Why do you or don't you believe in God?

[Iggy]

I do not believe in God as the stories do not ring true.
I can understand why man throughout the ages has invented and re invented Gods, be it for political reasons or purely that man does not like to admit, "I do not know the answer".

 

[JohnRM]

I do not believe in God as the stories do not ring true.
I can understand why man throughout the ages has invented and re invented Gods, be it for political reasons or purely that man does not like to admit, "I do not know the answer".

Or perhaps human beings throughout all of time have known that there is something else out there and have not always expressed that knowledge in the same manner.

 

[Billy Rubin]

I believe in God because he seems to be real to me according to my experiences. It is all about faith really.

I know a lot of you guys believe that love between humans exist, and I think the reasons why I believe God exist is very similar to the reasons why you believe love exists. I of course don’t believe in love for many reasons. You guys are so good at explaining why:


-I don't believe in love because I've never encountered any thought-model requiring such a thing.

Actually I did when I thought of an explanation what made my thoughts circle around one person over and over again in a way that distracted me from my daily duties.
I'm determined to reproduce by evolution, so obviously the person I was thinking about over and over again matched some more or less conscious patterns (intellect, looks, smell...) and therefore was evaluated as a sufficient individual to produce offspring with. My organsims reaction was to flood itself with hormones making me a mindless zombie to make sure I interbreed with her and stay with her for some time so the offspring has the best chance of survival. That endogenous intoxication is called love commonly.

Didn't encounter anything that would make a god neccessary to explain it, though.

The question for gods existence was not the question of this thread, but since lots of people brought it up:
According to Descartes proof of god for instance, the only thing any individual can know for certain is its own thoughts existence (Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.) - everything else is questionable.
According to his cause and effect model, the cause for the consciousnesses existence is god. If you go one step further and ask for the cause of gods existence, he states that god causes his own existence.
Imho, the best formula to explain something is the one which needs the least variables to describe something. So if I want to create a hypothesis on what causes the existence of my consciousness, I can assume that my consciousness causes itself just as well. After all, there has to be something causing itself - adding one level unnecessarily complicates the hypothesis and doesn't change anything about the result, thus making the variable god dispensable.

This doesn't say god doesn't exist - it's just the reason for me not believing in his existence.
I'd personally say that existence itself solely emerges in ones mind, so what it sees, believes to see or believes to exist does exist for any individual. So for believers (if they exist ), god indeed does exist (he's part of their assumption of what reality is), for me he doesn't.

On a side note, it's quite interesting to know that transcranial magnetic stimulation of the brain's right-hemisphere parietal and temporal lobes lead to the result that at least 80 per cent of subjects experience a presence beside them in the room, a sentient intelligent being, or — if they are inclined to atheism — a oneness with the universe. For me this indicates that god is a product of peoples minds, not vice versa.

 

[Iggy]

Or perhaps human beings throughout all of time have known that there is something else out there and have not always expressed that knowledge in the same manner.

Some human beings have thought there is something else out there, as it explained what they could not understand. In simplistic terms it is this:

Question to people prior to man understanding mathematics: What is 2 + 2?

The religious person, "It is God"
The thoughtful religious person, "It is God because God created the number 2."
The atheist, "It is not God"
The thoughtful atheist, "It is not God because man created the number 2."
The objective scientist, "I do not know, however given time we may be able to work it out. At the moment we cannot".
The spiritual person, "Do not look for the answer, simply ponder at the wonderment of the question."
The agnostics, "snigger..... number 2s.... snigger".

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

I looked up the defination of 'faith' and decided I'm agnostic. Actually much more complicated than that, but it is a good short answer.

 

[Syterion]

Well, that's bad too - Belief in God isn't to get into Heaven.

Good one!

 

[cgannon64]

Err, Syterion, at the moment I beleive in God quite strongly and doubt the existence of an afterlife quite strongly as well. Often I am filled with existential dread about my mortality, but that doesn't lessen my faith in God in any way.

kmad: So are you saying that all people beleive in religion becuase they are afraid of death? And you're basing that judgement on a few people you knew who converted to a religion after an experience with death?

 

[Shadylookin]

Most people admit the motive for their belief, but other times it is obvious. Like a lot of the time someone will become a Christian a few days after their mother passes. This is obviously because they wish their mother to be in a safe place (Heaven).

I'm sure plenty of people join up for the communal wine

 

[toh6wy]

I have seen no hard evidence (or first-hand experiences on my part) that would at least strongly imply that God exists and religion is true in some form. On the contrary, religion makes no logical sense to me, and sometimes seems completely counter-intuitive to the way I know the world and universe work. Nor do I have a need for something to keep my spirits up through long, hard times, like religion.

 

[Marla_Singer]

"Men were able to create Gods, the opposite has yet to be proven."

Serge Gainsbourg (1928-1991).

 

[kmad]

kmad: So are you saying that all people beleive in religion becuase they are afraid of death? And you're basing that judgement on a few people you knew who converted to a religion after an experience with death?

