Does God Exist?

Just as eager as Airyfox is to see a world without religion, because it supposedly would lead to something better, I would regard more people realizing this (in the quote) as something really progressive. As long as people insist to see them as opposing methods/forces/paths (whatever) there probably will be people opposing eachother because of their spiritual beliefs.

 

Opposing? ....I just think different people see things differently, is all.....and that is fine.....whatever works for anyone is fine, fine, fine...
The only thing I am opposed to is people insisting you take on their belief systems or their whatever, as well....

 

there is an authority of conciousness whose will you cannot resist , and you shall
not be treated unkindly by its action . when it happens to you you might only be
bemusedly annoyed . there's nothing to get all mad about . the Rule of Twice will
engage and this shall be for your comfort - it confirms the wonderous reality .

 

Who is mad?

 

Not every post after yours has to be a reaction to yours, moonglow. Just to be clear, mine wasn't. Tikoo probably wasn't adressing anyone in particular neither, just speaking to all of us

 

I did not say it was.....just did not sense anyone being mad, so I asked, is all...you don't have to think that I think what you think.....lol

 

I was simply clarifying because you seemed to project the content of my post (about opposing) onto yourself and therefor it appeared you took it personal. Then after Tikoo's reply you ask again right away: who's mad? As if it had to be about someone specific (maybe you). So even though you didn't mean it like that, that's how it seemed anyway.

 

No, I see it, as if everyone is sitting around in a circle having or trying to have a polite conversation about many things...and someone out of the blue says no need to be mad about it...isn't it a natural reaction to then ask who is mad?

Maybe you are projecting?

 

Asmodeon's natural state of being seems to be to incite others. I am uncertain whether he intentionally does what he does, but it is certainly annoying. Maybe that is his goal, like some others on this forums I could name, to simply annoy others.

 

Learn to ask what a thing is for. Asmodean incites others to what?

 

To get back on topic, I thought I would share some insightful responses from another forum in relation to the question: Why can't we accept it?

Italics are my responses, while quotes are others responses. The underlined portion will be the original post as well as his responses.

Why can't we just accept each others believe's and non believes? This is how I've been brought up and I wish everyone else had been brought up simile.

Because religion, left unchecked and allowed free reign in government, is dangerous and detrimental to societal progress.

The little good that religion has done in face of all the bad it has done is no argument in its favor.

Yes but religion also gives hope and creates a community.

Yes but they should be able to believe what they want to believe.

A society where religious belief is in any way relevant would have to be one whereby theists were capable of preventing themselves from proselytizing and using indoctrination to choose the lie over the truth in order to fool others into the delusion. If the religious aspect of society was capable of not disrupting the overall progress of society, whereby humans were allowed to be human instead of seen as second class citizens or science was not discredited due to ignorance, then I would probably have no qualms with religion. As it is, mankind seems incapable of allowing others to be who they are. Due to the fact that religion seems incapable of disrupting societal progress, the solution would be to discover a way to ensure a secular society.

Unfortunately, so long as religious people, no matter how supposedly good their intentions, are allowed to believe as they wish, there will always be the potential for twisting the belief. The truth should always be more valued over the lie. There is no harm in accepting a mythology as a mythology, as has happened with many ancient beliefs that were once held true, but the problems always arise when religious people think they have the monopoly on the truth and attempt to bring society back to a darker age where the primitive thoughts of those times should remain there in the form of recognized mythology rather than perceived as present/future truth.

Though only if it isn't harmful..

Its not like someone tells you "Hey god exist" And you instantly believe them. In the end, when you're grown up or a teenager you can think for you're self if you believe in god or not.

What I'm trying to say if a religious person wants to change an Atheist point of view, just attacking them for what they believe in isn't going to work, same with religious people and let them come to their own conclusion.

 

Back on topic...someone once asked me, if you don't believe in god....(and I am not denying that god does not exist, as I don't know for sure. Who really does...?) I just choose to be agnostic, I guess about it......secular humanist...that if there is a problem to solve, it is up to us, not some being that we don't see..This is what the seculars believe...anyway, they asked me if I did not believe for certain....how could I be so good?.....and that stumped me....as who is completely good or bad.....but yes, I am a kind, wonderful person.....but I answered.....for the sake of just being a good person is all. I do not need a reason...Some people in fear of punishment or reward may be checked by believeing in a god for sure....I don't know....I am lost again....lol

I do believe in energy...

 

And that is precisely what it boils down to. People are perfectly capable of understanding and knowing that for the survival of the species it is better to be a good person who is good to others.

Unfortunately, many theists are of the conception that they would be horrible people, raping and killing, without a belief in a higher being. And that is a scary thought. It makes them veritable psychopaths. Morality, after all, is contingent on an individual innately knowing that it is better to be good to one's fellow humans than to treat them badly, and a religious belief is in no way needed to reinforce that understanding.

