Is it up to us to believe in God?

[Charles Anthony]

I can't help but notice that your reply doesn't touch on any of the actual content of my reply.

Did you notice that before or after you re-posted her post?

[AshNazg]

Perpetual universe? Supreme being? Same difference.

So you're saying an inanimate object (which, essentially, is what the universe is), the "behaviour" of which is subject to various restrictions is the same as an animate, concious, sentient, omnipotent and omniscient entity that exists completely outside the bounds of what we know as reality? Look, if you were arguing that God is merely a human term to describe the mysteries of the universe and the infinite possibilities it contains (including the possibility of this universe being one among an infinite number)-IOW, shorthand for "all the shit we can't really fathom with our puny minds"- fine. But that's not what most people, including the O.P, are talking about.

Given our limited knowledge of the way human mind works and our almost complete absense of knowledge regarding what exactly makes something sentient or concious, we cannot really make claims about universe as a whole of being inanimate.

(sci-fi mode on) Sure it looks like its just a soup of radiation, but who knows, perhaps the universe as a whole is sentient and galaxies are its neurons. This then would be God. I mean, is it really far fetched to assume that our understanding of the world around us is so limited that we simply cannot concieve of a greater intelligence than us, elsewhere in the universe? (sci-fi mode off).

The best analogy i've heard so far is the one that likens humans to the fish living at the ocean bottom. To this fish, nothing but water exists and it cannot concieve of anything beyond the ocean. A term such as "outside of the water" would have no meaning to it, since water is its world. Same deal for us humans, we cannot concieve (yet) of anything outside of our limited world.

I myself believe that there exist intelligences greater than ours in the universe, but they are probably not aware of us and if they are, they certainly don't care that much (or maybe have a purely scientific interest in our development). The notion of God as religion sees it (an object of worship) and the notion of afterlife is utterly foreign to me. I see it as tool of societal control, nothing else. It is much easier to keep peons in check if you feed them with tales of heavenly riches that await them.

In fact, I would gladly welcome a regime that obliterates religion. Such a regime might at long last ensure a world that is relatively peaceful. (Example: USSR was a very diverse country back in the day, with muslims, christians, buddhists and other religious groups working peacefully side by side. There was very little racial / religious segregation and hatred because USSR as a government abolished religion and promoted science and communist ideals. Now with the conversion to capitalism, Russia is experiencing a lot of religious and racial tension).

[Charles Anthony]

In fact, I would gladly welcome a regime that obliterates religion.

How should that be done?

[Adel]

I'll take issue with you now , Black Dog.

So everything heeds to come from something except the creator? That's junk. Why not just say the universe has always existed and cut out the middle man?

You haven't cut out the middleman. You've just changed the name. Instead of calling it the Creator/God, you now call it the Universe.

A rose by any other name...

Look, the problem with religious people is not that they believe in God. The problem is that they believe some humans have had contact with God and hence have some kind of inside knowledge.

You can have faith in God but it's quite another thing to have faith in some guy who claims to have spoken to God. When someone (Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, the Pope) goes around telling me what to do, I call that politics not religion. I don't care whether he claims to be inspired by God - in fact, such inspiration is reason to be doubtful.

I disagree with Kurt Vonnegut on many things but I think he got this right: Take care of the people and let God Almighty take care of Himself.

What stops a charlatan from making the same claim?

That is a very valid question...

Anyone could come up and pretended he was a prophet... and actually this happened....

Through history, these are the characteristics of true prophets :

etc.

Adel, that's interesting. You admit that a charlatan could claim to be a prophet and then you suggest ways to know whether someone is a true prophet or a charlatan.

You are employing the scientific method (rather badly) to decide. I applaud your efforts and suggest you carry them to their logical conclusion.

If you do, you will realize that this God that impresses you so is far more wonderful and complex than any so-called prophet has ever understood.

IMV, Mohammed (and Jesus Christ) were just politicians. End of story. (Admittedly, others view them differently but to me, that's a political issue.)

You are not making any sense, Adel. You say he is the only one who can allow or disallow anything to happen, but still maintain that he doesn't prevent free choice. This needs a much better explanation than what you have given.

Melanie, replace the word 'Universe' with the word 'God' and your questions and quotes will make more sense.

Also you talk about prayer, as if it makes a difference to pray about anything. You have just said that he will do what he chooses - is he really swayed by people asking him to do things? If he has such complete wisdom, prayer is meaningless because he already knows what he will do regardless of what anyone asks. And I find it offensive to think that, if he had such wisdom and power to prevent suffering, he would only act if asked to do so.

