Do You Believe In God?

[Ereth]

How the human body functions is a miracle in itself as I've seen the lengths a body will go to in order to keep an equilibrium when even one system fails. In order for all of that to function like it does in harmony tells me there is a God.

That, or an evolutionary process over millions of years that helped keep our ancestors alive until they became us.

 

[Rob]

What really is a miracle, though, is that I held a human brain in my hand that had once had a personality, thoughts and memories - like yourself. A persons liver is also just a piece of meat, but when it fails it's a horrible thing to watch as it's connected to every other organ in the body. How the human body functions is a miracle in itself as I've seen the lengths a body will go to in order to keep an equilibrium when even one system fails. In order for all of that to function like it does in harmony tells me there is a God.

Wonderful insight. Your experience in the medical field has really sharpened your faith experience.

 

[Cerulean]

I'm more interested in whether "God" believes in me!

Very well said! I went through a period during college during which I lost my Christian faith, and that's exactly what I felt like- I believed but he didn't. We're still not on fantastic terms but at least I'm not angry about it anymore, I'll consider that to be progress.

 

[Peter A.]

Err, seriously dude - if you can provide evidence that God exists, wouldn't that make you rather famous!? Certainly you would hae a duty to mankind to share this evidence...

We are talking rational, scientific (aka independently verifiable fact based observational proof) here?

Images in burnt toast don't really count I'm afraid!

Actually, there is scientific evidence that (strongly) suggests that there is, or at least was, something that ensured the universe we live in turned out to be conducive to the development of life (i.e. the 'fine-tuning argument', anthropic principle, the horrendously improbable odds against certain constants of nature just, by chance, turning out to be beneficial for us). You don't have to call this 'something' God if you don't want to. Fred Hoyle, John Gribbin, Martin Rees and Paul Davies are just a few who thought it strange that so many of the constants of nature, if only slightly modified, would have ensured a dead universe. The evidence is there, you just need to look for it.

 

[Peter A.]

I believe in God because there is too much complexity and order on this planet and in the universe, to have it all come by chance. Sir Fred Hoyle, renowned mathematician and astronomer partnered with Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe to calculate the probability of a single living cell arriving by chance. That number came to be
1 chance in 10^40,000. That is one chance in 1 followed by 40,000 zeros. This is beyond astronomical as far as odds against are concerned. The number of observable stars is 10^22, while the estimated number of electrons in the universe is somewhere in the order of 10^80.

I do not know what happened to the original post I made, so I had to re-write and paraphrase it. So if you read this first it would make more sense.

Yes, exactly, and the next time I post I'll scroll all the way down first, so as not to repeat point(s) made by others

I hear so often from sceptics/atheists that the reason why they don't believe in anything beyond mundane, physical reality is due to 'the lack of evidence', but the evidence is there, it exists, and I am always left baffled by such comments. It makes me wonder if those who claim this have even bothered to seriously examine their most important beliefs about the nature of reality.

 

[Cuppa' Tea]

I do not believe in god(s) of any sort. However, if there was actual provable, solid evidence, then I would be happy to revise my opinion.

 

[Tarragon]

Actually, there is scientific evidence that (strongly) suggests that there is, or at least was, something that ensured the universe we live in turned out to be conducive to the development of life (i.e. the 'fine-tuning argument', anthropic principle, the horrendously improbable odds against certain constants of nature just, by chance, turning out to be beneficial for us). You don't have to call this 'something' God if you don't want to. Fred Hoyle, John Gribbin, Martin Rees and Paul Davies are just a few who thought it strange that so many of the constants of nature, if only slightly modified, would have ensured a dead universe. The evidence is there, you just need to look for it.

If there was real evidence that god existed in any way resembling what religions describe, don't you think the "winning" religion (they can't all be right can they?!) would pour their entire resources into bringing this to EVERYONE'S ATTENTION??!!

Ahem, please tell me why any correct, provable religion would NOT want the whole planet to know? What would they have to hide??

Finally, if there is a chance we are all here by random, and we happen to be here, it is not plausible that the reason is because we happen to be the one in a billion probability that rolled the right way? If we WERENT the lucky roll of the dice, we wouldn't be here to discuss this?

