Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jeepster

If this earns me an infraction, then word up

Recommended Posts

If a person uses complete rationality, there are no logical reason why a person could believe there is a God. But people still believe that God exists, and on what premise? A book? From our subconcious faith that there is a fourth dimensional entity like ghosts, demons and angels? The reason why kids eventually grow out of a fable stories like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny is because they use logic and rationality and eventually they know there is no way there can be a 7 foot homosexual rabbit and an obese loser flying around the skies on Christmas Eve.

But its weird though, I still believe there is a God so I am an epic failz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is SO bad.

fucking nihilist!

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not believe in god in any way shape or form, but I do believe that the only "higher power" that exists is that of nature (not animism). To suggest that our world and all the things within it could have been created by some being or power is so ridiculous that it borders on a ridiculous arrogance in my opinion (i.e. nature and the evolutionary process is so complex and beyond us that we must tell ourselves a story so that we can sleep at night). I suppose this can be explained by the human need to make sense of things as well as that other oh so human of traits, to dominate. That is, to dominate that which is foreign or different from ourselves. I often have a hard time understanding how people can actually believe in god as it is just such a ludicrous notion to me, but I am genuinely fascinated by if not a little blown away by devout believers. Another thing is the lack of physical evidence that exists to support the existence of a god(s), and conversely the relatively large body of evidence that exists to support evolution. The scientific community (not all of course, and yes, there are religious scientists) generally sees evolution as a theory, but not theory in the sense that it is just what someone thought up, but rather a tested and basically sound theory (however, obviously not proven) of how we got to where we are today....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fucking Catholic.

nazi-pope2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha I thought I was the only Christian on this forum.

1. Is there a God? Absolutely. Outside of what I put my faith in, I see a universe that is way too well defined and perfect in its organization for it to have been a giant cosmic accident. Christian and non-Christian alike can agree the universe had a beginning (if this in doubt, ask), and the micro/macro-organization of it all doesn't compute to random chance and swirling molecules. I'm in med school, and everything we learn about the human body continues to cement the notion that nothing was random, but instead every enzymatic pathway, structure, and function had an intimate purpose and design.

2. Why does He exist? (Btw, I'm not writing this to proselytize, just stating my stance.) Its a complete and mutual relationship. He displays his glory through his creation and the way we love and benefit one another, and in turn we get the satisfaction of knowing that no matter what happens in life, there is someone who loves and accepts us totally and unconditionally, regardless of what someone says about our fit, our place in society, or the way we live out our lives.

Jeep,

if you decide upon the fact that God exists (whichever God that is),

always ask the question what for.

The two always go hand in hand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always had a sense of something much bigger, but I acknowledge the concept of God in present life is a mess for most and the people who profess to know God are always the most violent, fearful or regressive.

I stopped going to church a couple years after my parents gave stopped taking me there, because a lot of things didn't resonate right with me. It's been 18 years now and until recently I still had the impression that religion was sort of like creative accountancy, using unproven and invisible margins (God and an afterlife) to try and change the basic equations of material life as I experience it.

Recently though, a lot of my spiritual concepts are changing as I explore and develop my awareness through meditive practices. I'm looking inward rather than consulting other people's preconceptions of what God is, and I would urge people to do the same because if you rely on other people's ideas, you're limiting your possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess this is a interesting thread, since I always have been interested by other people's way of experiencing religion, or the capacity to believe.

I myself have tried to believe in 'God', not even as in a being from a specific religion, but even in the most general way most of the time I can't.

For my studies I've read alot of the theoratical arguments, from both sides, and while they make for important reading (because religion is an importent force in the world), personally it's not what get's you there.

I have not interest in the arguments from a pseudo scienticfic standpoint, the only way I think religion matters is in personal experience and faith, and that should not come from arguments about the nature of the universe, or things like that. Leave that to science. The choice of believing, and yes it is a choice in some way, should be about something 'deeper' than the physical nature of our world.

I can not make myself believe, even if I wanted too. If there is something absolutly transcendental, the absolute Other, could a human subject have a relation to it? Would the experience of this not surpass human subjectivity? Would "God" not have to go beyond being to be absolutely transcendent, which would be a fundamental ontological paradox? Would "God", and especially a 'human' God as in Jesus Christ, be the absolute paradox? Maybe so, but it does go beyond me and I can not experience or 'feel' any of it.

Some people though, do 'feel' something there, their faith does give a orientation to their experience, and for them I truly think there is a God, because they have faith. For them having faith really is a different seinsweise.

So if there is something like a God, he might be there for some, but he is not there for me.