No, I'm not making an ignorant blanket statement. Thank you for your question.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

I don't believe in god because I see no reason to do so. There is no evidence for his existence, and plenty of reason to believe that his existence is much wishful thinking. Furthermore, I would assert that one cannot believe in god and be a rational historian, because one has to accept that there are countless religions in the world, and in the history of humanity. These religions can't all be right, and yet many of them have had their heydays. Religions rise and fall like so many civilizations.

 

[cgannon64]

If its not an ignorant blanket statement, what is it?

nanocyborgasm: That is untrue. Historians do not make judgements on the truth of the religions they study, and so they can beleive them to be untrue and still study their effects and beliefs just fine.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Furthermore, I would assert that one cannot believe in god and be a rational historian, because one has to accept that there are countless religions in the world, and in the history of humanity. These religions can't all be right, and yet many of them have had their heydays. Religions rise and fall like so many civilizations.

They could all be wrong and god still exist.
They could all be part right.
Organized religion is the creation of humans and, like civilizations, come and go. Belief in god appears to be a persistent part of our mental/genetic make up. Perhaps, as humans we have yet to to grasp the whole truth.

 

[samildanach]

I don't believe in god because I see no reason to do so. There is no evidence for his existence, and plenty of reason to believe that his existence is much wishful thinking. Furthermore, I would assert that one cannot believe in god and be a rational historian, because one has to accept that there are countless religions in the world, and in the history of humanity. These religions can't all be right, and yet many of them have had their heydays. Religions rise and fall like so many civilizations.

I'm not an historian but this is pretty much my answer as well. With the exception that if ever there are thousands of peoples lives riding on one of my decisions as opposed to just my own skin or pixellated civ units then I can assure you that I will be bending the knee to God and asking for some guidance.

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

cgannon64...

What I mean to say is that, as a historian, you have to accept that every religion has merit for its own civilization, or faction, that followed it. You cannot suspect that one religious belief is more accurate than any other. You should NOT make moral judgements about the past, least of all on the religions of the past. They served their purposes well enough, so who is to say that the religions of the present are any more valid than the older ones? If you begin with the mindset that your religion is the only true one, how can you judge a religion of the past in an unbiased fashion?

Furthermore, I think that the existence of religious belief is a side effect of the human mind's tendency to attach to magical thinking (ie. non-rational thinking) when times are desperate or out of ignorance. (I doubt that it has anything to do with some mystical search for deeper knowledge.) Even today, I notice that, in the U.S., religious belief has become deeper since the 9/11/01 tragedy. This is probably because people see life as more uncertain, and little recourse for worldly means. Naturally, they turn to un-worldly means, and that equates to supernatural beliefs.

 

[Birdjaguar]

What I mean to say is that, as a historian, you have to accept that every religion has merit for its own civilization, or faction, that followed it. You cannot suspect that one religious belief is more accurate than any other. You should NOT make moral judgements about the past, least of all on the religions of the past. They served their purposes well enough, so who is to say that the religions of the present are any more valid than the older ones? If you begin with the mindset that your religion is the only true one, how can you judge a religion of the past in an unbiased fashion?

If you don't believe that your religion is the true one, then it's not religion, it's a social club. Why can't we make moral judgemetns about the past? We make them about the present? And tomorrow those judgemetns will be about past events. Science is objective (mostly), history is not. Today's religions are not more valid than those of old, but they are still here. For whatever reasons, most of us do not support overt child sacrifice on stone alters. Whatever purpose it served those long dead souls, I think it was a bad practice and I would not support its revival.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Furthermore, I think that the existence of religious belief is a side effect of the human mind's tendency to attach to magical thinking (ie. non-rational thinking) when times are desperate or out of ignorance. (I doubt that it has anything to do with some mystical search for deeper knowledge.) Even today, I notice that, in the U.S., religious belief has become deeper since the 9/11/01 tragedy. This is probably because people see life as more uncertain, and little recourse for worldly means. Naturally, they turn to un-worldly means, and that equates to supernatural beliefs.

We (humans) do not need the excuse of "desparate times" or ignorance to do irrational things. We do them all the time, and often call them "fun". Your parents probably called the stupid. If you need a list let me know. Given the role of organized religion in history, I think you are misrepresenting it as a "side effect".

BTW, fundamentalism has been on the rise in the US and middle East for the past 30 years.

 

[kmad]

The popularity of something should not ever work as a proof of its authenticity.

 

[samildanach]

Furthermore, I think that the existence of religious belief is a side effect of the human mind's tendency to attach to magical thinking (ie. non-rational thinking) when times are desperate or out of ignorance. (I doubt that it has anything to do with some mystical search for deeper knowledge.) Even today, I notice that, in the U.S., religious belief has become deeper since the 9/11/01 tragedy. This is probably because people see life as more uncertain, and little recourse for worldly means. Naturally, they turn to un-worldly means, and that equates to supernatural beliefs.

I think you misinterpret my rationale. It is the Sword of Damocles argument. That is, you have done everything humanly possible to ensure that decision you have made is the right one. But the sword still hangs by a thread. From my perspective it is completely rational, every thing that can be done has been done. If praying might help to keep the sword from falling then that will be done to.