the one who decided to plant a tree in the garden of Eden, and he even created Lucifer all because there was nothing before him. So God must be good and bad otherwise it doesn't make much sense!

Valanga
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:14 PM
My parents baptized me when I was still a baby

Nicolás89
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:21 PM
Why bother trying to covince people there's no god? Let them be. My nephew believes in tooth fairy - sooner or later he'll realize there's no such thing. God believers will realize the same moment they get hit by a bus:lol:

That's not the point of this thread though.

Certinfy
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:22 PM
If God is real, he deserves no worshiping IMO.

abercrombieguy23
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:29 PM
Yes, everything is Gods fault. We have no choice but to build shoddy buildings along fault lines and in hurricane zones and live there.... :rolleyes:

Their logic, not mine

Kart
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:55 PM
What kiwifan said.

le bon vivant
Mar 9th, 2010, 05:57 PM
I'm not an adherent of any particular religion
but I do believe in God. Thats the only thing I can think of to make sense of this world and our existence on it.
Theres no way all of this happened randomly and without purpose.

PatrickRyan
Mar 9th, 2010, 06:08 PM
I used to believe in God, but the Catholic Church and basic reasoning pushed me away.

kwilliams
Mar 9th, 2010, 06:32 PM
Yes, everything is Gods fault. We have no choice but to build shoddy buildings along fault lines and in hurricane zones and live there.... :rolleyes:

I'm not saying it's God's fault but some people really don't have a choice where they live or in what kind of a building they live in or work in. Look at what happened in Haiti.

Andrew Laeddis
Mar 9th, 2010, 08:05 PM
so things must be perfect now for there to be God? meh...then you'd complain God gives you no choice but whatever...for those who don't believe no proof will suffice

but therein lies why I believe...because whether or not people believe, He is :) simply amazing

:worship:

Mina Vagante
Mar 9th, 2010, 08:15 PM
I do not believe in God.

Raiden
Mar 9th, 2010, 08:16 PM
I think that doubting the existence of God is natural, even if temporary. I think what matters is what follows the doubt.

One thing I have NO doubt about though: not for one minute do I ever believe that I am a mutated uppity fish that evolved into a cave-Chewbacca before eventually settling on a human form.

Nicolás89
Mar 9th, 2010, 08:29 PM
so things must be perfect now for there to be God? meh...then you'd complain God gives you no choice but whatever...for those who don't believe no proof will suffice

but therein lies why I believe...because whether or not people believe, He is :) simply amazing

I missed your post.

I'm not attacking you or anything but reading your post it sounds like not even you know why you believe in him. "I believe because I believe" WTH does that mean?

miffedmax
Mar 9th, 2010, 08:52 PM
That's the essence of faith though. Whether one believes or not, whether one follows a traditional, structured religion or not, one chooses to believe. You can't be "made" to believe, but there is no final, indisputable proof (at least that you can know of) and furthermore, one could very much--at least in the Christian tradition--question the validity of any one who's "made" to believe's faith. You either accept or you don't. You can marshal what you may think are convincing reasons for yourself, but in the end, you have to take that infamous leap of faith.

The nonexistence of God is just as unprovable as his existence. It's opposite sides of the same coin.

Aravanecaravan
Mar 9th, 2010, 08:57 PM
The nonexistence of God is just as unprovable as his existence. It's opposite sides of the same coin.

The real question is, are you willing to extend this logic to the issue of the "hotness" of Lena's bangs versus the gorgeousitiliouciousness that is Aravane? Whose very existence confirms, for me, the existence of God....btw.

:p

Nicolás89
Mar 9th, 2010, 09:07 PM
That's the essence of faith though. Whether one believes or not, whether one follows a traditional, structured religion or not, one chooses to believe. You can't be "made" to believe, but there is no final, indisputable proof (at least that you can know of) and furthermore, one could very much--at least in the Christian tradition--question the validity of any one who's "made" to believe's faith. You either accept or you don't. You can marshal what you may think are convincing reasons for yourself, but in the end, you have to take that infamous leap of faith.

The nonexistence of God is just as unprovable as his existence. It's opposite sides of the same coin.

The difference is that according to god if you don't believe you suffer for eternity so at the end you never really choose, who may want eternal missery?

Marionated
Mar 9th, 2010, 09:41 PM
Faith.

darrinbaker00
Mar 10th, 2010, 05:29 AM
George Carlton-

Who?

zvonarevarulz
Mar 10th, 2010, 05:40 AM
Personally, I've always been a very spritual person. I grew up in the church(UPC), and my father is a minister. I rejected my faith in my mid teens after some terrible things happened to me, but God never gave up on me. He helped me turn my life around. Now I'm happily married with three beautiful children. I know God exists because I feel his touch on my life daily. :)

LucyFromLondon
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:31 AM
Yes, everything is Gods fault. We have no choice but to build shoddy buildings along fault lines and in hurricane zones and live there.... :rolleyes:

Yes, whether or not we believe in God, issues such as hunger, famine, war, unfairness, greed, corruption, murder, being run over by a bus, airplane crashes, terrorism etc. all all man made, not God made. Even the effects of natural disasters are all down to man's choices. We were born on a planet and what we do with it is our choice not God's. What we do with our lives is our choice not God's. Some people overcome the most horrendous hurdles, some don't. Most religions say the same things and have the same 'lessons': beleive in yourself, take responsibility, don't lie, cheat be greedy or do others harm etc. It's our choice whether we take notice of these 'lessons', and you don't have to believe in God to do so.

Personally I do believe in some form of God because I have experienced too many things which are beyond rational explanation. Some may call it fate but something has to be behind fate. And all the things I have got wrong in my life have all been down to me when I have lacked belief in myself or have failed to take into account 'lessons'. If I had taken into account such 'lessons' or believed in myself then I would have done many things differently. And that was all down to me so I accept that I had choices.

I think that those who say there is no God because awful things happen are actually denying responsibility and that horrible things happen anyway and absolving choice and responsibility. I don't accept it has to be like that. If we all took responsibility and made choices based on 'lessons' then man would have a much better existence and planet. It's our choice and just because we make the wrong ones does not mean that God does not exist.

LucyFromLondon
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:35 AM
The difference is that according to god if you don't believe you suffer for eternity so at the end you never really choose, who may want eternal missery?

Another interpretation is that if we choose to ignore the lessons and guidelines many religious texts provide then we will have a life of misery. It's not about the after life but about the effects of bad choices on our actual lives and others. Painful divorce, being cheated on, being ripped off, being mugged, murdered etc. or being an alcoholic, drug addict with all the negative effects it has on our lives and those who know us are all down to bad choices made and the life of misery they lead to here in our lives.

I find this sort of topic fascinating!

Inger67
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:00 AM
I don't see how there is a God. The only reason why there is such a strong faith amongst people is because of what they were told at such a young age. If you constantly reinforce it into a child's head over and over, then of course they will have "faith".

Just think about it logically and scientifically, that is why I STRONGLY believe there is no 'God'.

Harvs
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:23 AM
i dont..

Noctis
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:27 AM
Something must have created the world
Something must have created Particles of everything
Something that started created something

Faith

Sassy-Na
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:40 AM
i was an angel, but not "imperfect angel". :angel:

azdaja
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:40 AM
The nonexistence of God is just as unprovable as his existence. It's opposite sides of the same coin.
yeah, coz proving the negative is comparable to proving the positive. let's not be silly. people who believe in god can't even define what god is. you can't prove that something that isn't clearly defined doesn't exist because you need to know what you are dealing with first. on the other hand plenty of things claimed by religious people throughout the history have been proven wrong time and time again. it simply isn't true that it's the opposite side of the same coin. the coin is not the same at all.

i can see that belief does exist. it is very undefined and personal. as for god, if anyone is willing to explain what that is we could talk about whether that thing exists or not. until then god is meaningless.

I think that those who say there is no God because awful things happen are actually denying responsibility and that horrible things happen anyway and absolving choice and responsibility. I don't accept it has to be like that. If we all took responsibility and made choices based on 'lessons' then man would have a much better existence and planet. It's our choice and just because we make the wrong ones does not mean that God does not exist.
so the poor of haiti are responsible for what happened to them? :help: the funny thing is that god has traditionally been used to justify all sorts of injustice. even if i'd agree that plenty of world's problems are man made i will disagree that it boils down to individual choices. if we agree on that we could push for the improvement of our condition. and it is usually people of religion who are the main obstacle when we try.

Harvs
Mar 10th, 2010, 10:23 AM
i never got why people feel the need to debate this?
i dont believe in god but dont give a shit if someone else does, up to them..
its a pointless argument, people will and can believe what they wish to

abercrombieguy23
Mar 10th, 2010, 01:48 PM
Another interpretation is that if we choose to ignore the lessons and guidelines many religious texts provide then we will have a life of misery. It's not about the after life but about the effects of bad choices on our actual lives and others. Painful divorce, being cheated on, being ripped off, being mugged, murdered etc. or being an alcoholic, drug addict with all the negative effects it has on our lives and those who know us are all down to bad choices made and the life of misery they lead to here in our lives.