Anyway, I think it is great to have some serious reflection on things like this once in a while. If you have faith, keep it up, but remember that it is about your experience of life. Religion and believing is indeed something that is important in community life as well, but it's what makes it more dangerous too. It's ok to keep doubting and have your own way of believing. If your lucky it can definitly be something that might make you better able to deal with life and be a good person, which is what it should all be about in the end.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There may be good arguments for the existence of God but none of them are contained within this post.

If you look at the universe and its mechanics it is very hard to conclude there is an intelligent hand guiding it. The existance of a planet that supports life as we know it (like Earth) is extremely improbable and the result of a number of random occurances.

As for the human body, the reason it looks designed is because it isn't the result of random chance. I'm amazed someone in med school has no understanding of evolution by natural selection.

If God really displays his glory through the way his creations interact with each other, he isn't that glorious. Even though the past hundred years have probably seen our species at its most civilized, they have included countless atrocities. Personally I think the need for someone to love you unconditionally is quite infantile and unnecessary for any mature person.

I didn't want to get too into astronomy and biology there because I have a very incomplete understanding of them; but I can assure you that most astronomers would agree that the universe is highly chaotic apart from some constants, and most biologists would agree that evolution is as much a fact as gravity.

haha arent you in high school? smart kid, but you need to think more critically.

ill offer my rebuttal, for better or worse, and then its off to sleep.

put me on ignore or scroll down if you dont want to read this.

-edit- that was way too long. so i redid it.

the concise rebuttal to evolution is this: get parts to build a house and lay them on the ground (boards, nails, etc..). tie a bunch of tools to a dogs tail and have him bang stuff around randomly. thats evolution. evolution says that somehow that random tail banging created the house and aka caused new organisms to form. random mutations (that we learn in school are pretty much always deleterious and fatal), accumulated to put that house together, from a process that had no intellect and reasoning capability to do so. we're building an "empirical science" (or theory) based solely on innumerable chances and odds. ridiculous right? (that's as simple as it gets, as Toto said there are better arguments)

But forget about science. About what I said about God. God does want to display his glory through us, and even though the wrongdoings of mankind dont point to that, the way the world is now is not how God intended it. Divorce, sexual abuse, genocide, and war are not glorious things, instead theyre things that God is calling us to do something about. He's fighting to make things right, and that's the purpose of the gospel in what I know to be Christianity.

The need for love and acceptance is juvenile and unnecessary? Kid, even the social psychologists got it right. There is no greater force on earth than social pressure, the need to belong, to be accepted and loved. Why do you wear the things you do? Why do you post in WAYWT? Because you know that sufu will accept and love the way you dress. Because the brands you wear are sufu acceptable. You would never wear Hilfiger, American Eagle, and Nike crosstrainers and post a WAYWT. Why? Because that would result in the exact opposite of the acceptance and in essence, the love you're longing for.

Human needs are juvenile, I'll admit that. But they're present and universal. Ultimately though, the improbability of it all leads me to believe that it wasnt a fluke. It's much more logical and easier for me to believe that this was planned, rather than for me to think that I'm a result of permutation upon permutation. That's all.

(sorry for the long post, i know its not what you all want to read).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh god, well ignoring the fundie,

then no, of course there is no god for which there is any evidence. Does humanity have within it a sense of the "spiritual" (for want of a better word) and of transcendence of the individual? well, yes obviously

also, just for the universe has a beginning point, yep that seems likley based on current evidence, but in a weird way it also dose not have a beginning, as nothing exisisted before the universe, and so on of the things that did not exist was time itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as freud said, religion is an instinctual desire. we dont wanna die and its hard to cope with the idea that life is meaningless and willll end. some people just cannot deal with that. thats why we have religion and cryonics :rolleyes:

thats just what i think and you all are entitled to your ideas/opinions also. :):):)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to approach this in a scientific manner. For awhile, I thought that evolution was right, Charles Darwin ftw etc.

Then I took a course in chemistry. I mean. Each individual human cell is composed of an insane number of molecules that come together. Organic chemistry etc. But they're ridiculously long [somewhere in the order of 10^n] molecules that come together and work PERFECTLY. Or imperfectly, however you choose to quantify it. And as anyone who's done basic chemistry knows, for every chemical specimen, you have an incredible amount of allotropes [basically, the same molecules but in a different configuration.] To put it in fashion terms, imagine being able to pick from the few hundred or so known pieces of clothing [elements]. And then putting an outfit that impresses EVERYONE. And only one specific combination works.

