Does God Exist??
-
That letter said he did not believe in the biblical stories. He didn't believe in a personal God.
Einstein was still a believer in Spinoza's God till the day he died. He was not an atheist. The correct word should be deist.
-
actually einstein is a atheist or not, does not relevant, because, no matter how superior he is , he only represent one free mind,
-
Originally posted by dAiyAm0nd0:
miracles and prophecies, i think you have yet to realize morals are mere creations of men.
men who are higher or lower than animals? who are you to judge? are you sure everybody else agrees with your judgment? only people who uphold the same moral system as you do, will agree. but there is no such thing as a universal moral system.
people in saudi arabia believe its morally right to kill women who shame their husbands and family.
No moral judgment is not something that is created by men. Each men have the capacity to judge what is good and what is evil. Any man who has lost its moral guidance and conscience is a derailed person.However men capability to judge what is good and what is evil may be distorted since childhood by culture or any other human made beliefs even by religion or distorted religion or by faulty upbringing.
But every man knows what is good and what is evil inherently.
And because every man knows what is good and what is evil we are ought to be judged in the end. If you look at the bible I don't think animal would be judged according to what they did.
A person once told me that the meaning of the antichirst number is involution which means the opposite of evolution. Men are ought to be judged because of the universally existing conscience in men. The existence of which cannot be expected in mere animals.
Christ didn't come to save the animals but to save men who was created in the image of God. Beacuse men could sin and rebel against God fully knowing of it consciously or subconsciously. Animal cannot be said to have rebelled against God. Do you know any sinful dog or snake? Or have you ever thought of a morally numb animal? or an evil animal?
Men are moral creatures because we have the ability to judge what is wrong and what is not. There is no doubt about it. Would you as a parent ever want to hope that your children grow to be morally corrupt people? People without conscience? People without a heart? Even if they grow to be successful and hold high prestige? Would you?
The most obvious proof that we are moral creatures is the universal existence of values in every culture which has existed. Kindness, lovingness, humility, etc. What grown man doesn't grasp the concept of goodness or any of those values above? In every culture and folklore we admit and understand the concept of good and evil. Or who here who would not feel violated when he or she is in the receiving end of an evil act from another person. One would not feel violated by acts of evil if one didn't grasp the concept of evil and good. Or just look at every civilization there is. which one doesn't have a judiciary system of some sort? Thus we acknowledge that evil needs to be punished. And that none of us would like to be in the receiving end of evil deeds.
Or is there a movie in which the protagonist is an evil character and the antagonist a good character? And which in the end the evil protagonist had a 'happy' ending?There is a perfectly good reason why there isn't such a movie made.
Men are moral creatures while we cannot say the same for animals. It's the same reason why we can be regarded as being lower than animals when we choose not to follow our conscience.
When morality fails universally, civilization will follow.
-
Your argument cannot be refuted, neither can mine.
-
Originally posted by dAiyAm0nd0:
Your argument cannot be refuted, neither can mine.
I'm not trying to prove anybody wrong nor am I interested in doing so but I'm simply trying to speak my mind. -
Originally posted by googoomuck:
That letter said he did not believe in the biblical stories. He didn't believe in a personal God.
Einstein was still a believer in Spinoza's God till the day he died. He was not an atheist. The correct word should be deist.
Einstein wasn't a deist either.
Einstein's religious views are often debated as he did not give a specific answer during his lifetime.
Einstein was often asked, "Do you believe in God?", to which he sometimes replied "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all being". "By God", Spinoza wrote at the very beginning of his Ethica, "I mean a being absolutely infinite-that is, a substance consisting in infinite attributes, of which each expresses eternal and infinite essentiality". Proposition XV of the Ethica stated: "Whatever is, is in God, and without God nothing can be, or be conceived."
Einstein certainly held, as his constant appeal to God showed, that without God nothing can be known, but what did he really mean by his appeal to Spinoza? Once in answer to the question "Do you believe in the God of Spinoza?" Einstein replied as follows:
I can't answer with a simple yes or no. I'm not an atheist and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many different languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see a universe marvellously arranged and obeying certain laws, but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's pantheism, but admire even more his contributions to modern thought because he is the first philosopher to deal with the soul and the body as one, not two separate things.
He dared not claim what he could not understand but he was awed by the laws that held the universe together.
Never did he once state he firmly believed in a supreme being who created existence.
An agnostic pantheist is what describes Einstein best, in my opinion. This is because he does not firmly believe in a spinozian god. Furthermore, spinoza's god is a pantheistic one.
Pantheism differs from deism because pantheists view the universe as one entity, everything is united together in some way, and this entity is god.
