By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Do you believe in God? Why/Why not?

 

Do you believe in any god?

Yes 63 36.21%
 
No 111 63.79%
 
Total:174
Cyran said:
JWeinCom said:

Agnostic or gnostic refers to what you know or rather claim to know.  So a gnostic atheist would be someone who claims "I know god does not exist".  An gnostic theist would say "I know god exists".  An agnostic atheist would say "I don't believe a god exists but I don't know that for a fact."  And an agnostic theist would say "I believe a god exists, but I can't prove it."

 

You actually got the definition of Agnostic backward.  Agnostic is the belief that something can not be known.  Someone that Agnostic about god believe it impossible to know whether god exist.  You can be Agnostic about anything, not just god.  On the other hand the term Gnostic originated from a religion that believed in a unknowable god.

Edit: After rereading what you wrote I realize you had Agnostic right and I got mix up with the statement you use for Gnostic.  I never heard anyone use the term Gnostic the way you did personally.  

I'm using it as an adjective here.  You can also use it as a noun which would be a bit different.



Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
Eagle367 said:

You said why does the response have to be one God or causeless. Of course if you say you don't know, that already exists in agnosticism but then you have to decide something in how to live your life

Atheism is what you believe about a god.  Atheism means I don't believe this claim.  Theism means you believe it.

Agnostic or gnostic refers to what you know or rather claim to know.  So a gnostic atheist would be someone who claims "I know god does not exist".  An gnostic theist would say "I know god exists".  An agnostic atheist would say "I don't believe a god exists but I don't know that for a fact."  And an agnostic theist would say "I believe a god exists, but I can't prove it."

That's how I'm using the terms, and how most atheists use it.  I'm not going to argue over them, cause I find that boring, but just wanted to make sure we're on the same page.  I don't mind being labeled as an agnostic, because that is technically accurate, but I tend to identify as an atheist, because I think my beliefs are closer to what most people think of when they think of atheism.

Back to the point, I don't know why I have to decide anything about the origins of the universe to live my life.  It'd be cool to know, but however it began, I can observe the world around me that exists now, and decide how to live my life based on the current state of the universe.  I can live just fine without knowing, or pretending to know, the origins of the universe.

Well to me that simply means you live your life as if God doesn't exist and if He does, then He doesn't interfere with humankind. You are making that choice whether you want to or not. Not choosing is a choice in itself. If you choose to be not 100% about God but still follow your life as if you're Muslim or Christian or Hindu or Jew, that's still a choice. So this choice affects your daily life whether you want it to or not



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

No, and I don't understand how nowadays people still believe in God(s). For as long as we're on that planet, we've asked the same existential questions and for majority of that time we didn't know any better. But now, with all the knowledge we have, for me, it's just as silly as believing in Santa. Obviously we don't know everything and we probably never will, but filling our gaps in knowledge with supernatural is plain lunacy. I wish that humanity could just move on and leave religion where it belongs ... in history books, under "ancient beliefs and mythology" section.



Eagle367 said:
JWeinCom said:

Atheism is what you believe about a god.  Atheism means I don't believe this claim.  Theism means you believe it.

Agnostic or gnostic refers to what you know or rather claim to know.  So a gnostic atheist would be someone who claims "I know god does not exist".  An gnostic theist would say "I know god exists".  An agnostic atheist would say "I don't believe a god exists but I don't know that for a fact."  And an agnostic theist would say "I believe a god exists, but I can't prove it."

That's how I'm using the terms, and how most atheists use it.  I'm not going to argue over them, cause I find that boring, but just wanted to make sure we're on the same page.  I don't mind being labeled as an agnostic, because that is technically accurate, but I tend to identify as an atheist, because I think my beliefs are closer to what most people think of when they think of atheism.

Back to the point, I don't know why I have to decide anything about the origins of the universe to live my life.  It'd be cool to know, but however it began, I can observe the world around me that exists now, and decide how to live my life based on the current state of the universe.  I can live just fine without knowing, or pretending to know, the origins of the universe.

Well to me that simply means you live your life as if God doesn't exist and if He does, then He doesn't interfere with humankind. You are making that choice whether you want to or not. Not choosing is a choice in itself. If you choose to be not 100% about God but still follow your life as if you're Muslim or Christian or Hindu or Jew, that's still a choice. So this choice affects your daily life whether you want it to or not

I'm not making a choice.

I don't choose what to believe.  I evaluate the evidence I see, and I make a decision.  For example, I believe that Australia exists.  I've never been there to confirm it, but there is an abundance of evidence.  Would you say I'm choosing to believe in Australia?  On the contrary, I don't believe Narnia exists.  Again, would this be a choice, or just an evaluation?

