Does God Exist?

[ben280489]

I hope there is a god, or at least some sort of universe beyond what we can see / hear / touch / smell.

 

In other words i dont really want some masterful designer who made everything including religion... but i dont want to just be gone when im dead.

 

 

But im intelligent enough to know that there probably is no god, and there might not be anything after this conscious existance. And if there is nothing after we die, I will never know about it.

 

So who cares. Enjoy life, forget religion.

 

 

Most religious people have it brainwashed into them as children. And those who turn to religion of their own choosing generally have something missing in their life. They need a different purpose, something to make them feel part of a group or special, or they need to believe it to help deal with things like death.

[Karis]

Serious question: if you can't find something after thousands of years of searching, is that pretty much proof that something doesn't exist?

 

Scientists are seeking the Higgs-Boson, but it doesn't mean they'll ever find it (presumably because it doesn't exist)...

 

Similar sort of principle.

 

Isn't it far more likely that something doesn't exist after all that searching than it does?

[Cavegirl]

Serious question: if you can't find something after thousands of years of searching, is that pretty much proof that something doesn't exist?

 

Scientists are seeking the Higgs-Boson, but it doesn't mean they'll ever find it (presumably because it doesn't exist)...

 

Similar sort of principle.

 

Isn't it far more likely that something doesn't exist after all that searching than it does?

 

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

 

Gods have been believed in for thousands of years do you consider that to be proof that they exist?

 

The excitement isn't over proving God doesn't exist however, that's a matter of faith, the fun part is using science to learn more about life, the universe and everything

 

The Higgs-Boson is a theory based upon rational principles what makes you think it doesn't exist?

Edited July 12, 2010 by Cavegirl

[milquetoast1]

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Now that statement is worthy of a thread all on its own.

 

If you look for "something" and don't find it, does that prove that there is no "something"? No.

 

But the more you look in places where that "something" should be, in ways and at times that "something" should likely be there, the more confidence you can have that there is no "something".

 

Carl Sagan's statement holds true for aliens and intelligent designers because we are unable to know where or when to look, or even what we are looking for.

 

It doesn't hold true for giant purple flying whales, or the Abrahamic god, because they both have characteristics which we can look for. Absence of evidence might not be proof of their absence, but I would argue that it is evidence of their absence.

[sccsux]

But then, in terms of god he is supposed to be everywhere, so if you can't find him he must be hiding!

 

Be a bugger playing hide & seek with him/her.

[Cavegirl]

Now that statement is worthy of a thread all on its own.

 

If you look for "something" and don't find it, does that prove that there is no "something"? No.

 

But the more you look in places where that "something" should be, in ways and at times that "something" should likely be there, the more confidence you can have that there is no "something".

 

Carl Sagan's statement holds true for aliens and intelligent designers because we are unable to know where or when to look, or even what we are looking for.

 

It doesn't hold true for giant purple flying whales, or the Abrahamic god, because they both have characteristics which we can look for. Absence of evidence might not be proof of their absence, but I would argue that it is evidence of their absence.

 

That's a good argument and you're right it's an interesting line, we use it a lot in archaeology and I'd forgotten it was coined by Sagan.

 

Just for the sake of an interesting discussion I'd like to raise a point. I wonder whether our long history of religious belief doesn't actually inform science. I'm not sure yet whether a belief in the spirit world, from the most ancient times, hasn't been the most significant aspect of our development that has led to our ability to use abstract thinking.

 

It's only because of abstract thinking that we can theorise about the micro and macro universe. Rationality in reality drops off quickly in physics, but we can still rationalise the abstract and even non-physicists can understand the basic principles. It's also of course been important in art, music and other creative aspects of human beings.

[sccsux]

Or really easy i suppose

 

"ok god, your turn to hide 10..9..8..7..6..5..4..3..2..1.. here i come"

 

1 second later

 

"there you are, i can see you in everything"

 

Depends on your faith.

 

I see wonder in most things, yet no sign of god.

[Vague_Boy]

I'm not sure yet whether a belief in the spirit world, from the most ancient times, hasn't been the most significant aspect of our development that has led to our ability to use abstract thinking.

 

Surely fairy stories and other myths and legends would do the trick?

[sandie]

It means I cannot be bothered with people who reject both God and the Bible.

 

There is no way a debate, or a learning process, can take place.

 

You have said it all "you cannot be bothered with people who reject both God and the Bible"

 

So those that differ with your opinions are wrong and not worth your time.

I thought this was a forum where people can debate their views and promote peoples responce, it appears that you have a 1 way narrow minded opinion and those that disagree with you are wrong.

Grow up and live in the real world, we all have different takes on a subject and are entiteled to voice them without insult.

[Cavegirl]

Surely fairy stories and other myths and legends would do the trick?

 

I think fairy stories stem from the same original ancient source as modern religions- a shamanistic approach, the idea that a human being can act as a conduit to the spirit world and thus invoke spirits to assist people in the earthly world.

 

I think there's a value to this approach for a society that is purely surviving, like a hunter-gatherer society. It offers morale and can unite individuals into a co-operative group, so I understand why it developed.

 

However, as agricultural surplus, civilisation and states developed it seems to have been manipulated into a political means of controlling people through propaganda. It's a source of power for those who say they are in direct communion with the spirit worlds.

 

As society has developed from an egalitarian structure to a stratified structure (with kings, popes, bureaucrats, religious leaders, academics etc) religion also seems to have been made more complex with new tiers of status added (angels, archangels, demons etc). Each time this happened most people were forced further down a chain and were kept further away from access to the spirit world.

 

Myths and legends are more like chinese whispers, they have some basis in reality but have become elaborated and altered over time. A lot of it is also propaganda designed specifically to subjugate a specific group of peoples.

 

As bad as I think propaganda, power, subjugation and control can be in society I do still appreciate that social unification, morality and abstract thinking are some of the beneficial side effects we've had from a belief in the spirit world.