Prayer. I have always figured that prayer means talking to one's self. Inside all of us, there is a constant conversation. For some, this is called prayer.

The basis of good mental health (I think June Callwood used to write about this) is that this internal conversation is a pleasant and enjoyable conversation.

The way you talk about prophets imply having very incorrect picture about them. Prophets were the best people ever – every one at his time….

Far from being interested in life enjoyment, money, authority, luxury life they were.

They spent there whole lives guiding their people in wise dialogues while most of them only had been told they were lairs, been tortured, deported..

All of the prophets said that they did not ask for any rewards from people, their rewards were promised from the one He had sent them.

After sending messengers to people, on the Judgment Day, no-one will ever have any excuse about not knowing about the God and His orders…

All I am saying here is from the holy book… not faking anything…

[AshNazg]

In fact, I would gladly welcome a regime that obliterates religion.

How should that be done?

Depends on what kind of person you are and the society you live in of course.

There are several options available to us.

The brutal, quick and highly ineffective in the long run one is to simply destroy or convert churches and other places of public worship into utilitarian buildings, sack the priests and convert them into someone else or exile them from the country if they refuse to take a more practical position. Forbid any religious holidays and revert back to holidays that celebrate natural events (Summer solstice, winter solstice, etc) or important scientific achievements. Slowly edge out religous worship from public view by destroying religious regalia (such as wooden crosses with Jesus image on them and so on). Then relegate the study of religion to history.

Forbid any sort of indictment into religion (baptism), abolish any religious taints in the marriage and other public ceremonies, impose a ban on people that stops them from openly practicing their religion anywhere outside of their house.

One other option would be to slowly edge religion out through media (which is kind of what is happening now). Continually bash it, denounce it, send a message across that people who are religious are mentally sick (after all religion is a sort of slavery!). Basically a massive PR campaign against it.

There are other options yet, one just needs to use ones imagination.

[AshNazg]

All I am saying here is from the holy book… not faking anything…

The holy book written by less than holy people. Had we lived by the holy book we would still treat women like they do in Afghanistan and keep slaves around.

The holy book was a guideline to live by 2000 years ago. We're beyond that now.

[Charles Anthony]

One other option would be to slowly edge religion out through media (which is kind of what is happening now). Continually bash it, denounce it, send a message across that people who are religious are mentally sick (after all religion is a sort of slavery!). Basically a massive PR campaign against it.

Do you identify slavery as being universally evil?

I do.

[Remiel]

The Riddle of Epicuris:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Good and evil are both necessary catalysts for choice. If you can do only good, then you will have to do which is the most good, and thus you have no choice but to do the single thing which is the most good, because all future goodness relies on the perfection of those good acts which came before. Without evil, good has no meaning, and no value.

Is God willing to prevent good, but not able? The he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing? Then he is benevolent.

Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh good?

Is he neither able nor willing? The why call him God?

Anyway...

Cause and effect, something from something and nothing from nothing are the laws of the universe. To suggest that if God exists, he would need a cause, is to project the laws of the universe onto God, which would be a faulty use of logic, since the whole idea is that God is not bound by the laws of the universe.

Also... if space and time are ultimately properties of matter and energy, how do you propose an infinite number of true singularities? In the absence of space prior to their origin, at the moment of creation of space they would all have the exact same space, thus there could only be one singularity, or rather, all singularities would be as one, would they not?

[AshNazg]

Do you identify slavery as being universally evil?

I do.

I'm not sure what this has to do with my message, but the answer to yours is that it depends on the definition of slavery. No, I don't consider it to be universally evil. Or rather, I consider it to be a necessary evil.

It has existed since the dawn of time and it still exists now, on a variety of scales starting from personal slavery of low wage workers for corporate monsters and ending with economic enslavement of third world countries by developed nations.

Until we develop a way of having robots do all the dirty and hard work for us (and enslave robots) we will be reliant on human slave labor.

[Adel]

All I am saying here is from the holy book… not faking anything…

The holy book written by less than holy people. Had we lived by the holy book we would still treat women like they do in Afghanistan and keep slaves around.

The holy book was a guideline to live by 2000 years ago. We're beyond that now.

I think we all agree that if we want to know about some religion, we take it from the source of it, not from people’s behaviors..

