Anonymous wrote:OP, you need to make the case for why a belief in god is a requirement for believing in objective truth.

Excellent point. But I think I tend to throw a wrench in the conversation. I'm hoping for more answers to the original question, and the follow-up: why don't you believe in God? What evidence would be necessary for such belief?

But I will address your point, I promise.

OP, you need to make the case for why a belief in god is a requirement for believing in objective truth.

If God exists and he wants me to follow his teachings then he has done a poor job of showing me. Why must I blindly believe his doctrine? Why not just make it clear to everyone?

This is why I find it difficult to believe in a god. Plus the fact that different societies have invented different ones. It's just a social construct that societies feel the need for to explain their surroundings.

I believe in randomness.

Anonymous wrote:I did not want to get bogged down in theological arguments of particular religions. I will repeat what, I think, G.K. Chesterton said: very few people hate Christianity, but a great many people hate what they think is Christianity. There are some misconceptions cropping up here, but I want to stay on track:

Many people say there is no evidence there is God, but do not explain what that means. Could you elaborate?

Well, this is evidence: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence

And the posters are saying that they have seen nothing that constitutes evidence. A personal feeling is not evidence. The beauty of the universe has alternate explanations, so it is not evidence. The fact that some people prayed and something good happened is not evidence.

If God said "I am here, and I'm going to make the earth spin backwards. Look!" And we went backwards for a day, I think that would be evidence that a sentient being reversed the laws of physics on a scale impossible to fake. That would be a good one.

Some of Jesus' miracles were pretty good, but (a) not everyone believes that the bible is an accurate historical document, (b) we see many phenomena today which would look like miracles but which today we know are not, and (c) Jesus' miracles didn't convince everyone who saw him, so it's hard to make the case that two thousand years later we should be persuaded.

If you think you have evidence, ask yourself if it can only be explained by the existence of God. If so, post it.

Anonymous wrote:OP again, good morning!

I could be wrong. There could be no such thing as Truth. But then we are just babbling. We cannot have even a simple conversation. Because we would violate the law of non-contradiction: something cannot both be and not be at the same time. X/-X cancel each other out into nothing.

And while we are taking about who is right and who is wrong--according to whose standard? Math? 2 + 2= 4, not 5? Science? If I put sand in my gas tank, my car will not go? Logic? X not -X? Who is the Author of math? Who is the Creator of science? Who gave us minds and will? Who is sustaining the laws of physics and the stuff of life? Why do children on the playground say "that's not fair!"

Why was it wrong for the Aztecs to rip the hearts out of babies? Why is it right to love thy neighbor? On whose authority?

Do you love your children? Do you believe in love?

I kind of wish I had not shared anything about my faith, not because I mind, but because I really just wanted to understand a lack of faith, and now I have muddied the waters. There are much, much better resources out there for someone who is seeking the Truth.

My DCUM wager is actually the opposite of Pascal's wager. His was a wager based on apathy and minimalism and laziness, of hedging a bet. Would you approach parenting that way? Just covering your bases? I would hope not...because knowing God is Love is a relationship, not a contract.

Back to the original question: why don't you believe in God?

We don't need to solved all the mysteries of the world before we can say it is "wrong for the Aztecs to rip the hearts out of babies". Answer is simple, it is wrong because we don't want that to happen to our babies. As an adult, I don't need a Bible, Fairy Tales or Fables for that.

Blind Faith is ludicrous. If you never heard of the Christian God, how could you full-heartedly believe in it without question. You have to wonder about a religion that asks you not to question anything.

^^ sorry, meant Nirguna Brahman and Saguna Brahman.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again, good morning!

I could be wrong. There could be no such thing as Truth. But then we are just babbling. We cannot have even a simple conversation. Because we would violate the law of non-contradiction: something cannot both be and not be at the same time. X/-X cancel each other out into nothing.

And while we are taking about who is right and who is wrong--according to whose standard? Math? 2 + 2= 4, not 5? Science? If I put sand in my gas tank, my car will not go? Logic? X not -X? Who is the Author of math? Who is the Creator of science? Who gave us minds and will? Who is sustaining the laws of physics and the stuff of life? Why do children on the playground say "that's not fair!"

Why was it wrong for the Aztecs to rip the hearts out of babies? Why is it right to love thy neighbor? On whose authority?

Do you love your children? Do you believe in love?

I kind of wish I had not shared anything about my faith, not because I mind, but because I really just wanted to understand a lack of
faith, and now I have muddied the waters. There are much, much better resources out there for someone who is seeking the Truth.