Deists believe one supreme god which created the universe, and left nature to develop it. -
The Flaws of Monotheist's counter-responses to the question of "Who created God".
The question “Who made God” is commonly used to argue against the existence of the sort of god traditionally believed in by Christians, Jews, Muslims, and many other monotheists. Strictly speaking, this isn’t an independent argument because it is not offered on its own. Instead, it is used as a rebuttal to the claim that our universe is too complex and intricate not to have been designed.
According to this common theological argument, nothing so complex as the universe with all of its accompanying natural laws could possibly have occurred simply due to random chance; ergo, it must have all been designed and created by some being which believers label “god.” This can only establish the existence of a creator god, but that is usually enough of a basis for many to then proceed with further arguments to show that a creator god must be the same god of their religion.
The response “Who made God?” can be used to point out an important flaw in the above argument: if the universe is too complex not to have been designed, then God is also too complex not to have been designed. A creator-god is never portrayed as something simple or, more importantly, something simpler than the universe. If this god is at least as complex as the universe, then it needs a designer and creator at least as much as the universe.
Believers will usually respond with one of a couple of common objections. The first is to claim that this creator-god has always existed while the universe has not; because the universe began to exist at some point, it requires a creator in a way that the god does not. Unfortunately, the assertion that this god always existed is unsupported and apparently unsupportable — it’s just an assertion we have no particular reason to believe. The assertion that the universe “began” to exist is also problematic because time itself is a feature of the universe, and therefore the universe does not exist “in” time such that we can talk about a time “before the universe” or a time “after the universe.”
Another objection raised by believers is the idea that their god is a “necessary being” and doesn’t need a “creator.” Unfortunately, this is also unsupported and unsupportable. There is no basis for such an arbitrary assertion, except to try to excuse their god from the same standards they wish to apply to the universe.
-
...continue from preceding post.
Moreover, both of the above excuses made for this god can be equally work for the universe. Why can’t the universe be “necessary” or not need a “creator?” Why can’t we say that the universe has “always” existed because there is no identifiable point in time when the universe did not exist? No one can say — after all, we really don’t know enough about our universe or universes in general to make such judgments. Of course, we also don’t have enough verifiable data of gods to make such judgments about them, either.
Another possible objection, also ad hoc in nature because it is only brought up in order to explain away this argument, is the idea that the “complexity” being discussed only applies to material things. God, being immaterial, is not subject to the same standards. This objection falters, however, because the same people offering it also typically believe in immaterial souls, thus leading to the unorthodox belief of our souls existing in parallel with this god rather than being creations of this god. Although someone could hold such a belief, it isn’t one you will likely encounter; as a result, it is unlikely that this objection can be used consistently or successfully with the person’s beliefs.
The question “Who made God?” does not quite suffice to prove that the traditional God believed in by Jews, Christians, Muslims, and others does not exist. It does, however, manage to show that one of the most common and popular reasons used to support belief in such a god is highly problematic and probably cannot serve as rational grounds for belief.
-
Sorry, i cannot shorten the passage as summarising it will inevitably lead to the loss of clarity of some of the key points I wish to bring to the attention of monotheists.
-
When I was a kid, I used to ask myself "God made us. But who made God?"
When I reached adulthood, I stopped asking. Why question and challenge God's existence when our wisdom is less than God?
-
Pigs exist...
-
Originally posted by Honeybunz:
When I was a kid, I used to ask myself "God made us. But who made God?"
When I reached adulthood, I stopped asking. Why question and challenge God's existence when our wisdom is less than God?
Err.. because there are so many Gods out there, one must use his/her intelligence to find the correct God that made us, or probably such a God does not exist at all?
-
Originally posted by Uraniumfish:
You compared god to love. So god is an emotion caused by hormones, which are chemicals?
There might be another plant that humans could live in, but just not in our solar system I guess.
We get sufficient light and dark? If our sun was brighter or dimmer, we would have adapted and that would then be the 'sufficient' amount of light.
I am not really sure on how to explain why the planets do not crash into each other, but I know that they revolve around the sun because they are 'stuck'. As they are revolving, the centrifugal force prevents them from crashing into the sun and the gravitational force of the sun prevents the planets from going out of orbit.
I did not say GOD is like love. FAITH is like LOVE.Don't be silly and quick to support your own ridiculous assumptions.
If you don't have wisdom, you can always admit your own foolishness and consult but LISTEN to another who have alot more wisdom than you.
You can always consult me if you wish.
-
Originally posted by Uraniumfish:
You compared god to love. So god is an emotion caused by hormones, which are chemicals?
There might be another plant that humans could live in, but just not in our solar system I guess.