I find this sort of topic fascinating!
What arrogance, without religion we are unhappy?
How ironic since nothing else on earth has spawned so much hatred/violence/bigotry than religion.
I don't need a magic book to tell me that misery = any of those things

Halardfan
Mar 10th, 2010, 02:01 PM
The question I've never seen satisfactorily answered is the awful, random horrors that befall people, people of all ages. Why does God allow people to suffer? Why when something good happens does God get abundant credit, God acts through people committing good acts, yet when something bad happens, we get evasive answers about free will, and not interfering. Which are entirely unconvincing to me and don't ring true.

Nicolás89
Mar 10th, 2010, 03:00 PM
What arrogance, without religion we are unhappy?
How ironic since nothing else on earth has spawned so much hatred/violence/bigotry than religion.
I don't need a magic book to tell me that misery = any of those things

That's true, but you can also say nothing else has given as much joy as religion, I think.

delicatecutter
Mar 10th, 2010, 03:04 PM
I've never met one agnostic or atheist who wasn't intelligent. :hearts:

Bayo
Mar 10th, 2010, 05:56 PM
Think atheism in reverse. Atheists can't imagine some invisible force having created the world, and I can't imagine something not having created it.

I try to wrap my head around the concept of complete randomness, which for me also implies pointlessness, and it doesn't even seem possible. The universe and everything in it just popped up one day? That doesn't work for me.

To each their own. It's psychological for us all, I suppose.

ivanban
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:10 PM
What arrogance, without religion we are unhappy?
How ironic since nothing else on earth has spawned so much hatred/violence/bigotry than religion.
I don't need a magic book to tell me that misery = any of those things

THIS.

ivanban
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:22 PM
Think atheism in reverse. Atheists can't imagine some invisible force having created the world, and I can't imagine something not having created it.

I try to wrap my head around the concept of complete randomness, which for me also implies pointlessness, and it doesn't even seem possible. The universe and everything in it just popped up one day? That doesn't work for me.

To each their own. It's psychological for us all, I suppose.

Can you explain then which God created everything: christian God, muslim God, hindu God, budist God? :confused: I mean, if God created all, shouldn't there be only one God? :scratch: Why 99% of people who are religious, believe in God that is "traditional" for their part of the world? :confused: If God is omnipresent wouldn't people be aware of him from their birth? Why do people have to be taught about God before starting to believe in him? :confused:

Apoleb
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:34 PM
yeah, coz proving the negative is comparable to proving the positive. let's not be silly. people who believe in god can't even define what god is. you can't prove that something that isn't clearly defined doesn't exist because you need to know what you are dealing with first. on the other hand plenty of things claimed by religious people throughout the history have been proven wrong time and time again. it simply isn't true that it's the opposite side of the same coin. the coin is not the same at all.

i can see that belief does exist. it is very undefined and personal. as for god, if anyone is willing to explain what that is we could talk about whether that thing exists or not. until then god is meaningless.



This. There is very little evidence, even contrary evidence, to justify the belief in a god, according to the monotheistic traditions. It's simply not a good explanation for world/existence. As long as people can't define what god is, it's pretty much meaningless to say that we don't have proof that god doesn't exist.

--

Most people believe in god because it's personally rewarding for them. What I find it funny is that they think that this is a good enough argument. What is comfortable/makes you happy does not make it true, and if being closer to truth is your objective, then this isn't a good criterion.

I met a taxi driver the other day who was brutally honest about it all. He believed he had to make a deal with god so he would be more successful in life, cause god wouldn't care about you if you don't come to him.

Bayo
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:56 PM
Can you explain then which God created everything: christian God, muslim God, hindu God, budist God? :confused: I mean, if God created all, shouldn't there be only one God? :scratch: Why 99% of people who are religious, believe in God that is "traditional" for their part of the world? :confused: If God is omnipresent wouldn't people be aware of him from their birth? Why do people have to be taught about God before starting to believe in him? :confused:


I'm not sure why my post inspired all of those questions. I never implied that I can explain creation. I wrote that for me personally, it's what makes sense.

I can no more prove it than you can disprove it. These debates are always null from the beginning.

ivanban
Mar 10th, 2010, 07:57 PM
I'm not sure why my post inspired all of those questions. I never implied that I can explain creation. I wrote that for me personally, it's what makes sense.

I can no more prove it than you can disprove it. These debates are always null from the beginning.

What about other questions, not related to creation?

le bon vivant
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:02 PM
What about other questions, not related to creation?You need to ask a theologian those questions.

ivanban
Mar 10th, 2010, 08:06 PM
You need to ask a theologian those questions.

My manager graduated Theologian University and believe me scholard theologist give the most unsatisfying answers :rolleyes:

On half of questions they answer with "It just is" or "It just is so" :tape:

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 02:28 AM
Think atheism in reverse. Atheists can't imagine some invisible force having created the world, and I can't imagine something not having created it.

I try to wrap my head around the concept of complete randomness, which for me also implies pointlessness, and it doesn't even seem possible. The universe and everything in it just popped up one day? That doesn't work for me.

To each their own. It's psychological for us all, I suppose.

"Randomness" is not a good explanation either. The thing is, we don't know and the problem is that not a lot of people are willing to accept that, in face of certain empirical situations, it's better to withhold judgement (one reason I really like the movie "Doubt", because that was its whole point). That doesn't mean though we can't prove that there's no "god." Unless people are able to explain what they exactly mean by a "god" and the logical predictions that entails, that is just a meaningless sentence. All I know is that the vision of god the monotheistic religions promote along with its worldview has very little evidence going for it; and an ever growing body of evidence against it. Everything modern psychology, genetics and recently neuroscience point out to the way the human psyche is formed makes it unlikely that somehow there exists a "soul" that is outside the realm of the physical, that has inherent attributes immutable to the physical and that is consequently subject to judgment. It's one reason why religious people in their crushing majority get all riled up whenever there is an implication that you can actually re-create the "soul" with physical matter. And the fascinating thing is that this could be experimentally possible within the few decades as we know more and more about the brain. There is already the "blue brain project" which attempts to ultimately build a human-like brain with computer software. It ultimately boils down to a philosophical issue in that faith is fundamentally irrational, and the only "models" or "theories" one should entertain are the ones based on evidence. Religion steps out of the rational and into faith. It makes no sense to believe in a personal god according to Christians/Jews/Muslims (I'm only pointing those out because I'm most familiar with those).

Whitehead's Boy
Mar 11th, 2010, 02:44 AM
After 4 pages, the supernaturalists did not provide one shred of evidence, or any good reason to believe a god exists, other than an appeal to emotion, and other fallacious arguments.

Whatever problem positing a god solves, you just create 10 more problems. For example, if you're trying to make sense of the regularity, beauty and complexity of the universe, if you posit a god, you posit something even more complex and demanding of an explanation, for why would an entity omnipotent and omniscient just happen to exist out there?

As for the problem of evil, it shows the alleged god is an idiot, and hence the alleged god cannot exist since the alleged god is said to be perfect. The answer that "god has a plan that our finite mind cannot understand" is a non-answer, for whatever "plan" god has in mind, there is no need for malaria, dengue fever, AIDS, cancer to exist to achieve it. (Unless you believe in a sadistic god who can only achieve a plan by torturing his creation).

meyerpl
Mar 11th, 2010, 02:46 AM
That's the essence of faith though. Whether one believes or not, whether one follows a traditional, structured religion or not, one chooses to believe. You can't be "made" to believe, but there is no final, indisputable proof (at least that you can know of) and furthermore, one could very much--at least in the Christian tradition--question the validity of any one who's "made" to believe's faith. You either accept or you don't. You can marshal what you may think are convincing reasons for yourself, but in the end, you have to take that infamous leap of faith.

The nonexistence of God is just as unprovable as his existence. It's opposite sides of the same coin.I agree 100% I find it irritating when people on either side of the coin assumes a superior or condescending attitude toward the folks on the other side. It's audacious, obnoxious and arrogant either way.

Whitehead's Boy
Mar 11th, 2010, 02:53 AM
Except that it is those who posit the existence of an entity who have the burden to show that said entity exists. So that the nonexistence of a god is unprovable is a non-issue, for there is no need to prove that an entity does not exist.

There's no sane person who would waste time trying to prove that the invisible monster under your bed does not exist. You would just assume that said invisible monster does not exist until his existence is supported by evidence, or reason.

Nicolás89
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:03 AM
I find fascinating when people say "I felt the touch of god and now I'm a better/happier person" or things of that sort, like if every action they do in their lifes weren't their choice at all, like if they are happy is because of god, if they are sad, the same, I couldn't feel like them I would think I've become a robot who is programmed to feel and act according to somebody else's wish since my birth.
I find much more satisfying in the saying "I've overcome adversity on my own", IMO that line gives me the power and hope to know that even though everything is against me I will succeed at the end and that choice is up to me not to some superior being, it gives me freedom I think.

Brett.
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:18 AM
God is a myth. End of Story!

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:21 AM
Lord Tarvu. :bowdown:

Tarvuism


What is Tarvuism?

