My view on religion has been misinterpreted. I am not Atheist, I am agnostic.
Where I stand is that the object that first created the universe and reality (whether it was a transcendental being or some kind of miraculous event) is defined as god the ultimate creator.
I don't believe, especially as humans, have the capability to depict the object ... See Moreknown as god. Not only that, but religion today is distorting itself and being manipulated into many different concepts and ideologies. I strongly doubt that the teachings of religion today reflected that of their origins thousands of years ago developing a new brand of whatever religion in question.
I do believe there are many reasons why someone, especially today, would want to use common religions today to some amount of manipulation of its followers for if it was not, there would be no point in belief.
To that extent, I have seen religion have both good effects and bad effects in our world today. Better effects are a strong moral foundations while some of the other bad effects is it derives churches such as the west borough church.
Religion that idolizes the ideology of God make the assumption that God exist, for if God didn't exist, there would be no foundation for said religion. However, as said previously, I have extreme amounts of doubts that religions today are not variations of their respective origins. This can be observed by the many different variations of any single form of ideology today.
Once again, I believe that the first object - the base of the ladder - of our reality is defined as God. If nothing had created reality, then nothing would be god, but that event has the smallest probability because the event of getting something from nothing has yet to be discovered.
Any attempt to define God any further will lead to probabilities of being inaccurate, such attempts can be seen in religions today. This can be seen in two different religions. If both these religions have different views regarding the ideology of God, it is not possible for P and not P to be true thus a contradiction. The decision to decide whether P is true or not P is true cannot be determined for we have no absolute factual knowledge that define God.
I choose this path because while I believe religion offers a strong moral foundation, I think this moral foundation can be flawed in many ways and is very societal influenced. These moral foundations are what the general society agrees to be true rather then proven to be true. For that, it would be impossible to say any one religion has true moral backgrounds.
Where I stand is that the object that first created the universe and reality (whether it was a transcendental being or some kind of miraculous event) is defined as god the ultimate creator.
I don't believe, especially as humans, have the capability to depict the object ... See Moreknown as god. Not only that, but religion today is distorting itself and being manipulated into many different concepts and ideologies. I strongly doubt that the teachings of religion today reflected that of their origins thousands of years ago developing a new brand of whatever religion in question.
I do believe there are many reasons why someone, especially today, would want to use common religions today to some amount of manipulation of its followers for if it was not, there would be no point in belief.
To that extent, I have seen religion have both good effects and bad effects in our world today. Better effects are a strong moral foundations while some of the other bad effects is it derives churches such as the west borough church.
Religion that idolizes the ideology of God make the assumption that God exist, for if God didn't exist, there would be no foundation for said religion. However, as said previously, I have extreme amounts of doubts that religions today are not variations of their respective origins. This can be observed by the many different variations of any single form of ideology today.
Once again, I believe that the first object - the base of the ladder - of our reality is defined as God. If nothing had created reality, then nothing would be god, but that event has the smallest probability because the event of getting something from nothing has yet to be discovered.
Any attempt to define God any further will lead to probabilities of being inaccurate, such attempts can be seen in religions today. This can be seen in two different religions. If both these religions have different views regarding the ideology of God, it is not possible for P and not P to be true thus a contradiction. The decision to decide whether P is true or not P is true cannot be determined for we have no absolute factual knowledge that define God.
I choose this path because while I believe religion offers a strong moral foundation, I think this moral foundation can be flawed in many ways and is very societal influenced. These moral foundations are what the general society agrees to be true rather then proven to be true. For that, it would be impossible to say any one religion has true moral backgrounds.