Then you look at the larger picture and think about the fact that each organ is filled with a gargantuan quantity of said cells.

But then when you revert back to Big Bang theory, that once upon a time, there was no life on Earth and that essentially, we used to be a bunch of random elements floating around that got zapped. I mean. Even with evolution and natural selection, I don't think 3000 million years is that long a time to form such complex, multi-organ creatures such as ourselves.

Therefore, I conclude that somewhere along the way.... there was some... guidance. Or direction involved. This is my own argument btw, so feel free to rebutt and please, do point out things I'm missing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, say we believe in the existence of God.

That he's an almight omnipresent cosmic being that can create life, shape planets, send floods etc.

So obviously, he's got powers that we don't understand.

I'm sure while we're at it we could believe that he was just... always there.

From the beginning. Some things bely explanation. Maybe this is one of them.

A theory I heard once utilizes dimensions. That... for example, we exist in 3 dimensions. Up, down. Left, right. In, out. A being that exists in 2 dimensions [up down, left right. Think back to your Super NES days. Existing only on a piece of paper]. It would be completely unable to comprehend moving in or out of the paper. But for us.... It's nothing.

Perhaps that's what God is. A being that exists in infinitely more dimensions than us, and therefore incomprehensible by us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anybody think that eating eggs is disgusting? I mean we are eating the "foetus" of a bird damn it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps that's what God is. A being that exists in infinitely more dimensions than us, and therefore incomprehensible by us.

That's basically nail on the head christian right there. If the Lord created everything, he created time, space, and thus lives outside of it. We can't possibly comprehend that...because we're human, on earth, in our little dimensional world. We were given a time frame to be able to relate our existance to something...basically to give the length of our life a bit of meaning and relevance in the big scheme of the world

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest youkinorn

I'd probably still consider myself an agnostic leaning towards atheism (cliche, huh?), but I still find the idea of some sort of supreme entity very romantic, and sometimes, rational to some extent. When I think of a "god," though, it's almost always in the Deist sense.

To me, "god" could be the inflation of new universes , I guess.

It seems very arbitrary in my life, though, for sure.

Higgs Bosons

Deism

yeah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I took a course in chemistry. I mean. Each individual human cell is composed of an insane number of molecules that come together. Organic chemistry etc. But they're ridiculously long [somewhere in the order of 10^n] molecules that come together and work PERFECTLY. Or imperfectly, however you choose to quantify it. And as anyone who's done basic chemistry knows, for every chemical specimen, you have an incredible amount of allotropes [basically, the same molecules but in a different configuration.] To put it in fashion terms, imagine being able to pick from the few hundred or so known pieces of clothing [elements]. And then putting an outfit that impresses EVERYONE. And only one specific combination works.

Then you look at the larger picture and think about the fact that each organ is filled with a gargantuan quantity of said cells.

Therefore, I conclude that somewhere along the way.... there was some... guidance. Or direction involved. This is my own argument btw, so feel free to rebutt and please, do point out things I'm missing.

The key problem in your argument is that it doesnt acknowledge the CUMULATIVE nature of natural selection. Imagine a vast sea of trillions of simple organic compounds. The majority of them will be failures, or unfit, or outcompeted. Out of all the random variations of these molecules, all it takes is one that is better at reproducing copies of itself. So it outreproduces the others, with slight changes in each generation (because duplication is inherintly flawed - try to photocopy a photocopy a photocopy - begins to degrade).

Now out of all those billions of descendents, most will be very similar to the original. But many will not; they might be bigger, or smaller, or faster, whatever. If it has a feature that benefits it, it survives and passes on those traits - and squeezes out the less "fit". Natural selection keeps what works, and kills what doesnt. Out of all the organisms - plants, animals, bacterium, etc. that have ever been concieved on earth, over 99.99% have died without leaving offspring or in genetic dead end extinctions.

So what youre seeing around you, life as we know it, is the tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiny fraction of the best of the best.

Everything works perfectly because it has to. The majority didnt work, and they all die. Evolution builds complexity incrementally.

Please watch this video: http://www.tuibguy.com/?p=288

Dawkins explains the fallacy in the argument "evolution is like a hurricane in junkyard randomly assembles an airplane"

You seem like a smart, curious guy so feel free to explore these issues further. Natural selection, in my opinion, is the most beautiful concept ever and its principles apply to so much. Truly understanding it has given me a much deeper appreciation for life and the world around me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's basically nail on the head christian right there. If the Lord created everything, he created time, space, and thus lives outside of it. We can't possibly comprehend that...because we're human, on earth, in our little dimensional world. We were given a time frame to be able to relate our existance to something...basically to give the length of our life a bit of meaning and relevance in the big scheme of the world

If God created existence, then who created God? Oh right, he exists outside known existence, and is thus immune from all attempts to logically define him.