If I want to understand physics, I don’t go and watch physics’ professor or teacher’s everyday behavior… this is not the right way…

Looking at how Christians did to their opponents all over the history – for example – does not necessarily reflect the truth of Christianity… Same applies to Muslims and Jews…etc

For the creator, men and women are the same. He just chose to create them this way for life continuity…

Looking at how women were – or have being - treated in that country or another and saying religion says that is the same as seeing a criminal killing innocent people and claiming that law says that…

Look at what religion says about women…

- “Who ever does good deeds – man or women – will be rewarded…” no difference

- A prophet was asked “Who is the one person with whom I must behave best?” The prophet said “Your mother”. The man asked again “Then who else?” The prophet said “then your mother”. The man asked again “Then who else?” The prophet said “then your you mother”. The man asked again “Then who else?”. The prophet said “then your father.” Religion asks people to take care of their mothers 3 times than their fathers. This is of-course you are dealing with your fathers very very well…

- “All people – men and women- are equals as a comb’s teeth… ”

There are a lot spread in the holy books

[Charles Anthony]

I'm not sure what this has to do with my message,

It has everything to do with your message because you equated religion with slavery.

but the answer to yours is that it depends on the definition of slavery. No, I don't consider it to be universally evil. Or rather, I consider it to be a necessary evil.

What makes it evil?

[AshNazg]

I'm not sure what this has to do with my message,

It has everything to do with your message because you equated religion with slavery.

but the answer to yours is that it depends on the definition of slavery. No, I don't consider it to be universally evil. Or rather, I consider it to be a necessary evil.

What makes it evil?

What makes slavery or religion evil? Even though one is reminiscent of the other, they're not necessarily equal.

Religion allows for easy and simple segregation of people into "friend/enemy" camp. It allows to demonize people by claiming they are inferior and sub-human (check the treatment of Native americans by Colonial powers for instance). It allows people to claim that they do work for the favor of the "Lord" and it allows them to commit unspeakable atrocities in his name without remorse or pity. It doesn't even register as a bad thing to do, since surely the Lord would reward any murders done in his name in the afterlife. (Check Inquisition, suicide bombers).

Basically it removes peoples capacity of independent and critical thinking and makes zealots out of them, brainwashing them into blind obedience to anyone who keeps their hand on the pulse of religion.

It also removes the burden of responsibility for your actions.

Zealotry + lack of responsibility make for a dangerous combination (check Nazi germany, who was guided by the same principle that underlies many religions, that of an inherent superiority of the "our" camp and inhumanity of the "their" camp).

[noahbody]

All I am saying here is from the holy book… not faking anything…

There we go. You're quoting from "the holy book." Wrong. You're quoting from "a holy book." There are many religions older than Christianity. Why do you think that is? I suppose God was doing the Truman Show thing cause he was bored.

[Charles Anthony]

What makes slavery or religion evil? Even though one is

No. That was not my question.

I asked: what makes slavery evil?

You equated religion to slavery and you said slavery was a necessary evil.

[AshNazg]

What makes slavery or religion evil? Even though one is

No. That was not my question.

I asked: what makes slavery evil?

You equated religion to slavery and you said slavery was a necessary evil.

Slavery is evil because it takes the brains and wills of many people and makes them subservient to one. One who might not be smarter, brighter or even more mature than any of the subservient people.

It takes a number of human personalities (lets call them potential talents) out of circulation and from that standpoint people who are enslaved are forever lost to the society.

Religion enslaves peoples minds in the same manner. They refuse to see facts and follow logical reasoning and instead blindly cling onto the ephemeral. Those minds could be great minds, they could have great potential for unlocking the secrets of the universe but they do not, because they're dominated by the idea of God. Because of that loss of potential I pity them and I pity our society for allowing such mass "slavery" if you will to take place.

When I likened religion to slavery I said religion is a sort of slavery to imply that where slavery normally presumes physical possession, religion implies mental possession.

The reason why I said slavery is a necessary evil is because from the standpoint of economics, someone HAS to clean the toilets. Therefore we need people working for min wages and being economically bound to those positions. Incidentally, it helps if people who work low end jobs are religious, they'd be more willing to endure suffering in this life so that they'd be rewarded in the afterlife.

Hence the "necessary evil" part.

[Charles Anthony]

Slavery is evil because it takes the brains and wills of many people and makes them subservient to one.

That makes sense.

The reason why I said slavery is a necessary evil is because from the standpoint of economics, someone HAS to clean the toilets.

That is not subservience. People can quit their jobs.

