Is there a God?

[flouran]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

I am not an adherent of a faith that purports many of the things you bring up.

My apologies for the miscalculation. So your faith does NOT purport that God is an infinite being? And what faith may that be?

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

For instance, we believe that humans are literally spirit children of God, and hence capable of being like our Father.

You mean after death humans can join the likeness of their Father?

[Zeta-Flux]

Originally Posted by flouran

So your faith does NOT purport that God is an infinite being? And what faith may that be?

Our faith doesn't use the Greek philosophical terminology of "infinite" (or other such terms) on a regular basis. We are not what you might call "creedal Christians". For example, we don't believe in creation ex nihilo; but rather that the universe was organized from previous states. I'm not sure that we would disagree with the idea that God is infinite, per se, just the idea that there is a fundamental dichotomy between God and man that is insurmountable. For the most part we reject many of the philosophical creeds that arose after the death of Christ.

The name of the church is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

You mean after death humans can join the likeness of their Father?

We believe man was created in the image of God, and that we are already like Him in many ways. Ultimately, we can be at one with God, just as Christ is. You might say we strive to fulfil the admonition in Ephesians 4, to "come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ".

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by South Park's response to cheesehead & flouran?

Look, maybe us Mormons do believe in crazy stories that make absolutely no sense, and maybe Joseph Smith did make it all up, but I have a great life. and a great family, and I have the Book of Mormon to thank for that. The truth is, I don't care if Joseph Smith made it all up, because what the church teaches now is loving your family, being nice and helping people. And even though people in this town might think that's stupid, I still choose to believe in it. All I ever did was try to be your friend, Stan, but you're so high and mighty you couldn't look past my religion and just be my friend back. You've got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls.

Moderator's Note - HRB apparently thought most people would recognize the quote as really coming from South Park, as shown by a link a few posts down, and thought it would be funny suggest that Zeta-flux should have responded in like manner by giving a faked attribution that I have changed.

In addition to the wikipedia link a few posts down, HRB also provided this link to help explain his intent. I moved it into the body because the "latest editing" now shows me.

http://www.yoism.org/?q=node/307

[Zeta-Flux]

HRB,

Those are not my words. It is completely inappropriate to "put them in my mouth" as it were, by creating a "quotation."

Not to mention the inaccuracy, puerilism, and downright nastinest.

[__HRB__]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

HRB,

Those are not my words. It is completely inappropriate to "put them in my mouth" as it were, by creating a "quotation."

Not to mention the inaccuracy, puerilism, and downright nastinest.

Aw, c'mon. Anybody with a brain must realize that cannot be a quote of one of your posts. Furthermore it is so clearly out of character that you should be ashamed of yourself for thinking that anybody could think you had written it.

All I ever did was try to make fun of cheesehead and flouran. But, Zeta-Flux, you're so high and mighty you couldn't look past your religion and have some fun. You've got a lot of growing up to do, buddy. Suck my balls.

I apologize for thinking you were cool enough to enjoy one of the few positive portrayals of members of a religion South Park has to offer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_About_the_Mormons

Better, now?

[Zeta-Flux]

HRB and William,

I understand that some people might see the link at the bottom of the post, and I understand HRB's intent. I still believe it is entirely inappropriate for him to make it look like a quote from me. At the very least, please change that. He can quote SouthPark all he likes. Just don't let him get away with putting their words in my mouth.

I have moderated the post to make it clearer to even the most casual of observers that Zeta-Flux didn't utter the South Park quote.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by Zeta-Flux

From your previous posts I assumed that you were implicitly meaning that "God exists only as an idea in human minds."

That is correct.

This interpretation seemed to be backed up by the clarification/summary: "The latter phrase ("God exists ... minds") can be summarized as "Man created God" in a consciously sincere twist on the well-known phrase "God created Man"."

Yes, it does.

But from what you just said (at the top of my post), I'm uncertain whether you are saying this.

Perhaps the difficulty is that I did not spell out that the statement

"God exists only as an idea in human minds"

can be separated into two separate hypotheses, for simplicity in proof:

Hypothesis 1) God exists as an idea in human minds.

Hypothesis 2) God does not exist in any form other than as an idea in human minds.

Hypothesis 1 is a subset of "God exists only as an idea in human minds". Even though you (and I) consider it trivial, I wanted to get evidence for it formally on the record here, for possible later reference.

My post #320 presented evidence to support #1.

I claim that hypothesis 2 is true. I can, and will later, present evidence to support that part of the claim which is not covered by #1.

My challenge to you is to present evidence that disproves hypothesis 2, which you evidently think is false.

Option 1: You were only claiming there is objective evidence that people think about God.

This is rather trivially true,

(thus my mild surprise at your nevertheless-quite-reasonable request for a list, which I would have presented soon anyway to formally support my claim)

and seems to be a significant retraction.

No, it's no retraction at all. Notice the different placement of "only" in your Option 1 and Option 2.

We're all familiar with the use of "if and only if" in mathematics. The "if" and the "only if" require separate subproofs. So, too does the "exists as" and "not exist in any form other than as" (= "exists only as") in the present discussion -- though I don't claim the analogy with math goes any further.