Follow the argument - "God created everything"

"then who created God"

"nothing, he always existed"

By that reasoning, we can remove god from the equation and just say existence always existed. Just because something "exists" doesnt necessarily mean it needs a creator. This causal relationship is so deeply ingrained in humans because in our world, its true - an object must be created by a creator.

But in the ultra-large scale (and the ultra-small), the way we perceive things as simple mammals does not apply. All the physical rules we follow on earth dont exist.

Inventing a grand creator is our brain's tendency to anthropomorphize everything to make it easy to identify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well your last statement makes more sense then the water example. That's a purely biological function.

I dunno, there is some creeping suspicion in me that regardless of fate or whether something is supposed to happen by destiny or providence or what have you, there is nothing out there that is greater than ourselves save for the responsibilities we chose to embrace.

It could all be a crapshoot and maybe there is something out there. Maybe god is in the internet. When my parents see me wasting hours on end browsing the darkest depths of the internet, I always tell them I'm trying to find god in the ether we seem to be drawn to. Maybe there's something to it?

i think the pissing example makes perfect sense. After all, if you look at most of our actions, they're determined by chemical responses to outside stimuli in the brain, just like pissing. Falling in love, getting angry, jumping off a bridge or whatever are all biological functions if you don't believe there's some God controlling everything. It might sound like semantics, but I think it's interesting to look at it that way. What's the difference between me eating a hot dog and shitting 5 hours later and me meeting some one and falling in love five months later? They're both products of different biological systems working inside my body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anybody think that eating eggs is disgusting? I mean we are eating the "foetus" of a bird damn it.

If you're eating balut, you are. Otherwise, all hen-laid eggs are unfertilized. So you're actually eating a bird's period.

And if you want to discuss the viability of selection to help form complex systems, take a look at any of the rat whisker-barrel neuron studies or at how the neurons develop in our eye. Synaptic plasticity is basically natural selection within an organism where we naturally have far too many neurons synced to our sensory input and those neurons that receive the strongest signals survive while others die out. Don't have much to offer, since headcoat's already elucidated most of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm reading Friedrich Nietszche's "thus Spoke Zarathustra"

and in it he claims "god is dead" and things like that

i donno

scope it out, shit's mind blowing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm reading Friedrich Nietszche's "thus Spoke Zarathustra"

and in it he claims "god is dead" and things like that

i donno

scope it out, shit's mind blowing

Reading it in the original German is positively trippy. The problem with the "God is dead" quote is that he actually says "Gott sei töt", which is Konjunktiv I, which is a German mood with no English equivalent. Seriously, I don't know any respectable person who's taken language and hasn't read Nietzsche.

/end off topic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The key problem in your argument is that it doesnt acknowledge the CUMULATIVE nature of natural selection. Imagine a vast sea of trillions of simple organic compounds. The majority of them will be failures, or unfit, or outcompeted. Out of all the random variations of these molecules, all it takes is one that is better at reproducing copies of itself. So it outreproduces the others, with slight changes in each generation (because duplication is inherintly flawed - try to photocopy a photocopy a photocopy - begins to degrade).

Now out of all those billions of descendents, most will be very similar to the original. But many will not; they might be bigger, or smaller, or faster, whatever. If it has a feature that benefits it, it survives and passes on those traits - and squeezes out the less "fit". Natural selection keeps what works, and kills what doesnt. Out of all the organisms - plants, animals, bacterium, etc. that have ever been concieved on earth, over 99.99% have died without leaving offspring or in genetic dead end extinctions.

So what youre seeing around you, life as we know it, is the tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiny fraction of the best of the best.

Everything works perfectly because it has to. The majority didnt work, and they all die. Evolution builds complexity incrementally.

i think styleofmind is saying it's hard to comprehend the random formation of ourselves within such a small time frame:

"I don't think 3000 million years is that long a time to form such complex, multi-organ creatures such as ourselves."

the process of casting out undesirable traits may be a relatively quick one but the process of random complexations of elements and compounds to form desirable traits in the complexed form could be a very long one, yet due to randomness it can still be relatively short.

hell, we're still basing a bunch of stuff on an atomic THEORY. there is still a bunch of stuff undiscovered that could prove many more things contradicting what we think/believe/thought to have explained our observations now and this is why i have a very open view on the matter (formation of living organisms by evolution or/and intelligent being).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this