Do You Believe In God?
- Thread starter Jack_Sparrow
- Start date
- Views 109,560
- Replies 1,802
- Likes 5
- Status
great website.. it's as good as a religion as any to me!
If god is outside of the observable universe, then it is impossible to prove him. Rather asking how a universe could exist without a fire starter can prove that a god is a possibility.
Yup, I believe in God, I pray, I go to mass and I love boobs. Nothing wrong with any of them. =3
And yes... Sometimes I pray for boobs too. <3
And yes... Sometimes I pray for boobs too. <3
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 5,484
- Trophies
- 2
- Location
- Sacramento, California
- Website
- lazerlight.x10.mx
- XP
- 5,496
- Country
It's rather interesting. I'm by no means an expert on science, but I do have questions. The theory is that the universe was created by what is known as the Big Bang, yet, the components to produce the Big Bang needed to have existed for it to happen. So where did those come from? And what about what's outside of the universe? The universe expanded from the Big Bang, so not only is there a sort of boundary/limit of the universe, but that the universe is expanding into a space that supposedly doesn't exist, unless that space did exist for it to expand into. Maybe I'm not making any sense here, but we know so little about our universe. We use what little knowledge we have to explain things, and it seems validated because it's based on what we understand, not how the universe may actually work. For each time we identify something that we initially thought we understood but didn't until later, we end up rewriting out books to take whatever discovery we find into account. I mean, we even go into depth of how 1 + 1 can equal something other than 2.
If a god is defined as being outside the natural universe and having no effect on the observable universe, then it is impossible to prove or disprove that god, which is not any reason to believe in that god's existence, and is every reason to not believe in that god's existence. However, when a god is defined as having effects on the observable universe, those effects can be demonstrated to not exist. See my post from earlier.
Broadly speaking and from a philosophical point of view, a god's existence is a possibility in that it has not been disproven. However, there is no way to know if a god's existence is actually physically possible. Lots of things are technically possible, but that's no reason to think those things are true, and that doesn't mean it's rational to believe those things.
We don't know what components, if any, were needed for the universe to come into existence as we know it. See my earlier post on this.
The universe isn't expanding into space; space is expanding.
If we care if our beliefs are true, all we can do is make sure our beliefs comport with the evidence. If the evidence changes, the only intellectually honest thing to do is to change our beliefs accordingly. The rewriting of our books, as you put it, is a positive feature of the scientific method, not a bug.
The universe is said to have started with the big bang, depending upon how you want to view certain theories about cyclic universes* anyway,
*most would meet this when they think about the end of the universe. One of them is heat death -- if energy can not be created or destroyed then eventually it will all be spread out so far that the entire universe reaches a baseline temperature and nothing can happen worth speaking of, another has it that the universal expansion will end and then things will go into a big crunch (possibly to then emerge later in... history? as the second (or whatever iteration this is +1) universe).
The universe expanding into something tends to be from people that want to view it like a balloon which is a kind of limited model. It is not bad for discussing why there is an observable universe* that is smaller than the universe itself but it really does not do well for space-time and things of that nature. The edge of the universe itself is also a topic of note for some as things might well play out quite differently there.
Speaking of observable universes then being outside it is not really a hard line for proof -- you can observe the effects of many things you can't see (the classics being germs, wind, atoms, gravity and so forth).
*for those not familiar the idea runs that every point in the universe is expanding away from each other. Or if you take a point and then two more points opposite each other but the middle of the line connecting them goes through the first point you can say that if both ends are leaving the middle at 1 m/s then looking at the extreme points it is moving away from those at 2m/s. You can then envisage a suitable distance there it is not 2 m/s but actually faster than light travels but still slower than light compared to the middle point.
"and it seems validated because it's based on what we understand, not how the universe may actually work. For each time we identify something that we initially thought we understood but didn't until later, we end up rewriting out books to take whatever discovery we find into account. I mean, we even go into depth of how 1 + 1 can equal something other than 2."
Not quite. Any experiment can indeed disprove another, though most of the time it is not thrown out as much as becoming a useful simplification (Newtonian mechanics is generally considered wrong, however it works in the real world so you do need to learn it). Equally it is indeed based upon repeated observation and testing rather than looking at the universe's source code or something akin to it, however the universe has always acted predictably at present and as far back as we can see so contemplating the existence of a power far outside it is something you could do but is probably not that useful if you are going to play scientist. Also it tends not to be a rewrite for physics (biology can be a different matter but it is an exception there) as much as clarification on an earlier point.
