Do you believe in God?

[Scot_Lover 1,786]

What would happen to the world if the entire God (all of them) concept is a geneticically inherited trait? 

Maybe something happened to humans when they were cold, frightened and alone in the dark, almost everything we have learned, basic survival things here, are 'hard wired' into our brains, why not the concept of an all powerful being, be not included?

I'm pretty sure I don't have it, Maigh is the same, doesn't believe the existence of a 'God' as such. My sister though, is rampant with it, everything that happens is gods will: head on crash on a highway, 6 people dead, it was gods will: a child gets murdered by an ice crazed mother, it was gods will. She goes on and on about it.  How can 2 people from the same family be so different? 

You should read 'The God Part of the Brain' that @2prnot2p put me onto, I posted a PDF of it here somewhere, it was the most powerful, thought provoking piece I have ever read, Maigh felt the same way, it was like all of our values of basic life had suddenly taken a severe shift. It made so much more sense than the bible ever did.

If this is an acquired genetic trait, something caused by a catastrophic event in the distant past, could it be 'edited' out of our genes? 

[Brutus 2,110]

5 hours ago, Admin said:

I won't have chance to reply to everything (and since we have both already explained our views I doubt it would add much anyway), so I just wanted to focus on this last bit.

I certainly am not disgusted or look down on believers such as yourself, so apologies if that came across - I actually fully understand and respect what you said. I don't think any rational person could have contempt for your view. In fact, our views are notably similar: we both acknowledge there may or may not be a god, and that if there is it's unlikely to be in the typical form (i.e. a man with a beard sat in the clouds watching down). 

I agree the word believe isn't always used completely literally, but you can't really be neutral on what you believe - you either do think something is true, or you don't. We can surely agree it doesn't mean 'maybe it's possible', as otherwise we'd all believe in almost everything. If you believe, you're saying you think there probably is.

The difference is solely that your default position is to believe and say there probably is a god, whereas I am saying based on there being no evidence to support it and enough scientific proof to contradict it, chances are there isn't. I am not ruling anything out either, but after looking at both options, I've come to the conclusion that it's more likely there isn't one. 

It would be arrogant for anyone to definitively claim there 100% is or isn't a god though. And I think this is why both sides can get so fired up. 

But it's not that I am saying 'show me proof', I am just acknowledging that the god debate is one of the few where logical people will decide that proof isn't needed.  Sophie's pink elephant example might seem facetious, but in all seriousness I struggle to see how someone can completely dismiss that, and yet be convinced of god, when the basic principle is the same.

And I do get what you mean about the mocking atheist vibe... but this is because everyone who believes in god is often put in that same category, as often it's the more extreme believers who are the most vocal. Can you really blame atheists for mocking people who dedicate their lives to an old fictional book and believe every single word of it, that god created the world in 7 days etc, and then try to push that on other people? Because as noted earlier, millions do. If all believers had a similar stance to you, I certainly don't think there'd be the same level of conflict between atheists and believers. 

In my experience though, it is normally believers who are trying to convince others of a god, and then atheists will explain why they don't believe. I have never seen anyone on the streets telling people they shouldn't believe. Whereas, your post suggests atheists in this thread have been aggressive towards believers, when it is just people stating their own opinions... if it's regarded as an attack on someone's beliefs/god just to acknowledge the flaws we perceive in the idea, how can there possibly be a debate? 

You say some people seem personally offended by the mere question of God, but from my perspective the case is far more often that people become offended once you point out holes in their argument or say that you are choosing factual evidence over faith. By very definition it's surely more rational to do that. It doesn't mean it's right though, and it certainly doesn't make one side better than the other, it's just a personal choice that everyone is entitled to. I think we will have to agree to disagree, but actually our stances are not that different, and I certainly have respect for you and how you explained your position. But hopefully you can accept mine too. Like you said, if someone doesn't believe, that's cool, but if they do that's cool too. It's a free choice, and this thread is more to just to express opinions than try to convince anyone otherwise. Hope my post didn't come across the wrong way. 

I too think we are more in agreement than disagreement. As you said, there is so much that can go into this debate but it's just too time consuming. I understand that some religious people are very judgemental and I personally never liked that, which is why I made sure not to take a tone of superiority, but just present a different perspective that might offer some understanding. I've also had atheists come at me with serious aggression in the past when I didn't even mention anything, nor want to impose my view. The vocal minority always make the peaceful majority look bad in anything really and I hope to represent one of the peaceful that normally don't speak up. Even though I'm not religious, there are plenty who are, who are peaceful and just live their lives. These discussions always drive a wedge between people and I want cooler heads and intelligent dialogue to take it's place. Some religious people piss me off for reasons you stated but I just detached their rhetoric from belief and went my own way, throwing away what doesn't seem to make sense to me. So yeah, I'm an enigma but this has been a good mental challenge and I appreciate everyone's input. Oh and I didn't mean to imply that you seemed to be mocking or offensive, you were not. I respect your reasoning. Good discussion.