And, as I seem to be quoted by people throwing "reasoned arguments" back at me, can someone explain the flaw in my logical statements in this post please?

 

[Grumpy Cat]

I've come to the conclusion that most Aspie's are not believers in God and that I'm ok with that. I don't want to change anyone. I just don't know how I would get up everyday believing that there is nothing else after this life (sometimes I think that being on earth is actually a form of hell). There has to be a reason why we are all here, not just happenstance. I tend to think of life as a game and whatever actions I do here will decide if I win a ticket into heaven. Believing in God relies mainly on faith, I also have my doubts at times so I understand how atheists have to have "proof" that God exists. There is a part of me that gets saddened because I have been brought up religiously and it is also in the bible that a person has to believe in God to be admitted into heaven. If God actually goes by this rule, it bothers me because of a lot of you that I've met on this site not being believers in God - I think you're all wonderful and should be accepted into heaven as much as the next person. Thing is, God may very well go by the rule that we have to believe in Him - we all have been given free will and this also includes how we want to think and believe. And also if I were God (figuratively speaking, of course), it wouldn't really make much sense for me to want someone in my "house" if they didn't even believe that I existed in the first place. Hmmm. Something to think about.

 

[IContainMultitudes]

(sometimes I think that being on earth is actually a form of hell).

This reminded me of a story I heard a few years back:

A Question Of Hell - ABC News

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/304/transcript

Just as a little personal note, I have to say that having a highly conservative and religious grandmother who believed that everyone who didn't belong to the right branch of Christianity was going to burn in the lake of fire and wasn't shy about letting me know it didn't do much to make organized religion appeal to me when I was growing up.

 

[Grumpy Cat]

I wish I knew people's real names. Mr. WOW is that picture a wolf or a dog? Anyway, I was raised Catholic and I am totally against the Catholic religion now (or any other organized religion). I came up with enough proof to even make my mom realize that the Catholic religion is all about brainwashing. But, that does not mean I don't believe that God exists. I just don't go to church anymore, I definitely quit going to confession a really long time ago and I pray everyday on my own. I'm really bad at bible reading, though. Why the heck does Jesus have to talk in parables? I tell you my eyes glaze over. I'm sure that I'm going to hear about my lack of bible reading when I get up there. I do have a good friend who is also nondenominational that is well versed in bible scripture. She is able to point me to places in the bible if I have questions and explain things to me. This may sound bad, but I'd much rather be reading a murder mystery than the bible. (Whew! I was fully expecting to get struck by lightening for that comment.)

 

[IContainMultitudes]

If anyone here is interested in reading the Bible for its historical and cultural importance (which I would recommend whatever your religious beliefs are), this is a good edition with useful footnotes (pretty much essential for a lot of the more difficult parts, I would say), I got it because one of my English professors recommended it:

The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised Standard Version: Michael D. Coogan, Marc Z. Brettler, Carol A. Newsom, Pheme Perkins: 9780195289602: Amazon.com: Books

(One word of caution: some people with more conservative/fundamentalist leanings might not like the annotations, or even the NRSV for that matter.)

Also, here are a couple of books on religion that I've read and found interesting (again, not everyone is going to like these):

http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Nazaret...tmm_hrd_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=1388545489&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Revelations-V...1388545624&sr=1-1&keywords=revelations+pagels

 

[Grumpy Cat]

Thank you Mr Wow. I'll look into those and will try not to let my eyes glaze over.

 

[Winter_Rose]

Who are you to judge other people's faith? If it brings people comfort and helps them through tough times, be happy for them.

And yes, I believe in God. I'm a very happy Catholic Christian.

 

[apt-get]

Here is a model if literally every religious discussion that I have ever had:

The guy selling the car represents the religious folk and the guy who is looking to buy the car (as well as the cute fox) represent the atheists. When it comes down to it, the religious either have no evidence to support their claims, or their claims turn out to just be wrong on further inspection. I just don't really see how to put it any better. Because I care about evidence and reason, I see religious people trying to justify their faith pretty much exactly the same as some shady used-car salesman or some other scam artist. Sorry, but that's how it is.

 

[Peter A.]

