Are You Religious?

[BitBuster]

Well, I think we'd need to define "good" before we could embark upon that discussion, and that alone would be a never-ending discussion.

It's true that mindsets can be altered by religion, but given that most religious people seem to have been born with their faith, I'm not sure how much changing of mindsets is actually going on...

[geodave]

Well, I can't use myself, because I know where I got my sense of right and wrong, but C.S. Lewis -- one of the great modern doctors of the faith -- said that he found himself to be a hypocrite as an atheist, because he couldn't justify the existence of justice without an external definition of justice. That is, if there is no "supernatural" being to define justice, then there is no justice.

Now, that doesn't satisfy everyone, but it was at the heart of HIS conversion, so it worked at least once. Many people are convinced by the "design" argument. That wouldn't work for me if I were an atheist -- it's simple enough to contribute that to evolution. However, then you have a bigger problem -- why is there evolution? Why is there anything? This is basically the "first cause" argument. That might convince me.

[BitBuster]

...even if you believe that there is a God, you still have the "why is there anything?" dilemma. You just have to take it back one more step...

Justice itself is somewhat subjective. I don't think that necessarily invalidates it.

[ManipulatorGeneral]

...even if you believe that there is a God, you still have the "why is there anything?" dilemma. You just have to take it back one more step...

That question should be considered, yes. The fact that anything does exist evidences that it stopped somewhere, and I find that God is the most plausible beginning because the nature of God offers the most possible reasons why He could be the first cause (such as eternality and, as sometimes argued, necessary existence); I also find God the most plausible explanation for why anything beyond the first cause both could and should begin to exist, and the more complex the course of time grows, the more I am hesitant to assign existence to mere contingency when it could simply be all intentional. Certainly it's valid to ask this about God in return, because He is an additional element, as to whether God is complex, contingent, etc, but even discounting the arguments offered by some apologetics that the concept of God is neither complex nor contingent, I am more willing to believe that the nature of God avoids these initial philosophical problems in some manner than the nature of whatever else could have been the first cause. It largely sums up the centrality of my choice for faith: that existence as it is appears markedly more plausible under theism than atheism, such that I couldn't imagine this universe arising without God, and even if it could (returning to earlier thoughts), God is more able and likely to cause this universe than anything else.

[geodave]

It's reasonable to say that if there is no God, we created a God that would best fit all our unanswered questions. However, the things that actually happened in the bible (or quran, or vedic text), are not logical or reasonable to explain things. They are just weird. The old adage that fact is stranger than fiction may hold here, since I don't think we could make up some of this stuff ourselves.

I will mention here (in case I haven't yet) that my actual belief system is based on upbringing, experience and searching, and that I am always willing to discuss these things with an open mind.

[IceyLava108]

God has a reason for everything..

Like why I just posted this

On the other hand, we all have a free will, so it isn't actually God making me post this. But God knows what my 1,000th post will say and he knew a few decades ago.

[James]

Well, I can't use myself, because I know where I got my sense of right and wrong, but C.S. Lewis -- one of the great modern doctors of the faith -- said that he found himself to be a hypocrite as an atheist, because he couldn't justify the existence of justice without an external definition of justice. That is, if there is no "supernatural" being to define justice, then there is no justice.

Justice and morality are subjective concepts that vary both individually and by culture. C.S. wrote some interesting stuff, but his arguments from morality are among his most illogical and belong in the trash can IMO unless justification can be given for all his assumptions that he passes off as a priori "knowledge".

why is there evolution? Why is there anything? This is basically the "first cause" argument. That might convince me.

Evolution is just a logical consequence of how the natural world works. Additionally, re: origin of the universe etc., there's no harm in saying "We don't know yet"...substituting an explanation simply for the sake of having an explanation is incredibly counterproductive.

I think BitBuster nailed the first cause part, although it's worth noting that even if the universe had to have a "first cause", there are still mountains more arguments to make before the nature of that cause can be determined.

The fact that anything does exist evidences that it stopped somewhere

[citation needed]

because the nature of God offers the most possible reasons why He could be the first cause

[citation needed]
(and a bit more explanation of this would be awesome, not completely sure I understand this)

mere contingency

Interesting word choice.

It's reasonable to say that if there is no God, we created a God that would best fit all our unanswered questions. However, the things that actually happened in the bible (or quran, or vedic text), are not logical or reasonable to explain things. They are just weird. The old adage that fact is stranger than fiction may hold here, since I don't think we could make up some of this stuff ourselves.

I think the fact that those books were revered for thousands of years and believed by most to be the absolute literal complete truth (and there are still an astounding number that believe this today) shows that it's quite reasonable that the events could have been thought up by humans. A human design pattern is exactly what we see upon examination of the origin of the text, as well (The Documentary Hypothesis is a good example. Read the first bit of the wiki page so you understand what it means and then scroll down and look at the coloured image for a visual representation. 1) a collection of myths, traditions, and superstitions written, altered, and combined over many centuries by humans, or 2) a divinely inspired document; which of the two does that look like?)

I will mention here (in case I haven't yet) that my actual belief system is based on upbringing, experience and searching, and that I am always willing to discuss these things with an open mind.

What IS your belief system, anyway? You seem to be on all sides of this discussion

God has a reason for everything..

Like why I just posted this

On the other hand, we all have a free will, so it isn't actually God making me post this. But God knows what my 1,000th post will say and he knew a few decades ago.

[citation needed]


[citation needed]


[citation needed]


[citation needed]


[citation needed]

[IceyLava108]

[citation needed]



[citation needed]



[citation needed]



[citation needed]



[citation needed]

LIES.

[BitBuster]

I have never understood why God is seen as the "most plausible" explanation (and this is certainly not the first time that I've heard that "argument" made). Simplest, perhaps. Most satisfying (from a certain point of view). But most plausible? How the heck can you place a numeric probability value on the existence of God? You're just pulling numbers out of nowhere. Heck, with that logic, one can "prove" anything! (And people do, sadly.)



And the "God has a reason for everything" argument always makes me smile (in a very frustrated, bitter way). I wonder what abused children or starving people or wrongfully imprisoned people or rape victims or [fill in the blank] feel about this.

[geodave]

Speaking wrongly imprisoned -- how in the heck did they leave that guy in a cell for FIVE DAYS with no food or water??

GEEZ.

Anyways, I tend to be coy about what I actually believe because people get "careful" if they think they might offend you. However, this crowd seems to be the "whatever"-type, so I can probably tell you. Also, I don't offend easily.

Technically, I'm a protestant Christian. I regularly attend a medium-sized church which happens to be associated with the Assemblies of God. According to them, the A of G isn't a denomination, so the church doesn't belong to A of G -- but that's just semantics. It's a pretty typical A of G church from what I know about them.

That is not to say this would be my first choice. I judge churches based on what they teach, and how they treat people. This one's pretty good and meets my family's needs -- and it's close to home!

As I mentioned somewhere else, I've attended many, many different denominations. I was baptized by sprinkling as an adult in a United Methodist church; I also was a certified "lay speaker" in that church for one year. They all have good and bad, and they're all made up of people, which makes them flawed.

If you want to talk about the more "ecstatic" parts of the faith -- feel free to ask. I can relate what I know and what I believe, but you may not be interested so I won't digress.

I think the real key to whether you decide there is a God or not is to decide if you need a God or not. Frankly, I can barely handle existing WITH a benevolent God and a human Saviour. I cannot imagine my despair if I did not believe. That's part of why I, personally, will never be an atheist. I certainly have doubts, but I would never have enough FAITH to be SURE there was no God.