User Avatar Image

Are you religious?

posted by JedExodus on - last edited - Viewed by 770 users

Well, are you? Just interested in seeing how everyone round these parts is inclined.

Personally, I dunno what the story is myself, caught in a game of Pascals wager and open minded specticism.

So vote and discuss, it goes without saying that if you disagree with someone's views you don't have to stamp your feet and bore us to death about how you're right and others are wrong

222 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • Merged, though you'd never know it from the identical thread title. Doodo, please don't post duplicate threads.

  • And my deja vu is resolved! Hallelujah!

  • @GuruGuru214 said: Merged, though you'd never know it from the identical thread title. Doodo, please don't post duplicate threads.



    You merged the two identical threads!? but doesn't the laws of physics say two forum thread titles cannot occupy the same space!?

  • They're molecuthreaded bonded.

  • @coolsome said: You merged the two identical threads!? but doesn't the laws of physics say two forum thread titles cannot occupy the same space!?



    Guru has created an antimatter thread. If it collides with any regular matter threads, we could have an explosion of catastrophic proportions that could bring about the end of the world! Or...the Rapture.

    And now we are back on topic!

  • Got asked a question the other day that I still wonder about. It won't be a new one for atheists on here, but I'd be interested if any of them had any thoughtful responses to it.
    The question is "what evidence would you require to believe in God?"

    Everything that comes to mind instantly doesn't work after a bit of thought. If there was a huge booming voice in the sky, and a beardy guy in my room, and a dead person that comes back to life in front of me, I think it would still be a better explanation to say "I'm losing my mental capacity" than "God exists".
    So then what? A famous answer is "rabbits in the precambrian" or Richard Dawkins talked about finding some sort of biological signature. Neither of these answers work well either, because it still seems better to say "That's an unexplained phenomena" than "that phenomena is best explained by a giant, mostly unknowable deity".

    The best answer I've heard so far is "I do not need to answer, because if God did exist, and I needed to believe, he would surely be able to find a way, even if I cannot conceive of one."
    But it feels like a copout, so yeah, any responses guys? :)

  • Honestly, unless a deity showed themselves up close and personal to a wide group of individuals and proves that they can legitimately control the world around them with crazy powers that are proven to be nothing but the control of the deity without the aid of illusions or tricks, then I'd say that's pretty sufficient proof of the deity existing. Doesn't exactly mean I'd follow them though.

  • Philosophy/ art, music taught me ways to view universe, that were wise to those fields long before science were, and science does actually acknowledge these views.


    I find it very fascinating. All these different people, view points often cross intersect, they are all the same, really. No matter how different their views appear to be, I see that one is often just the abstraction, or cousin of another.

    I watch music videos, artist renderings, even if the intention is direct/ indirect all these beliefs, ideas can be correlated.

    I see topics in both science and philosophy that correlate all the time, even if from a naive sense, the most abstract artistic "anti-ideas" are true ideas. Creativity that rules over certain ideas , that imagination should be no less valued in artistic genius than it is in scientific genius. Often the two have coincided. Many religious men throughout history have made famous scientists, as well as artists.

    So very often I see reflections of beliefs spread throughout different medium, that actually turn out to be indifferent , it's just the ideas that spread throughout those different medium that distract us from the actual message we've picked up on.

    So, yes, I am acknowledging all the contextual differences of religions , sciences, arts, but as foreign languages have symmetry so do all these things.

    There's several beliefs, and beyond those things their true belief.

    And it doesn't matter what came first, they are all the same, just demonstrated differently based on how they've been licensed.

  • User Avatar Image
    Vainamoinen Moderator

    @Giant Tope said: Honestly, unless a deity showed themselves up close and personal to a wide group of individuals and proves that they can legitimately control the world around them with crazy powers that are proven to be nothing but the control of the deity without the aid of illusions or tricks, then I'd say that's pretty sufficient proof of the deity existing. Doesn't exactly mean I'd follow them though.



    That is a problem of many religions. They claim to have a benevolent and forgiving deity, but still it plays that essentially unfair believe-in-me-or-forfeit-eternal-life game. You could have a god who'd sacrifice a large percentage of humanity come judgement day without remorse, just because they believed in the wrong god (or none at all), but this is the very same guy you want to spend eternity with. If I can choose between being locked in one heaven with such a ruthless deity and not living forever, I chose the latter.

    Don't get me wrong, though. I am not exactly an agnostic. I've met women and men who took great strength and compassion from their religion, and about the most impressive of them was a successful chemist - in all honesty, I do not perceive religion and science in that much opposition. Nonetheless, I think it is high time our religions gave up their exclusivity claims concerning their knowledge of the way to bliss, and the violence that goes with it.

Add Comment