If there was real evidence that god existed in any way resembling what religions describe, don't you think the "winning" religion (they can't all be right can they?!) would pour their entire resources into bringing this to EVERYONE'S ATTENTION??!!

Ahem, please tell me why any correct, provable religion would NOT want the whole planet to know? What would they have to hide??

Finally, if there is a chance we are all here by random, and we happen to be here, it is not plausible that the reason is because we happen to be the one in a billion probability that rolled the right way? If we WERENT the lucky roll of the dice, we wouldn't be here to discuss this?

And, as I seem to be quoted by people throwing "reasoned arguments" back at me, can someone explain the flaw in my logical statements in this post please?

I don't care about the claims that are made by 'religion' (whatever those claims may be, and assuming that 'religion' actually exists 'in the abstract' as D. B. Hart would point out). Of course, they can't 'all be right', but they CAN 'all be wrong' and they are. We actually agree on this point.
I really am amazed at the way in which some people here, and elsewhere, so prominently display their confirmation bias. There isn't a 'one chance in a billion' that all we see arose purely by 'chance'; it's more like one chance in 1 to the 10,000 to the 10,000 against. In other words, it's practically impossible for what you outline to actually occur. Your comment also reveals the underlying belief in the idea that there are other universes elsewhere (i.e. the Multiverse concept), an idea for which there is not a shred of credible evidence, and which was invented by atheistic cosmologists simply because they couldn't stomach the idea of a creator.
The 'flaw in your logical statements' is that there is no actual logic within them. You seem to believe in miracles, magic and the impossible (i.e an entire universe from literally nothing, with no purpose or reason for its existence, against hopeless odds, and counter to all we know about the nature of reality).

 

[Rob]

Nice work, Peter.

You do not need to be a part of an organized religion to be a believer in God. I do agree with Tarragon in that they cannot all be right. Though it takes faith to believe in God, I do not believe in a God who tricks us into blind faith and credulity. For me, it takes more faith for me to believe that a primordial soup can produce a living cell and overcome odds of one chance in 10 to the 40,000th power. Just like a Boeing 747 with all the cockpit instruments perfectly formed can magically come from a scrap metal yard, or a combination of an iron ore mine and petroleum deposit, etc. It takes a lot of faith for me to believe in that kind of luck.

Also the problem with the Big Bang singularity - how can the Big Bang singularity explode into a fully functional universe, and a black hole singularity draws everything in, and does not allow light to escape past the event horizon? This is contradictory reasoning that is all too common in the secular world.

With all due respect,

Rob

P.S. There is a great source of valuable information on the website Creation.com or enter "Creation Magazine Live". It is full of insight, and the thousands of articles in the site will encourage the reader to see things from a fresh perspective.

 

[apt-get]

You seem to believe in miracles, magic and the impossible (i.e an entire universe from literally nothing, with no purpose or reason for its existence, against hopeless odds, and counter to all we know about the nature of reality).

This is a strawman.

 

[Tarragon]

I don't care about the claims that are made by 'religion' (whatever those claims may be, and assuming that 'religion' actually exists 'in the abstract' as D. B. Hart would point out). Of course, they can't 'all be right', but they CAN 'all be wrong' and they are. We actually agree on this point.
I really am amazed at the way in which some people here, and elsewhere, so prominently display their confirmation bias. There isn't a 'one chance in a billion' that all we see arose purely by 'chance'; it's more like one chance in 1 to the 10,000 to the 10,000 against. In other words, it's practically impossible for what you outline to actually occur. Your comment also reveals the underlying belief in the idea that there are other universes elsewhere (i.e. the Multiverse concept), an idea for which there is not a shred of credible evidence, and which was invented by atheistic cosmologists simply because they couldn't stomach the idea of a creator.
The 'flaw in your logical statements' is that there is no actual logic within them. You seem to believe in miracles, magic and the impossible (i.e an entire universe from literally nothing, with no purpose or reason for its existence, against hopeless odds, and counter to all we know about the nature of reality).

Ahem, I was simplifying it a bit for those not used to v large numbers. Still, just cause we exist doesn't mean it's because a guy with a white beard made us.