Tarvuism is a world religion that is over 3000 years old. It holds that there is one God - Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) - who created the two universes - Universe A and Universe B. We live in Universe B. Tarvuism is one of the oldest and largest monotheisitic religion in the world.
Tarvuism is based on the principles laid out in the holy Tarvunian (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunian) book, the Tarvunty (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunty).

Who was Tarvu?

Tarvuists believe that Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) is the one true God. After creating the universes, Tarvu came to Earth as a baby boy over 3000 years ago. After swimming in the ocean for 9 years with the holy octopus, Oobu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=oobu), Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) came onto dry landand entered the city of Baalb. It is unclear exactly where Baalb lay. Most scholars believe it lay between Turkey and Ethiopia. Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) lived and worked in this region, as a breadmaker, and later as a local government officer. He helped a lot of people in charitable work and was an expert on irrigation. Tarvu kept it secret that he was Lord God until he was 21. At his birthday party held in the Mun-Mun Valley, he announced himself as the true Deity. This is known as the 'Unveiling of Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu)', and is celebrated each year on December 25th as Tarvu's Day (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu_s_day). From here, his followers spread all around the world.

What do Tarvuists Believe?

The beliefs (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=beliefs) of Tarvuism are many and complex, but in essence, the religion can be reduced to just two words, 'Be nice (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=be_nice).'

Holy animals

http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?w=&h=&cache=cache&media=octopus.jpg (http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/detail.php?id=tarvuism&cache=cache&media=octopus.jpg)
Oobu, holy octopus of Tarvuism
Octopuses are holy animals. Owls are also holy but not as holy as octopuses.

Dietary Laws

It is forbidden to eat calamari (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=calamari) in any form. Or to drink sparkling water. Because the bubbles can often spell out blasphemous or rude phrases in Octish (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=octish). Some Tarvuists do not eat bread.
On the two holy days of the week, religious Tarvuists eat orange coloured food is often eaten: for example, carrots, cheddar cheese, mandarins, pumpkin, tangerine,sweet potato, egg yolks, and oranges

Clothing

Tarvuists are just like you and me, and wear whatever they want. However women tend to wear neck ties. Priestmunties (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=priestmunty) (Tarvuist priests) wear gowns.

Marriage

Marriage (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=marriage) is holy in Tarvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvuism). It is traditional for women propose to men. In some cultures gay marriage (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=marriage) is a new concept, in Tarvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvuism) it has been going for thousands of years.

Worship

http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?w=&h=&cache=cache&media=24566338.thb.jpg (http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/detail.php?id=tarvuism&cache=cache&media=24566338.thb.jpg)
The ancient chabernackle at Ghil-Metheron, said to have contained over 1000 toilets
Tarvuist temples are known as 'Chabernackles (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=chabernackle)'. Tarvuists go to Temple every Tuesday (Tarvusday) and Thursday (Tharvusday). Tarvuists read from the holy book The Tarvunty (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunty), sing hymns and also carry out private prayer in the form of songs, known as psongs which are sung silently inside the person's head.

Children

Children are valued in Tarvuism. At the age of 9 every Tarvuist boy or girl has an initiation ceremony,called an Erbuniatum (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=erbuniatum) which marks the age at which Tarvu stepped onto dry land. During this they bake a special cake, called an Erbunty roundling (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=erbunty_roundling) out of, which is given to the priest who must eat it all without sipping any water. If he does, there will be bad luck for all the family.

Afterlife

Tarvuists believe that when you die, your soul spends 9 years in the oceans. If you survive, spiritually, you are allowed to go to Tarvupia. Tarvuists believe that Tarvupia is a giant sphere that is larger than the universe itself. It is made up of infinity-minus-one concentric circles, each one leading, eventually to Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) (who is positioned at the centre).

Festivals

There are many joyous festivals in Tarvuist. The holiest day in the Tarvunian (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunian) calendar is December 25th in which we mark the day that Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) revealed himself to all mankind. The days is known as 'Tarvu's Day (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu_s_day)'. Tarvuists go to temple, come home, sleep, then get up, sleep again, then have a late lunch with lots of dancing and giving of presents.

Attitude to other religions

Tarvuists preaches harmony between all religions (except Barvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=barvuism)).

CoolDude7
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:22 AM
It's incredibility self-centered to think the creator of the universe or his offspring resembles man. Some people just don't understand how large this universe is. Not to mention the fact that their DNA would technically be much more complex. I believe there is God and Jesus, but he isn't in the lowly form of human. But we need the need to feel special.

we know that the first known things in the universal was force/energy.

Makes more sense that a God would be a form of ALL force/energy and not human.

and we know energy can't be destroyed or transformed so that would explain that he is EVERLASTING.

Nicolás89
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:27 AM
^^ Oh my Tarvu, it's like Judaism/Christianism/Islamism but with a tolerating doctrine, I'm in. :hearts:

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:33 AM
^^ O my Tarvu, it's like Judaism/Christianism/Islamism but whit a tolerating doctrine, I'm in. :hearts:

The most important prayer in Tarvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvuism) is 'Tarvu's Prayer' ('Tlentifini Marhaaysu'). It is said when you wake up, go to bed, and and after you have visited the toilet.
Here is the prayer:
Tarvu tarvooti,
Oboonoo cTooti,
Mimmin O'tibbi noonah,
Mdfitty fitty noonah,
Arvu immentiBarvu,
Tarvu.


Tarvuists believe that, when you die, your soul goes into the oceans for nine years (corresponding to the nine years that Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) swam). During this time, your soul has to learn to live underwater. It is survival of the fittest, and only those tough enough - spiritually - are judged fit to enter Tarvupia (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvupia) (heaven). Those that fail, are turned into amoeba or grains of sand.

:sobbing:

Nicolás89
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:36 AM
The most important prayer in Tarvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvuism) is 'Tarvu's Prayer' ('Tlentifini Marhaaysu'). It is said when you wake up, go to bed, and and after you have visited the toilet.
Here is the prayer:
Tarvu tarvooti,
Oboonoo cTooti,
Mimmin O'tibbi noonah,
Mdfitty fitty noonah,
Arvu immentiBarvu,
Tarvu.


Tarvuists believe that, when you die, your soul goes into the oceans for nine years (corresponding to the nine years that Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) swam). During this time, your soul has to learn to live underwater. It is survival of the fittest, and only those tough enough - spiritually - are judged fit to enter Tarvupia (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvupia) (heaven). Those that fail, are turned into amoeba or grains of sand.

:sobbing:

Like I said is the same as other monotheist religions. :lol:

CoolDude7
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:43 AM
I refuse to believe god and his son have a huge flaw in their gene whereby they would have to shit like humans. Just no!!! God or Jesus would not have to take a dump.

They are in a form way above us, but yes they live

irma
Mar 11th, 2010, 04:35 AM
Lord Tarvu. :bowdown:

Tarvuism


What is Tarvuism?

Tarvuism is a world religion that is over 3000 years old. It holds that there is one God - Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) - who created the two universes - Universe A and Universe B. We live in Universe B. Tarvuism is one of the oldest and largest monotheisitic religion in the world.
Tarvuism is based on the principles laid out in the holy Tarvunian (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunian) book, the Tarvunty (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunty).

Who was Tarvu?

Tarvuists believe that Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) is the one true God. After creating the universes, Tarvu came to Earth as a baby boy over 3000 years ago. After swimming in the ocean for 9 years with the holy octopus, Oobu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=oobu), Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) came onto dry landand entered the city of Baalb. It is unclear exactly where Baalb lay. Most scholars believe it lay between Turkey and Ethiopia. Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) lived and worked in this region, as a breadmaker, and later as a local government officer. He helped a lot of people in charitable work and was an expert on irrigation. Tarvu kept it secret that he was Lord God until he was 21. At his birthday party held in the Mun-Mun Valley, he announced himself as the true Deity. This is known as the 'Unveiling of Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu)', and is celebrated each year on December 25th as Tarvu's Day (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu_s_day). From here, his followers spread all around the world.

What do Tarvuists Believe?

The beliefs (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=beliefs) of Tarvuism are many and complex, but in essence, the religion can be reduced to just two words, 'Be nice (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=be_nice).'

Holy animals

http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?w=&h=&cache=cache&media=octopus.jpg (http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/detail.php?id=tarvuism&cache=cache&media=octopus.jpg)
Oobu, holy octopus of Tarvuism
Octopuses are holy animals. Owls are also holy but not as holy as octopuses.

Dietary Laws

It is forbidden to eat calamari (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=calamari) in any form. Or to drink sparkling water. Because the bubbles can often spell out blasphemous or rude phrases in Octish (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=octish). Some Tarvuists do not eat bread.
On the two holy days of the week, religious Tarvuists eat orange coloured food is often eaten: for example, carrots, cheddar cheese, mandarins, pumpkin, tangerine,sweet potato, egg yolks, and oranges

Clothing

Tarvuists are just like you and me, and wear whatever they want. However women tend to wear neck ties. Priestmunties (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=priestmunty) (Tarvuist priests) wear gowns.

Marriage

Marriage (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=marriage) is holy in Tarvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvuism). It is traditional for women propose to men. In some cultures gay marriage (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=marriage) is a new concept, in Tarvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvuism) it has been going for thousands of years.