My DCUM wager is actually the opposite of Pascal's wager. His was a wager based on apathy and minimalism and laziness, of hedging a bet. Would you approach parenting that way? Just covering your bases? I would hope not...because knowing God is Love is a relationship, not a contract.

Back to the original question: why don't you believe in God?

Actually I don't know where you are going with this, but according to quantum mechanics the bolded statement is not true. See Schrodinger's Cat.

Also, according to Hinduism, the Supreme Being is both with and without attribute (nirgun, satgun), indescribable and describable. I think if you look at the notion of God without the blinders of the Bible, you'll be a lot more comfortable in having faith in him/her/it. Look at Eastern religions. They even explain the possibility of suffering despite the presence of God.

Anonymous wrote:I did not want to get bogged down in theological arguments of particular religions. I will repeat what, I think, G.K. Chesterton said: very few people hate Christianity, but a great many people hate what they think is Christianity. There are some misconceptions cropping up here, but I want to stay on track:

Many people say there is no evidence there is God, but do not explain what that means. Could you elaborate?

What that means is that there is no tangible objective evidence. All there is is subjective opinions, belief, experiences, and feelings.

I grew up in a very conservative Christian home. And I'm an atheist. I don't know what misconceptions you're referring to, but I do know that for a group that claims to be the end all and know all of truth, they can't agree with each other on what that truth is. It's very ironic. And I think any Christian in any given denomination or sect would view someone else's denomination or sect (or the perception of it) to be false and/or a "misconception".

I did not want to get bogged down in theological arguments of particular religions. I will repeat what, I think, G.K. Chesterton said: very few people hate Christianity, but a great many people hate what they think is Christianity. There are some misconceptions cropping up here, but I want to stay on track:

Many people say there is no evidence there is God, but do not explain what that means. Could you elaborate?

Anonymous wrote:I am glad to see that there are a lot more non-believers than I expected. I just don't believe in a deity. I have not seen any proof that a God exist.

I cannot understand how a rational person can believe in the Bible. It's like a fairy tale for children, but with murder and incest.

I also do not understand how people still practice Sharia Law under where a sexual slavery is condoned, a girl as young as 8 years old can be married off, to prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses, a Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body which is considered a sexual organ..... ugh, I could go on and on about Islam.

I think you make an excellent point about how people get turned off of religion because people really bastardize the religions. Are all those right-wing conservatives who hate gay people and women really acting in the spirit of Christ?

And the practice of Sharia law is often anti-Muslim. For example, according to the Koran, a woman does NOT need 4 male witnesses to prove rape. Rather, to prove that another woman committed *adultery* you have to be able to procure 4 male witnesses. The standard is intended to be ludicrous; basically, MYOB. Unless you can meet some really high (impossible) evidentiary standard you do not get to punish a woman for adultery. Unfortunately, that has been warped and now the woman is supposed to procure four witnesses to show that she WASN'T committing adultery, and that she was raped.

Same with the whole "killing of infidels" thing - if someone attacks YOU because of your religion, you have to ask them to stop several times. If after non-violent protest they continue to attack you, then you can use force in response. This does not mean you kill innocent people.

I think you see this in all religions - people distort a religion to support what they want to do, even if it's antithetical to the religion itself. I am Sikh and I am truly shocked at how people interpret our religion - the whole purpose of Sikhism is to set aside religious differences, and to recognize men and women as equals, and to recognize no class differences. Yet I see Sikhs who embrace their own caste system and loathe Muslims and treat women like dogs. Not real Sikhs, by any stretch. I think that people's bastardization of religion makes it harder for others to believe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP again, good morning!

I could be wrong. There could be no such thing as Truth. But then we are just babbling. We cannot have even a simple conversation. Because we would violate the law of non-contradiction: something cannot both be and not be at the same time. X/-X cancel each other out into nothing.

And while we are taking about who is right and who is wrong--according to whose standard? Math? 2 + 2= 4, not 5? Science? If I put sand in my gas tank, my car will not go? Logic? X not -X? Who is the Author of math? Who is the Creator of science? Who gave us minds and will? Who is sustaining the laws of physics and the stuff of life? Why do children on the playground say "that's not fair!"

Why was it wrong for the Aztecs to rip the hearts out of babies? Why is it right to love thy neighbor? On whose authority?

Do you love your children? Do you believe in love?

I kind of wish I had not shared anything about my faith, not because I mind, but because I really just wanted to understand a lack of faith, and now I have muddied the waters. There are much, much better resources out there for someone who is seeking the Truth.