On 1+1=/=2 then know that maths is not a universal truth but a human construct, again a very useful one and if you want to limit it to simple arithmetic using real numbers then it will, it is when you start bringing in other concepts like infinity and its ilk or putting it next to physics* that it starts to break down.
*one atom plus another atom tends to equal two atoms but one or both of said atoms could decay and they do decay at a very small rate for various reasons, to that end it might not and over a long enough time period it almost certainly will not. It is then that such things tend to crop up.
*most would meet this when they think about the end of the universe. One of them is heat death -- if energy can not be created or destroyed then eventually it will all be spread out so far that the entire universe reaches a baseline temperature and nothing can happen worth speaking of, another has it that the universal expansion will end and then things will go into a big crunch (possibly to then emerge later in... history? as the second (or whatever iteration this is +1) universe).
The universe expanding into something tends to be from people that want to view it like a balloon which is a kind of limited model. It is not bad for discussing why there is an observable universe* that is smaller than the universe itself but it really does not do well for space-time and things of that nature. The edge of the universe itself is also a topic of note for some as things might well play out quite differently there.
Speaking of observable universes then being outside it is not really a hard line for proof -- you can observe the effects of many things you can't see (the classics being germs, wind, atoms, gravity and so forth).
*for those not familiar the idea runs that every point in the universe is expanding away from each other. Or if you take a point and then two more points opposite each other but the middle of the line connecting them goes through the first point you can say that if both ends are leaving the middle at 1 m/s then looking at the extreme points it is moving away from those at 2m/s. You can then envisage a suitable distance there it is not 2 m/s but actually faster than light travels but still slower than light compared to the middle point.
"and it seems validated because it's based on what we understand, not how the universe may actually work. For each time we identify something that we initially thought we understood but didn't until later, we end up rewriting out books to take whatever discovery we find into account. I mean, we even go into depth of how 1 + 1 can equal something other than 2."
Not quite. Any experiment can indeed disprove another, though most of the time it is not thrown out as much as becoming a useful simplification (Newtonian mechanics is generally considered wrong, however it works in the real world so you do need to learn it). Equally it is indeed based upon repeated observation and testing rather than looking at the universe's source code or something akin to it, however the universe has always acted predictably at present and as far back as we can see so contemplating the existence of a power far outside it is something you could do but is probably not that useful if you are going to play scientist. Also it tends not to be a rewrite for physics (biology can be a different matter but it is an exception there) as much as clarification on an earlier point.
On 1+1=/=2 then know that maths is not a universal truth but a human construct, again a very useful one and if you want to limit it to simple arithmetic using real numbers then it will, it is when you start bringing in other concepts like infinity and its ilk or putting it next to physics* that it starts to break down.
*one atom plus another atom tends to equal two atoms but one or both of said atoms could decay and they do decay at a very small rate for various reasons, to that end it might not and over a long enough time period it almost certainly will not. It is then that such things tend to crop up.
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2012
- Messages
- 887
- Trophies
- 0
- Location
- Taxachusetts
- Website
- www.google.com
- XP
- 503
- Country
I do not believe in God because i don't believe that a Jewish carpenter died for my sins and now lives in heaven and he's part of a trio who's equal to one.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2015
- Messages
- 4,999
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- Behind a screen reading news
- XP
- 4,885
- Country
I would like to believe there's some sort of higher power out there but I don't know what it might be.
I respect what others want to believe though as long as they don't cram their beliefs down my throat. It does no one any good asserting that others are wrong for believing something.
I respect what others want to believe though as long as they don't cram their beliefs down my throat. It does no one any good asserting that others are wrong for believing something.
I don't know anymore! Lol
On one side, we have science...on the other, we have something that cannot be disproven (is that correct?) ...miracles and such and even here we have members that do believe and have felt God...it goes both ways. Much respect in both sides, except radical religious folks. ;P
I mean, I like to lean more towards the science but to be honest, I carry flowers to the Virgin Mary in the basilica of Mexico City because of family tradition/beliefs...it doesn't hurt to do so. I don't pray either though. Lol
So, I guess I'm unsure.