Worship

http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/fetch.php?w=&h=&cache=cache&media=24566338.thb.jpg (http://tarvu.com/wiki/lib/exe/detail.php?id=tarvuism&cache=cache&media=24566338.thb.jpg)
The ancient chabernackle at Ghil-Metheron, said to have contained over 1000 toilets
Tarvuist temples are known as 'Chabernackles (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=chabernackle)'. Tarvuists go to Temple every Tuesday (Tarvusday) and Thursday (Tharvusday). Tarvuists read from the holy book The Tarvunty (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunty), sing hymns and also carry out private prayer in the form of songs, known as psongs which are sung silently inside the person's head.

Children

Children are valued in Tarvuism. At the age of 9 every Tarvuist boy or girl has an initiation ceremony,called an Erbuniatum (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=erbuniatum) which marks the age at which Tarvu stepped onto dry land. During this they bake a special cake, called an Erbunty roundling (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=erbunty_roundling) out of, which is given to the priest who must eat it all without sipping any water. If he does, there will be bad luck for all the family.

Afterlife

Tarvuists believe that when you die, your soul spends 9 years in the oceans. If you survive, spiritually, you are allowed to go to Tarvupia. Tarvuists believe that Tarvupia is a giant sphere that is larger than the universe itself. It is made up of infinity-minus-one concentric circles, each one leading, eventually to Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) (who is positioned at the centre).

Festivals

There are many joyous festivals in Tarvuist. The holiest day in the Tarvunian (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvunian) calendar is December 25th in which we mark the day that Tarvu (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu) revealed himself to all mankind. The days is known as 'Tarvu's Day (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=tarvu_s_day)'. Tarvuists go to temple, come home, sleep, then get up, sleep again, then have a late lunch with lots of dancing and giving of presents.

Attitude to other religions

Tarvuists preaches harmony between all religions (except Barvuism (http://tarvu.com/wiki/doku.php?id=barvuism)).

He at least looks a little bit like the only God we have to worship :worship:

http://www.jcnot4me.com/images/Spaghetti_Monster.jpg

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 04:39 AM
I've never met one agnostic or atheist who wasn't intelligent. :hearts:Oh really? There are quite a few dummies in this thread showing their colors

LudwigDvorak
Mar 11th, 2010, 04:55 AM
I believe at the bottom of my heart the reason I've had so many struggles in my life and am generally dissatisfied with myself is a lack of belief in God. I stopped believing in Christianity around six/seven years ago, and while I believe in something greater out there than I can possibly know about, I just don't know what its name is or what it really does, or if it's something I should "pray" to. I feel like if I want to be happy, I need to succumb my inhibitions and believe in God, since that's the primary way I see people be "happy."

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 05:51 AM
I believe at the bottom of my heart the reason I've had so many struggles in my life and am generally dissatisfied with myself is a lack of belief in God. I stopped believing in Christianity around six/seven years ago, and while I believe in something greater out there than I can possibly know about, I just don't know what its name is or what it really does, or if it's something I should "pray" to. I feel like if I want to be happy, I need to succumb my inhibitions and believe in God, since that's the primary way I see people be "happy."

I think that's true for most people. It naturally makes us all comfortable to have all our questions answered. Some people have entertained that there might be genetical reasons for believing in God since it could be evolutionary beneficial. I'm not sure about the extent of the evidence though. Still, though, that's not good enough reason to believe in god, and I think one can make himself/herself happier in other ways.

azdaja
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:00 AM
I agree 100% I find it irritating when people on either side of the coin assumes a superior or condescending attitude toward the folks on the other side. It's audacious, obnoxious and arrogant either way.
i can invent all sorts of fairy tales and then consider you arrogant and obnoxious for not believing them or even not bothering to prove them wrong. that would only make me arrogant and obnoxious, though.

belief in supernatural things is superstition, plain and simple. it doesn't mean that you are not supposed to believe in something or be "spiritual" - i do think that such things are a part of human nature. you just don't need to invent silly things and then worship them.

Oh really? There are quite a few dummies in this thread showing their colors
why don't you expose them then? :shrug: should be easy, no? :confused:

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:07 AM
i can invent all sorts of fairy tales and then consider you arrogant and obnoxious for not believing them or even not bothering to prove them wrong. that would only make me arrogant and obnoxious, though.

belief in supernatural things is superstition, plain and simple. it doesn't mean that you are not supposed to believe in something or be "spiritual" - i do think that such things are a part of human nature. you just don't need to invent silly things and then worship them.


why don't you expose them then? :shrug: should be easy, no? :confused:Its not a matter of exposure.
It is very prideful, arrogant and condescending to ridicule/doggedly question other people for their spiritual beliefs. As if your empirically driven, Western-based epistemological way of understanding your universe is the only way to possibly make sense of the world. I'm not a Christian or religious by any means, but I understand that people understand and make sense of their worlds in different ways depending on their individual histories and their culture, and no one way of thinking is better than the other.

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:13 AM
Its not a matter of exposure.
It is very prideful, arrogant and condescending to ridicule/doggedly question other people for their spiritual beliefs. As if your empirically driven, Western-based epistemological way of understanding your universe is the only way to possibly make sense of the world. I'm not a Christian or religious by any means, but I understand that people understand and make sense of their worlds in different ways depending on their individual histories and their culture, and no one way of thinking is better than the other.

It's "rational" more than "empirical." And reason is not the possession of the "West." Of course, it's always easy to step beyond rational discourse in order to claim validity for one's ideas. And seing that the Judeo-Christian tradition is usually considered the pillar of "Western civilization"....

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:22 AM
It's "rational" more than "empirical." And reason is not the possession of the "West." Of course, it's always easy to step beyond rational discourse in order to claim validity for one's ideas.How is it more rational to assume that the seemingly perfect universe began spontaneously as a big bang out of a single point of critical mass that came from nowhere, than to believe that the universe was designed intelligently? Both of these explanations are theoretical and require a certain leap of faith to put credence into. Any scientific explanation of the creation of the universe is definitely based on empirical evidence (yes, Western-based scientific methods) and not "reason". Lets not confuse the two.

These arguments in this thread just reek of ethnocentrism and a complete lack of understanding.

azdaja
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:23 AM
Its not a matter of exposure.
It is very prideful, arrogant and condescending to ridicule/doggedly question other people for their spiritual beliefs. As if your empirically driven, Western-based epistemological way of understanding your universe is the only way to possibly make sense of the world. I'm not a Christian or religious by any means, but I understand that people understand and make sense of their worlds in different ways depending on their individual histories and their culture, and no one way of thinking is better than the other.
the "empirically driven, Western-based epistemological way of understanding" the universe has put a man on the moon, what did other ways to understand the universe achieve? :confused:

of course i do not think that this way of understanding the universe is "western" but universal. but i do think it is superior to others precisely because it is universal and rational and it is the driving force behind all progress.

and i am not even saying religion has never produced anything good. at around this time last week i was in vatican and i was looking at plenty of great works of arts inspired by religion and theology. and i also understand that some people might need religion for comfort or whatever. as a way of making sense of all things that surrounds us it is inferior to rational thinking, though. it simply is. on a personal level it's fine.

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:30 AM
the "empirically driven, Western-based epistemological way of understanding" the universe has put a man on the moon, what did other ways to understand the universe achieve? :confused:

of course i do not think that this way of understanding the universe is "western" but universal. but i do think it is superior to others precisely because it is universal and rational and it is the driving force behind all progress.

and i am not even saying religion has never produced anything good. at around this time last week i was in vatican and i was looking at plenty of great works of arts inspired by religion and theology. and i also understand that some people might need religion for comfort or whatever. as a way of making sense of all things that surrounds us it is inferior to rational thinking, though. it simply is. on a personal level it's fine.Yeah, this same superior line of thinking that led to 2 World Wars and the Holocaust and the development of nuclear weapons.
Its not even worth arguing with those who are this unabashedly ethnocentric.

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:35 AM
How is it more rational to assume that the seemingly perfect universe began spontaneously as a big bang out of a single point of critical mass that came from nowhere, than to believe that the universe was designed intelligently?

I don't know who are you talking about, but I personally said that neither are satisfying answers that explain all of existence. But this fact does not mean we have to adopt mystical views that are not based on evidence. The Big Bang simply offers an explanation of how the universe we perceive started, and not the ultimate truth. We may never wrap our brains around that. But at least we would be making a step, however small it is, closer to an understanding of the world. Some people think we may never be capable of doing anything more, and they may be right. If you take Descarte's argument, you may be an imagination in my head, as well as the whole world around me, and there's no way I can disprove that. But there is a better epistemological method than another.


Both of these explanations are theoretical and require a certain leap of faith to put credence into. Any scientific explanation of the creation of the universe is definitely based on empirical evidence (yes, Western-based scientific methods) and not "reason".

One adequately explains observations, which you can observe directly or generate through experiments. The other does not. The scientific method is based on rational grounds. It's the most rational method we can use to understand the world. In science, anyway, nothing is held to a 100% belief.


These arguments in this thread just reek of ethnocentrism and a complete lack of understanding.