My DCUM wager is actually the opposite of Pascal's wager. His was a wager based on apathy and minimalism and laziness, of hedging a bet. Would you approach parenting that way? Just covering your bases? I would hope not...because knowing God is Love is a relationship, not a contract.

Back to the original question: why don't you believe in God?

One moment of lucidity...

Not!

But, if we don't believe that god is love, he's going to send us to burn in hell. That's not unconditional love. The premise of the god of the bible is just not love to me.

Anonymous wrote:OP again, good morning!

I could be wrong. There could be no such thing as Truth. But then we are just babbling. We cannot have even a simple conversation. Because we would violate the law of non-contradiction: something cannot both be and not be at the same time. X/-X cancel each other out into nothing.

And while we are taking about who is right and who is wrong--according to whose standard? Math? 2 + 2= 4, not 5? Science? If I put sand in my gas tank, my car will not go? Logic? X not -X? Who is the Author of math? Who is the Creator of science? Who gave us minds and will? Who is sustaining the laws of physics and the stuff of life? Why do children on the playground say "that's not fair!"

Why was it wrong for the Aztecs to rip the hearts out of babies? Why is it right to love thy neighbor? On whose authority?

Do you love your children? Do you believe in love?

I kind of wish I had not shared anything about my faith, not because I mind, but because I really just wanted to understand a lack of faith, and now I have muddied the waters. There are much, much better resources out there for someone who is seeking the Truth.

My DCUM wager is actually the opposite of Pascal's wager. His was a wager based on apathy and minimalism and laziness, of hedging a bet. Would you approach parenting that way? Just covering your bases? I would hope not...because knowing God is Love is a relationship, not a contract.

Back to the original question: why don't you believe in God?

This is why belief in gods (or lack of) is just that... belief. And belief is subjective and does not involve facts or evidence.

Morality has more basis in society and evolution then religion. Some attribute common trends to a god (and then falsely assume you must believe in gods to be moral).

Once again - I don't believe in god because there is zero objective evidence for the existence of gods, and I see no credible reason to believe they exist. For me, feelings are not evidence and not convincing (and feelings can often be misleading).

OP here, to consider I could be wrong:

Scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports the theory that the universe exploded into being out of nothing. Either no one created something out of nothing, or someone created something out of nothing.

Sagan's claim that "the Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be" is a statement of faith. No limited human being could state with certainty what was, or what will be.

The statement "there is no such thing as absolute Truth" is an absolute statement. Belief in that statement flies in the face of reason.

Either no one created the universe out of nothing, or someone did. Either one could be true. As limited human beings, none of us could know the answer with 100% certainty. Which position offers more evidence?

As for the experience of Love...that is the real question, isn't it? Even if a First Mover is reasonable, we are free to reject it, and make our own destiny. Even if our intellect accepts evidence of order, and genesis, there is enough ambiguity for us to reject the evidence. That is freedom. Because love should never--can never--be forced. God the ravisher, versus God as Love.

It is possible I am just weird, high, psychologically disturbed. It is possible motion always was, and always will be. It is possible X and not X. But what does the available evidence point to?

And is this question worth asking? Socrates said the unexamined life is not worth living. We should ask these questions.

Anonymous wrote:OP again, good morning!

I could be wrong. There could be no such thing as Truth. But then we are just babbling. We cannot have even a simple conversation. Because we would violate the law of non-contradiction: something cannot both be and not be at the same time. X/-X cancel each other out into nothing.

And while we are taking about who is right and who is wrong--according to whose standard? Math? 2 + 2= 4, not 5? Science? If I put sand in my gas tank, my car will not go? Logic? X not -X? Who is the Author of math? Who is the Creator of science? Who gave us minds and will? Who is sustaining the laws of physics and the stuff of life? Why do children on the playground say "that's not fair!"

Why was it wrong for the Aztecs to rip the hearts out of babies? Why is it right to love thy neighbor? On whose authority?

Do you love your children? Do you believe in love?

I kind of wish I had not shared anything about my faith, not because I mind, but because I really just wanted to understand a lack of faith, and now I have muddied the waters. There are much, much better resources out there for someone who is seeking the Truth.

My DCUM wager is actually the opposite of Pascal's wager. His was a wager based on apathy and minimalism and laziness, of hedging a bet. Would you approach parenting that way? Just covering your bases? I would hope not...because knowing God is Love is a relationship, not a contract.

Back to the original question: why don't you believe in God?

I'm feeling a little lost on how loving our children has anything to do with religion. As I said earlier, god's relationship with his flock is kind of fraught with abuse. That's not how I want to love my child.