 Nobody has yet presented evidence to me that suggests a god is interfering with the world, so I don't believe in it.  I can't choose to believe even if I tried really hard.  At best, I could pretend to believe.  I could choose to follow a religion despite not believing in it, but that would be kind of bizarre wouldn't it?  



I do believe in god, Christianity specifically because it is the most efficient cure of the spirit, for those who understand it

and since mental health is the most important thing in my opinion, it really leads to a better life

I am a science freak at the same time, and I find it pointless to mix the two, religion's purpose is not to fill science gaps, it is the mental cure that leads to a better life, making Christianity self-evident in its biggest part

and in my opinion, psychologists  are the kind of new ''religion'', telling you what to think and how to live and how to act, all that while making it look 'advisory' and asking for money... an extremely short-term relief rather than a cure

psychology is science, science may heal the body but will never heal the spirit

welcome to the ex-religion age, the age of personal psychologists

Last edited by dark_gh0st_b0y - on 26 August 2018

don't mind my username, that was more than 10 years ago, I'm a different person now, amazing how people change ^_^

Around the Network

I used to be a believer in god, but with age I realized the probability of such a thing existing is probably nill. God is a human creation, and there is nothing to suggest he actually exists.



Made a bet with LipeJJ and HylianYoshi that the XB1 will reach 30 million before Wii U reaches 15 million. Loser has to get avatar picked by winner for 6 months (or if I lose, either 6 months avatar control for both Lipe and Hylian, or my patrick avatar comes back forever).

barneystinson69 said:

I used to be a believer in god, but with age I realized the probability of such a thing existing is probably nill. God is a human creation, and there is nothing to suggest he actually exists.

the word 'believe' would be rather pointless if there was proof that he existed, it would have been a matter of 'obeying' in that case

life on earth is a miracle on its own, let alone the expansion of the universe and the coincidental conditions and chemical reactions that led to living organisms evolving to us, the only being with proper ''logic'' that can bypass natural instincts

statistically speaking, the chances of the events, chemical reactions (how and why was the first dna strand formed? on absolute luck?) and conditions that led to our existence happening randomly are too low to be calculated, there could be a higher 'god' intelligence in another dimension who designed all this, just like a black hole bypasses the being of time and space for which we have no other clue, the possibilities are endless

there may not be proof, but nothing can be completely rejected either, even from a scientific perspective



don't mind my username, that was more than 10 years ago, I'm a different person now, amazing how people change ^_^

Yes, there is God. Definitely.

Only, it's deinitely NOT defined the way most people believe.

It is only a matter of interpretation..



dark_gh0st_b0y said:
barneystinson69 said:

I used to be a believer in god, but with age I realized the probability of such a thing existing is probably nill. God is a human creation, and there is nothing to suggest he actually exists.

the word 'believe' would be rather pointless if there was proof that he existed, it would have been a matter of 'obeying' in that case

life on earth is a miracle on its own, let alone the expansion of the universe and the coincidental conditions and chemical reactions that led to living organisms evolving to us, the only being with proper ''logic'' that can bypass natural instincts

statistically speaking, the chances of the events, chemical reactions (how and why was the first dna strand formed? on absolute luck?) and conditions that led to our existence happening randomly are too low to be calculated, there could be a higher 'god' intelligence in another dimension who designed all this, just like a black hole bypasses the being of time and space for which we have no other clue, the possibilities are endless

there may not be proof, but nothing can be completely rejected either, even from a scientific perspective

I wouldn't call it a miracle or luck. It's rather unavoidable. We are certainly not the only planet who managed to grow life on it  Even it if were one planet per galaxy whereas a galaxy has billions of solar systems. And our universe has how many millions or billions of galaxies? Not to mention that we found dozens of planets in our own galaxy which are fit for life.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

dark_gh0st_b0y said:

I do believe in god, Christianity specifically because it is the most efficient cure of the spirit, for those who understand it

and since mental health is the most important thing in my opinion, it really leads to a better life

I am a science freak at the same time, and I find it pointless to mix the two, religion's purpose is not to fill science gaps, it is the mental cure that leads to a better life, making Christianity self-evident in its biggest part

and in my opinion, psychologists  are the kind of new ''religion'', telling you what to think and how to live and how to act, all that while making it look 'advisory' and asking for money... an extremely short-term relief rather than a cure

psychology is science, science may heal the body but will never heal the spirit

welcome to the ex-religion age, the age of personal psychologists

I think you'd have to demonstrate Christianity leads to a better life.

And I don't know if you've ever been to a therapist, but I've been to a bunch, and none of them have ever been anything like that.  

Edit: Actually never mind.  I don't think you need to demonstrate Christianity leads to a better life, because that really has no bearing on its truth.