Incidentally, it helps if people who work low end jobs are religious, they'd be more willing to endure suffering in this life so that they'd be rewarded in the afterlife.

Hence the "necessary evil" part.

Now you are suggesting that religion is necessary...??

[AshNazg]

Slavery is evil because it takes the brains and wills of many people and makes them subservient to one.

That makes sense.

The reason why I said slavery is a necessary evil is because from the standpoint of economics, someone HAS to clean the toilets.

That is not subservience. People can quit their jobs.

No they cannot. Not if they want to live an acceptable life anyway. Economic servitude is quite brutal.

Incidentally, it helps if people who work low end jobs are religious, they'd be more willing to endure suffering in this life so that they'd be rewarded in the afterlife.

Hence the "necessary evil" part.

Now you are suggesting that religion is necessary...??

I'm merely saying that religion is a necessary evil (hence the necessary part) that should be fought against and abolished as soon as it is possible to do so with little reprecussions for society.

[Canadian Blue]

But hold on, weren't alot of the early abolitionists, and fighters for social programs religious?

[Charles Anthony]

I'm merely saying that

You have a personal vendetta against religion and you can not justify it.

[Adel]

Slavery is evil because it takes the brains and wills of many people and makes them subservient to one.

That makes sense.

The reason why I said slavery is a necessary evil is because from the standpoint of economics, someone HAS to clean the toilets.

That is not subservience. People can quit their jobs.

No they cannot. Not if they want to live an acceptable life anyway. Economic servitude is quite brutal.

Incidentally, it helps if people who work low end jobs are religious, they'd be more willing to endure suffering in this life so that they'd be rewarded in the afterlife.

Hence the "necessary evil" part.

Now you are suggesting that religion is necessary...??

I'm merely saying that religion is a necessary evil (hence the necessary part) that should be fought against and abolished as soon as it is possible to do so with little reprecussions for society.

I cannot help being surprised that we are being distracted from the main question whether we have the luxury to believe there is a creator of the universe …

Scientifically speaking, no-one yet has any strong point that this universe does not have a creator…

The opinions I have seen are:

1- Over millions of years, the un-living materials – no-one even told us from where they came – shaped themselves blindly into this unique universe. Furthermore, they created life on this earth.

2- Seeing living cells and organs in action, then they have their own logic and they created themselves, work by themselves. So why do we need a creator?

3- If everything needs a creator, so why we exclude God from that?

Apart from the third point, I am surprised we consider some un-living materials understand it all; away more that we do, and shaped this amazing universe and created us…

If any one told me that the most perfect and complicated computer or any high-tech tool was created blindly by some materials, I found it much to accept - although I will have to sacrifice my mind though – than saying I, or the intelligent people arguing me here were made by them…

Ask any scientist in any field about the perfect design and logic in this universe and he/she will tell you that ages and ages are needed just to give a general idea about what we know so far. They will tell you that the more they know the more they realize that there a lot more to learn. The scientist will tell - modestly - you they are LEARNING about the universe and LEARNING from the universe. Many many wonderful inventions came into existence by merely mimicking some creatures in this universe…

And guess what, I am being told this universe were created by itself blindly..try/error..!!! and they take the driver’s seat and advise people to talk “logically”

Now to the third point. Who created the creator Himself?

If we gave a mind to a car and ask it how it would picture its maker, it would tell you that he (more accurately – from its point of view - it) must have a motor, steering wheel, brakes, wheels….etc. Why? Because it compares the maker to itself which is wrong…

As I mentioned before, the creator is above time and place. He is not a being of anyway we could imagine. He is much greater than we might think. Concepts like life and death are created the same like universe when living being were created.

Existence is the rule not non-existence.

One more example to clarify

Our souls are from outside this created universe. Death does not apply to them. Death is just a separation between our bodies and our souls. Anyone can easily tell that. Anyone will feel time does not affect his soul. It is above time. A man or a women aged 10, 20, 50, 80 would feel no time passed and if the body helps, he/she will live forever …

[AshNazg]

I'm merely saying that

You have a personal vendetta against religion and you can not justify it.

That the best you can do? Tsk

[Canadian Blue]

May I remind the poster that many genocidal acts have been committed by atheists as well. Communism comes to mind.

[AshNazg]

I cannot help being surprised that we are being distracted from the main question whether we have the luxury to believe there is a creator of the universe …

Scientifically speaking, no-one yet has any strong point that this universe does not have a creator…

The opinions I have seen are:

1- Over millions of years, the un-living materials – no-one even told us from where they came – shaped themselves blindly into this unique universe. Furthermore, they created life on this earth.