They don't. It's just a leap you're making. For instance, Budhism does not attempt to deal with the idea of a god or how the universe came to be, so it is probably more in line with what's beign said in this thread than Judaism and Christianity, which are strongly associated with the West (especially that several posters have gone out of their way to specifically make fun of monotheistic religions). And I'm still waiting how do show lack a "complete lack of understanding," so maybe we can all know better.

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:45 AM
Yeah, this same superior line of thinking that led to 2 World Wars and the Holocaust and the development of nuclear weapons.
Its not even worth arguing with those who are this unabashedly ethnocentric.

So genocide and wars were the result of the scientific method? Let's see.. it's probably the scientific method that will allow us best to know why some people behave the way they do, in the hope to stop that. Science allowed for more advanced technology, but it's not the one that used them the way they were.

azdaja
Mar 11th, 2010, 07:48 AM
Yeah, this same superior line of thinking that led to 2 World Wars and the Holocaust and the development of nuclear weapons.
Its not even worth arguing with those who are this unabashedly ethnocentric.
but what you are saying is insulting to all non-westerners who are trying to understand the world in this way. the west does happen to have been leading the way over past few centuries when it gets to sciences, but that's a historical coincidence. other parts of the world were leading the way before that.

as for world wars and atomic bombs, well, again this way of understanding stuff has given us so much power that we can even destroy the world. it is another sign of superiority in a way :tape: nor were these wars waged in the name of reason. there are still plenty of room for improvement and abolishing organised violence is certainly one of them. it's not like no wars were ever waged in the name of religion, though, so at best we can say we are equal about that part.

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:04 AM
I don't know who are you talking about, but I personally said that neither are satisfying answers that explain all of existence. But this fact does not mean we have to adopt mystical views that are not based on evidence. The Big Bang simply offers an explanation of how the universe we perceive started, and not the ultimate truth. We may never wrap our brains around that. But at least we would be making a step, however small it is, closer to an understanding of the world. Some people think we may never be capable of doing anything more, and they may be right. If you take Descarte's argument, you may be an imagination in my head, as well as the whole world around me, and there's no way I can disprove that. But there is a better epistemological method than another.Nobody "has" to adopt any belief that they don't want to. My point is that everyone has a right to believe what they will, and no one way of thinking is better than the other. Atheism is a no more valid way of perceiving the world than agnosticism, Agnosticism is a no more valid way of perceiving the world than Christianity is, etc.

One adequately explains observations, which you can observe directly or generate through experiments. The other does not. The scientific method is based on rational grounds. It's the most rational method we can use to understand the world. In science, anyway, nothing is held to a 100% belief.Are you familiar with Stephen Jay Gould, and his premise of non-overlapping magisteria? Science and religion are two completely different realms of knowledge, and there are some things that happen in our world that science cannot explain (the power of prayer, miracles, etc.), and there are some things in our world that religion cannot explain (dinosaur existence and extinctions, human population genetics, etc.) Trying to combine the two epistemologies is fruitless and only detracts from the validity of each separate system of knowledge. So combining science and religion into the same frame of knowledge and declaring one as a better way of understanding the world than the other is undoubtedly foolhardy, and shouldn't be done.

They don't. It's just a leap you're making. For instance, Budhism does not attempt to deal with the idea of a god or how the universe came to be, so it is probably more in line with what's beign said in this thread than Judaism and Christianity, which are strongly associated with the West (especially that several posters have gone out of their way to specifically make fun of monotheistic religions). And I'm still waiting how do they lack a "complete lack of understanding," so maybe we can all know better.Its not a leap, people are suggesting that Western science has basically provided the only adequate framework for understanding the world around us, and thats an ethnocentric idea. This is why I often have a problem with atheists, they are often just as arrogant and single minded as fundamentally religious people. I'm not particularly well versed in Buddhist thought, but I know that most people around the world rely on some form of faith in navigating their everyday lives. And marginalizing these people as foolish because science and "reason" isn't their religion is arrogant and disrespectful. What I meant by "complete lack of understanding" is the fact that many people in here who claimed to be atheist have made fun of religious people or ridiculed the idea of religion. If they are truly as rational and open-minded as they claim to be, they wouldn't be so condescending.

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:13 AM
So genocide and wars were the result of the scientific method? Let's see.. it's probably the scientific method that will allow us best to know why some people behave the way they do, in the hope to stop that. Science allowed for more advanced technology, but it's not the one that used them the way they were.So untrue. Economists have tried to use the scientific method to predict human economic behavior, they have failed half of the time. People have tried to use psychology to understand human behavior, without taking into account the importance of culture and individual life history in how a person behaves and understands their world. Human beings don't behave in an empirical, uniform fashion, basic level anthropology has shown this time and time again.

but what you are saying is insulting to all non-westerners who are trying to understand the world in this way. the west does happen to have been leading the way over past few centuries when it gets to sciences, but that's a historical coincidence. other parts of the world were leading the way before that.

as for world wars and atomic bombs, well, again this way of understanding stuff has given us so much power that we can even destroy the world. it is another sign of superiority in a way :tape: nor were these wars waged in the name of reason. there are still plenty of room for improvement and abolishing organised violence is certainly one of them. it's not like no wars were ever waged in the name of religion, though, so at best we can say we are equal about that part.You consider the ability to exploit the earths nonrenewable resources to create massive energy outputs that can potentially destroy the world and kill massive amounts of human lives as a sign of progress? With all of this technological advancement, we are actually reducing our fitness as a species and hastening our extinction. This is not sustainability or progress. Its a form of de-evolution.

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:20 AM
Nobody "has" to adopt any belief that they don't want to. My point is that everyone has a right to believe what they will, and no one way of thinking is better than the other. Atheism is a no more valid way of perceiving the world than agnosticism, Agnosticism is a no more valid way of perceiving the world than Christianity is, etc.

There is, and until I have seen the arguments, I'm not convinced. Sorry. :shrug:


Are you familiar with Stephen Jay Gould, and his premise of non-overlapping magisteria? Science and religion are two completely different realms of knowledge, and there are some things that happen in our world that science cannot explain (the power of prayer, miracles, etc.), and there are some things in our world that religion cannot explain (dinosaur existence and extinctions, human population genetics, etc.) Trying to combine the two epistemologies is fruitless and only detracts from the validity of each separate system of knowledge. So combining science and religion into the same frame of knowledge and declaring one as a better way of understanding the world than the other is undoubtedly foolhardy, and shouldn't be done.

If that's the best religion can claim to explain, then it's pretty damn weak, cause those are very, very scantily documented and verified. Ultimately, whatever provides an explanation for the world could be subjected to judgement based on observations and verifiability. And contrary to popular opinion, I do think many monotheistic assumptions could be subject to experiments in the future, and there are already evidence against them. Religion and science can be related in many ways, especially whenever science shows something that a religious belief contradicts with; and there are plenty with religious beliefs contradicting to scientific evidence (such as the age of the Earth, or the necessary involvment of god in creation of man...etc). Ultimately, making an explanation of the world that documents the evidence is better than one that does not or that can't. I don't mean to be condescending or disrespectful, so we can respectly agree to disagree.


Its not a leap, people are suggesting that Western science has basically provided the only adequate framework for understanding the world around us, and thats an ethnocentric idea. This is why I often have a problem with atheists, they are often just as arrogant and single minded as fundamentally religious people. I'm not particularly well versed in Buddhist thought, but I know that most people around the world rely on some form of faith in navigating their everyday lives. And marginalizing these people as foolish because science and "reason" isn't their religion is arrogant and disrespectful. What I meant by "complete lack of understanding" is the fact that many people in here who claimed to be atheist have made fun of religious people or ridiculed the idea of religion. If they are truly as rational and open-minded as they claim to be, they wouldn't be so condescending.

Well, it may be arrogant and disrespectful, but I haven't seen yet any argument in this thread explaining why such a view is wrong. I think it's the more rational view to adopt, and seing that I hold reason higher than anything else, I think it's the best method. But as I said, people can disagree if they want to.

So untrue. Economists have tried to use the scientific method to predict human economic behavior, they have failed half of the time. People have tried to use psychology to understand human behavior, without taking into account the importance of culture and individual life history in how a person behaves and understands their world. Human beings don't behave in an empirical, uniform fashion, basic level anthropology has shown this time and time again.

Sure, but that's like saying science is bad because Aristotle used something like the scientific method to propose that there are five elements, or that the universe is composed of two sub-spaces. Only recently we have started to make forays into human behavior, and it's all being done in neuroscience. The problems of psychology and economics is that they fail to strongly associate the physical world with human behavior, and so they have very small predictability (like all social sciences). This is what neuroscience is doing.

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:34 AM
How is it more rational to assume that the seemingly perfect universe began spontaneously as a big bang out of a single point of critical mass that came from nowhere, than to believe that the universe was designed intelligently? Both of these explanations are theoretical and require a certain leap of faith to put credence into. Any scientific explanation of the creation of the universe is definitely based on empirical evidence (yes, Western-based scientific methods) and not "reason". Lets not confuse the two.

These arguments in this thread just reek of ethnocentrism and a complete lack of understanding.

