Jump to content


Does God Exist?

Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Mr Fisk said:

The need to have some meaning, being spritual exists in all of us.

I accept some may not (and do not) subscribe to a particular religion, as I agree this can be quite a loaded point.

 

But I do hold the view that by our innate disposition, we seek meaning, we need to worship something- for some this may be even a materialistic thing (that they make their 'god').

 

Atheism in itself cannot explain this natural state of humans- if it were true (that atheism is the default position as some claim) how does it explain the nature of God. There are people who have had no religious upbringing  but then find a spiritual meaning/answer that is not materialistic.

 

Also to answer earlier point made by Baron99, religion/belief in God exists even in atheist states like China and former sovient union.

Despite state controlled atheisma, people naturally find their innate belief that there exists something far more greater and intelligent then anything else.

As we have no common ground of what atheism is, I do not expect that you can accept my world which has no need for a religious version of "meaning", "worship", "innate disposition", "being spiritual" etc.

 

In the world where respect for other people should be fundamental, I would expect other people not to make assumptions  about me and that I am in need something or that I am in some way lacking in ability to function as a fully paid up member of human society.  A society that is not restricted by religious concepts of faith, hope and belief, policed by church and state and justified by the presence of a vengeful, all seeing,  superior and omnipotent construction.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
On 26/04/2020 at 11:21, Annie Bynnol said:

As we have no common ground of what atheism is, I do not expect that you can accept my world which has no need for a religious version of "meaning", "worship", "innate disposition", "being spiritual" etc.

 

In the world where respect for other people should be fundamental, I would expect other people not to make assumptions  about me and that I am in need something or that I am in some way lacking in ability to function as a fully paid up member of human society.  A society that is not restricted by religious concepts of faith, hope and belief, policed by church and state and justified by the presence of a vengeful, all seeing,  superior and omnipotent construction.

 

 

That is the point- under atheism and by extention who adopt philosophical naturalism- you cannot explain what being 'human' is.

After all, you are nothing but an ingrained social, biological pattern- a process.

 

So where does this 'humanity' come from- under naturalism.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr Fisk said:

That is the point- under atheism and by extention who adopt philosophical naturalism- you cannot explain what being 'human' is.

After all, you are nothing but an ingrained social, biological pattern- a process.

 

So where does this 'humanity' come from- under naturalism.

As I have already said  we have no common ground of what atheism is which, like the other bits of  your philosophy you mention don't have any  place in explaining what we observe so are only relevant in justifying your religion. So the answer to your post is " I haven't a clue what you're on about, but I know why you ask".

 

For nearly 1500 years the religious but not biblical view of the Solar System involved adding more and more layers of philosophy and mathematics to explain its structure.  Each new religion supported explanation failed to explain planetary motion as observations from around Europe increased in accuracy, quantity and frequency. 

 

Unable to account for, and unwilling to add more "wheels within wheels" Copernicus took on the infighting churches and came up with mathematical ideas that fitted better and despite massive flaws would be "fixed" later by generations led by Keppler, Brahe, Newton, Einstein, Hawking, and the next ones along and the next. At each stage the religions complained, attacked and attempted to discredit the individuals and their ideas because they don't use a god or need a god to function.

 

Not only do the theories based on observation move on but they overlap and validate each other and if they don't to then we know that is the current limit of our communities' understanding and a problem to solve. Some religions when they come across something they don't understand become fearful of the consequences understanding and invoke a god, belief, faith and an impenetrable wordy philosophy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
2 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

As I have already said  we have no common ground of what atheism is which, like the other bits of  your philosophy you mention don't have any  place in explaining what we observe so are only relevant in justifying your religion. So the answer to your post is " I haven't a clue what you're on about, but I know why you ask".

 

For nearly 1500 years the religious but not biblical view of the Solar System involved adding more and more layers of philosophy and mathematics to explain its structure.  Each new religion supported explanation failed to explain planetary motion as observations from around Europe increased in accuracy, quantity and frequency. 

 

Unable to account for, and unwilling to add more "wheels within wheels" Copernicus took on the infighting churches and came up with mathematical ideas that fitted better and despite massive flaws would be "fixed" later by generations led by Keppler, Brahe, Newton, Einstein, Hawking, and the next ones along and the next. At each stage the religions complained, attacked and attempted to discredit the individuals and their ideas because they don't use a god or need a god to function.

 

Not only do the theories based on observation move on but they overlap and validate each other and if they don't to then we know that is the current limit of our communities' understanding and a problem to solve. Some religions when they come across something they don't understand become fearful of the consequences understanding and invoke a god, belief, faith and an impenetrable wordy philosophy.

 

If you're going to come up with nothing but rhetoric, lets not bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Mr Fisk said:

If you're going to come up with nothing but rhetoric, lets not bother.

I would never try and persuade anybody ever to turn away from things religious as I know how important it is to them.

However this works both ways and I would challenge those (individuals, groups or organizations) who would seek to persuade others through inaccuracies in fact and interpretation.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does God exist?  Perhaps? 

 

But intelligent design?  Lucky for us, God gave us evolution, dinosaurs & science. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Baron99 said:

Does God exist?  Perhaps? 

 

But intelligent design?  Lucky for us, God gave us evolution, dinosaurs & science. 

And terrible jokes...…..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Padders said:

And terrible jokes...…..

😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.