On one side, we have science...on the other, we have something that cannot be disproven (is that correct?) ...miracles and such and even here we have members that do believe and have felt God...it goes both ways. Much respect in both sides, except radical religious folks. ;P
I mean, I like to lean more towards the science but to be honest, I carry flowers to the Virgin Mary in the basilica of Mexico City because of family tradition/beliefs...it doesn't hurt to do so. I don't pray either though. Lol
So, I guess I'm unsure.
While each side has just as much a right to their beliefs as the other, it would be inaccurate to characterize both sides as equally reasonable. As far as I'm aware, there is no sound reason to think god(s) exist. The fact that we cannot disprove god(s) is not a reason to believe they're real, and it does not make belief equally reasonable to nonbelief. If one cares whether or not his or her beliefs are true, one requires sound reason and evidence for his or her beliefs. I cannot disprove the existence of leprechauns, but that does not mean it's rational to believe they exist, and it certainly does not mean belief in leprechauns is as reasonable as disbelief.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2016
- Messages
- 1,365
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- ↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
- Website
- github.com
- XP
- 2,287
- Country
This is a pretty subjective topic, and there's no right answer here. My two cents:
If a singular god does exist, he's the ultimate dick. Who else could possibly create such a fsck'd up world? I tend to throw that concept out for the sake of my sanity. The universe is too chaotic for a 'nice' god. Not to mention, if there was only one god, we would all be worshipping the same one.
Religion is a political tool more than a belief system. Always has been, always will be.
There's also no proof of any afterlife or reincarnation, so I find living in the moment to be a better way to approach life. Is an organism sharing 100% of my celluar structure "me", and will it be conscious as "me"? Hell if I know. I do know the very concept of 'heaven' sounds boring. Eternal paradise bathed in god or whatever? No thanks. Sounds bland. I'd rather burn, kthx.
I classify as agnostic leaning towards atheist personally. Give me indisputable proof that a god exists, and I'll believe it. Until then...
If a singular god does exist, he's the ultimate dick. Who else could possibly create such a fsck'd up world? I tend to throw that concept out for the sake of my sanity. The universe is too chaotic for a 'nice' god. Not to mention, if there was only one god, we would all be worshipping the same one.
Religion is a political tool more than a belief system. Always has been, always will be.
There's also no proof of any afterlife or reincarnation, so I find living in the moment to be a better way to approach life. Is an organism sharing 100% of my celluar structure "me", and will it be conscious as "me"? Hell if I know. I do know the very concept of 'heaven' sounds boring. Eternal paradise bathed in god or whatever? No thanks. Sounds bland. I'd rather burn, kthx.
I classify as agnostic leaning towards atheist personally. Give me indisputable proof that a god exists, and I'll believe it. Until then...
Last edited by chaoskagami,
While God has all the power in the universe (and probably more, but I can't really comment on this since I've never been outside the universe), there are some things He cannot do. He cannot act against His own nature, so questions like "can God make a stone so big he can't hold it" are invalid.
The rule forbids murder. It is distinct from killing because murder is killing without justification. This is why it's justified to kill certain criminals without becoming murderers ourselves.
A lot of this is not advocated by God himself. While some deaths have in fact been mandated by God, many have not been, and those who claim this are misusing His name. (We'd need specific examples to discuss this further.)
That's not it at all. Quite the opposite really.
We sin. A lot (unfortunately). We've disobeyed God, and His standards are perfection. And the punishment for sin is death. "But what about all the good I've done?" someone may ask? Imagine a brownie. A marvelous, delicous brownie. Now let's add a tiny amount of dog poop. Not so appealing anymore, right? Unfortunately, that's us.
Fortunately, God still loves us, in the way I love my cat even when she makes a mess or bites me, so God has provided a way for us to live, without eternal death. If the punishment for sin is death... the does it have to be the one who sinned? Thousands of years ago He told the Jews to sacrifice an animal in their place, to pay for their sin. This was only a symbol of what would come. In order for this substitution to work, He sent his Son to save us (who existed from the beginning, the specifics of this are a discussion for another day). His son entered this world as a baby, concieved by the Holy Spirit and a virgin (Mary). Jesus was raised from birth as a Jewish carpenter, performed miracles to prove his divine power, gave one of the, if not the most, influential sermons ever (the Sermon on the Mount), and was tempted by the devil to sin in many, if not all, of the ways we are. Because Jesus wasn't born into a sinful nature like we were, he managed to never sin, and was absolute perfection. Because reasons (the details of which are in the bible and are again a discussion for another day; basically Jesus denounced their bad practices, and there was some political stuff going on too), the Jewish leaders plotted to kill him. But this was part of the plan all along. Jesus willingly confronted his own death by crucifixion (on a cross), in order to pay for our sins. (To make it worse, he was almost killed by lashes from a whip beforehand, and what many people did to him around that time can easily be simplified as "torture".) He died in our place so that we can live.