Uhmm, if universe was not designed spontaneously but intelligently by a God, how come that by all studies universe is expanding and will eventually collapse like a balloon?! :confused:

So, if I understand it correctly God was like "Blah, I'm so bored. What should I do......oh yeah, I could create a vast space with big shiny balls and little non-shiny balls that go around them. It will grow and grow and grow till it pops like a balloon. Oh whatta joy, that sounds fun. Let's try it!............Oh, and by the way I could make my various incarnations on one of those non-shiny balls!" :help:

Does that mean God was doing nothing before he created universe?! :scratch:

I also never understood, how was God created?! I'm sure he didn't pop out "spontaneously out of nowhere, but was designed intelligently" :confused:

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:41 AM
There is, and until I have seen the arguments, I'm not convinced. Sorry. :shrug:
Thats a very arrogant philosophy to have, and I truly hope that it extends only to religion and youre not as judgmental about other things. What youre saying is tantamount to people saying 'Homosexuality is deviant behavior because it goes against the natural order of animal sexual relations and reduces our fitness as a species, and until I hear an argument to the contrary that convinces me enough I know that I'm right'

If that's the best religion can claim to explain, then it's pretty damn weak, cause those are very, very scantily documented and verified. Ultimately, whatever provides an explanation for the world could be subjected to judgement based on observations and verifiability. And contrary to popular opinion, I do think many monotheistic assumptions could be subject to experiments in the future, and there are already evidence against them. Religion and science can be related in many ways, especially whenever science shows something that a religious belief contradicts with; and there are plenty with religious beliefs contradicting to scientific evidence (such as the age of the Earth, or the necessary involvment of god in creation of man...etc). Ultimately, making an explanation of the world that documents the evidence is better than one that does not or that can't. I don't mean to be condescending or disrespectful, so we can respectly agree to disagree.We'll just have to agree to disagree. If religion can fulfills ones life and individual existence, make them content and doesn't impede on the lives of anyone else, I think its a far more elevated level of thinking than science is capable of providing.


Well, it may be arrogant and disrespectful, but I haven't seen yet any argument in this thread explaining why such a view is wrong. I think it's the more rational view to adopt, and seing that I hold reason higher than anything else, I think it's the best method. But as I said, people can disagree if they want to.I'm glad that you agree. Such a view is wrong because it doesnt promote greater understanding amongst human beings - that way of thinking is just as prideful, arrogant and destructive as religious fundamentalism.

Sure, but that's like saying science is bad because Aristotle used something like the scientific method to propose that there are five elements, or that the universe is composed of two sub-spaces. Only recently we have started to make forays into human behavior, and it's all being done in neuroscience. The problems of psychology and economics is that they fail to strongly associate the physical world with human behavior, and so they have very small predictability. This is what neuroscience is doing.Are you serious? :lol::lol:
Anthropology has been making forays into human behavior for over a hundred years. As a matter of fact, you are espousing anthropological thought regarding reason, rationality, and universal human behaviors from the 1940s and 50s in all of your posts in this thread, you just dont realize it. :lol::lol: Unless neuroscience is making forays into the ways that culture and ecology work in tandem to influence human behavior, it is not making any meaningful advances in understanding human behavior.

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:46 AM
Uhmm, if universe was not designed spontaneously but intelligently by a God, how come that by all studies universe is expanding and will eventually collapse like a balloon?! :confused:

So, if I understand it correctly God was like "Blah, I'm so bored. What should I do......oh yeah, I could create a vast space with big shiny balls and little non-shiny balls that go around them. It will grow and grow and grow till it pops like a balloon. Oh whatta joy, that sounds fun. Let's try it!............Oh, and by the way I could make my various incarnations on one of those non-shiny balls!" :help:

Does that mean God was doing nothing before he created universe?! :scratch:

I also never understood, how was God created?! I'm sure he didn't pop out "spontaneously out of nowhere, but was designed intelligently" :confused:I dont know the answers to any of those questions, bb :lol::lol:
All I can say is do your research and whatever makes most sense for you, roll with that. :cool:

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:49 AM
I dont know the answers to any of those questions, bb :lol::lol:
All I can say is do your research and whatever makes most sense for you, roll with that. :cool:

Why would I bother researching about something I don't believe in?! :scratch:

Svetlana)))
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:50 AM
I am Roman Catholic and I do believe in God because I have felt his love. It is intangible and unlike any other emotion I have ever felt. So often do you see the holy spirit touch a person and he cries instantly, falling FLAT on the floor. It is unfathomable.

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:51 AM
Why would I bother researching about something I don't believe in?! :scratch:Because its dumb to totally discredit the validity of something that you don't know much about :lol::lol::lol:

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:55 AM
Thats a very arrogant philosophy to have, and I truly hope that it extends only to religion and youre not as judgmental about other things. What youre saying is tantamount to people saying 'Homosexuality is deviant behavior because it goes against the natural order of animal sexual relations and reduces our fitness as a species, and until I hear an argument to the contrary that convinces me enough I know that I'm right'

:lol: No it's really not. First of all, even if that statement is true, it doesn't make it "bad." Reducing our fitness is not necessarily ethically bad. And ironically the reason comes from science and our knowledge of the world. We're most likely the result of evolution. There's no purpose for organisms. They just are and have survived, so why should I care about the human fitness level? It may very well be arrogant, but I think I have the arguments on my side; until I'm proven otherwise. And so far, a lot of stuff has been said about "arrogance" and "disrespect", but not much about the argumentative content.


We'll just have to agree to disagree. If religion can fulfills ones life and individual existence, make them content and doesn't impede on the lives of anyone else, I think its a far more elevated level of thinking than science is capable of providing.

It depends on your priorities. My priority is not living a comfortable life. It's gaining a better understanding of what's around me. It's fine though if it makes people happy. :shrug: I just don't believe that makes the actual epistemological content of the claim correct, which what is ultimately trying to do.


I'm glad that you agree. Such a view is wrong because it doesnt promote greater understanding amongst human beings - that way of thinking is just as prideful, arrogant and destructive as religious fundamentalism.

Why? At least I'm debating, looking for answers and asking for a rational discourse about what is the best method of knowledge. There is no better way to promote a "greater understanding." Those who cling to their beliefs in spite of reason are the ones who hamper understanding.


Are you serious? :lol::lol:
Anthropology has been making forays into human behavior for over a hundred years. As a matter of fact, you are espousing anthropological thought regarding reason, rationality, and universal human behaviors from the 1940s and 50s in all of your posts in this thread, you just dont realize it. :lol::lol: Unless neuroscience is making forays into the ways that culture and ecology work in tandem to influence human behavior, it is not making any meaningful advances in understanding human behavior.

Anthropology is a science, and it's not me who made the claim that science isn't doing anything to promote an understanding of human behavior. I don't think psychology, economics, anthropology or any other social science is useless at all. However, I think neuroscience will be the one that makes the biggest advances in this field, because it ultimately wants to link physical phenomena in the brain to human behavior. And that of course will take into account "culture" (which is a product of those phenomena) and ecology, represented in the stimuli and environment that shapes the brain. It's a pretty nascent field, still.

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:56 AM
I am Roman Catholic and I do believe in God because I have felt his love. It is intangible and unlike any other emotion I have ever felt. So often do you see the holy spirit touch a person and he cries instantly, falling FLAT on the floor. It is unfathomable.

If you describe someone behaving like that it sure sounds more like anxiety attack or something :unsure:

azdaja
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:57 AM
You consider the ability to exploit the earths nonrenewable resources to create massive energy outputs that can potentially destroy the world and kill massive amounts of human lives as a sign of progress? With all of this technological advancement, we are actually reducing our fitness as a species and hastening our extinction. This is not sustainability or progress. Its a form of de-evolution.
technology may have given us ability to destroy the world. it doesn't mean we need to.

and regarding social sciences, people underestimate progress made there. people should not underestimate resistance to understanding of human behaviour from people who profit from the status quo. it's the same as the previous resistance of the church to development of astronomy which undermined its position. in a similar way there are plenty of ideologies that simply profess some "higher truths" that are not to be questioned. those who do question them are definitely making progress, though.

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 08:58 AM
Because its dumb to totally discredit the validity of something that you don't know much about :lol::lol::lol:

Enlighten me with answers to my questions and then I'll maybe be interested :rolleyes:

Plus, that sure sounds like "It just is" and "It just is so" answers I already mentioned :help:

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:02 AM
technology may have given us ability to destroy the world. it doesn't mean we need to.

and regarding social sciences, people underestimate progress made there. people should not underestimate resistance to understanding of human behaviour from people who profit from the status quo. it's the same as the previous resistance of the church to development of astronomy which undermined its position. in a similar way there are plenty of ideologies that simply profess some "higher truths" that are not to be questioned. those who do question them are definitely making progress, though.

Exactly!