 

While by definition insightful you don't see the world clearly by the evidence of your italicized responses.
For example;

Religion doesn't do anything. Actors with religious ideologies perform acts. Little and good are relative proportions for which we have no verifiable statistics so little good done is no argument at all but an accusation.

 

That's an authority issue talking. Inferiority and superiority.

Do you "believe" in experts?

Think of one of your idols .. science, philosophy .. whatever. Isn't that person superior in knowledge and understanding to some others in the world? But of course! Isn't it true that a university professor has gone before his or her students, and thereby is superior to them? Isn't it true that there are people who know and understand religion far greater than others?

James Hetfield (Metallica) knows infinitely more than I ever will about instruments, music making, industry, business, stardom and fame (and more). Isn't he a God of music? I have absolutely no problem acknowledging that, for who he is and what he does, he is an ultimate superior to myself. It does not hurt me. Could you imagine standing in the same room as James Hetfield? I can imagine it: it would be CRUSHING and excruciating! I'd probably have all sorts of intense anxiety, overwhelming feelings and I'd probably cry and hyperventilate. Maybe even pass out.

God Most High, the ultimate superior .. compare the power of God to the power of Metallica performing for a packed amphitheater. God is greater. An example of that is Hebrews 12:18-24 but I can't read it or understand it for others. They have to do that work for themselves.

Some people want only God. Their entire life is invested in religion, divinity and God. It is passion, devotion and love. I think you could easily, with no harm or injury to yourself, acknowledge that you do not know those people and you do not understand anything about them. You may think you know, but you don't.

 

In the face of underwhelming evidence in support of any deity's existence, I can state with certainty that god does not exist and know that I am correct in my assessment of what facts we have available to us. The theist cannot state the same, because the theist relies upon zero evidence to make a claim that something exists when there is zero proof that it does.

It would be more intellectually honest to state I don't know to the question of whether any deity exists, because to state with certainty that a deity does exist would be filling in the gaps of knowledge. It cold likewise be intellectually dishonest for an atheist to make the claim that god does not exist, but the end of this paragraph will show why that is not such. Religion and spirituality claim to know the answer, that god does exist, when there is nothing except fallible faith; of which is the precise opposite of evidence. However, it is absurd to make the statement I don't know if unicorns exist, and it is no different with the concept of god. If there is no evidence for unicorns, we cannot rationally claim that they could or do exists when there is no evidence for there existence.

That is why I can state, when there is no evidence and has never been any evidence despite the progress we have made in understanding the world around us, that god does not exist.

To claim knowledge of something without the evidence to support it is not relying upon truth or intellectual honesty. It is merely clinging to a comforting lie in the overwhelming existence of the harsh truth: that reasonably in the absence of proof it is morally required to acknowledge that the thing does not exist rather than maintain a stranglehold on ignorance by making false claims to the existence of something that by all accounts simply only exists as delusion in the minds of men.

There is no reason for otherwise reasonable men to claim a primitive mythology as truth. Needing it to be true is not a valid reason for claiming that it is true. Men are under the misconception that they need a belief in a higher being. To state anything to the contrary is to veritably admit that one would rather enjoy the lie than have to feel lost with the truth.

Wanting or needing something to be real does not make it real. The truth should always be sought over a lie that too many irrational minds are unwilling to recognize as a lie.

 

And I can prove with absolute evidence that God is most definite.

If God doesn't exist, for you, why do you bother to discuss God, at all, ever? Aren't you wasting your life, your time, your mind, your attention, your energy? What else could you be doing with your assets (mind, time and energy) if you weren't trapped in God land?

Isn't it true that God is inescapable and you're trapped in a nightmare of negation and denial? The only thing you'd need to do is acknowledge God. That's a matter of LOVE.

 

False. If that was even remotely true, which countless others have claimed as well, then there would be no need for faith, because everyone would believe in a higher being without question. The fact that there is atheism proves that no one has proven any deity's existence.

Suspending doubt to believe through faith is not proof.

I actually answered this in your other thread:

It is the same concept as discussing anything fictional. One who discusses Harry Potter on a regular basis does not have to believe that Harry Potter is a non-fictional character. One discuses that which s/he finds interesting. Belief in the existence of that which is being discussed is as unnecessary as the belief itself.

No.

I reiterate:

Suspending doubt to believe through faith is proof.

 

only annoying because he doesn't acquiesce and back away from your opinions, which is all you have presented thus far, your opinions.

You really should learn how to discern the difference between your opinions and actual fact.

 

AiryFox, do you admit that you do not know me?