We get sufficient light and dark? If our sun was brighter or dimmer, we would have adapted and that would then be the 'sufficient' amount of light.
I am not really sure on how to explain why the planets do not crash into each other, but I know that they revolve around the sun because they are 'stuck'. As they are revolving, the centrifugal force prevents them from crashing into the sun and the gravitational force of the sun prevents the planets from going out of orbit.
You should first find out for yourself how the Earth's planet eco-system would be affected if the Sun were too close or too far away from Earth.Especially when you only chose to consider the brightness/darkness of the Sun, you should never be naive to ignore the UV effects of the Sunlight.
Like I said, things don't happened by themselves or by an accident. Everything that is around you, has it's own maker and creator.
So please don't be naive and believed that the solar system and the planets and the Sun and all the blessings around you were there by luck or an accident.
Not even a shot-gun baby can be created by accident or luck, you still need a shot-gun boy and his deserved-to-be-shot girl to produce a shot-gun baby.
-
Ugh are the the same parn? Somehow your posts seem to be set in a different tone. But I'm a forgetful person lol.
-
Originally posted by A.T.R:
I need to noe whether i shuld believe in god....i have lots of punk frens and have met some unique type of frens..they call themselves Nihilist(they fvck cares everything which i tink its more or less some kind of a bullshit) and they asked my sku frens wad has god done for them....and my sku frens replied "god brought me to tis life?"...and my Nihilist frens has some point which i agree...god didn't...it was ur parents who have sex together and thn u came out and i dun see why god has a part in it...i'm starting to doubt god nowadays....i have wasted my time praying for him which i dun c its going anywhere...anyone can tell me whether i shuld continue to believe in god?
Hi A.T.R. It is normal for anyone to doubt the existence of God. Especially when God does not appear to answer our prayers and when we have friends who ridicule our belief in God. I would suggest that you speak to your favourite priest about your doubts and your fears. Pray to God as well, not to ask him for this favour and that (can do that later) but just cry out to him as a friend about your doubts and fears.
You might also want to read the following inspiring stories of folks who have found God in the Catholic Church:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2008/0802dr.asphttp://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0610dr.asp
Lastly, we will never be able to prove or disprove the existence of God using 'scientifc means', so it will be pointless for you to pursue that route. God bless ! -
actually we are close to discovering god through scientific means, in september, when the large hadron collider will be in full functionality.
whether we discover god or not, it is still uncertain, but we will be one step closer to god.
i would not advise you to listen to the stories of priests alone, though that would help. you should open up to more channels of information, study buddhism, taoism, judaism, islam, wicca, scientology, science, philosphy and even satanism.
often, when you only accept information from one idealogy, you become brainwashed, and will dismiss other sources of information as nonsense. this was a mistake i made previously.
however i still want to stress that christianity's growing influence will have a negative impact on our future.(look at bush, look at lee myung bak, look at benny hinn)
Sometimes i feel it is right for me to combat this problem,by telling other people there ARE alternative religions.
Sometimes i don't feel like caring at all. it is my PERSONAL point of view afterall, and the whole world can perish, for after my demise, it would not matter anyway.
yet there is a part of me which tells me, it matters. I might not disappear into ashes, who knows? -
Originally posted by dAiyAm0nd0:
actually we are close to discovering god through scientific means, in september, when the large hadron collider will be in full functionality.
whether we discover god or not, it is still uncertain, but we will be one step closer to god.I wouldn't bet on it ...
-
Originally posted by Omnia:
I wouldn't bet on it ...
Oooo.... a gambling man... -
Originally posted by Omnia:
I wouldn't bet on it ...
Me too.But not because he doesn't exist of course.
-
Read the book "god is not great: How Religion Poisons Everything" by Christopher Hitchens with an open mind.
-
Originally posted by cookie1:
Read the book "god is not great: How Religion Poisons Everything" by Christopher Hitchens with an open mind.
I can't God had delivered me from evil by the name Olahzhong in a twinkle of an eye(so much for evil), showed me death, given me an earthquake and other things. He is great. Who is as the Lord our God?Religion and God have been abused and used as an excuse to do evil by evil people which were followed by men who didn't know God but
Faith in God doesn't poison everything. Worshiping people and putting faith in money which poison everything.
-
Originally posted by Miracles&Prophecies:
Me too.But not because he doesn't exist of course.
Me three...
and bush, lee myung bak or benny hinn does not represent Christianity.....
-
well.. when an overwhelming number of people who share the same belief do things detrimental to our society, its hard not to stereotype isn't it?
-
This is a stupid topic, either you believe or you don't, no one can tell you otherwise......