But that's not the end of it. While not many realized it at the time, Jesus is God's Son. Three days after Jesus was executed, God brought him back to life. Not only in this world, but eternal life, which He is offering this as a gift to anyone who wants it. All you have to do is believe that Jesus did in fact die on the cross to save us, and your sin is paid for.
TLDR
Here's 6 words that summarizes all of this. I remembered this half way into typing all of this, it may or may not explain it all better.
http://www.lifein6words.com/
This is a sad side effect of the world being corrupted by sin.
The Big Bang is an effect, and it is outside the scope of science to attempt to explain the cause. Not only is it outside the nature of the universe as we know it, scientifically, any idea anyone comes up with is just a guess, because the biggest requirement of a hypothesis is that it can be tested. Any guess about this cannot be tested.
I believe that God is the cause. While I am not aware of any evidence that can prove this, there is other evidence indicitive of God.
One of these is the question of where languages come from. Evolutionists believe there is a common ancestor, using this theory, one would think language would be the same, right? One single language that became the ones we have now? Wrong! We have many different languages that are completely different from each other. To quote wikipedia, "The origin of language in the human species has been the topic of scholarly discussions for several centuries. In spite of this, there is no consensus on the ultimate origin or age of human language." The Bible explains this nicely: God told everyone to spread out, to fill the Earth, but we were like "naw, we like it here, let's build a giant tower that will keep us occupied here", so God invented different languages for everyone so that everyone would spread out, since different groups of people couldn't understand each other.
While there might not be hard evidence for God's existence (at least, not to my knowledge), there is are various hints.
The TLDR version (all this typing is making me tired
):-Intelligent design - all of creation is rather complex. Athiests like to believe it all happened by chance, but that seems unreasonable to me.
-The story of Jesus - proclaimed as fact by witnesses... who were burned at the stake at parties until they simply said something like "it was all a lie", but no one did. Christians were murdered, persecuted, many people tried to completely destroy all trace of the bible... and it's still going strong today. Divine intervention anyone?
-Languages
-God's instructions - The old testament has rules on how to deal with various types of mold. People back then would have had no clue how it all works, but these instructions are consistent with what we know today. Also the thing about not eating certain meat? Back then, people didn't know how to safely cook everything, but now we do.
Athiests do not like to believe it all happened by chance. The other stuff you mentioned isn't real evidence of a God.While God has all the power in the universe (and probably more, but I can't really comment on this since I've never been outside the universe), there are some things He cannot do. He cannot act against His own nature, so questions like "can God make a stone so big he can't hold it" are invalid.
The rule forbids murder. It is distinct from killing because murder is killing without justification. This is why it's justified to kill certain criminals without becoming murderers ourselves.
A lot of this is not advocated by God himself. While some deaths have in fact been mandated by God, many have not been, and those who claim this are misusing His name. (We'd need specific examples to discuss this further.)
That's not it at all. Quite the opposite really.
We sin. A lot (unfortunately). We've disobeyed God, and His standards are perfection. And the punishment for sin is death. "But what about all the good I've done?" someone may ask? Imagine a brownie. A marvelous, delicous brownie. Now let's add a tiny amount of dog poop. Not so appealing anymore, right? Unfortunately, that's us.
Fortunately, God still loves us, in the way I love my cat even when she makes a mess or bites me, so God has provided a way for us to live, without eternal death. If the punishment for sin is death... the does it have to be the one who sinned? Thousands of years ago He told the Jews to sacrifice an animal in their place, to pay for their sin. This was only a symbol of what would come. In order for this substitution to work, He sent his Son to save us (who existed from the beginning, the specifics of this are a discussion for another day). His son entered this world as a baby, concieved by the Holy Spirit and a virgin (Mary). Jesus was raised from birth as a Jewish carpenter, performed miracles to prove his divine power, gave one of the, if not the most, influential sermons ever (the Sermon on the Mount), and was tempted by the devil to sin in many, if not all, of the ways we are. Because Jesus wasn't born into a sinful nature like we were, he managed to never sin, and was absolute perfection. Because reasons (the details of which are in the bible and are again a discussion for another day; basically Jesus denounced their bad practices, and there was some political stuff going on too), the Jewish leaders plotted to kill him. But this was part of the plan all along. Jesus willingly confronted his own death by crucifixion (on a cross), in order to pay for our sins. (To make it worse, he was almost killed by lashes from a whip beforehand, and what many people did to him around that time can easily be simplified as "torture".) He died in our place so that we can live.