In post #320, I was presenting evidence to support only the claim that there is objective evidence that people think about God. ... But that didn't say anything about, or exclude the possibility of evidence for, hypothesis #2.

Option 2: You were claiming there is objective evidence that God exists only as an idea in human minds.

I have and do claim this, yes, but I never said that post #320 presented evidence for all parts of that claim.

- - -

Perhaps it would be simpler to reverse the negation in #2, so that it says:

Hypothesis 2A) God exists in some form other than as an idea in human minds

... and you and I would reverse our positions relative to it. That is, I'd claim that 2A is false and present evidence to support disproof of it, while you'd claim that 2A is true and present evidence to support it.

Which do you prefer?

[Zeta-Flux]

William,

Thank you.

---------------

cheesehead,

That clears it up quite a bit. I have no preference how you state the hypothesis.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by flouran

Ah. Mea Culpa

Are you agnostic or atheist?

It would be more accurate to categorize me as explained here: http://www.the-brights.net/

I have a naturalistic worldview, free of supernatural and mystical elements. My ethics and actions are based on a naturalistic worldview.

I was raised by Christian parents, and attended (Methodist) church and Sunday school regularly until I was 18. Thus, I am familiar with the general tenets of Protestant Christianity. I doubted the supernatural/mystical aspects of Christianity (or any other religion) from an early age.

[davar55]

Originally Posted by jasong

I only read the first half of this page, but I am still of the same opinion,

If Darwin was right, then our values, our deeds, our opinions about morality is equally as important as a rock or a piece of feces. I am a Christian because the alternative is unbearable. If Darwin is correct, kill me now, for my reason for existence is crap.

Some say all we need is God plus nothing. By the same token, without God, there is nothing. Not the nothing before creation, but nothing of value. God is my rock, He either exists or my life is meaningless. Therefore let cling to the idea that God exists, even if we are ever given overwhelmingly convincing evidence.

Since this is a Forum of intellectuals, I will express it thus. Let's take two basic questions: Is there a God? and Do I believe in God? and look at their ramifications. Because I'm a Christian, we're going to assume that if there is a God in this scenario that he loves us and wants us to be happy. So there are 4 possibilities.

There ISN'T a God and I DON'T believe in him.

In this case the person is simply correct, they live their life in a better way than people who do believe in God, but in the end they die, with the only absolute truth being physics.

There ISN'T a God and I DO believe in him.

This state is actually covered in the Bible, Christians are beings to be pitied, since they hope and strive for something that they'll never receive. In the end, everyone dies, but Christians have it worse because they believed something that was totally untrue and therefore behaved in unnecessary ways. Not good.

There IS a God and I DON'T believe in Him.

Ouch, the penalties for this are horrendous, you assume there isn't a God and suffer in the worst possible way.

There IS a God and I DO believe in Him

Choirs of Angels, huge mansions and limitless food, as well as a job that you enjoy and look forward to.(no lie, I just forget where it's written.)

Of course there are trillions of variations on this theme, but this is how I approach it. My value system teaches me that Godless evolutionary theory(a God-based evolutionary theory would suggest an evil God that likes to cause pain and death) doesn't have anything to offer me, and I'd rather entertain the idea that Islam and Christianity simply diverged a long time ago then consider the idea that I'm related to pond scum.

It's not logical, it's not rational, but it keeps me on track in a world that's hard enough as it is. Ray Kurzweil is a nutjob for simultaneously believing in evolution and actually wanting to live long enough to see humans get made obsolete.

Is there a God?


to jasong:


Let me say I agree with your last point first: to believe in evolution and
also to want humanity to become obsolete is contradictory and wrong.

But as an atheist who doesn't believe in any god, and does believe in
science and evolution and all those good things, I want to address to
you personally a suggested way based on my reading only of your OP
of this thread for you to live through and hopefully regain some hope
for humanity and for you personally, even if I would under
other circumstances challenge your religious views / conclusions.

Here's the crux:

From your OP:

/* quote */
If Darwin was right, then our values, our deeds, our opinions about morality is equally as important as a rock or a piece of feces. I am a Christian because the alternative is unbearable. If Darwin is correct, kill me now, for my reason for existence is crap.
/* unquote */

You value values, deeds, morality, and importance.
That's a good start. We all agree.

We know your religion got you through a mental health crisis.
Some people here have known others with similar pasts.

Maybe with some guidance from your friends here you can learn
what most of us know, that the same values and virtues you already value
will still be there and still be yours even if their religious basis becomes
replaced by a scientific, rational, philosophical one.

Maybe this thread was a start.

[davar55]

Originally Posted by T.Rex

Logic says: with a false property, one cannot build some true property.
There is no proof that there is a God (moreover, everything shows that the idea of a God is stupid), so "God knew" is a false statement, and everything you say then has no meaning: bullshit. Full stop.

True, we atheists know there is no god.

But you (TRex) are arguing logically against the second post of
this thread, which he (jasong) just included to explain his
reluctance to accept evolution as being wrong in some way
while you are ignoring his (jasong) first OP in this thread.