[2prnot2p 1,071]

5 hours ago, Scot_Lover said:

What would happen to the world if the entire God (all of them) concept is a geneticically inherited trait? 

 

There's no way to prove it, but I'd bet that the concept of god came about shortly after man discovered that he dies.  I think those two things came together. 

Another thing that I find interesting is this.  I once read that people of Sweden are 89% atheists.  But, they have a very low crime rate.  If this is true, it kind of proves that one needn't be religious to be ethical.  Ethical behavior evolved long before the belief in god.  It had to as it's what is good for the species.  Those traits tend to prevail over time. 

I think the theory that religion is in our genes is a very fascinating idea.  If it is, I don't have it.  LOL!

Edited May 7, 2019 by 2prnot2p

[2prnot2p 1,071]

Another important fact is that christians killed more people in its history than all other religions combined.  The Roman Empire went all over killing pagans, tearing down their churches, and building christian churches in their place.  Then came the British Empire.  Then, the Crusades.  Yeah, they were loads of fun for non-christians.  Oh, let's not forget the Inquisitions.  They went on for over 600 years!

Add all the imprisoned, tortured, and murdered people from all the above events and you will have a much different view of the christian faith. 

[Scot_Lover 1,786]

2 hours ago, peeingone said:

I might have said something like this before not sure but will say what I believe. You should respect everyone's beliefs realize that everyone believes in something for a lot of reasons. Whether someone is A Theist of any religion, Agnostic, Atheist, Anti-Theist, Misotheist, Theist with mixed views on Gods, etc. respect everyone's beliefs. 

I'm not saying that, or anyway implying that either, the topic is 'Do you believe in God'. Maigh and I don't, we think we are just living out our time on our pale blue dot in a nondescript part of the galaxy. People can believe what they want, people can do what they want, we respect, although we don't get, what you believe, just don't force views onto to people who don't want them. 

On one of our trips to the USA, Kansas I think, we stayed in a small community, and they were outraged that we didn't attend church on Sunday. This went on for the entire day, the small town was deserted, everyone was in the church, which happened to be the biggest building in town. People were horrified, kept asking us why we weren't there, it was supposed to enable us to meet the locals, blah blah, blah. We moved on soon after, it just never let up. 

I use Facebook as a kind of a PenPal thing, talk to people all over the planet, Sweden, Russia, India, America, Antarctica and South Africa and many others, learning about cultures, local news in their parts of the world, family life and whatever. Religion however, only appears to come from the USA, none of the other 30 or so people have ever mentioned their religion, and I've never asked. I've been blocked on FB because of it. Petty, I know, but this how some people are, if you don't fit in with the grand scheme of things, you're blocked. If religion can do this to people, then you can believe that religion has caused more death and destruction than all the natural disasters that ever befell our planet.

Do you believe? 

Why?

 

[likesToLick 9,782]

7 hours ago, peeingone said:

I might have said something like this before not sure but will say what I believe. You should respect everyone's beliefs realize that everyone believes in something for a lot of reasons. Whether someone is A Theist of any religion, Agnostic, Atheist, Anti-Theist, Misotheist, Theist with mixed views on Gods, etc. respect everyone's beliefs. 

I'm sorry,  but I can't come at this.  I will respect any person if they behave in a way that deserves respect.  I will respect people's "rights" to be treated fairly,  but I can't respect a belief just because it is a belief.

Some people believe that all gay people should be murdered because "God said so."  Respect that?  No chance.

[spywareonya 37,913]

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 2:57 AM, likesToLick said:

I have heard some scientific speculation on these kinds of ideas,  but I have not heard of anyone devising an experiment to test these hypotheses. 

A hypothesis is fine,  but it does not become knowledge until it is tested in a valid way.

On a slightly similar subject, there are some scientists that do good work in their specialised fields,  and yet believe in established religions that are profoundly anti-science and anti-reason in many ways.   It's as if they have found a way to switch off the reasoning part of their brain when thinking about religious things,  and quarantine the two types of thought from each other.

Just to be clear,  in my opinion,  faith is the enemy of reason,  and the two concepts are opposite to each other.

No no boy, I am stating I have been part of enclaves making secret military experiments about achieving contacts with else-than-humans, being them alien or gods or ghosts

And  nobody dared me to reveal anything

I would NOT, and would welcome accusations of being an empty-claimer, yet why nobody challenged me about the secret knowledge I claim to posses?