But that's not the end of it. While not many realized it at the time, Jesus is God's Son. Three days after Jesus was executed, God brought him back to life. Not only in this world, but eternal life, which He is offering this as a gift to anyone who wants it. All you have to do is believe that Jesus did in fact die on the cross to save us, and your sin is paid for.
TLDR
Here's 6 words that summarizes all of this. I remembered this half way into typing all of this, it may or may not explain it all better.
http://www.lifein6words.com/
This is a sad side effect of the world being corrupted by sin.
The Big Bang is an effect, and it is outside the scope of science to attempt to explain the cause. Not only is it outside the nature of the universe as we know it, scientifically, any idea anyone comes up with is just a guess, because the biggest requirement of a hypothesis is that it can be tested. Any guess about this cannot be tested.
I believe that God is the cause. While I am not aware of any evidence that can prove this, there is other evidence indicitive of God.
One of these is the question of where languages come from. Evolutionists believe there is a common ancestor, using this theory, one would think language would be the same, right? One single language that became the ones we have now? Wrong! We have many different languages that are completely different from each other. To quote wikipedia, "The origin of language in the human species has been the topic of scholarly discussions for several centuries. In spite of this, there is no consensus on the ultimate origin or age of human language." The Bible explains this nicely: God told everyone to spread out, to fill the Earth, but we were like "naw, we like it here, let's build a giant tower that will keep us occupied here", so God invented different languages for everyone so that everyone would spread out, since different groups of people couldn't understand each other.
While there might not be hard evidence for God's existence (at least, not to my knowledge), there is are various hints.
The TLDR version (all this typing is making me tired
-Intelligent design - all of creation is rather complex. Athiests like to believe it all happened by chance, but that seems unreasonable to me.
-The story of Jesus - proclaimed as fact by witnesses... who were burned at the stake at parties until they simply said something like "it was all a lie", but no one did. Christians were murdered, persecuted, many people tried to completely destroy all trace of the bible... and it's still going strong today. Divine intervention anyone?
-Languages
-God's instructions - The old testament has rules on how to deal with various types of mold. People back then would have had no clue how it all works, but these instructions are consistent with what we know today. Also the thing about not eating certain meat? Back then, people didn't know how to safely cook everything, but now we do.
This world is a mess because we made it this way through our own sin.
If God made the universe, then everything else is simple. Don't try to overthink it. Compared to God, we're basically like my cat when she's watching me do something with my computer, not having any idea what's going on.
If that's how you really feel, there's nothing I can do for you, but I think you might want to reconsider, since either way, it's eternity we're talking about.
What do they believe caused everything?
I did say it wasn't hard evidence; however, all together, I believe that it's enough to make a leap of faith.
If we were to make the claim that there is no evidence of a god, then it would be ridiculous to believe in god because (under those conditions) even though he hasn't been disproven, we believe all kinda of things that haven't been disproven are false, such as the invisible unicorn analogy. It only makes sense to belive anything with no evidence suggesting it is true is false because otherwise we would have to believe goku is fighting the freeza a galaxy over because there the same amount of evidence suggesting that. However if you were to claim there is evidence of god then it is reasonable to believe in him.
- Status
Similar threads
-
- Poll
-
The Real Jdbye
*is birb*
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
It's not the movies or games downloads that I would worry about, like breaking into networks, downloading encrypted things, spying on network traffic. I have seen so many "Top Secret" seals on files when I was a kid -
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I was obsessed with finding UFOs, a surprising amount of US files where stashed on computers in other countries, China back in the early 90s omg sooo much
-
@
BigOnYa:
Yea that crazy, I've never tried hack into anything, I just pirate, and my ISP have send me 3-4 letters, so had to VPN it -
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Ship to ship communication software for the Navy although without access to the encrypting chips it was mostly useless
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I bet now a 4090 could probably crack it? Hmmm maybe not even back then I'm pretty sure they where using like 1024 bit encryption
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I remember one time I downloaded like a 500MB ISO file on 56K and that literally took like 2 days
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