And wasn't it the very christian church who preached that Earth is flat as a pancake and that Earth is center of Universe and everything is circling around it? Have they got wrong message from the God and needed help from scientists to show them the correct way of things? :confused:

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:14 AM
:lol: No it's really not. First of all, even if that statement is true, it doesn't make it "bad." Reducing our fitness is not necessarily ethically bad. And ironically the reason comes from science and our knowledge of the world. We're most likely the result of evolution. There's no purpose for organisms. They just are and have survived, so why should I care about the human fitness level? It may very well be arrogant, but I think I have the arguments on my side; until I'm proven otherwise. And so far, a lot of stuff has been said about "arrogance" and "disrespect", but not much about the argumentative content.There is a purpose for organisms: to procreate. :lol::lol: That is the most basic purpose and instinct for all organisms.
And as a homo (I'm gay - so its no disrespect to anyone) you are flying directly in the face of this evolutionary truth. So yes, in purely scientific terms, homosexuality is bad. :lol: This is not only science, but it is also reason and rationality, no? I'm sure Kant or Descartes or one of those philosophers would say that homosexuality is therefore unethical. I dont agree with this assessment, Im just showing you where your line of thinking goes when it stretches to realms outside of religion.

Why? At least I'm debating, looking for answers and asking for a rational discourse about what is the best method of knowledge. There is no better way to promote a "greater understanding." Those who cling to their beliefs in spite of reason are the ones who hamper understanding.Making fun of people for the beliefs that they hold nearest and dearest to them is not a good way to promote understanding, even if you are coming from a place of "reason" and "rational discourse" lol

Anthropology is a science, and it's not me who made the claim that science isn't doing anything to promote an understanding of human behavior. I don't think psychology, economics, anthropology or any other social science is useless at all. However, I think neuroscience will be the one that makes the biggest advances in this field, because it ultimately wants to link physical phenomena in the brain to human behavior. And that of course will take into account "culture" (which is a product of those phenomena) and ecology, represented in the stimuli and environment that shapes the brain. It's a pretty nascent field, still.LOL I just critiqued those who made science their religion and stood condescendingly against religious folk. I'm actually a grad student in Anthropology, so I'm familiar with evolutionary psychology and motivations of human behavior and rational thought and I agree that social sciences are useful, but only with a rigorous and critical eye. I'm not that familiar with neuroscience, I'll have to read more scholarly journal articles about it. I am familiar with cognitive anthropology though, and most studies have found that the internal composition of the human brain does not act or cause human behavior independently, and cannot be seen as the source of human culture and behavior. Claude Levi-Strauss did much work into these ideas, where he tried to break down universal commonalities in linguistic patterns and try to link them with specific centers of the brain as a way to predict and find universals in human behavior. Its interesting stuff, you might enjoy some of it!

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:19 AM
technology may have given us ability to destroy the world. it doesn't mean we need to.

and regarding social sciences, people underestimate progress made there. people should not underestimate resistance to understanding of human behaviour from people who profit from the status quo. it's the same as the previous resistance of the church to development of astronomy which undermined its position. in a similar way there are plenty of ideologies that simply profess some "higher truths" that are not to be questioned. those who do question them are definitely making progress, though.I agree with you for sure, I am studying to eventually get my PhD in a social science. I hope to be a social scientist one day lol. And you raise far deeper issues than I was taking on. Even if I was religious and I was a Christian, theres no way in hell I would be a Catholic. :tape: I was just arguing thst we all should be more respectful of eachother and our individual beliefs.

Exactly!

And wasn't it the very christian church who preached that Earth is flat as a pancake and that Earth is center of Universe and everything is circling around it? Have they got wrong message from the God and needed help from scientists to show them the correct way of things? :confused:
OK, because Christian Catholicism is the only religion in the entire world, right? :tape:
Sorry that I dont share your cynicism.

azdaja
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:22 AM
There is a purpose for organisms: to procreate. :lol::lol: That is the most basic purpose and instinct for all organisms.
And as a homo (I'm gay - so its no disrespect to anyone) you are flying directly in the face of this evolutionary truth. So yes, in purely scientific terms, homosexuality is bad. :lol: This is not only science, but it is also reason and rationality, no? I'm sure Kant or Descartes or one of those philosophers would say that homosexuality is therefore unethical. I dont agree with this assessment, Im just showing you where your line of thinking goes when it stretches to realms outside of religion.
i find it funny that you are implying that science would claim that homosexuality is unethical when it was religions that have made such claims trhoughout the history. meanwhile it is precisely science that has established that homosexuality is natural.

I agree with you for sure, I am studying to eventually get my PhD in a social science. I hope to be a social scientist one day lol. And you raise far deeper issues than I was taking on. Even if I was religious and I was a Christian, theres no way in hell I would be a Catholic. :tape: I was just arguing thst we all should be more respectful of eachother and our individual beliefs.
i don't think all beliefs are equal. that's how all progress is made, by questioning the established opinions and formulating new ones which explain the world in a more satisfying way.

Apoleb
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:24 AM
There is a purpose for organisms: to procreate. :lol::lol: That is the most basic purpose and instinct for all organisms.
And as a homo (I'm gay - so its no disrespect to anyone) you are flying directly in the face of this evolutionary truth. So yes, in purely scientific terms, homosexuality is bad. :lol: This is not only science, but it is also reason and rationality, no? I'm sure Kant or Descartes or one of those philosophers would say that homosexuality is therefore unethical. I dont agree with this assessment, Im just showing you where your line of thinking goes when it stretches to realms outside of religion.

No it's not. That's one of the most fundamental and frequent mistakes people make about evolution. :yawn: Evolution simply states that what survives, stays and has the chance to procreate, passing along its genes. That's ALL. It takes into account several factors, including natural selection. It's only an explanation of why we're here, and it is not related to an ethical code in any shape or form. There's no "hidden purpose" behind evolution, and that's its beauty. Evolution does not imply we are supposed to increase our fitness. It only tells us how we ended up. When I think of morality, I think of human consciousness and empathy: both of which could have scientific foundations.


Making fun of people for the beliefs that they hold nearest and dearest to them is not a good way to promote understanding, even if you are coming from a place of "reason" and "rational discourse" lol

Fine. :shrug: I should sugercoat my comments next time with "religion is still cool as long as it makes people happy."


LOL I just critiqued those who made science their religion and stood condescendingly against religious folk. I'm actually a grad student in Anthropology, so I'm familiar with evolutionary psychology and motivations of human behavior and rational thought and I agree that social sciences are useful, but only with a rigorous and critical eye. I'm not that familiar with neuroscience, I'll have to read more scholarly journal articles about it. I am familiar with cognitive anthropology though, and most studies have found that the internal composition of the human brain does not act or cause human behavior independently, and cannot be seen as the source of human culture and behavior. Claude Levi-Strauss did much work into these ideas, where he tried to break down universal commonalities in linguistic patterns and try to link them with specific centers of the brain as a way to predict and find universals in human behavior. Its interesting stuff, you might enjoy some of it!

I am a graduate student in neuroscience. :lol: We'll see who'll get there first on human behavior, and who'll get the Nobel in 60 years. ;) In my field, at least, you'd be surprised of how impacting brain lesions can be on personality. This is one famous example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_Gage

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:24 AM
I agree with you for sure, I am studying to eventually get my PhD in a social science. I hope to be a social scientist one day lol. And you raise far deeper issues than I was taking on. Even if I was religious and I was a Christian, theres no way in hell I would be a Catholic. :tape: I was just arguing thst we all should be more respectful of eachother and our individual beliefs.


OK, because Christian Catholicism is the only religion in the entire world, right? :tape:
Sorry that I dont share your cynicism.

It's not :rolleyes: What confuses me is that if they're in constant connection with God, why they needed science to realize Earth isn't flat? :cuckoo:

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:39 AM
Enlighten me with answers to my questions and then I'll maybe be interested :rolleyes:

Plus, that sure sounds like "It just is" and "It just is so" answers I already mentioned :help:Pay me, Ill enlighten you all you want :)

i find it funny that you are implying that science would claim that homosexuality is unethical when it was religions that have made such claims trhoughout the history. meanwhile it is precisely science that has established that homosexuality is natural.


i don't think all beliefs are equal. that's how all progress is made, by questioning the established opinions and formulating new ones which explain the world in a more satisfying way.I was implying that philosophers could formulate that argument regarding the ethical nature of homosexuality, not scientists.

No it's not. That's one of the most fundamental and frequent mistakes people make about evolution. :yawn: Evolution simply states that what survives, stays and has the chance to procreate, passing along its genes. That's ALL. It takes into account several factors, including natural selection. It's only an explanation of why we're here, and it is not related to an ethical code in any shape or form. There's no "hidden purpose" behind evolution, and that's its beauty. Evolution does not imply we are supposed to increase our fitness. It only tells us how we ended up. When I think of morality, I think of human consciousness and empathy: both of which could have scientific foundations.You're speaking of Darwinian evolution, Im speaking more about Malthusian population theory and demography, but nevermind.
And thats an interesting idea. I'd need to read more into the research surrounding that, but its an interesting position.