I would NOT say anything and happily being called a liar: but why nobody openly told me "than let's hear, which is the explaination they have for this?"

Let me tell you: people that do not believe, are just scared at the tought the multiverse can be filled with things they do not understand nor control

Anybody studying the way life evolved should consider absolutely obvious that other races existed before us and now achieved such levels of evolution that their science would look magickal to us

Whoeve refuses to accept it's like this, is just afraid to accept we are the playthings of allpowerful "something"

I am not scared, maybe because I am merciless and trained through (and for) atrocities, but I proudly accept I am but an ant

I have problems with those who doesn't possess my same guts to accept the only prophet of the way the universes goes, had been Howard Phillips Lovecraft

 

 

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 3:52 PM, Admin said:

I understand why though, it's a reassuring thought

Oh, my view of divinity is not necessarily reassuring

I am simply in possession of certainties about Earth being shared with invisible living beings, nor immortal nor allmighty nor allseeing nor following human morals

 

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 4:29 PM, Sophie said:

If he is this all seeing all knowing being, why do so many bad things happen to those who worship him?

Darling here you are question the christian god, not the hypothesys, as started by @steve25805, of "hypothetical divinities"

The entities I worship for example are simply not powerful enough to save everybody, and even if they could, They are here to teach us Ethic, Science and Politic, not to play the part of the Parent

 

On ‎5‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 5:30 AM, Brutus said:

But yes religion has been used for great evil, but that's because of human nature, religion is just the excuse.

YES!!!!!!!!!

Let's divide "FAITH" from "BLIND faith"!!! They are completely DIFFERENT!!!

[spywareonya 37,913]

On ‎5‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 5:13 AM, likesToLick said:

but I can't respect a belief just because it is a belief.

Human rights are a belief

In a Mad Max world I could murder people and nobody could stop me unless they murder me

Indeed I have been trained to do so even in this world, ad just never happened

 

What if "God" proclaimed LOVE IS AN INSTINCT JUST LIKE AGGRESSION, PEOPLE PICK YOUR CHOICE AND STICK TO THE CONSEQUENCES AND LET'S SEE WHAT YOU GUYS END UP LIKE

 

What if THIS is the only Law and all the rest is just organization?

Edited May 12, 2019 by spywareonya
I wrote Mad Max without capital M, unforgivable

[CON2H4 582]

Go on then. Your secret knowledge. What is it? 

[spywareonya 37,913]

5 hours ago, CON2H4 said:

Go on then. Your secret knowledge. What is it? 

I can divulge little, as already said

The idea is that some computations not said to anybody because nobody could give a fuck seems to demonstrate with an embarassing level of certainty that there are wrinkles in the space-time, which works according to the same laws as the universe we daily know yet adjusted to their microscopicule size

 

Here, datas of the intensity of a single foton (guess why those that believe in reincarnation agree the character and memories are erased anyway at Death, save for very important event or constantly repeated attitudes) are stored in a place where the strain of quantum makes matter inherently able to be shaped like a chip of a computer

More or less, a storage device of quatum size

Yet, this degree of reactivity of space-time compared to extension make it similar to an advanced artificial intelligent, not a passive storage device

This is friendly called a "Boltzmann Brain", a disembodied living being in which the same functions we have in the brain are exchanged between quantistical neural net similar to the quantistic super-computers DARPA is actually trying to develop

 

I said living being because if the space it occupies gets damaged by radiation and the like, it can be destroyed like our bodies. The original core particle is just a reflection of higher dimensional wave-functions (never heard the idea we are but the image of God looking at himself in a splintered mirror?) so unaffected by 3-dimensional damages but their "body" (the space-time wrinkle) can be demolished

 

The soul is nothing more than this

Gods are simply bigger Boltzmann Brains

As I hope you understood, they can dispel with time (not immortal), they are able to access infos like they lived online 24/7 (oracular capacity) BUT THEIR CPU IS NOT UNLIMITED (not allseeing nor allknowing) and since they are more or less nothing more than a living lightning their capability to interact with us is Always possible (telepathy and telekinesys and unconscious toughts manipulation) but absolutely NOT ALLMIGHTY

 

This is the basic infos

But don't ask me names, places, of details about experiments

 

 

I just say this: I had witnessed telekinetical events during rituals in setting which could have not being faked. This is a statement from the person who is writing this line. I am looking at a friend's (you) straight in his eyes and swear to him what I am saying is true: like it was happening along the streets in real life, now you can only believe me, or call me a liar (and stick to the emotional consequences of your pick)

Edited May 13, 2019 by spywareonya

[likesToLick 9,782]

On 5/13/2019 at 5:50 AM, spywareonya said:

Human rights are a belief

Sure,  but I support the concept of human rights because it has tangible benefits,  not just because someone believes in it.