Honestly, the more science has pushed our knowledge forward, the more religions have had to fight a rearguard action covering what their belief sŷstem is based on. If you really want to get technical, then modern science has pushed the understanding of everything we see around us (and everything we don't, if you want to raise that old chestnut) to a time just after the "big bang" to when the universe was smaller in size than the Planck constant. Seven days to create the world? Ahem!

What I love about religion is that is always claims to be right. Yet, it's goal posts are constantly pushed back by reason. Anyone claiming to know what happened when the universe was smaller than the plank constant is making it up, whether they are scientists or religous leaders.

So, if you want to talk about the nature of reality, then which version do you want to follow? Countless hours of scientific thinking which continue to investigate its own obvservations, or countless hours of religious minds justifying their own antiquated ideas born of a time when people thought thunder was a sign from the gods?

Honestly, I am through with this thread. I don't find it fun arguing with limited logic. Religion is a hoax, god is whatever you want to invent. If it makes you happy, go for it. Just don't even try and insinuate that my reasoning is flawed. That is simply a projection of your own shortcomings onto someone else.

Religion was probably created to alleviate suffering. Considering life expectancy was short, and there was no medical knowledge short of leeches, some fairy story had to be created to make people think there was something better waiting for them. Nothing wrong with that. But, the downside is people want to feel special. That causes no end of problems. Religious people feel special (or not if they are masochists)

I don't like being told what to think by people who use flawed reasoning.

Right, I cannot contribute any further to this thread without it looking like I'm ranting or being horrible. Not my intention. As an aspie, I hate illogic. people are illogical. Religious fanatics even more so. Can we just leave it there with quoting my posts please?

 

[Tarragon]

Nice work, Peter.

You do not need to be a part of an organized religion to be a believer in God. I do agree with Tarragon in that they cannot all be right. Though it takes faith to believe in God, I do not believe in a God who tricks us into blind faith and credulity. For me, it takes more faith for me to believe that a primordial soup can produce a living cell and overcome odds of one chance in 10 to the 40,000th power. Just like a Boeing 747 with all the cockpit instruments perfectly formed can magically come from a scrap metal yard, or a combination of an iron ore mine and petroleum deposit, etc. It takes a lot of faith for me to believe in that kind of luck.

Also the problem with the Big Bang singularity - how can the Big Bang singularity explode into a fully functional universe, and a black hole singularity draws everything in, and does not allow light to escape past the event horizon? This is contradictory reasoning that is all too common in the secular world.

With all due respect,

Rob

P.S. There is a great source of valuable information on the website Creation.com or enter "Creation Magazine Live". It is full of insight, and the thousands of articles in the site will encourage the reader to see things from a fresh perspective.

NICE WORK?! :banghead:

Good grief, if this doesn't sum up why discussing this topic is an utter waste of time....

I'm bowing out of this thread before people think I'm arguing for the sake of it. all hail the giant spaghetti monster in the sky folks!

 

[Grumpy Cat]

I've just come to a conclusion, for myself, after reading the last couple of posts. You all know that I'm a believer in God. What this has come down to is each side trying to prove the other side wrong and I don't believe that there is going to be a winner. Believing in God is all about faith. Everyday I have to deal with my own doubts about Gods existence (because I'm also a person who desires proof), but I go on and keep finding things that "I" believe are proof that He exists. And whatever the other side comes up with to try and persuade me that God doesn't exist, will not change my mind. I don't expect to ever change the other side into believing in God. The only thing that can happen is that both sides present what they believe and give information that backs up why they believe that way. Then each person can take in this information, analyze it and make up their own minds. It is up to each individual to take responsibility for their own soul. That's why we have free will. When I look at what everyone has said from a neutral place, both sides have good points. But when both sides start trying to prove the other wrong, defensiveness starts (a normal human reaction because each side thinks they're right) and no one ends up listening to anything. When it comes to religion and whether God exists, I believe there is no real hard "scientific" proof (hence the reason for faith). The fact that both sides are still in disagreement of the other at the end of this thread is proof of this. Evidentally, God must not have intended for it to be too easy to land a first class seat on the plane to heaven. Some days it's so hard for me to keep my faith going that I'm willing to accept a coach seat.