2- Seeing living cells and organs in action, then they have their own logic and they created themselves, work by themselves. So why do we need a creator?

3- If everything needs a creator, so why we exclude God from that?

Apart from the third point, I am surprised we consider some un-living materials understand it all; away more that we do, and shaped this amazing universe and created us…

If any one told me that the most perfect and complicated computer or any high-tech tool was created blindly by some materials, I found it much to accept - although I will have to sacrifice my mind though – than saying I, or the intelligent people arguing me here were made by them…

Ask any scientist in any field about the perfect design and logic in this universe and he/she will tell you that ages and ages are needed just to give a general idea about what we know so far. They will tell you that the more they know the more they realize that there a lot more to learn. The scientist will tell - modestly - you they are LEARNING about the universe and LEARNING from the universe. Many many wonderful inventions came into existence by merely mimicking some creatures in this universe…

And guess what, I am being told this universe were created by itself blindly..try/error..!!! and they take the driver’s seat and advise people to talk “logically”

Now to the third point. Who created the creator Himself?

If we gave a mind to a car and ask it how it would picture its maker, it would tell you that he (more accurately – from its point of view - it) must have a motor, steering wheel, brakes, wheels….etc. Why? Because it compares the maker to itself which is wrong…

As I mentioned before, the creator is above time and place. He is not a being of anyway we could imagine. He is much greater than we might think. Concepts like life and death are created the same like universe when living being were created.

Existence is the rule not non-existence.

One more example to clarify

Our souls are from outside this created universe. Death does not apply to them. Death is just a separation between our bodies and our souls. Anyone can easily tell that. Anyone will feel time does not affect his soul. It is above time. A man or a women aged 10, 20, 50, 80 would feel no time passed and if the body helps, he/she will live forever …

I see what you're saying Adel.

However, isn't it much easier to imagine that on a billion different worlds, where atoms and molecules arrange themselves in various ways under the pressure of different forces, eventually, somewhere life will develop at random without interference of any higher deity.

Logically speaking it is impossible to prove that God does not exist, therefore the burden of proof lies on the believers to prove beyond doubt that God does exist.

What you have cited is merely evidence that we do not understand everything about the Universe. This does not mean that the missing part is God, this only means we're not yet omniscient. 2000 years ago people thought thunder was caused by God..we know better now, don't we? Same will happen when we crack other secrets of the world.

The perfect design and logic in this universe only seem perfect and logical because we're an innate part of the system, we developed within the system and we were optimized for the system by evolution. Naturally the system looks optimal to us. Our eyes see light because our Sun has a radiation peak in the visible wavelength. If our eyes only saw infrared and our Sun peaked in visible light, then our bodies would NOT be perfect for the system and then you'd have room to argue that maybe we were artificially designed by someone. Our planet has an oxygen atmosphere, and our lungs have evolved to breath oxygen so we could survive. This "perfect design" that you refer to is only logical and has nothing to do with Creator.

And of course our science imitates other creatures. Again, nature itself ensured that those creatures are optimized for their habitats and she spent 4 billion years so far evolving creatures to make sure that they're "up-to-date". Naturally we can borrow many principles from those creatures.

As far as aging and soul goes. Im not sure what you're talking about. When I age from 10 to 20 I surely feel more mature, more experienced, more jaded perhaps. Is that my soul or my body? I feel older and I ask myself many questions I didn't when I was 10. Is my soul not aging?

The existence of a soul itself is dubious at best. What is it tied to? Your head? Is it basically your mind? If so, indulge me with a little thought experiment.

If you were in a surgery room and a robot was operating on your brain, slicing little pieces of it at a time and reconstructing a perfect copy of that brain from other organic molecules, piece by piece, right next to your body, at what point would your perception shift from the old brain into the new? Or would you die?

[Charles Anthony]

You have a personal vendetta against religion and you can not justify it.

That the best you can do? Tsk

I followed your rant more than enough.

You say religion is like slavery and everybody is a slave if they have a job.

[AshNazg]

You have a personal vendetta against religion and you can not justify it.

That the best you can do? Tsk

I followed your rant more than enough.

You say religion is like slavery and everybody is a slave if they have a job.

If thats how you choose to see it *shrug*

Although among the two of us I am not the one whose arguments are having problems with the logic.