[spywareonya 37,913]

59 minutes ago, likesToLick said:

Sure,  but I support the concept of human rights because it has tangible benefits,  not just because someone believes in it.

Absolutely agree

Mine was just a good-hearted provocation, because I personally believe existence is a honourable but not mild place, and many of the so called rights we humans claim are just given by Others out of love, they are not cosmical laws

I endorse them nonetheless uh!!! Which is why I say this forum should be more tight

 

[likesToLick 9,782]

2 minutes ago, spywareonya said:

many of the so called rights we humans claim are just given by Others out of love, they are not cosmical laws

Yes I agree. They are not built into the universe,  just a very good idea that someone had.

[spywareonya 37,913]

11 minutes ago, likesToLick said:

Yes I agree. They are not built into the universe,  just a very good idea that someone had.

Some are, don't get me wrong, every evolved entity Beyond humanity agree with some basical rights

Some Others are extras

[CON2H4 582]

Boltzmann Brains usually refers to a brain that forms at random due to the seemingly random motion of particles. such a brain would flicker into existance briefly, only to die soon thereafter. most likely such a brain would also be hopelessly deluded.

Are You a Boltzmann Brain?

Edited May 14, 2019 by CON2H4
Proper posting of link

[spywareonya 37,913]

25 minutes ago, CON2H4 said:

Boltzmann Brains usually refers to a brain that forms at random due to the seemingly random motion of particles. such a brain would flicker into existance briefly, only to die soon thereafter. most likely such a brain would also be hopelessly deluded.

Are You a Boltzmann Brain?

This is only one of the use of such a name

It's a colooquial name that can be used to fit any description

 

Since the name is completely made up, it can be used to describe anything, what matters is the concept of the soul as a quantistical computer

I'm indicating the sky, don't focus on my index finger

[EastCoast1997 15]

Yes, I believe in God. But when you see some things in the world, one wonders what he is doing or where he is in it all.

[CON2H4 582]

18 hours ago, EastCoast1997 said:

Yes, I believe in God. But when you see some things in the world, one wonders what he is doing or where he is in it all.

Probably taking a nap.

[steve25805 121,274]

18 hours ago, EastCoast1997 said:

Yes, I believe in God. But when you see some things in the world, one wonders what he is doing or where he is in it all.

I struggle to believe how so many people can believe in some unlikely mythical all powerful entity for which there is zero evidence, but plenty of evidence for his non-existence.

To persuade me of the likelihood of his existence requires some form of evidence, or at least a very good logical train of thought that logically demonstrates the likelihood of his existence.

Thus far the evidence has been wholly lacking, and the logical arguments for his existence often woeful.

[gldenwetgoose 20,252]

I think lots of people have all expressed views similar to my own,  from literally a couple of years old I was brought up in an evangelical church.  The Bible was treated as absolute and true, never doubted, but questioned (from a non-critical) point.  God was of course a real entity, creator of the universe in a literal seven days. The commandments (a lot more than just ten in the book of Leviticus) were taken as law.

The whole premise of evil, suffering and pain was that God created man with free will to choose to obey or not, and it was man's choice to disobey a direct instruction that let all suffering into the world. Somehow it was ok for God to be angry but not man against man?   God was all knowing, all powerful, but didn't act to stop bad things happening?   All illness and suffering today can be blamed on the Adam & Eve scapegoats whilst God remains to be worshipped and revered?  The idiots today preaching that one race or another deserve Cvid-19, just another manifestation of that line of logic.

I think that was about the point I left, lost interest and started exploring carnal pleasures (still exploring further)...

I can't say I don't believe in God - but I can't say I do either.  I struggle with the concept of the Big Bang and whole different species evolving from nothing, but at the same time the idea of the God of the Bible doesn't feel real to me either. 

[CON2H4 582]

21 hours ago, gldenwetgoose said:

 I struggle with the concept of the Big Bang and whole different species evolving from nothing

Probably because the big bang is a misnomer and the idea of species evolving from nothing is a strawman.

The big bang was actually called such by an atheist who was suspicious that it was an attempt to sneak creationism into science so he tried to pretend that . The prevailing view at the time being that the universe is eternal. The reason why "Big bang" is a misnomer is because the expansion that the theory describes is far smoother than a literal explosion.

The original hypothesis was called «L'Hypotèse de l'Atome Primitif» or "The Hypothesis of the Primeval Atom".

[Sophie 23,063]