I am a graduate student in neuroscience. :lol: We'll see who'll get there first on human behavior, and who'll get the Nobel in 60 years. ;) In my field, at least, you'd be surprised of how impacting brain lesions can be on personality. This is one famous example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phineas_GageMeh, they respect yall way more than they respect us in anthropology. I'll never get a Nobel Prize, Ill just support and live vicariously through you when you win yours :lol: And Ill check that link out. :)

ivanban
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:54 AM
Pay me, Ill enlighten you all you want :)

Be a good Samaritan :angel:

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 09:57 AM
Be a good Samaritan :angel:LMAO :lol::lol::lol:

Whitehead's Boy
Mar 11th, 2010, 10:18 AM
How is it more rational to assume that the seemingly perfect universe

Seemingly perfect? You seem to have forgotten about AIDS, cancer, dengue fever, Lyme Disease and tsunamis.

Not to mention that the process of evolution is a painfully long and cruel process.

began spontaneously as a big bang out of a single point of critical mass that came from nowhere, than to believe that the universe was designed intelligently?

What is more rational when we don't understand something is to admit that we don't understand it. We don't know what caused the big bang, so we wait until we find out instead of making up invisible beings.

Both of these explanations are theoretical and require a certain leap of faith to put credence into.

There is no leap of faith to admit that we don't fully understand the universe.

Whitehead's Boy
Mar 11th, 2010, 10:32 AM
Nobody "has" to adopt any belief that they don't want to. My point is that everyone has a right to believe what they will, and no one way of thinking is better than the other. Atheism is a no more valid way of perceiving the world than agnosticism, Agnosticism is a no more valid way of perceiving the world than Christianity is, etc.


Do you extend this "logic" to Scientology as well? If so, why, and if not, why not?

le bon vivant
Mar 11th, 2010, 11:00 AM
Boy the discussion is over.
Stop quoting me. :lol:

Whitehead's Boy
Mar 11th, 2010, 11:22 AM
I can see why you would want the discussion to be over.

Princeza
Mar 11th, 2010, 12:06 PM
its a pointless argument, people will and can believe what they wish to

Indeed.

Vaidisova Ruled
Mar 11th, 2010, 12:14 PM
I'm not really religious but I believe in god though I don't really care about the bible and what's written in it and I usually don't like what the church says on the "political" issues (lots of BS).
And I don't like when atheists try to make me believe/convince that there's no god. If you don't believe in god, fine. But there's no need to try to convince everybody.

Lucemferre
Mar 11th, 2010, 12:19 PM
I think that doubting the existence of God is natural, even if temporary. I think what matters is what follows the doubt.

One thing I have NO doubt about though: not for one minute do I ever believe that I am a mutated uppity fish that evolved into a cave-Chewbacca before eventually settling on a human form.

So you believe we are products of incest sex between Adam and eve's children?Yes that's much more reasonable :tape:
Some people are like this,too proud to believe in evolution.Not necessarily because they are religious. They take offence when somebody says you were like a monkey one day.

Londoner
Mar 11th, 2010, 01:47 PM
My Dad used to say: never discuss politics, religion or money. 'nuff said!!

delicatecutter
Mar 11th, 2010, 01:57 PM
I love what Kathleen Hanna has to say about God in this clip. :worship:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFWOzzIIApA

Nicolás89
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:10 PM
Boy the discussion is over.
Stop quoting me. :lol:

I thought you hated when people get condescending. :(

Super Dave
Mar 11th, 2010, 03:37 PM
My Dad used to say: never discuss politics, religion or money. 'nuff said!!

So true. Words to live by.

ivanban
Mar 12th, 2010, 11:05 PM
What arrogance, without religion we are unhappy?
How ironic since nothing else on earth has spawned so much hatred/violence/bigotry than religion.
I don't need a magic book to tell me that misery = any of those things

President 'revealed reasons for war in private meeting'

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Friday, 7 October 2005

President George Bush has claimed he was told by God to invade Iraq and attack Osama bin Laden's stronghold of Afghanistan as part of a divine mission to bring peace to the Middle East, security for Israel, and a state for the Palestinians.

:o

Cosantoir
Mar 13th, 2010, 07:27 AM
Arguments surround religion. I think people just believe what they believe and keep it to themselves. If you believe in something it doesn't hurt/harm/affect anyone around you. If you don't believe in something it doesn't hurt/harm/affect anyone around you. It's between you and you.

ivanban
Mar 13th, 2010, 08:35 AM
Arguments surround religion. I think people just believe what they believe and keep it to themselves. If you believe in something it doesn't hurt/harm/affect anyone around you. If you don't believe in something it doesn't hurt/harm/affect anyone around you. It's between you and you.

I'm sorry, have you read my previous post :cuckoo: :weirdo:

esquímaux
Mar 13th, 2010, 12:11 PM
I believe in a higher power. There has been too many times when I could have been in serious peril. But, something... someone helped me. Someone who wasn't human. A supernatural, omniscient power. This world is filled with too many religions.

Do me a favour and look at the stars tonight. Overlook religion and ponder who is really in control of the universe.

HippityHop
Mar 13th, 2010, 08:45 PM
The story of the Exodus from Egypt is a good illustration of why even if God showed himself to people there would be unbelievers. The Israelites had seen many miracles performed by God but started bitching at the first sign of discomfort.

Long after the deniers and haters of God are food for the worms, there will still be believers.

The Dawntreader
Mar 14th, 2010, 12:48 AM
I believe we all have personal connections spiritually.

However the thought of having an omnipotent power over EVERYONE is misguided. Religion should never cater for the masses, but for the individual.

Halardfan
Mar 14th, 2010, 07:47 AM
If good things happen religious people give thanks to God who was watching over them. If people perform great deeds, they thank God for working through them. So God is clearly interefering, answering prayers, tending to his flock. If a few are pulled from the rubble following a natural disaster God is thanked for this miracle.

BUT when terrible things happen, when people do terrible things, then God is a hands-off kinda God. He'd like to intervene but there is something about free will in the rules, and so he can't, sorry. Religious people cite the handful of people pulled from the rubble and forget about the hundred thousand people under it. Where was God for them? God gets all the credit when things go well, and none of the blame when don't. He has a great deal going!

The truth is, there is no God, and no rhyme or reason to why a particular person lives a long, healthy life, while their neighbour suffers terrible pain and misery. I truly wish there were, I truly wish that everything happened for a reason, and that those who suffered so terribly on earth get a blissful reward in heaven. But to believe that I need more than blind faith I need evidence. There is none, as yet.

Edinboro
Mar 14th, 2010, 08:30 PM
I've read a lot of stories on reincarnation that I find them too hard to believe it's not true. I also recently just finished reading this book called Seth Speaks. It was written in the 70s by a medium letting a spirit guide talk through her. It was very good and so different from the Chrisitan view I was brought up in. I admit my spiritual beliefs are different than most others but i'm pretty sure we compose everything that will happen to us in our current life prior to birth. The universe is a ride that we all take part in.

This is one of my favorite websites.. http://www.afterlife101.com/ ... I tend to believe what psychics and mediums say over the bible, because well... The bible was written by man.

omoruyi
Mar 15th, 2010, 04:41 AM
Re: What makes you believe in god?

The bible! ~ :D

Six Feet Under
Mar 15th, 2010, 11:10 AM
At this stage of life, i prefer not to think about religion becuase frankly it just makes me a little confused.

I went to primary catholic school and am now currently in a public non-religious high school.

I respect all faiths. I don't believe intelligence, integrity or morality in individuals can be asserted based on religious stereotypes.

My mother who was brought up in a strong Roman Catholic household, and my father who is an atheist both respect my religious choice and have not pressured me into following a faith.

As a 15 year old, i can not definitively determine what faith i may or may not chose to follow in the future.

abercrombieguy23
Mar 15th, 2010, 02:14 PM
I've read a lot of stories on reincarnation that I find them too hard to believe it's not true. I also recently just finished reading this book called Seth Speaks. It was written in the 70s by a medium letting a spirit guide talk through her. It was very good and so different from the Chrisitan view I was brought up in. I admit my spiritual beliefs are different than most others but i'm pretty sure we compose everything that will happen to us in our current life prior to birth. The universe is a ride that we all take part in.

This is one of my favorite websites.. http://www.afterlife101.com/ ... I tend to believe what psychics and mediums say over the bible, because well... The bible was written by man.

I don't know what happens when you die, and all the religious people who claim they do know are being ridiculous. I know that they don't know any more than I do. They do not have special powers that I don't possess. When they speak about the afterlife with such certainty and so many specifics, it just makes me laugh. -Bill Maher

A good friend of mine was clinically dead for 8 minutes after going into cardiac arrest....She woke up afterwards and told me she saw nothing, no light, no voices etc...
Just a thought

DemWilliamsGulls
Mar 15th, 2010, 02:40 PM
I was raised on God, but I believe in him because of what he's done for me. Some of the things I've prayed for he's helped me with. But I've seen what God has done for OTHERS as well that makes me a believer so thats why I know there's a man upstairs. I dont agree with what everyone says about his rules and regulations about life (such as homosexuality, tatoos, and various other things christians over the years has hand picked out of the bible as "major sins" and ignored the rest only to fit to what they see as God's vision of a lifestyle and how you should live.) thats why you should have your own personal relationship with God if you believe in him and not get caught up in MAN and how he think you should live and what he tell you about God. Experience him for YOURSELF..